Talk:Final Fantasy VII/Archive 6

Connections with FF X
It is stated in this article that there are some plot connections between FF 7 and X. However no further explanations were given. Can someone please tell me if such "connections" really exist and if so what are they? if this is a false statement (like some other citation-lacking "facts") I ask to please remove it from the article. 87.68.75.206 (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Kiato


 * The article about the game's world explains it under concept and creation. It should probably be elaborated in the main article as well since the cite is a Japanese book. Davhorn (talk) 01:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Too Long?!?
Who in God's name put up the tag saying that the article was too long? The game is, in any standard, long. Therefore, the article about it has got to be long in order to portray it properly. Anybody else agree? Tool-apc (talk) 02:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no problem with a long game having a long article. However, this one is not just long, it's too long. See the other Final Fantasy FAs for long games with reasonable contents. It would also not be uninteresting to consider spliting the Development section into its own article, à la Development of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Kariteh (talk) 07:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You know, that's actually not a bad idea. I'd try and undertake the task but I just don't see myself being able to complete it. Tool-apc (talk) 02:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It is a good idea in the case of lots of development information, and a Development of FFVII might be good as more and more information keeps coming out on how they made it. A separate article on the plot, however, would be a very bad idea, as the plots are supposed to be summaries, and if the plot of The Lord of the Rings and Chrono Cross can be summarized, so can this one. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. One excellent idea, and one excellent reason against that idea. IMHO, I think a vote should be taken, just to see what people think of the idea. Tool-apc (talk) 01:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * There doesn't appear to have been much effort in shortening the article. I'll see what I can do, and make some bold edits. I am probably going to start by shortening the Story section, which from what I've read in past archives, is and has been really long for some time now – about two years at least. Gary King ( talk ) 17:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Summarizing the plot
I created Talk:Final Fantasy VII/Story to try and better summarize the plot. I am beginning with bullet points first, then it will be re-converted back to prose. Gary King ( talk ) 18:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you ever finish it? I feel bullet points would work a lot better than just blocks of text. Beckster1026 (talk) 04:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Who did Game/Battle Design and/or Battle Director in this game?
Final Fantasy V and Final Fantasy VI's person responsible for Game/Battle Design was Hiroyuki Itō. It appears that as rpg's got more complex the title "Game Design", although I also heard the term Battle Design, is not really credited as much and now in the credits I see: Battle Planning Director, Event Planning Director, Field Planning Director, and Map Planning Director. After Final Fantasy VI Hiroyuki Itō did the Game/Battle design for Final Fantasy Tactics before coming back to do Final Fantasy VIII's Game/Battle design. Who is credited as Game/Battle Design and/or Battle Planning Director on Final Fantasy VII? Dragonblades (talk) 09:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:VG External Links check
This Former Featured Article has a total of four dead external links. They can be found here. Please fix them as soon as possible. Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 00:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Link have been fixed, accessdates are good. — Dispenser 01:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Oversourcing?
I'm trying to get this article to GA, but I'm having some trouble as the article is filled with so many refs. Beacause of all of these refs, it's very hard to edit the article, and as a matter of fact, some sentences have up to 4 refs at the end, which is IMO overkill. Would anyone object to having only one source at the end of a sentence+ This would also help making the article not too long; it's 84 kb at the moment. The Prince (talk) 23:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As long as every word in the sentence is still referenced in the one remaining reference, go for it. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The dead links shouldn't have been removed though. There could have been archives of them at the Wayback Machine. Dead links are really precious, because they don't come up in search engines. Kariteh (talk) 09:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see the point in saving them when you can't actually see the content og the source. The Prince (talk) 09:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * BTW, can someone fix ref. 77. I don't know what happened. The Prince (talk) 10:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The point is that there could have been archives of them at the Wayback Machine. Kariteh (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but they aren't gone. They're still in the article history, so if you can find them in the "Wayback Machine", feel free to add them back. The Prince (talk) 12:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Plot
I've been trying to trim the plot as much as I can, but I'm afraid if I trim anymore, I'll be trimming too much. Is everyone satisfied with the current length of the story section, and can the plot tag finally be removed? The Prince (talk) 19:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You need to trim much more. The plot is still way too long.  Do we really need so many quotes, so many details?LedRush (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * "Cloud and Zack were among the wounded survivors who were apprehended by Shinra as part of a cover-up of Sephiroth's massacre. Professor Hojo subjected these survivors to an experiment, performing the same enhancements given to SOLDIER members—a procedure which included Mako showers and the injection of Jenova cells. All but Zack entered a comatose state, and nearly five years later, Zack broke free from his confinement and took Cloud with him."

About the comatose thing... in Shinra mansion there are writings on the glass tubes where the experiments were done. It says they were scratched into the glass, something to the effect of 'lets get out of here' on one and 'feeding time, nows our chance' on the other one. This would mean that Cloud wasn't comatose? I think this site did a good job explaining that part --Lakecityransom (talk) 00:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sephiroth kills Aeris
Can that image at least be removed? It's a spoiler and it is a big part of the game. 24.95.62.211 (talk) 06:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We've discussed this before.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 06:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the whole argument was funny both had good points though 0.o User:Sammus999 User talk:Sammus999

Endless Crisis
i believe that we should make an article about the new Final Fantasy 7: Endless Crisis that is about to be discussed this year on TGS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Speedy512 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Article
Hey everyone, just stopping by. The article looks great keep up the good work. Emo777 (talk) 08:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

GA time soon?
Will this article be nominated for GA soon? It's a real shame that Final Fantasy is no longer a featured topic. — Realist  2  17:33, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I intend to send it to GAN as soon as I've read through the article and corrected any errors etc. Hopefully, I'll get it done by the next couple of days. The Prince (talk) 19:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Great, this is like my favorite game every, be nice to see it with at least a GA symbol again. — Realist  2  23:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Cite needed on music section
Since I'd like to avoid an edit war over a cite tag, I'll point out that the source "History of Final Fantasy VII" does not support the sentence "Instead of recorded music and sound effects for the game, Uematsu opted for MIDIs, using the PlayStation's internal sound chip." In fact, the source indicates the opposite: that developers intended to ditch MIDI for a better form of music if and when Nintendo's "disc-fed Ultra 64" came out. --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 18:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That's incorrect. On the IGN article it said: "Accordingly, VII stepped off the 2D grid and into a breathtaking 3D world, with fully rendered battles and MIDI sound traded in for Nobuo Uematsu's deeper compositions." I don't know how much clearer I can make it. The Prince (talk) 20:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It used to say that in the Discography of Final Fantasy VII article as well, but the only source was a 1998 interview with a fansite so obscure I couldn't even in good faith say the interviewer didn't make the whole thing up. I've changed that paragraph to just say that it 'is' Midi, with no mention that he 'wanted' it to be midi. --PresN (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, the section looks a lot better now. The Prince (talk) 15:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, wait a minute. Firstly, why can't IGN History quote can't be interpreted that they wanted SNES-quality MIDI sounds tradid in for CD quality music on the Ultra 64? And secondly, in the Discography article, how does the RPGfan article confirm that Uematsu "opted" for MIDI sound rather than was forced to by space limitations? Just because the final result is MIDI doesn't mean you can jump to the conclusion that developers wanted it to be so. --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 20:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Now you're just speculating. The fact is that Uematsu used MIDI for the music in Final Fantasy VII. I don't see what's so confusing about that. The Prince (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not arguing the fact that Uematsu used MIDI in FFVII; I'm just arguing that the way the article is phrased is incorrect according to the source material. The sources simply state that Uematsu used MIDI, and can be used to back that claim up.  But as it's currently written, the article also claims that developers specifically wanted MIDI instead of CD quality music.  A source might come up to support that, but the article should be reworded otherwise.  --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 22:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Where does it say that about the developers? Only Uematsu is mentioned. And it doesn't say that he "wanted" MIDI, it says he "opted" for it. The Prince (talk) 22:12, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Release date
The release date listed for North America, 9/7/97 was the date given on marketing materials. But that is a Sunday. The game was actually available for sale in the US on Sept. 3rd. This was done with Square's blessing, so I'm not sure that really counts as "breaking the street date". I worked at EB on that day, and remember it pretty well - we had gotten permission to sell it the day we received it about 2 weeks beforehand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.156.74 (talk) 19:15, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The article claims it was released on 17th November 1997 in the EU. I don't know about mainland Europe, but it was definitely released on Friday 14th November 1997 in the UK. Should I edit the EU date, or add a separate date for the UK? Skip1337 (talk) 22:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If this is true, it would be nice if you could provide a reference for it. The dates that are currently listed come from various game websites (Gamespot, IGN, Gamespy, etc.) that record these things so a contradiction of them would require a reference. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Need less personal opinion:
From the page: "A major critical and commercial success, the game remains arguably the most popular title in the series. Noted for its graphics, gameplay, music, and story, Final Fantasy VII is recognized as one of the greatest and most influential games of all time." If it's arguable whether it's the most popular, than it isn't definitively the most popular, which makes that a meaningless statement. In addition, saying it's recognized as "one of the greatest and most influential" games should have multiple sources, since it's using superlatives. I think this is much too much opinion, and argue there should be a less biased, or better cited, version of it. Special:Contributions/72.64.2.82
 * 1) "Arguably" means that while most sources say that it is the most popular, it's impossible to definitively prove, as it's a group opinion. 2) As the statement is in the lead, it should have no sources- it's a summary of what it says in the reception section, where there are statements/sources saying it's been voted "best game ever" and that it redefined the RPG genre. -- Pres N  01:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Aeris / Aerith
What should the article call her, Aeris or Aerith? I like the name Aeris much more, but her official name is now Aerith (which was the name on the japanese verision of FF7), and Aerith is the name that is in her article.. On one side she was called Aeris in the English version and in the manual of the English version, but officially she's called Aerith, even in English. --Jim88Argentina (talk) 23:49, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * IIRC, there's a kind of WikiProject:Final Fantasy-scope MOS for the character names, which says to use Aeris here in the FFVII article, since as you point out that was her name in the English translation, but to use "Aerith" in the rest of the articles. I'll go look for the link. umrguy  42  23:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Makes sense --Jim88Argentina (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think what I added was appropriate, that she is Aeris, known in later installments as "Aerith". And as I said in my description, the kids can look at her article if they are confused. "Aeris" is just plainly her name for our North American version of the game. If they ever happen to remake the game (I could die happy) they will call her Aerith. Then we can say her name is Aerith although she was once known as Aeris. Belasted (talk) 00:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Looking through things, I swear there used to be a page with this as almost a "rule" (using that term loosely, mind), but I can't find it. (The WP:FF MoS page doesn't say squat on it.) There IS plenty of debate on Talk:Aerith Gainsborough (there's a whole archive for the name debate)... but anyway, I'm under the impression that consensus, at least for now, has been it's "Aeris" here (and possibly in FFVII-AC?), "Aerith" for the character article, KH, etc. umrguy  42  00:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

no, AC, specifically said aerith, also i'm pretty sure the tech demo for final fantasy 7 said aerith.Haseo445 (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

PSN version
Corcerning the PSN version: right now, the small note simply says "A version ...". Are there no sources which or what version is available? -- Soetermans |  is listening  |  what he'd do now?  23:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * i believe its based on the original not greatest hits version, I'll have to play it for more than 5 mins to make sure, lol chocobogamer   mine  22:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Concerning the PSN version, does anyone know how many sales it has had? If we can, could we maybe add the total of PSN FFVII sales to the total sales of the game? The 9.8 Million sales came from 2005, then that number must be higher since the re-release. --68.32.4.83 (talk) 23:11, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Nixie Tubes (Detail Note)
Originally, I found the numbering for the screen timers, as they show lines with the unused numbers as the background, as rather odd. I have since learned that this is likely because they were modeled after Nixie Tubes (the rocket countdown is the most notable). This might not be relevant enough to be added to the main page, but I found it interesting. The developers were apparently going for a not-as-technological look for the setting, and this was just another detail. --165.234.134.202 (talk) 16:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

File:FFVIIsephirothkillsaeris.jpg
Upon seeing the restoration of the image to the article (which I agree with), I realized the image had changed. I'm wondering if we can get a proper fair use version that actually shows Sephiroth killing Aeris all in the image (I didn't quite follow what the problem was with the original version), as actually, what we have now almost doesn't seem properly "fair use" to me, in that it doesn't quite properly illustrate the scene (if we're saying "Sephiroth kills Aeris", I feel the need to have a picture showing them both in it, rather than just Aeris with a blade through her). umrguy 42  22:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * (Starting this here as a more centralized location, and as it's probably more seen than the image's page.) umrguy  42  22:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * i can probably do a cap at some point with both of them in, although it'll probably be just before or just after the action, IIRC square were pretty gruesome in this scene and it was close up chocobogamer   mine  22:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * There is such a version in the history of the image; I'm going to revert to it. You may have to clear your cache to see it (shift-F5 for Firefox, ctrl-f5 for IE, I believe). -- Pres N  23:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, no! Why revert back to that version? The version with Aeris and a sword was far better because it had artistic value. We, the users of Wikipedia, are humanbeings and not some machines that need to be fed with some well-formed data. (The only human that needs such picture is a judge or a member of the jury.) Human loves art and beauty and the best encyclopedias have always kept the good look of their encyclopedia as a priorty. (Just look at Encarta!) This issue becomes even more important in fictional articles.


 * No, I do not feel that I need to see Sephiroth in the image as much as I seek to see a more emotional picture. The text of the article that says "Sephiroth murdered Aeris" is enough for me.


 * And please do not bring up any "Fair-use compliance" excuses; Administrator ESkog have already seen the picture (check the change log) and if there was any "Fair-use compliance" issue, this image would have been long deleted.


 * Please revert the picture. (I'm badly tempted to revert it myself right now but I do not want to begin an edit war or any other uncivic misconduct.) So, please, let's revert back to the artistic version for the sake of improving Wikipedia.
 * Fleet Command (talk) 09:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There are too many images in this article. It is more appropiate in Aerith's article where he death is discussed.Tintor2 (talk) 14:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, as much as I love art and design, as this is an encyclopedia, "encyclopedic" is more important than "artistic". I would also not call a zoomed-in red-tinted Aeris with what may possibly be a sword sticking out of her "artistic" anyway. I'd support changing the image if you could find a more dramatic shot that still showed both Sephiroth and Aeris (and Sephiroth killing Aeris). -- Pres  N  15:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Wait a second! This article doesn't have a picture of Aeris! Your rationale has never been an acceptable one in the first place.


 * Fleet Command (talk) 15:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Way to actually do some research before spouting off accusations. Tintor removed the image a few hours ago after his last comment above... as can be Plainly Seen by checking the article history. -- Pres N  15:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you read my latest comment?Tintor2 (talk) 16:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Alright, Sephiroth article doesn't have a picture of Aeris either. Now your rationale for reverting is completely void. Now only Aeris article has the picture and the picture description fully matches the picture of Aeris with a sword. (I didn't do it; it has always been like that.) So now that everything fits...


 * Image is reverted!


 * Fleet Command (talk) 16:09, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Tintor2; the image adds nothing to the article as there's no critical commentary on the subject. The caption indicates it fits better in the reception section, but since there's no mention of it there, it should just be removed. And FleetCommand, stop shouting. Discuss in a civil manner, please. The Prince (talk) 17:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow! What made you think I'm shouting? On the contrary I'm happy. Don't let your imagination to make a beast out of me because of a simple conflict. The image displayed must match the use rationale and the original version does so. Fleet Command (talk) 20:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

BTW, I reverted the image again. FleetCommand seems to be the only one who wants the close-up image. You need a consensus when changing images like this. The Prince (talk) 17:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * forget the artistic argument - it has to be the full pic or none, its worth being in there and in the story section. Its a turning point in the game - the 'it just got personal' moment, and it is the most talked about moment, and it changed games in the future. 100% worthy of mentioning chocobogamer   mine  17:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

(First off, sorry for not checking back in sooner.) I agree - it should be the full up image. "Artistic merit" isn't what we're about. Also, please note, I'm not really talking legalistic mumbo-jumbo "fair use compliance", I'm just saying that if it's a pic of Sephiroth killing Aeris, it ought to show Sephiroth killing Aeris. I think we should have the image, although where in the article it belongs is a different debate. umrguy 42  19:59, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, as far as the "too many images" rationale - there's one of the box art (fairly typical), a shot of the battle system (illustrative), a group image of the main characters (illustrative), the disputed Sephiroth kills Aeris shot (illustrative of the iconic scene in the game), and a shot of the differences in the original snowboarding and re-released (or whatever) snowboarding mini-game(illustrative, although is THAT one really necessary?). For the size of this article, and for what each image does, I don't feel that FIVE images is too many, particularly in the way they're being used. umrguy  42  20:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * First, what made you guys to think that I'm shouting? I'm calm because I know that both rules and rationale are behind me.
 * Now, the image does not have to have Sephiroth in it. It is solely about Aeris and matches the description of the image in the article.
 * Now, you guy no longer have a rationale for keeping the wrong image that you love. Your version is not suitable but the original version exactly fulfills the need of the article in which it is used. So, stop being obstinate and cease this edit war. Do not make me regret that I was wrong to assume good faith.
 * I too didn't like your image but I swallowed my emotions and didn't do anything but plead because it didn't help Wikipedia. But now that both rules and artistic value are behind me, I do not abandon the well-being of Wikipedia to personal selfishness. Fleet Command (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Adding such image is completely unnecessary since readers would understand the situation by just reading the section. That event is never mentioned in the reception section, and even if it is, the image would collapse with table of reviews.Tintor2 (talk) 20:16, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * tintor2, it isn't unnecessary, it was a standout moment in the game, the most talked about point of the game and as I said above, the turning point in the game - regardless of it not being mentioned in the reception. remember you're primarily looking at reviews based on the game when it came out - of course they're not going to say she dies - back then it would have been a major spoiler which Square and Sony I'm sure would have had something to say if it had been given away. You can't use forums even for reception, which is where you would see the feedback into her dying. Also a clear consensus is saying the image should stay. Keeping the image also allows the caption which allows someone's opinion on the moment. One half-sentence is not worth being put into the reception section
 * FleetCommand, I think that 'sephiroth kills aeris' does need both characters in, it'll explain better how cold the killing was etc. It might not have to have it but more people want it than not. The other image is not wrong either - Wiki rules will say either will be sufficient so don't lie. Also, don't start personal attacks when nobody is in the wrong - its all about opinion at the moment chocobogamer   mine  20:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

From the perspective of our non-free content rules, I would say that there does not appear to be a substantive difference between the images. If a rationale applies to one image, it would likely apply to the other as well. If one could not be used in a particular place in a particular article, it is unlikely the other could either. I'm not going to wade into the artistic dimensions of this debate, but some of the above comments on a policy level seem a bit misinformed. (ESkog)(Talk) 20:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Very well then, Administrator ESkog. If you think so, then you are right. I believe in your judgment. Now that you believe that the well-being of Wikipedia is not in danger, then I'm standing down. Fleet Command (talk) 21:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * These images are copyrighted. Adding more than necessary will result in this article being tagged for non-free content. "Keeping the image also allows the caption which allows someone's opinion on the moment." Everything that is talked in the images and the infobox has to be mentioned in the article. Images in the plot section are unnecesary since everything is explained in such section.Tintor2 (talk) 20:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, so the consensus seems to be to keep the image in the article with the version showing both Aeris AND Sephiroth. I still think the image should be removed, but I'm not going to revert or anything. Anyway, we need to get an admin to protect the image as FleetCommand keeps reverting. The Prince (talk) 20:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Whoa! The Prince of Darkness, you tend to let your imagination loose. There was no mention of consensus in the first place. No one is seeking consensus here, not even umrguy42. Each of us have a motivation for being here. Fleet Command (talk) 21:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * tintor2, i suggest you read the fair use and copyrighted images help guides. you are wrong as to 'too many' and no it doesn't have to be will people stop passing their opinions off as facts. I see from your page that you like a few Final Fantasy games and that you're learning English. Can you tell me as to why you are dead against this image, and not the less relevant snowboarding one, which you should technically argue violates more copyrights as its 2 games, a mobile phone etc? There is no rational reason this image cannot be included chocobogamer   mine  20:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

FleetCommand, how was the original image (Sephiroth and Aeris) "unsuitable"? Also, please note, the caption is on the effect of "Sephiroth kills Aeris", not "Aeris, murdered". The latter describes the current image, only showing Aeris; the former described the original image. Tintor2, please see my (restored) comment above on the number of images in the article. umrguy 42  20:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Addendum - I won't edit war, I consider my re-insertion of the image (and this talk page) to be R & D in WP:BRD. umrguy  42  20:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also - speaking of the caption, before people want to start changing it, the current one also matches the description in the story text (and I think it should). umrguy  42  20:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - The original image, depicting Sephiroth plunging the blade into Aeris clearly meets the non-free rationale and depicts a crucial scene. There is absolutely no fair reasoning above stating why the image should be switched, other than some flimsy subjective "artistic" merit.  The original image, and deleted rationales, should be restored. - hahnch e n 21:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - I agree with the reinstatement of the original image and I think it should be re-uploaded to remove that edit war and the other "artistic" image. It's just a fact that having Sephiroth in the picture makes it more understandable. Considering the crappiness of PS1 graphics, I don't think it's a major aesthetic issue one way or the other.--ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * fleet, what are you on about, of course concensus is trying to be met or there wouldn't be a discussion. Now its a choice between either having the image, or not chocobogamer   mine  23:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I uploaded the image in a PNG format for better scaling. That way the edit war history won't be a problem either. Also, User:FleetCommand has agreed on his talk page to stop reverting, so I think we can wrap it up here. The Prince (talk) 23:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, I have already registered my agreement in this very same page as well. Just look above. Fleet Command (talk) 18:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Why is this picture a part of this article is truly beyond me. First and foremost it's a HUGE spoiler that people who haven't played the game can't help but notice. Secondly, since it's already referred to as one of the most shocking moment in video game history, maybe us Aeris fans don't feel like having it thrown in our faces in wikipedia. But I guess too bad for us, Sephiroth fanboys are more numerous... Klinthar (talk) 00:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * At this point to call Aerith's death a spoiler is a bit much. So you can't use that as an excuse. Nor are your hurt feelings on having to see a picture of it.TheJaff (talk) 08:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Ican't beleave such spoiler, please remove the freaking picture --Starlingmaximilian (talk) 06:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Again: WP:SPOILER —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk 07:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I must throw my hat into the ring to ask why on earth this picture is in the article at all. Yes, in the story synopsis it must be mentioned but to throw it in your face is so awfully garish. There are a thousand other pictures that could be used of memorable scenes that could be used, this image is just show boating. Steadders (talk) 14:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

the term 'near future' in setting
'Near future' does not match up with the game itself, or the seperate article on Gaia, which calls it industrial/post industrial, what is the exact quote from the ref? Also, the setting is certainly more not-too-distant-past than future. OK that is probably OR so I have not made an edit, however if we can find one we can expand on it easily - the more basic technologies in travel, comms, cities, weaponary, etc, and even as mentioned above, the use of something similar to nixie tubes for countdown timers. chocobogamer  mine  23:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I can honestly say that we had absolutely no cities like Midgar or the Golden Saucer anywhere in the world as the year this game was released, not since. I believe the problem, however, is that while SOME elements of the game certainly felt like futuristic or nearly so, many elements (a mining town, a desert prison, etc) felt very rustic and almost out of place, now that I come to think of it. Looking back, the entire game seemed a bit inconsistent. However, mixing futuristic with older technology settings seems to be something Final Fantasy did fairly often, so I don't know how you'd really classify the setting of this one. Dakmordian (talk) 12:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * well no, remember its a work of fiction. most of the older ff's had older settings but still had insanely futuristic areas. there are more near-past than near-future areas. however, since the source was badly misquoted and edited to say near future when it didnt even say that, i corrected it making the point moot. chocobogamer   mine  18:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Aeris vs. Aerith (again)
replying to old topic as tintor2 partially changed it to aerith. concensus and logic (as all versions of this game default to aeris) say aeris has to be used. In FF5 the actual translation of the lead characters name is Butz. But all official versions in English say Bartz. Only later games and the tech demo (possibly) say Aerith so this article has to stay as Aeris. Its the only logical answer, as for all intents and purposes, in English, in this part of the "compilation", her name is Aeris, not Aerith. chocobogamer  mine  23:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Read WP:Consistency. Using Aeris in quotes from video games and websites is okay, but not in prose to avoid confusing the reader. Since the wikipedia article is Aerith, it has to be consistent with all the other articles.Tintor2 (talk) 23:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've read that before, its been read by others before. You're wrong in this instance. The explaination in the Aerith article is enough for MoS:consistency. Also, you just reverting was silly as there are multiple instances of Aeris name already in the article. And you reverted a quote from the game, which would have her name as Aeris. Again, wrong in this instance. People are miscredited in films etc, you point out the miscredit - this is done in the Aerith article and therefore is correct for MoS chocobogamer   mine  23:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It's still confusing. By the way, I first changed Aeris to Aerith was a few weeks ago. The article already had the spell of Aerith in some parts. By the way, Characters of the Final Fantasy VII series uses Aerith when it's an article from Final Fantasy VII. There's no consistency.Tintor2 (talk) 23:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I know its confusing, and I am aware there are inconsistencies. Its very much the same with the Dragon Warrior titles, there is no consistency (they'll at one point say Warrior, then Quest then Warrior). As far as I'm aware the Characters article covers to some extent all the games (if I'm wrong then correct me) so referring to her as Aerith is more correct as if I'm correct, other FF7 games call her Aerith. I have called the other editors in to make their points either way to avoid an EW. To me its like stuff made by a female before she gets married (Victoria Adams/Beckham, Cheryl Tweedy/Cole)- the earlier material is not recreditted to her new name chocobogamer   mine  00:09, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with the example of those names, if in life a person changes his name the former name should remain in some sections, but this refers to fictional character whose name differs from different titles, media, countries, etc. I agree that Aeris is the most common form of her name, but it confuses how the main article's title differs.Tintor2 (talk) 00:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

In the Characters of FF7 series article it says Aerith Gainsborough (romanized as Aeris Gainsborough in the English version of Final Fantasy VII game but as Aerith in later publications), to me that is sufficient to explain the differences/inconsistencies between articles. My problem with having Aerith across all pages is that someone new to Wikipedia and not knowing of the mistranslation will go why are they calling her that. It essentially isn't her name in this game. The articles that require an explaination of the differences (Aerith Gainsborough and Characters of the series) have an explaination. The other articles should be as fits chocobogamer   mine  00:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * If that's so then this article could have an explanation.Tintor2 (talk) 01:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Chocobogamer asked me to chime in, I guess since I was involved in the image dispute a week ago. My official position is: I don't care. The game came out almost 13 years ago, Aerith and Aeris are homonyms in Japanese, and it really doesn't matter. I suppose go with Aerith, at least then it will be consistent across all of the articles; I'm tired of watching people attempt to defend a nuanced naming ideal that doesn't really matter like they have on this page for the over-three years I've had it watchlisted. I'm certainly not going to waste any effort trying to get her named one way or another on this article. -- Pres N  01:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Tintor2 feels we should re-address the issue of Aeris' name, so I'm opening this section up, as to whether it should be changed. I personally agree with the long-term consensus, that for this article (the game), "Aeris", which was used in the predominant English language release (PSX), should be used consistently throughout the article, with the mention of why everywhere else says "Aerith". In addition, the old WikiProject Final Fantasy conventions say the same thing. See WikiProject Final Fantasy/character names for details. And, links to past discussions on the topic: this, not quite as on-target, but commenting on translation, and another re-hash of the first discussion - although I think the PC copy of the game I later acquired DID use "Aerith" in the FF7 talk archives. The last link points out that the changes to Aeris were made for internal consistency, as well as accuracy with the most widely released version(s) (PSX for US and most to all of Europe) of the game (the comment about quotes from the script). This was done in preparation for trying to get the article to Featured Article status. I haven't found any explicit discussion on the old WPFF archives, just that when they spun the character names page linked above off, that convention was already in place. umrguy 42  19:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think the in the previous FLC there were some objections regarding Aeris' name. About having "relevant explanations of the difference in the FF7 article and in the main Aerith article", there are none which why I'm confused. As far as I'm experienced I remember that wikiprojects focused in a series used to have rules that were against the ones from wikipedia (remember what happened with the pokemon articles?) and if there is no consistency with aerith/s' name (I don't what name should be used though) there will be more good faith edits to the FF articles and more reverts. Unfortunately I'm having problems with my computer and I will be a bit inactive these days. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 19:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't do Pokemon, so, no, I don't remember what happened. (And I'm not sure what you mean with the FLC comment.) I think the article needs to be internally consistent to what the game itself used, which was Aeris. There should have been an explanation of it, but possibly it never got added, or it's been subsequently deleted. It IS right at the top of the Aerith page, though. (If it's felt it takes away from the text, perhaps a footnote saying "For the Aeris/Aerith discussion, please see the Aerith page"? Or similar, short and sweet.) Basically, the Aerith page and the main "Characters of FF7" page both mention that it was originally romanized as Aeris. umrguy  42  20:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I also meant to add - as far as wikiproject conventions, yes, some may be in conflict with the MoS. The MoS is also a set of guidelines, not iron-clad policy. I don't currently see these naming conventions as being out of line, or if so, so drastically out of line that it has to be changed. But please, I in no way claim to have read the whole MoS, could you point out what you think are relevant sections, and let's discuss. umrguy  42  20:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In fact, the first "General Principle" on WP:MOS I think heavily applies - internal consistency of an article is good, encyclopedia-wide consistency is not required. (The second principle, about long-term stable articles, is also a good read, IMO.) As far as internal consistency, the only instance of "Aerith" I find on the page is in the FF7 box at the bottom, which relates to the whole "universe", and thus is set to "Aerith". umrguy  42  20:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * As to the old discussion, I have the PC version of the game and I'm 99% sure it used Aeris as it was just a straight port, it doesn't even say Eidos in the splash screens, as with the PSN version not saying Square Enix. I think Tintor2, now since discussing it with him last night (day it may be wherever lol, he understands the reasons it needs to be Aeris. If we tried to look at it from the POV of an outsider that doesn't know, you would wonder why is it written Aerith? At not one point is she called Aerith in the English translations of this game
 * As for mentioning it, I did think about how earlier and thought of having it, in the characters section, as Aerith Gainsborough (spelt Aeris). Is this OK with everyone? (ie the only mention of 'Aerith' is that one in the character section)
 * Its a bit like Squall in FF8 (a slight different reason though), he calls himself Leon in Kingdom Hearts 1&2 but all references bar one to explain, say Leon. Therefore it should be the same here chocobogamer   mine  20:27, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, don't hold me to the PC thing, it's been a while since I fired it up ;) I personally DON'T think it should be "Aerith" in the characters section - THAT's where we start introducing inconsistencies. I would repeat my suggestion of possibly a footnote pointing out that in all other media, it's "Aerith", but that "Aeris" was used in the English translation. umrguy  42  20:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I had just changed it to my suggestion, please have a look and see if it looks ok. If not I was thinking "Aeris Gainsborough (spelt Aerith in the other titles in the series)" We can't generalise too much, as she was Aeris in Tactics as well as FF7 so we can't say "all other games" chocobogamer   mine  20:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Umrguy42, your change seems ok by me :) thanks :) chocobogamer   mine  21:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. As I said, I'm striving for the balance of reasonable explanation with the internal consistency of the article (with hopefully a helping of minimal disruption to the article's flow thrown in). umrguy  42  21:26, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The fact of Squall (which I agree with) is more for plot reasons (it is said in the game that he changed his name) than a change done between English and Japanese release of a game.Tintor2 (talk) 23:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

a little notice for ya
I'm gonna be goin thru the article making minor tidy-ups as I look through it as I've noticed a few dodgy bits, so if you see a dozen minor edits by moi this is why :) chocobogamer   mine  20:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

sales
is it safe to now say has sold over 10million? there are several sources that say its been downloaded on PSN over 100,000 times. 9.9M+100,000=10M.. chocobogamer  mine  22:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that that's an allowable synthesis, so long as you clearly specify something like "sold over 10M copies (9.9M+ on PSX[source], 100K+ on PSN[source])". umrguy  42  20:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Technically that's still synthesis. ALL original research and synthesis is banned on wikipedia- wiki reports the facts it does not deduce them. That said, if you want to change it then change it, I'm not going to revert it I'm not that anal. 86.131.8.178 (talk) 19:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There's an exception when it is simple common sense type of calculation. I don't think anyone will challenge you if you place in something like 1+1=2(decimal) or 1+1=10(binary) without a source.  9.9M+0.1M=10M is hardly out of common sense.  per WP:V, All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable  I don't think simple adding numbers would be challenged by normal users, those who challange it are likely to be vandals and/or gaming the system for no reason. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  01:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * For further information on this, one can look into WP:NOTOR, Any relatively simple and direct mathematical calculation that reasonably educated readers can be expected to quickly and easily reproduce. For example, if given the population and the size of a specific area, then the population density of that area may be included. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  07:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Different Versions?
I could not find that the article offers any information the slight adjustments they did on the different versions of the game. There are some big differences actually between the original release the current release including different monsters, side quests, Easter eggs and very little plot change. I do not have a refrence on this yet but I have personally experienced it and have read about it in many reviews and walk throughs. I also know of some difference between the American and Japan version that might want to be included.

(Alchier (talk) 06:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC))


 * There are also slight differences in the soundtrack - but that seems mostly tweaking the MIDI for PC (dropping certain sounds that perhaps didnt play right on the PC?) such as the almost exhale like sound in the battle music that was dropped from the PC version, as well as some other instrument tweaks/changes/omissions.


 * I noted some game play changes (as you mentioned), but could never pin down exactly what was different as the time between when I played the PS version and the PC version was years apart. If I find any references, I will drop some links here so you or someone else can take a crack at whatever you think relevant to the article.


 * RobertMfromLI | RobertMfromLI 05:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If you are talking about the original Japanese version and the International version's differences, you can probably find it in the Japanese guidebook. They usually list every single different points out just so people who bought or is going to buy both of the games can know the differences. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  06:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I found a page that lists off some of the differences. It is from a website called Stason.org.  Not sure whether or not that would be considered a good enough source.  I would list them off here but they are fairly numerous. Differences between International and Japanese FF games Mirror of Article at Pastebin.com Zell Faze (talk) 00:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Main problem is that it is not a reliable source. It is only created by fans with no editorial or expert oversight.  Also, the Turks is still the Turks in the Japanese version, it was not a translation error like Aerith/Aeris. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  02:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Remake Speculations
I have added a new section with the new information that has recently come to light, along with sources. If the sources are not found to be legitimate for whatever reason, I can find others barring I have more time. I ultimately decided it was enough information to start the new section (titled 'Remake Speculations'). If anything needs re-worded or re-organized, or if no one else feels like the new 'Remake Speculations' section is necessary, don't hesitate to organize it in a different manner. Many thanks, and apologies if I left anything out (haven't edited on Wikipedia for a few years). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.235.133.197 (talk) 19:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've removed the whole thing you added, actually- for the french reference, the only thing the quote said is that the guy is sure that SE will someday make it- he has no facts to back it up, its just his speculation. For the Nomura ref, as I say in my edit summary, I think everyone can assume that SE will announce a game(s) in 2010. Unless he hints much more that it is FF7 besides that it is "requested by fans", it doesn't need to be in here- it might well be a new Chrono Trigger game or something. -- Pres N  21:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

More news about a possible remake
Don't know if this is noteworthy but Square Enix asked fans in their Japanese twitter account if they would like a PS3 remake of the title (I thought they already said they couldn't). Lots of users responded (all positive) so the author told the users to stop it. The sources are these, but I don't know if it's okay to use twitter as a reference. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 21:35, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems like the question is only about a remake, but did not specify the console? —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  02:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I think they didn't specify.Tintor2 (talk) 15:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I kinda think that fan desire for a remake has been well covered, so I personally dont think this (other than as a footnote) is edit-worthy. Also, at this time, I dont see any posts at those links - and I am not sure how we would differentiate whether it was a post by SE or not.


 * This really doesnt discuss anything about a possible remake either, IMHO. If fan interest was all that was required, SE would have done the remake a long time ago. I personally, would be thrilled with a remake. But my opinion also does not warrant inclusion in the article. :-)


 * Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 16:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Supposedly there will never be a FFVII remake, since it would take 30-40 years. Here's the interview: http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2010/05/30/versus_xiii_and_ffvii_remake/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.235.71.74 (talk) 00:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Spoiler?
Quote: Sephiroth kills Aeris in a scene which has been referred to by some as "the most shocking moment in video games"

This is a major spoiler, shouldn't there be a spoiler warning for this? (78.135.32.165 (talk) 10:37, 7 May 2010 (UTC))


 * see WP:SPOILER for your answer. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk 12:46, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

YEah this was annoying. I was researching the game, I've never played it, and I scroll down and there's a huge picture with this game breaking spoiler. I'm not opposed to the spoiler being in text, where it is properly avoidable. Having the picture is almost like baiting people into being spoiled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.181.225.50 (talk) 05:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

nes version
there is a version of the game for the nintendo entertainment system. i can prove that it exists since i have played it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.72.121 (talk) 20:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a hack by a group in China. It wasn't produced by Square. --Cromas (talk) 04:38, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It you read carefully, there is an article of it already. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk 10:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Ultimania development information
The following sources should be translated and used to expand the current incomplete article:


 * FFVII Creator Interview (from the Final Fantasy VII Ultimania Omega)
 * FFVII Ultimania Omega Staff Comments (from the Ultimania website)

Anyone willing to help translate even one page is welcome! Jonathan Hardin&#39; (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Sephirot kills aeris (NEW)
Ok, i'm tired of this stupid image to be put again in the article, just put another one, it's a freaking spoiler and while wikipedia allows spoilers to be in a "plot" section it doesn't say anything about a media tipe content, a picture catches your atention so you may be scrolling down the article and without noticing you have that stupid picture in front of your eyes, and even with "kill" word writen just under the image, just put another picture it should be millions, it could be a Mako reactor or what ever, the insistence of putting that controversial picture is childish. I will take out that stupid picture until i get some responce on the matter.--Starlingmaximilian (talk) 07:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You placed something in my archived talk page instead of the current one, I will reply here along with this. I will remind you of WP:CONSENSUS, WP:3RR.  Also, the picture is a screen shot of a very notable scene in the game, which was actually well sourced, thus extremely appropriately placed in the article.  WP:PLOT, WP:SPOILER and WP:CENSOR, WP:IDONTLIKEIT also tell editors not to remove content just for the sake of you not wanting to have it shown. Content include all pictures and media files.  A more compromised way can be changing the word kill to stab which is technically still correct, yet this a waits others' consensus. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  07:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Articles are restricted on the number of fair use images that it can include. That image is critical to the article because it fills a tri-fold purpose: it depicts a scene from the story, it depicts an iconic scene in video gaming (explained elsewhere), and it depicts what in-game cutscenes look like. No other image can do all three of these things. MythSearcher already outlined the relevant policies on spoilers. As Gabe once put it: "There's a statute of limitations on this shit, man." Axem Titanium (talk) 08:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

You may use a picture of cloud in the hardy daytona, one of the sea weapon shooting against shinra, i know these pictures may not be as "iconic" (lol) as sephirot killing aeris but it shows a cutscene and depicts a scene on the story, also readers may see how a weapon looks like and most important of all is not a controversial picture like the one you are using. I can see you just want to use this stupid picture for "style" purposes only instead of looking for what is most functional, this image was questioned but a lot of people, even some guy said on another discussion topic that he doesn't played the game and was a victim of this stupid spoiler. The spoiler policies of wikipedia doesn't speak of media elements, what the spoiler policies of wikipedia states are applied to text as is it implied on itself. Stop acting like children. And sopt putting the damn picture until it achieves consensus.--Starlingmaximilian (talk) 10:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The picture is sourced to be the most shocking scene in video game history, it goes way beyond any other pictures you suggested, and it is not only about iconic. It is NOT used only for style purposes but for showing a very notable scene of the game, in which the scene itself is extremely notable, and notability is the reason that it is included in wikipedia. I will tell you one last time, the consensus is to keep the picture, as shown by many different people reverted your edits and told you otherwise. WP:SPOILER said "Information" and information does not equal to text, it includes images and any other media format as well.  You can ignore all of these policies and opinion of the others, but you have already passed 3RR for a few times, and you were sufficiently warned a few times.  Your comments in the talk page showed that you are not listening to others and insisted on your own action.  You opinion can be wrong, and you insisting your own idea takes you nowhere since you can never force it on others, you must learn to accept this very point.  Wikipedia works on WP:CONSENSUS, you have failed to convince the majority of us to consent with you act, and the consensus stay the same as it had been.  Anyone of us reporting you to WP:3RR will pretty much guarantee a block on your account, and I can tell you, I will report you.  Stop your disrupting acts, now.  —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  12:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * (editconflict) As I mentioned above, the selection of that image is solely based on functional reasons, not stylistic. The guideline on spoilers refers to "information", which can refer to knowledge in many forms, both text and pictoral. The article was promoted to featured article, featured on the main page, and was later listed as a good article with the picture in question intact. If that's not consensus to you, I don't know what is. Axem Titanium (talk) 12:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

This article is definitely NOT the best one's to read especially with the major spoilers!
Upon finishing the game I wanted to go to Wikipedia and read about it. Seems that the major spoilers are everywhere.

Sure the major spoilers are the storyline but why put Aeris' death as a picture in this article? This isn't about paying tribute to the game you know? Its about making an article that other people can read about. There's a place called Final Fantasy Wikia if you guys want to do that.

By placing that picture there you are basically highlighting all the major stuff in this game. Either Wikipedia gives a warning message warning viewers of spoilers or you guys remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueknightex  (talk • contribs)  03:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Did you read the above section before making this one?Tintor2 (talk) 03:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

One more in agreement with the current concensus to keep the full image (as opposed to none or the cropped version). Figured I'd add my two cents since this can of worms may be reopened. RobertMfromLI | User Talk 05:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

One wonders why some people are so bothered by spoilers showing up on the page of a 13 year old game? Also why is Aerith's death in particular causing such consternation? TheJaff (talk) 12:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Yep. It's like if people got angry that the lead of an article says that Darth Vader is Luke's... Well, you know.Tintor2 (talk) 12:53, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Should there be some need to re-evaluate consensus on it in the near future, keep the full image as well. umrguy 42  14:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

"By placing that picture there you are basically highlighting all the major stuff in this game." -> Dude, that's exactly the point of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The whole idea here is that we show the major components of the game. Aeris' death was widely covered by third party sources as a groundbreaking feature of this game. We don't use nonfree images just to decorate articles, but in this case, that's a major component of the game and was widely discussed. The presence of the image is entirely justified. And we do have in our general disclaimer that articles may contain spoilers. Generally speaking, if you don't want a spoiler for something you might watch/read/play, you should probably avoid looking at any dynamically generated Internet content on that particular thing. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to add one more thing to this dead horse... errr... discussion. I believe the fact that the inclusion of this image seems so notable to so many, especially those against, makes the image... (what's the word I'm looking for?)... notable (and thus valid for inclusion on those grounds). I also disagree with the contention that this image is a spoiler for this game. (1) there is a lot more that happens in this game besides Aeris' death (much of which is also covered in the article) - meaning this is far from "all the major stuff" that happens in the game, (2) as someone else stated, the game is 13 years old - and inclusions of plot points and spoilers (within days if not hours of their release) in numerous TV and movie and comic articles generally do not get this type of controversy (so, why should this, 13 years after the game's release?), and (3) it's not like there arent literally hundreds of other sites that have a similar spoiler (many with pics as well) meaning removing this one would be entirely meaningless in the "it's a spoiler! get rid of it!" sense. RobertMfromLI | User Talk 17:13, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I have a suggestion, let's include the fact that it is the "most spoilerific spoiler of all time" (sourced, see the ref from that very picture), which makes it even more notable and a very good counter argument to those who over-react to spoilers. No, this is not WP:POINT, I only find it strange that it was only quoted for the most shocking scene and not along with another "most" claim. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  18:22, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Remove/Condense Possible Remake Section?
This is just a suggestion, but the section regarding the possible remake seems to diminish the quality of this article. So far any information about the possibility of a remake comes from hype regarding a 2005 Playstation 3 graphical demo, and secondary sources translating the supposed words of Square-Enix employees and representatives. I think the information in this section could be edited to a few key points and ideas(Maybe under the legacy section?). If Square-Enix makes an official announcement regarding a remake it would be enough to merit the creation of its own exclusive page. Until then, I don't think masquerading wishful thinking under the guise of legitimate sources constitutes what most would consider a professional article. Since there is currently no remake project in any stage of development, everything thus far is purely hypothetical. I think their are better places on the internet to post speculation. --173.187.81.228 (talk) 21:34, 24 June 2011 (UTC)