Talk:Final Fantasy VI

Final Fantasy VI is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

Final Fantasy VI is part of the Final Fantasy series series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 20, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 8, 2005	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
August 9, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
September 11, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
January 11, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
July 19, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
July 31, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
November 7, 2006	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
June 24, 2008	Featured topic removal candidate	Demoted
November 25, 2009	Featured article review	Kept
December 28, 2015	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
April 13, 2017	Featured topic removal candidate	Demoted
April 13, 2018	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
Current status: Featured article

Video games High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has had a peer review which is now archived.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Final Fantasy VI's sequel, Shadows of the Light

Is this true or not? I first read about it on a Retro-gaming story about Final Fantasy VI. There were some images to what would be FFVI's sequel, a game called "Shadows of the Light". The main character would be Shadow and most of the game would happen in the one year period between Kefka's growth to power and fall. Is that true? If it is, it should be on the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.142.58.18 (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link please? Google is not turning up with anything of the sort. --Pres N 19:36, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shadows of the Light appears to be a fanfic. Belasted (talk) 19:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's neither of them, I've found the truth. A website made an April's Fool in 2000 saying that Square planned to make this game but cancelled it, and many people believed it was truth. A now-extinct brazilian games magazine (Ação Games) made a story about it... that's why many people here in Brazil believe the "Shadows of the Light" rumor. There were even pictures of the so called sequence on the internet back then... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.142.58.18 (talk) 12:09, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very positive reception?

First off let me just say don't crucify me for questioning this (I know what some fans are like) but when compared to other featured articles for games with equal or greater receptions like Shadow of the Colossus, StarCraft, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, even other Final Fantasy articles etc to same only a few, the reception is a string of "one of the best ever" style comments. Now granted I am aware of the game's impacts, legacy and overall praise and that there is one line of criticism. I'm not suggesting shoveling useless and trivial cons for the sake of diminishing creditability, yet I am rather surprised that a featured article barely reflects any other note beside undying praise making this game more of a 99.999999% than 90-93%. Stabby Joe (talk) 16:37, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that most of the FF featured articles tend to be like this because they were mass-written and mass-promoted in succession and in short amounts of time. With other featured article pushes the main pusher tends to focus on only one article, for a very long time, even after it is promoted to FA. But with the FFs it appears that the objective was always to take on the next numbered FF article as soon as the pushed article is promoted. So the reception sections tend not to be as in-depth as in other featured articles, maybe. It also doesn't help that every FF has hundreds of possible reviews to consider. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:55, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean. I've worked on numerous reception sections for massvely popular games, sometime I've even written the whole thing to prevent it becoming a string of praise. Without having to change anything or start an edit war, I'd just insert one or two lines of genuine criticism. For example the aged graphics for the GBA version, or perhaps something completely different. Stabby Joe (talk) 11:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you just include the Nintendo Power review into the reception section? If you look at Game Rankings, that is the review that is the lowest. It gave it about a 75%. I do think it should be rewritten, but I don't think it should be drastically rewritten. It is pertinent that the game is often ranked highly in "best of" lists, specifically in magazines such as Game Informer and Nintendo Power.75.131.35.252 (talk) 21:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I read all the reviews, but in my opinion, Final Fantasy VI is a true masterpiece, in both storyline, musical score and depth. It was a video game that was truly generations ahead of its time.--Zhane Masaki (talk) 04:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yahtzee's reception of FFVI

I'm unsure about whether or not FFVI being one of the few JRPGs that Yahtzee actually likes deserves a full paragraph in the reception section talking about him comparing it to FFXIII. I don't really know much about Yahtzee, though, so if it is worth mention, then please tell me. Alex.liu064 (talk) 22:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, reviewers unknown to most are glorified as if their take on the game was of any relevance. Who cares if that guy likes the game ? I hate most JRPGs but love FF6, it's a well-known fact on a gaming website I write for but nobody wants to see a whole paragraph on Wikipedia about it. 82.231.37.66 (talk) 18:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With no disrespect meant, you're not a well known video game critic, but Yahtzee is.96.38.123.188 (talk) 01:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With no disrespect meant, that wasn't relevant. Regardless of whether or not he's a big critic, his words make sense. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 23:35, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The point of that comment wasn't that 82.231.37.66 isn't "a big critic", but that Ben Croshaw is a well-known, Wikipedia-notable critic. - 24.180.122.2 (talk) 19:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The graphic directors should be added to the credits list under Artists.

The term Graphic Director was just another term for Art Director before Square started using it. Yoshitaka Amano only did the character designs. Those that worked on the visuals seen in the games towns and locations shoud also be credited. These three people deserve recognition:

Tetsuya Takahashi, Hideo Minaba, Tetsuya Nomura

82.31.135.50 (talk) 01:33, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now that you say that... I guess you can go ahead and put them back in, until someone more informed comes along and disagrees. Sorry for the trouble. The Stick Man (talk) 01:57, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Prime Blue seems to have problem with it. I don't really know much about the staff, and what he says makes sense. [TheStickMan]^[✆Talk] 20:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like GZay has good intentions but is too lazy to write prose instead of putting microscopic additions in infoboxes. Things like Nomura/Tanaka/Takahashi contributing stuff should be explained in the Development/Creation section, which is currently kinda lacking in that department. Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 19:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Error- Secret of Evermore

I'm too much of a wiki novice to confidently edit the main article, so I thought I'd just mention what I'm pretty sure is an error. No Final Fantasy 6 characters appear in Secret of Evermore. This is most likely a confused allusion to the Final Fantasy 4 characters that appear in Secret of Evermore. The reference provided only pertains to the latter bit of the sentence about the 3d polygon demo models. If we want to list other games in which FF6 characters appear besides Kingdom Hearts, we could use Final Fantasy Disidia (spelling?), or we could say 'appeared or were referenced' and include Final Fantasy Tactics, in which one of the FF6 Characters (Setzer) does not appear, but is mentioned in some dialogue.

If I'm wrong, someone please let me know, as I've played secret of Evermore all the way through and the only Final Fantasy character's I've encountered therein are Cecil and Rosa, from final fantasy 4 appearing as shop keepers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mleem16 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've never played that game, but Terra, Locke, Mog, Relm, Strago, and Umaro actually do appear in the game. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 21:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Error - Reception

Electronic Gaming Monthly's 1994 video game awards did not have separate categories for "role-playing game" and "Japanese role-playing game." It had a single category for role-playing game, which FFVI won. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.82.81.67 (talk) 15:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mode 7 image

The article seems to suggest that the Mode 7 in this game was particularly noteworthy, so I think that it would be worth showing the way it's used. Perhaps while riding a Chocobo? My memory is a little fuzzy, but I remember the Mode 7 being particularly "3D". - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 21:55, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uncensored church crosses in final fantasy (III) or VI snes

To the person in charge of Final Fantasy VI. I have an interesting article for you. I've played Final Fantasy 6 many times and I wanted to point out that there are actually uncensored Church Crosses that are in the Localized English Super Nintendo version.

For Example the characters shield icon in the equipment menu shows a cross on the shield. Also when you're fighting in battle, The characters like Terra, Locke or Edgar defend themselves with a shield with a cross symbol.

Also in the towns of Thamasa, and the Ruined town of Mobliz in the "World of Balance" and "World of ruin", there are tombstones with the church cross carved on the Tombstones in the graveyard and at General Leos memorial tombstone. Just like the church crosses on the tombstones in "Legend of Zelda" NES.

Yes there is some religious content in Final Fantasy VI. I've always been fascinated by religious elements even in video games. I don't understand why the Nintendo company would try to suppress religion in video games which I'm against because I'm religious myself.

Anyways yes there are church crosses in Final Fantasy VI that have been overlooked in the SNES version and I think that it should be included in the localized section. Let me know if I can add the article on it. CrosswalkX (talk) 05:53, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you just post the article here? Also, for the record, there is technically no one in charge of this article. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 06:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've added the article about crosses on tombstones and shield icons that were left in Final Fantasy VI SNES. I hope I did a good job and I hope it will be acceptable. Let me know what you think because that was definitely in the 1994 American SNES version of Final Fantasy VI or (III) CrosswalkX (talk) 02:25, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to actually post/use the source you're talking about; just linking to the wikia wiki on FF6 isn't the same thing. --Pres N 02:53, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it is generally not a good idea to use other wikis as sources in Wikipedia. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 02:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't know those rules. I'll remember from now on. Anyways I'm done and I'll do other wikipedia articles. Thanks for your time. CrosswalkX (talk) 01:42, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Links

Using the Checklinks tool, I've updated this article's dead links. A few notes:

Ref 064 (fixed) 404 error. Updated with Wayback.
Ref 065 (no change) Already archived. Removed dead link tag.
Ref 078 (no change) Already archived. Removed dead link tag.
Ref 085 (fixed) 301 error. Cannot be crawled by Wayback due to Robots.txt. Updated with current URL on Gamespot.com.
Ref 096 (fixed) 404 error. Updated with Wayback.
Ref 098 (fixed) 404 error. Updated with Wayback.
Ref 105 (fixed) 301 error. Updated with Wayback.

Aside from broken links, I found a few other problems:

Ref 04 (fixed) Naked URL. Updated to cite web template.
Ref 33 (fixed) Naked URL. Updated to cite web template.
Ref 70 (fixed) Naked URL. Updated to cite web template.
Ref 72 (fixed) Naked URL. Updated to cite web template.
Ref 079 (not fixed) 301 error. Cannot be crawled by Wayback due to Robots.txt. I found the current page for Final Fantasy Anthology Reviews on Gamespot, but I'm concerned that the information in the article DOES NOT support ANY of information it is cited for (there are three uses of in the Wikipedia article). It's cited for Electronic Gamer Montly in several spots, even though it's from Gamespot. Someone more familiar with the article needs to look into this. Added dead link tag.
Ref 81 (fixed) Naked URL. Updated to cite web template.
There's a clump of inline citations commented out just above the category list. I didn't mess with it, but maybe it should be moved to the talk page?

I did not check every citation. All citations should be up-to-date in terms of archiving, but there may be other problems (like the problem with Ref 79) that I didn't catch. Some one more familiar with this article should inspect the citations to make sure they are accurate. --chrisFjordson (talk) 22:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Scenario writers

I removed the mention of Hironobu Sakaguchi and Yoshinori Kitase as the game's main writers as this paints a very different picture from the actual situation back then. As confirmed by several sources, Sakaguchi came up with the plot outline but wasn't involved with the scriptwriting. This Dengeki transcript of a 2007 interview with Kitase on FF6 details the contents of the plot outline: Sakaguchi had come up with the idea of the imperial conflict and several key scenes of the story. The scene orders in the document were very rudimentary, however. For example, the instructions for the opera scenes would only read "There is an opera stage where lots of things happen." It was Kitase's job to think what exactly should happen and then write the scenario, with all team members contributing ideas. And he had three or four colleagues help out with the scenario. The situation mirrors that of FF13 where Motomu Toriyama created the crude plot outline and Daisuke Watanabe came up with the scenes and scenario (only that FF13 was much less of a team effort than FF6).Xiomicronpi (talk) 17:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Final Fantasy VI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:49, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Final Fantasy VI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://playstationjapan.tripod.com/Sakaguchi.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Final Fantasy VI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6hWAylKsC to http://www.1up.com/features/final-fantasy-kitase-story
Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6F1GlRrn3 to http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=9002538&publicUserId=6049935

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:47, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Final Fantasy VI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/features/final-fantasy-kitase-story
Corrected formatting/usage for http://playstationjapan.tripod.com/Sakaguchi.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.play-symphony.com
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070421003854/http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-USPlatinum.shtml to http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-USPlatinum.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:08, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Story sections trimmed

My work is finished, I think. It's pretty succinct now. Might be worth double checking. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 22:55, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier this year, someone rewrote about half of the plot summary and omitted most of the characters. They did a good job fleshing out some of the major plot beats and eliminating some of the less important ones, but the section is now kind of vague about where the major characters enter the story. I feel it needs another rewrite that keeps the same overall length and pace but reintroduces some of the omitted elements. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 21:11, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I did another pass and I rather like the summary in its current state. It's very succinct and flows quite well. Frankly, the rest of the cast can be summarized by the "Returner" handle quite well. I often find it a chore to include "X character joints the party" in plot summaries anyway. If people want to know details, they can go to the characters page. Thoughts? —Deckiller (t-c-l) 21:43, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I was one of the folks who helped trimmed the plot summary down to make it similar to Final Fantasy XII. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:31, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1994 Developer Interviews

Shmuplations just posted a translation of some incredible developer interviews with the development staff in 1994. Someone should work on incorporating this into the article. TarkusAB^talk 00:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Space limitations

I have personally run the English script through an optimizer utilizing the game's built-in DTE, and it reduces the size by something on the order of 40-60%. Space limitation is hardly to blame. The truth is, Ted Woolsey had just 30 days to translate the game, which probably meant some localization and brevity had to be introduced. Imzogelmo (talk) 07:02, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup Tag

Do we agree or not that the legacy section needs a trim or rewrite? It’s a very famous game, and its legacy section should probably be long in the first place. Should we keep the tag, or remove it? Or Does someone want to rewrite the section? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:11, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alert some of the all-stars as well: @PresN:, @ProtoDrake:, @Tintor2:. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have the same problems as some other Final Fantasy articles like "He was listed as most popular character in 2010. In 2012, he was listed as the most popular story, etc" using multiple quotes. It's kinda like the issue we had with Rinoa's article. Probably the best solution is writing something like "It has often been listed as one of the best games by Square and gaming in general" in order to provide generalizations over undue weight.Tintor2 (talk) 17:40, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The legacy section looked a little questionable. I decided to do a rewrite. As to the "Retrospective" section, I'd suggest doing some summarising and cutting the quotes, and that should fix the issue. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely amazing, it’s fixed just like that. You are really gems of Wikipedians. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Dream oath opera" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Dream oath opera. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 29#Dream oath opera until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:42, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]