Uwee hee hee hee! Welcome, editors, to the Dragon's Neck Colosseum! My name is Ultros the receptionist, and each week I'm taking bets as to who will win in a tussle between two characters from the Final Fantasy series! The winner gets, well, nothing. It's more of a poll, really. The Colosseum owner stuck me on this duty after Kefka was defeated, but I need the money! So what are you waiting for? Get voting! Remember, you can remain anonymous! If you have any requests for future fights, please feel free to leave a message here.
The Rules, Briefly
Functionally, this is a popularity contest. You may vote for your favorite or who you think would win in an competition between the two combatants that week.
You may vote only once.
If you are a user, please include your vote in the user section.
If you are not a user, please include your vote in the anonymous section.
To vote, leave the following "#~~~~" and you are required to leave this whether you are logged in or anonymous.
If you wish to comment on the fight, please leave your remarks in the peanut gallery. You are expected to conduct yourself with courtesy. Comments must relate to the fight at hand.
Do not alter the format of this page.
Any failure to adhere to these rules will result in your vote(s) being removed. Ties may be called if the victor won by a margin of 10% or less.
E3, the end all, be all of videogame wizardry has come and gone, and its pretty clear that we've seen what we are to see of these two titles for a little while. As each draws nearer, the question is obvious, which are you anticipating more?
Votes for Pure Numbers
First Vote!!! I prefer main series to anything else. Jeppo (Talk)
Although I'd probably prefer Versus, I only have a 360 so I cannot really look forward to it.--Werefang 22:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
XIII will be gorgeous. I <3 Lightning/Snow/Sazh/Oerba. Some of the concept art has captivated me as well. 8bit 22:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I know more about Pure XIII then Versus. Also XIII has a female protagonist. NeoZEROX 23:02, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
At this very moment, I am much more excited about XIII, but I bet that will change as soon as we get more information leaked about versus :) MMLNメーマウリアン 23:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Definitely XIII. It seems amazing and just as good as FFXII. Versus looks good, but there's too little info and I don't have a PS3, just a 360. Plus, Lightning reminds me of Ashe.Wee187 23:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I prefer something I've actually seen how it looks like than a game shrouded in shadows. What's taking you so long SE? We want a gameplay trailer! - Henryacores^ 23:50, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Not even a contest. I don't care about Nomura's directing "abilities." I'm not a fan of the Rule of Cool, and has there been any gameplay shown for Versus? What's to get excite about? On the other hand, FFXIII looks to be getting closer and closer to release, and the gameplay looks a lot of fun. Plus, I want to see what kind of direction they'll take with an "enemy of the world" plot. Overall, this isn't even a contest in my opinion.ClixPsi
XIII's world looks amazingly beautiful not to mention the music is amazing so far. Plus I think the characters are very well designed, though I wish Lebreau should be a main char but probably not. Oh well, Vanille is perfect for me :) Can't wait to play her! BoAKaN 01:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
BlueHighwind ツ: I haven't read what this fight is about, but I'm seeing two faces here. And I guess I'll decide by which pair of lips I more want pressed against mine.
I think XIII looks more interesting than Versus XIII, and the characters look better designed in XIII. Alos, Noctis looks like another Squall (Oh No!) Destriker73 02:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC) 07:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
BigSlurp I prefer the purity of the mainline series of Final Fantasy. The greatest series of RPGs out there. Hence why I did not like FFXI, cause I don't like the online stuff with no true ending, which probably means I wont like XIV much either cause they are talking about that as an online as well. Versus XIII might be fun, but that will have to be proven when the game actually comes out.
Nevanus I prefer the main series to spinoffs. Not that the spinoffs aren't good in their own right, but they're still just afterthoughts. Besides, a character with emo hair is a few points off of Versus XIII. 14:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I'll go with main series unless Versus proves me otherwise, but I can't rightly judge because the trailers for Versus haven't even shown gameplay mechanics, etc. -Nokareon
This game has a guy with an afro housing a small bird in it, the other doesn't. End of. - Paramina 18:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but what the hell? This fight is so stupid-neither of these games have been released. Whatever. This game looks so freaking awesome that I want to pee my pants, so of course I'll vote for it. P.S. I've always liked Vanilla Ice Cream ...Yummy. Violetmage20:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I have always preferred the main series NeoExdeath 05:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm definitely looking forward to this game more. It promises a true FF-experience with both traditional elements and new innovations. The world divided into a futuristic side and a primitive side is also very intriguing. All the revealed characters look unique and the plot premesis is mind-boggling as well. Now I really hope the game won't let me down. SamSandy 08:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
This fight is incredibly inane, but let's face it: in a contest of versus Versus, XIII will win every. SINGLE. TIME. MechaUltimaZero 15:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Seeing as how I've been keeping up to tabs on XIII and not Versus, I guess I wanna play it more. But, you know, it's just been too long since a numbered title came out v.v Yzz 16:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Versus looks like its just a ripoff of VII. Not that Lightning is not, but still. Exdeath64 17:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I have this strange feeling Versus will never see the light of day for a long time. ScatheMote 18:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Can't say that I like either more than the other, but I'm going for the game with a actual gameplay trailers, more than two characters named, and the fact that this game is in the main series. Here's to hoping that this game will be just as good as it looked in the demo. :D Xxwater blue pandaxX
Bruntie2 09:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC) I only have an Xbox 360, but I think this game looks better anyway ;)
On the condition it's just as good as XII... Captain Darkblade 17:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Eowynjedi 02:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC) One, Lightning looks kickass. Two, Nomura's running the show on Versus and he's a bad writer. Three... the guy in Versus. His name translates to "Nightlight." Come on.
It pretty much comes down to XIII vs. Versus XIII (THE BRAIN! IT BURNS!) know more about XIII (and lightning for that matter). also, i cant get versus on xbox. so NYAA! (edit: apparently it was XIII vs Versus XIII. need to read as well as look at pretty pictures >.>) --Adonzo 09:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Cryss Leonhart Haha Other Than The Name Translation Fail About The Other Game. Im Just Gonna Say Id Rather Play The One Coming To 360
Because its comeing out first and its in the main series this gets my vote.R-o-b-s-t-a-r 15:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
This one looks cooler, and i think its a terrible idea and a waste of money to make compilation for a game before the actual game even comes out. X-2 was made before people even had enough time to react to X and that turned out to be awful. Gyromite 15:47, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
There is a battle system confirmed and it looks great. plus the characters seem more interesting than the standard forbidden love that's coming across in the moody versus. main series ftw. oh and lightning is a much cooler main character.
XIII's characters look awesome! Lightning looks like an awesome main character so yea! 184.108.40.206 22:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
XIII's going to come out a lot sooner than Versus. I'm excited about both, but to be honest, XIII tips it for me. The world seems more interesting, we've actually SEEN the battle system, and there's not a character I don't like the look of! #220.127.116.11 08:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
XIII story from what i've seen and heard is much more intresting and the characters seem better and less depressed the guy from vs looks depressed in the trailer.
Votes for Plus Versus
Finally a fight worth of my presence, I like dark games and this game seems to be the darkest FF. Plus, Noctis and I share the same hair style and color. --TenzaZangetsu 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Noctis is my dream protagonist come true <3. But release some gameplay screenshots, damn. Template:BfDsig
Masamune: Two reasons: The first being that there was something deliciously tragic about the latest Versus XIII trailer. The interactions between the two characters coupled with the gloomy setting brought about a very ominous and vulnerable atmosphere. The second reason is less likely to make me sound like a douche: there was no ear-mutilatingly bad voice-acting. Like, "reminiscent of FFX" bad
I vote for this because of the protagonist. KuzlalalaSquee! 04:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Vampyro entertaiment 09:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC) first of all noctis is hot. hotest of all ff ppl. and his ability is much same with my own character, and versus seems to be even darker then the legendary ff7 so this wins.no matter what.
because i like the promotional videos for this one more. AtmaCrisis 10:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm probably going to like XII more but this looks like something I want to play NOW. Give it a day and my I'll probably change my mind but oh well.Immune to stop 01:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
This just looks more interesing, also darker coloring and more realistic looking. Lost-myth
Although I will try out XIII Original for its unique story, I like action adventure RPG games more, and with the story having settings and events alluding off of real life, I like this one a lot more. A Final Fantasy that mated with Devil May Cry with the world of No More Heroes and Killer 7? I'm up for it. Mask no Oni 22:02, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
For some reason I seem to be more excited about this game. Not sure if it's the style of the game or the the fact that it is still a PS3 exclusive (YAY! PS3), but I seem to be a little more excited about this one. 18.104.22.168 23:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Versus XIII just seems more badass to me. XIII also seems to be going towards a XII style battle system, and I hated XII's battle system. 22.214.171.124 01:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Decliner: What's better than wielding 30+ swords at once with your mind? Defying gravity? Like that hasn't happened already with every single JRPG in existence. And Noctis can do the latter, too. Jokes aside I think that Versus will have a good story that will go on par with XIII, but with the twist of the darker and edgier stuff mixed inside. That's what made The Dark Knight eternally more badass than Batman Begins.
Although FFXIII looks to be out sooner, the trailer for versus XIII pretty much blew me away. If the combat and fight is like that in the game, then my vote goes to Versus XIII
Definitely Versus. The character designs are far better, not to mention Noctis is a badass to rival any classic FF character. This is a game that anyone can be excited about. The new sense of realism, the violence, the intense action. What's not to love? 126.96.36.199 2:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I do like both of them and can't wait to get my paws on them, but Versus gets my vote because it's dark. From my point of view, this is more than enough to win xD 188.8.131.52 20:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
For once, I agree with this guy. Well...maybe not the exact words, but yeah, this is stupid, & if you think about it for more than 2 seconds, you realize it's against the rules, anyway, yet it somehow made through. I don't care whether it's, "which has better characters," "which are you more excited about," or whatever. It's STILL a game-versus-game fight. And what the Hell is Versus XIII, anyway?184.108.40.206 23:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
It's not against rules because the rules pertain to fights about which game is better. This one is more about which one would you be more willing to buy if they were to both come out right now.--Werefang 23:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
You guys don't half take these fights seriously. It's only a bit of fun! Geez... Jeppo (Talk) 00:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I get no enjoyment out of this fight. I'm not looking forward to either, since I highly doubt they'll be worth spending 400 dollars for a PS3, & therefore, I won't be getting them. As such, the only thing left for me to do is comment, since I have no opinion on the games. And Werefang, would you think your posts out before you make them? "Which one would you be more willing to buy," is "which one are you more excited about," which is, "which do you think will be better," which is all the same damn thing. A game vs. game fight will ALWAYS amount to which game is better. I CAN read, but as I keep showing you, it's no different, it's all meaningless semantics. How many suggestions are there in the DNC Nomination page for a game vs. game fight insisting that they ARE NOT about which game is better? Do any of THEM get approved? What makes this one any different? It got through because of bad reasoning, that's what. Now, I have nothing against Tactic Angel, but his logic makes NO sense in this case, & I WILL point that out, because I am the argumentative asshole, & while anyone is welcome to try & refute my points, I should note that there is a difference between a refutation & a response. If you just wish to stubbornly proclaim that "they're different!" it is a response. If you can actually reason HOW they are different, & the logic works, it is a refutation. I have no interest in starting a flame war, so I welcome refutations, but responses WILL end in a flame war, regardless of whether or not the public sides with me, because it's just beating a dead horse. I'm noticing a trend in that certain members just feel the need to show me how right they are, but they completely ignore any logic to the contrary. If I sound annoyed, it's because of that. Now, I don't want to ruin anyone's fun, but I also don't want to be bothered to keep posting wordwalls such as this. I gave my opinion. You have every right to disagree with it. Don't make a nuisance out of yourself, though. Now, on a more important note: Lightning is awesome, despite her weird-ass name.Neo Bahamut 00:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
This is different because neither game is released yet. This is not "which game is better." This is "which game do you think will be better." I think we're just measuring how well Square has advertised these games again each other in order to appeal to different demographics. 8bit 01:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Again: Pure semantics. Great. I gave myself carpal tunnel for nothing.Neo Bahamut 05:19, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
The difference is, that there is not enough information that exists on either game to make a judgement on which game is better. That is the inherent nature of a "will be" fight. A will be fight is therefor incapable of starting a flame war. But if you bothered to look at TA's comment you'd know that.--Werefang 11:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Werefang, remember what I told you about thinking through your posts? DO IT. I DID read Tactic Angel's comment, & it is no more convincing. Now, have you been reading MY comments? I keep saying that calling it different because it's "will be better" as opposed to "is better" is just pure semantics, & therefore meaningless. If you don't want to agree, fine, but stop responding to me without even bothering to make a point. To be quite frank: It's annoying to keep arguing with a closed-minded dumbass who keeps trying to make me agree with his baseless, substanceless opinion.Neo Bahamut 01:44, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
I do think about my posts. Can you say the same? Simply because you say that they are the same does not mean that they are the same. Every argument I've seen you make is based on the use of your interpretation as proof. Will be fights are driven by their very lack of information; ie: How deep is the story? Does the game actually play like that?, etc. Present tense fights are based on the existence of facts that are already present; Who is your fav. char.? Fav. Weapon?, Boss? etc. Also, I never said that you had to agree with my opinions, I simply point out that most of the time that you try to justify your opinions (a feet that is inherently impossible) you actually resort to invented facts that are just as much an opinion (sometimes even a farce) to "prove" why your opinion is right. And do not make a referance to logic again. You have made it cleat that you have no actual experience when it comes to anything even remotely related to logic.--Werefang 02:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
You're the one who doesn't seem to understand logic. "Invented facts"? Jesus Christ, the meaning of words are not OPINIONS, they are FACTS. And the FACT is that this is STILL a game vs. game fight. Trying to get around that with semantics is just retarded. And the only one attempting to prove their opinion is you. Think about it: You keep coming back here to fight with me when I tell you just fucking drop it. You simply WILL NOT give it a rest so long as I voice the FACT that this is a Game vs. Game fight, & no amount of flawed logic is going to change that. This, alone, would not be a problem, but you've shown to be completely INCAPABLE of making a point of your own, only saying, "THAT'S WRONG!" & regurgitating a bunch of shit I've already read & dealt with ages ago. It's annoying. Make a point, for crying out loud. I notice that the people arrogant enough to say to the person they're arguing to that they don't know anything about logic are usually just spewing out word diareha. Ad infinitum doesn't make you right. No matter how many times you rephrase, "this is a will be fight, not an is fight," this is STILL a game vs. game fight. If you can prove THAT wrong, you'll have a point. But you can't. And you know it. So you try to get around that with idiotic qualifier statements such as, "It's different, because it's future tense!" No,. it is not. Game vs. game. Shouldn't have been done. Boring anyway. End of discussion. You intend on doing this shit next week, too?Neo Bahamut 03:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
First of all, no one said this isn't a game vs game fight. We are talking about the subtle differences between the concepts of "Which game is better?" and "Which game are you more exited by?" And Logically, the very fact that they are not identical means that "is" is not the same as "will be." In other words, the very semantic difference that you claim is not relevent is logically the only evidence needed to prove them separate. You are the one who has to proove that this is a "which game is better?" fight and that it is against the rules. And lets not forget that you are the one who started the discussion, not me. You cannot start a fight and then tell everyone to drop it, that isn't the way reality works. When you say that something is a fact, you have the burdun of having to prove that it is a fact. Most people will not just bend over and take it, they will stand up and support what they consider to be fact. Just because you deny that something is relevant or important does not make it so. You are an absolute hypocrite as the very thing you accuse me of is the very problem that you have and if you even bothered to objectively examine what you write, you'd know that. So instead of being an argumentative asshole, try to at least be intelegent.--Werefang 14:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Oh, lately I'm in agreement with Neo Bahamut (incredible, I remembered pushing the spacebar between Neo and Bahamut!) with some frequence. You're just calling it with other name. Tell me, in what are we supposed to base our impressions in which game is more expected? In which of them looks better :/ Rai Balmung, the gargoyle 17:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
You're supposed to base it on which one you are more exited about, nothing more or less. I could have sworn TA put that in somewhere but I guess not. The future tense is about plans, not oppinions. As I said it is the very lack of Information that separates this from a "which game is better" fight. So what if it only has one word different. It is that one word that changes the entire meaning of the entire statement.--Werefang 17:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, think about it. Are you going to tell me you get excited about games that doesn't look good? Because I don't think so, it's ilogic. In order to get excited by a game unreleased, that bit of information that we got must offer us a impression about the quality of the product. If you want to know what of those products it's more expected, you have to compare that impressions and make your own judgement. That's why this is a "which game looks better". Rai Balmung, the gargoyle 23:50, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
You can get exited about whatever you want. Personally, I get more exited by what I don't know because the experience is fresh for me.--Werefang 02:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
CryssLeonhart Comparing one game with a lot of information about it and another with absolutley none seems pointless anyway. Also I'm not sure its fair to judge until we actually get some gameplay and can form our own subjective personal opinions. I suppose until then we can hope for a DNC fight I actually pay attention to.
I really like both of them. I can't really decide! Cluna06 22:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
It's not which one you like more, it's which are you more exited about, Zak.--Werefang 22:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I thought liking the games and being excited about the games were the same thing...meh, oh well. I am pretty excited about both. I just would really wish VersusXIII would have English voices already. Sorry, but I'm a little impatient. Cluna06 00:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
TA, can we have logo images instead of single protagonists, please? 8bit 23:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Another pointless criticism... 8bit 23:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Another good laugh...--Werefang 23:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Another questionable decision, too. (I don't remember seeing this even getting suggested, much less votes counting. But, I don't mean anything, I'm yet again just pointing it out.) The.DreadnoughT 02:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm finding it hard to vote in this. I mean #1 they still haven't come out yet. How can you judge something just by the trailers? Was this even in the queued list? Xlatinsorax 03:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't even remember seeing this in the list at all. Maybe TacticAngel did this as a kinda spur of the moment thing? Thats my guess anyway.TheBlueDragoon 03:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
What the? How can we possibly have this fight, the game's aren't out! Plus, what happened to "no game fights"? -Nokareon
The vote is not which is a better game, which is obvious since there's no way to tell. The question is which game are you more looking forward to. The reason we don't do game versus game fights is because anytime has has been suggested (and its almost always _____ vs. VII) it is just going to turn into a flame war between fanboys. There is a substantial quantity of information and off-topic to go into when you speak of two sixty hour games next to each other which would be brutally ugly. These two titles do not pose that delemna. There is a critical lack of enthusiasm for them, which is counterproductive to our community, I think it would be good for people to talk about them. Plus, there's a nice palindrome going with XIII versus versus XIII. You cannot ignore that. T·A·C·T·I·C·A·N·G·E·L
Ok, well that makes more sense. I was wondering why this got chosen over fights that are sitting in the suggestion page. Its to build hype I'm guessing. TheBlueDragoon 05:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I abstain from voting, because I'm looking forward to Agito XIII way more than these two. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 04:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
It's not as one-sided as I thought it might be. I was expecting XIII to wipe the floor of Verses. Not so it seems. Still, there's a long way to go. Jeppo (Talk) 11:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Hell, If they anounce a Versus XIII release for 360 I'm changing my vote. It'd probably be even closer except that most people are not willing to buy an entire system for one game.--Werefang 13:13, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Aren't Game fights against the rules? Characters and Stuff i know is allowed but i am sure games were not allowed. just checkin. Leonhart178 00:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Maybe if you read the Peanut Gallery before adding something that has already been said and thenyou may find the answer you seek. Jeppo (Talk) 01:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I have only one thing to say about this fight: "What... The... F*ck... !?" -- SorcerorNobody 18:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
People are taking this whole Colosseum thing waaay too seriously. You don't even seem to get what this fight is about. It's impossible to decide which game is better, since no-one has played either of them, but it is very interesting to see which game is more expected and hyped. Naturally FF XIII will win this, but Versus isn't doing that badly either.SamSandy 08:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Um, this is about which game are you more excited about not which is better and, NOW, it is NOT doing good.--SilverMage 06:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Huh? But that's what I said! :P But you're right, Versus hasn't been gaining many votes since my first comment. Go FF XIII! SamSandy 09:05, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Wait a minute, I thought that we didn't allow these kind of fights in the DNC!?- Saraija Merinas
why does Neo Bahumut always have so much to say on a final fantasy wiki when he hasn't even played the majority of the series? plus his huge chunks of ranting are just nuisances.
Haven't faced either of these bosses. However, XII's idea of an "ultimate boss" is an absurd amount of HP & a ridiculous amount of buffs. Quantity over quality, if you will. Any boss that you can beat by setting up a bunch of gambits & walking away is bullshit. Any boss that takes "over 50 hours" (that's over 2 days, people) to beat is also bullshit, & sounds like a fucking meme. So, I'm going with the proper boss on this one.Neo Bahamut 01:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Damn! Before I changed my mind I had first vote of all! Oh, well. Anyway, the 50000000+ HP is good, but it's no connection to Ragnarok. The.DreadnoughT 01:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I actually fought and won against Shinryu. And Shinryu is my second favorite dragon. NeoZEROX 01:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Because I actually have the patience and the time to defeat Shinryu. And because I like the original Dragon Superboss. TheBlueDragoon 02:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Yiazmat's difficulty only stemmed from the fact that fighting it was very, very, very boring. ScatheMote 02:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't like either of these options... I don't like this fight... So, I'll be biased and vote for Shinryu because he didn't appear in XII. I hate basing my decision on that, but oh well. Shinryu appeared in more games than Yiazmat Yzz 02:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I really enjoy a fight where I have to focus all my attention on. When I fought Yiazmat, I just set the gambits and occasionally healed and/or revived. Also, Shinryu is the one who appears as a summon in Dissidia, another plus! Shinryu FTW!! Xlatinsorax 12:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I like my super bosses to be difficult, but not beasts with endless HP.ClixPsi
I really think fighting Yiazmat would be one long fight.Shinryu on the other hand, looks like a decent superbossDestriker73 07:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
All I was going to say was already said by NeoBahamut. Rai Balmung, the gargoyle 08:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Yizamat was only cool because of HP,Shinryu was cool because was a hard awesome superboss NeoExdeath 09:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Yizamat was just a bore Mr_Darkside 12:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Shinryu IS the Dragon GOD CheeseNinja 11:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Who revives the Gods when they die in war? SHINRYU FTW! YamiNoBahamut 13:03, 11 June 2009 (GMT)
Shinryu is just awesome. Can't wait until I get him in Dissidia. User:Guiness Kid
Another difficult one for me chose. Shinryu= has so many different ways to kill your party despite the strategy choosen to kill it...Yiazmat= EXTREMELY annoying and time consuming despite the attack party's maxed levels and ultimate equipment(longest time I've EVER spent fighting one boss, it took me WEEKS)! But the deciding factor for me is that, with Shinryu, you can't just run away, save, and pick up from where you left off the damn thing. It really becomes a race of trying to kill it before it kills you. Heretic Ramza
See the Peanut Gallery for my detailed comment -- SorcerorNobody 16:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Pikmin Master: The first time I saw Shinryu, it was in Dawn of Souls. When I realized that the thing was actually harder in V, I'll just have to say that this dragon actually knows the difference between a hyped-up battle and a pissed-off battle. 02:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Let's see. A boss that can take over 24 hours to beat, or a boss that can beat you in less than a second. I've never faught Yiazmat, but the guide was reason enough to NOT vote for it. Besides, Shinryu is one of two original 'OMG Diz Beh tew hurd' superbosses. Yath 13:16, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Surviving and beating a boss that can annihilate an entire party in a few seconds>Lots of HP and a Bore(Like most of XII. Burn! HO HO! ^^). Though the Mark info was pretty nifty to read. AnonyMan 22:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Vampyro entertaiment 08:49, 13 June 2009 (UTC) Yiazmat is just a looong and booring battle and besides he doesent even look like dragon, shinryu is actually a dragon, its more original and its not a test about how long you can play.
I like fast game... rather than an all day match.... ehehhee... Shinryu is the best!! OnionKnight23
As much as I like both of them, Yiazmat was kind of time wasting. Plus, I got more of an adrenaline rush when I fought Shinryu. MisfitAirship
Shinryu is prolly one of the hardest REAL bosses of any FF game. He was so cool... Hell he came upon the planet via Omegas foot! AND has a bigger, badder version in the GBA port. if anyone tries to say that 24 hours of gameplay against ONE mob is fun, they REALLY need to be admitted to a hospital for laser eye surgery. Shinryu was so much more badass and way more skill/luck based. Plus he's HOLY incarnate. Try to beat that one on a tuesday! --Gerdat14 06:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Shinryu, unlike Yiazmat, is my idea of a real superboss. The only thing that really makes Yiazmat difficult is the amount of time it takes to beat him, whereas you have to really know what you're doing when fighting Shinryu. Nevanus
Yiazmat is only difficult because you deal poor damage and he has tons of HP, like most of the Superbosses in XII, there's no real challenge. Shinryu is hard and can whoops my ass in FFX, and he's toned down from his V incarnation apparently (I'm not that far on V yet) NirvanaPhoenix
I guess since he's winning...Cluna06 01:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
BlueHighwind ツ I'll fight this guy eight times again before I ever even consider stealing all those Spears I needed to beat Neo Shinryu. JESUS!
I nearly had a heart attack when I realized what those cute little squares under his health bar are. Leon5550 12:24, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
What Leon said is so, so true. I'm pretty sure my mouth actually dropped open after realizing what they were. What a fight. Paramina 12:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Shinryu was tough, sure, but Yiazmat basically set an all-time high for a boss' HP (within Final Fantasy for sure, maybe within all gaming). Plus, XII has a lot less exploitable glitch/tricks than V (which make even Shinryu easy). -Nokareon
Shiryuu is old. Time to young dragons win! Do it Yiazmat!!! Final Cannon 18:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Yiazmat has such a ridiculous amount of HP that I can't help but vote for him. Violetmage19:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of doing optional bosses, hence I've never fought either of these but I've seen both in fights and I think Yiazmat is cooler overall BoAKaN 21:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
User:Genesis rhapsodos Well in response to Neo Bahamut, first off I'd like to see anyone set up the gambits and walk away from the Yiazmat fight, secondly if it tooks you 50 hours you must have been pretty damn weak, so know what you're talking about so you don't seem so pathetic okay? :D Now then I feel like Shinryu wasn't a big enough jump in dfficulty from some of the other big bosses, just my opinion. So my vote goes for Yiazmat the bigger of the beasts. Genesis rhapsodos 23:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I never was able to kill either. But Yizamat made you WORK to be able to kill it, you had to waste every other mark in the game, but with shinryu you just open a chest. Exdeath64 02:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
An optional boss exists purely for the challenge of fighting it. As such, Yiazmat gets my vote because it is the only boss that actually grades your success (retreat counter). Beating Shinryu is like beating Halo on Legendary: its hard, but just about everyone has done it.--Werefang 00:03, 13 June 2[009 (UTC)
In fairs I think its the FFXII is crap argument comes to mind. Alas I gave it a "few" hours so ill don them a pity vote. Ive seen larger hps though Cryss Leonhart
Definitely gotta vote for Yiazmat I've currently spent 4 hours fighting it and it still has 2 million HP left, not only that Yiazmat is one of the biggest most badass bosses in the FF series and to top it off the epic FFXII boss theme plays for the fight. Wyvern777 15th June 1009
Seven F***ing hours- Saraija Merinas
Yiazmat was a lot more of a challange than Shinryu...as thus more respect from me Derum
T·A·C·T·I·C·A·N·G·E·L supports Yaizmat, homage to the creator of FFT rather than some random dragon, no matter how cool it might be.
Honestly, I like them both, but Yazimat was harder for me to beat. #220.127.116.11 05:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I think this goes without saying, but sign your damn anonymous votes! You're wasting your time if you don't SIGN YOUR DAMN VOTES. I'm not even a moderator and I know this. TheBlueDragoon 02:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I was considering voting for Yiazmat, because Shinryu seems to be almost a water elemental, which is fail. However, reviewing the articles, I forgot just how ridiculous Yiazmat really was. Oh, & don't get me started on its backstory. First of all, I think that NOTHING should have surpassed the Lucavi (Espers in the fucktarded world of FFXII's Ivalice), second of all, "ZOMG! IT DEFIES TEH GODS!" Yeah. Who doesn't in that game?Neo Bahamut 01:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
First of all, voting against Yiazmat because someone else walked away and left it for 50 hours is not an intellegent reason. Gambits are an option, just as being level 100 is. Second, we know you hate 12. You've ranted about that every oportunity you have. We get. Saying "Zomg, tis gmae is suxxor, lol," isn't going to make you sound any more intellegent. Third, "it defies the gods" is a story. There is no proof that gods exist in the world of 12, just like real life. The scions (separate completely from lucavi as the games aren't in the same universe) are said to be fallen gods but do they ever say that they were ousted from the heavens themselves; no. As with real life, no proof exists to prove that any gods exist. So, to answer your question, just about everyone who is important.--Werefang 12:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Maybe you should do some research before you run your mouth? FFXII is part of Ivalice Alliance. Specifically, it is the distant prequal of FFT. It is the same universe. You are wrong. Not only that, do you know what makes YOU sound unintelligent? Responding to my points, instead of actually refuting them. I point out how Yiazmat fails as a proper boss. You go, "Well, that's just an OPTION." So? The fact that it's an option is what makes it a bad fighting sytem! The fact that its only advantages are ridiculous shield abilities & HP make it a bad boss. And "Gods" means "Occuria." No, it is NOT a story. Because half the characters OF XII defied the Occuria! I don't say "tis gmae is suxxor," idiot, unlike you, I actually reasoned my way through the vote. I didn't spend an inordinate amount of time declaring that XII sucks, I only called it on the faults that came up. I didn't randomly go on a rant about the license board, because it never came up. For more information of objectivity, you can go to the DNC nomination page,& note that I leave fights with FFXII characters in them alone, & have even APPROVED some. If you're going to try to argue a point with me, use something that ISN'T a half-assed straw man!Neo Bahamut 19:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. First of all, I was refering to how you bitched about Yiazmat in your vote and then bitched in the peanut gallery. Don't start spamming everywhere to make sure everyone sees your opinion. Second, by option, I was refering to how you said that gambits made the battle too easy. Gambits were the option. If you want the challange don't use gambits. Third: Whether the superboss can sustain damage or delive massive damage to you isn't the end result the same: Frustration. Isn't the achievement really that you have little enough of a life that you can waste time on an optional boss at all. Another thing: How is XII a prequal without it being refered to on the page? Is that in a copy of Ultimania that no one has? I remind you that unless refered to explicitly as a direct sequal or prequal, they do not actually exist in the same universe. As such, the Scions are not the same as the Lucavi. Perhaps the defying the gods thing was premature. But does that make a game bad? No. Generally, that is a pretty good Idea. And lastly: Quality over quantity. Do you even know what that is supposed to mean? Appearantly not because having a lot of buff is quality while having a bunch of allies is quality.--Werefang 00:08, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, dumbass, that's what I always do! It isn't spam, what you're doing right NOW is spam. And flaming. But that's not the point. Besides, where do you get off telling me not to divulge my opinion in the manner of my choosing? And arer you seriously using the FF Wiki--A FAN WIKI--as your ultimate source for FF information? Dumbass. Here's how it charts out: FFXII is the "Golden Age" of Ivalice. And it DOES mention Ajora in one of the Clan Primers. FFTA is the recreated Golden Age, done by the Grimoire of some such shit. FFT is the world after the cataclysm, set in a slightly different locale. Balthier explicitly mentions having travelled through time in War of the Lions. And here's a tip: Instead of going premenstrual on me, DO YOUR OWN FUCKING RESEARCH. You're entitled to your own dumbass opinion of whether or not you THINK the Scions are different from the Lucavi, but they aren't. End of subject. If you spam me again with your unnecessary bitching, it will be ignored. And, while you're complaining about my "bitching," remember that YOU started this shit. As to your "arguments" about my reasoning, they're a crock of shit, as usual. "If you don't want to use gambits, don't use gambits!" The flaw is still there, dickhead! The POINT is that there's a FLAW in the system. You don't like that I bitch ab out FFXII? Maybe if FFXII didn't have so many freakin' problems, I wouldn't!Neo Bahamut 00:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
The ironic thing is the last time you called me a dumb ass, you told me to look for the information on the wiki. That, good people is the definition of hypocrisy.--Werefang 00:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
No, I told you to "do some research." You're the one who concluded that this meant the Wiki. And if that was a trap to get me to respond to you when I said I wouldn't, ooh, aren't YOU clever?Neo Bahamut 01:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Would you two please stop griping at each other and cease eating up Peanut Gallery space? Take your own advice and ignore each other. kThanksmuchbai <3 8bit 02:20, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
8bit, that wasn't "advice," that was a promise. The only reason I responded was because I hate being misquoted. Otherwise, why on Earth would I need to respond to inane ramblings about posting habits I'm perfectly entitled to?Neo Bahamut 18:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
XII is sequel to Tactics. Says so on the Ivalice page. The Occuria are the gods. The espers and the lucavi are one and the same. The difference is that in Tactics, the lucavi bind themselves to the user's body rather than follow them around. Thats why I think they SE made them look so different in XII. I wish they can explain their war with the Occuria more. Instead of making Revenant Wings and Tactics advance....ChaosEsperVII
And I'm guessing "the Ivalice page" refers to the FF Wiki? The official continuity is that FFXII takes place before FFT. It doesn't make much sense, but it's fairly obvious. "The time of airships." And then, NONE of that stuff exists in FFTA, until you "remake the golden age of Ivalice." And yeah, I hate the way the "story" was executed. I think it should be a prerequisite to learn about Ivalice Alliance if a person wants to bitch about how bad the Compilation of FFVII is. Because it could be SO much worse, yet most people fucking love XII. Quite frankly, I don't think the day will ever come when my most important question is answered: Just what, exactly, did Ultima hope to gain from her rebellion?Neo Bahamut 00:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
SERIOUSLY! I hope SE has a reason for making games that are related but unnecessary to some of the titles. Yes I understand they are trying to expand on the world, but I feel that alot of the time they are adding to it rather than enriching it. I don't want to know new things (i.e. Revenant Wings) unless they are expanding on the things I already know (Esper's War with the Occuria). It's good to have a gigantic universe but if its filled with half-shit then it doesn't help to add more shit. ChaosEsperVII
That's why I like the Compilation. It actually adds to the story. Crisis Core: This is what Sephy was like before he went kookoo. Also Zack. Dirge: This is Vincent getting the fuck over everything. AC: This is what happened to everyone. And so on.Neo Bahamut 05:49, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Cryss Leonhart I was actually ok with watching that argument, partly because I have respect for Neos opnions even if half the time they differ from my own. Alhough this time I could actually agree with him. For the record I did not use gambits when playing FFXII was too easy otherwise. As for the DNC fight at hand honestly couldnt care.
I simply find it aggitating that whenever you bad mouth XII, you resort to features that are optional (games exist to be challenging. If you want it to be harder, do it yourself), inacurate, or hypicritical (if you have a problem with it challenges the gods, how can you like Tactics. That's the goal of the entire game). Perhaps the way that I went about this was wrong but I stand by my possition.--Werefang 16:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't MATTER that the features were optional, the fact that you can beat several bosses by literally doing NOTHING is a problem. You shouldn't have to limit yourself just to play the game. You should know how to do the gambit system well, but STILL have challenges that you have to directly interfere in. And the goal of FFT is not to challenge the Gods, it ranges from fighting injustice to rescuing your sister. The problem is that the Lucavi are different in the 2 games. They're more Eastern in XII, but more Western in Tactics. That doesn't sound like a big difference, but if you know a bit about Western religions, when a messenger of God is fallen, they become a demon. That is why, in FFT, the Lucavi are depicted as quite demonic in nature. It's different in XII, where they were going for a more Eastern theme, and therefore just seem like "bad Gods."Neo Bahamut 00:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I think you may be mistaken about the western religion. Most cases they become myth: good for stories, but no one has any faith in them (ie:germanic/norse paganism). I truely and utterly doubt that the Lucavi and Scions are the same thing. Perhaps they share the same underlying concept but the Scions were fallen gods forced into servitude, while Lucavi are fiends bound to gemstones and unable to take form without a vessal. As for gambits, I highly doubt that anyone can truely do nothing and still win: 1) most cases, you cannot get all of the useful gambits until late in the game, 2)tough enemies and bosses do significant damage and can quickly kill off you party if you aren't paying attention, 3) Items and magick are exhaustable, meaning that if you have healing gambits set, you will run out of resourses if the battle lasts longer than half of a day. As for "not limiting yourself," what about T.G.Cid. His skills and stats make him far too powerful and make the game too easy. To counter this, I (and other people) remove him from my party. And what about "Hard mode." It is a feature in many games to provide a challenge where one is absent. It is the same principle really. If it seems easy, the means to create a better challenge exists, so why not take it. If it seems to hard, the means exist to make it easier.--Werefang 01:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Christianity is a Western religion. -_-' In any case, the point is that there's an Eastern theme with the Scions and a Western theme with the Lucavi but they are, in fact, THE SAME THING. They're bound the zodiac, most of them were in both games, they have a similar backstory, they're the same. And there's a difference between an actual flaw in the gameplay and a self-imposed restriction. No matter how powerful Orlandeu is, you still have to control him. And you can believe whatever you want, but people HAVE fought Yiazmat & a large portion of the final battle with JUST gambits.Neo Bahamut 01:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Gambits aren't the flaw, players are. Gambits do absolutley nothing until they are set by the player. They are designed to allow the player to play the game as he/she sees fit. So what if some slob pays $20 to $50 for a game and then refuses to play it, how does that affect you? It was unavoidable for the nature of an AI system is to act in response to a situation. And also, I think you forget about Tactics' tactics, you can set Orlandeu at Berserk and have him level the entire field without input. Why you would want to I don't know, but it's the exact same idea.--Werefang 14:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
It is not the same idea. In berserk, you can't heal, or do much of anything but attack. And the AI system in FFT is not as fine-tuned, either, so it's still not the same as the Gambits, where you can literally set up the characters & walk away. Don't give me this "it's not a flaw," nonsense, it IS a flaw. Especially with bosses where it seems pretty much intended for you to do that. I mean, honestly, who has x # of hours to devote to Yiazmat?Neo Bahamut 21:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
No one. That is why you have the option to preform a tactical retreat. You aren't supposed to walk away and leave the fight on. You are supposed to retreat when you cannot fight, so that you can heal or what ever, sort of like a real battle (most "battles" in final fantasy are actually scirmishes). And there are many people who can defeat it in less than that amount of time. As for the "because-you-can-do-something-it-sucks" arguement, humans CAN commit murder, but that doesn't justify sending everyone to jail. And before you call this apples to your oranges, I will point out that this example exercises the same falacy as your argument. And I will close this with the following: Video games exist purely so that WE may challenge OURSELVES. If we find that we are unskilled, we can play on easy or use only gambits. If we find ourselves over skilled, we have the tools to challenge ourselves at our disposal. Do not think that because an AI CAN be efficient, that the most efficient AI has to be used. All there is is our choice.--Werefang 23:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
That's not even apples & oranges. And it most definately is not the same as my argument. Bottomline: There are flaws in FFXII's gameplay, & the Yiazmat "battle."Neo Bahamut 00:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually, it is identical reasoning. Capacity is not the same as inevitability. Because you can choose to kill some one, you are a killer; because you can choose to make the game easy, the game is too easy. But just as you may choose to not kill, you may also choose to challenge yourself. The arguements have identical frameworks and as one is an obvious falacy, so too must the other. And of course there are flaws, but the ones that you see and are refering to are self induced and are not inherently flaws of the game.--Werefang 02:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
That's nice. Now, -I- feel the need to point out to you that one world is real, & the other is programming. Thusly, they are not the same. I could limit myself to not using magic to make things harder, but that isn't a flaw in the gameplay. Because I'm avoiding using it in the way it's meant to be used. Gambits weren't meant to play the game for you, so the fact that they can be used that way is a flaw. It is, by no means, the BIGGEST flaw, but unless you want to turn the entire Peanut Gallery for this week, & most likely next week into a "Why FFXII sucks" rant, I'd suggest you just leave it alone.Neo Bahamut 04:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Lucavi and scions are the same. Remember when you beat a scion it gets imprisoned in a glyph. I believe that Tactics is a LONG time after XII and the Lucavi probably need a human host because they have been separated from the physical world for a while. Probably reviving Ultima is the way for them to come back. Speculation but it makes sense. ChaosEsperVII
You're always going to have speculation, & none of it's going to make definitive sense. They didn't even try to tie the Ivalice games together.Neo Bahamut 05:49, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Now your just dodging facts: whether one is real and another is programmed, both are governed by choice. Because people are not meant to kill each other but we can do it, we must all be murderers. And gambit are meant to be used the way you see fit, that includes the ocassionaly abuse of the system. Had they not had the gambit system, people would be bitching about how hard it is to control the entire party, so they gave a system that would make everyone happy. No one anticipated that some pig headed individual would say that freedom is a flaw. So if you try to say that the game suck as a fact, try to use an actual flaw. So what if players can make the game easier for them, that doesn't affect you.--Werefang 12:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
You're. You're, asshole, you're. With that out of the way, this, "You can choose not to do it!" argument is retarded. I can choose not to play the game, & it won't affect me, it doesn't change the fact that there are problems with it. Now, since you LITERALLY asked for it; poorly developed characters, several badly-drawn monsters, bad battle system, imbalanced Limit system, poorly-designed bosses, bad vocals, not-so-great music, shit summons, poor story, poor status as a prequal, flawed area design, not-so-well-avoided random battles, bad ability learning system, not-so-great money system, insufferable fanbase, about the only thing good about this game was the graphics. Take. Your. Pick.Neo Bahamut 02:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Most of those are opinions, not facts. XII has the most character developement of the entire franchise according to people smarter than either of us. Those same people praise it for it's complex and intricate story. And it isn't a prequal as the stories are unrelated, whether it is in the same world or not. If your arguement was that it simpley didn't appeal to you, that would make sense, but instead you resort to saying that anyone who can like the game is an asshole, a retard, or a dumbass and use false "facts" to support your own bias. And I missed the part where I said that you had to play it. Was it between the part where I called you a dumbass or an asshole? No, wait, you're the one who called me that. I was the one being civil here. I was simply identifying a flaw in your logic, nothing more or less.--Werefang 12:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Mother of <insert deity here>! That thing can take over 50 hours to beat? I beat MGS3:Substance twice in 30 hours!
And FFX-2 in 10, or less. That boss isn't hard, just boring and time-eater. Rai Balmung, the gargoyle 08:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
And, NB...we tried. We hoped. We came. We saw. We failed horribly. I mean, a superboss fight? Come on. It's at least a new fight, I'll give it that, but... I won't bitch about it though. There's (probably) always going to be next week. The.DreadnoughT 01:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
This fight my idea so your welcome. NeoZEROX 01:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't mind. However, I just checked. We now have official proof votes don't always count. (I don't mean anything by that. I'm just pointing it out for those concerned about the democratic process.) However, (edit: few moments ago, thought NB suggested this; error correction) Xlatinsorax's Kuja v Genesis has something like twelve for and only me against. This had seven for and none against. Votes don't count, apparently, because even if TacticAngel "voted for" this, it would have had 8-0 to Kuja v. Genesis' 12-1. The.DreadnoughT 01:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Interesting, a superboss fight. At least we have something new. And yeah, I'm noticing a trend here. Kuja V Genesis has more support. I wonder how TacticAngel picks these fights... Cuz a lot of fight like this one was suggested. I even suggested Shinryu versus Omega. Still waiting to see Genesis versus Kuja and Red v Mog. TheBlueDragoon 02:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Wow I almost forgot I even put that request there! I'm not complaining because this is an interesting fight, but how ARE the fights picked, I'm curious now....Xlatinsorax 03:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I could be very mistaken and I'm not trying to piss of TacticAngel, but I think each week he picks one that has decent support and one he thinks makes sense. That's what I would do at least, so that may be dead on or way into left field. TheBlueDragoon 03:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I think it goes without saying that the fights that make more sense aren't always as popular, as last week proved. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 05:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I know what you mean Slash. I guess all we can do is hope for a good fight each week. TheBlueDragoon 05:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Cryss Leonhart Im still waiting for a fight I can honestly care about. If only I knew what I knew about thunder god cid during his fight with basch I sooooo wudda changed my opinion. Just because FFT is amazing haha!. Also Genesis Vs Kuja definitely.
I'm not familiar with this version of Shinryu (as opposed to the FFX one, I mean), but from what I know of it, it's pretty lethal, right? By contrast, although Yiazmat is extreme (50M HP, for cryin' out loud!), and one of only two things I haven't completed utterly on XII (the other being the bloody Black Hole Concurrence), the leave-save-and-resume strategy means that Yiazmat becomes merely time-consuming, not properly difficult. I'm at the point with Yiazmat where I have my Gambits set and I only need to even be in the room just in case I take a bad hit, not because it needs much input from me. I probably would have killed him by now, but I got bored and haven't played XII for a couple of months now because I got him down to half HP, thus initiating that tiresome Reduce Damage Augment. Still, I expect Black Hole to annoy me long after the Great Wyrm is felled. So, yeah, this is me once again voting for the one I'm unfamiliar with :P -- SorcerorNobody 16:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree that Yiazmat isn't particularly tough to defeat if you have sufficiently levelled up and have a lot of time on your hands. It isn't even the hardest enemy in the game, if you ask me. I've only fought (and felled) the FFX version of Shinryu so it be a little unfair if I voted in this particular fight. Jeppo (Talk) 22:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Genesis: A lot of the later battles can be won simply by setting up gambits & walking away. This is a known fact. As for the "50 hour" thing, I just went by the article. Although, with statements here like, "It took me 2 weeks!", I wouldn't be entirely surprised.Neo Bahamut 23:21, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Damn, A cool fight this is... but the NeoVs.Werefang's kinda better </joke>. Ok, I'm not gonna flame but we should put in the description of the fight that "Sign your Votes or it will be deleted!" kinda thing... DB36 03:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
We should put that up for next week. I bet I'd get more votes. And I guess that works, but I'm not sure how many people read the fight description, either.Neo Bahamut 18:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
We do all know already what I have to say on the matter, right? Well, apparently the anony's don't, so here I go, reminding people again, because it seems to work:
SIGN YOUR DAMN VOTES!
While editing, your vote should look something like this example:
#This is an example of a signed (and therefore correct) anonymous vote that will actually count, rather than wasting your time. ~~~~
When you click Preview, it looks something like
This is an example of a signed (and therefore correct) anonymous vote that will actually count, rather than wasting your time. 18.104.22.168
So now that you have two examples of how to do it, GO SIGN YOUR DAMN VOTES (then sit down and drink your goddamned tea!), you anonymous people! (The rest of us have been signing, it seems, so just keep it in mind, people.) The.DreadnoughT 22:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
(oh, and extra marks for Genesis Rhapsodos, who signs his votes twice.) The.DreadnoughT 22:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Responding to some votes, for no apparent reason: "Shinryu...isn't anything special...ooh, I get a new sword." I'd like to know how Yiazmat is "anything special." "OOh, I get a new sword...& there's nothing left to use it on!" Just sayin'. Also, there was mention made somewhere that Yiazmat may have "the greatest HP total in all gaming." I played a web RPG once where an enemy had 275 million HP. Granted, it was a war event, & his HP guage was being used instead of an enemy total, but you COULD fight him 1-on-1 (surprise: nobody ever beat him), & so he IS technically 1 enemy with 275 million HP.Neo Bahamut 19:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why I said "maybe"; within a straight RPG it seemed like a pretty safe claim to make, but I figured there's always MMO bosses... so yeah. -Nokareon
I said "web RPG." Not "MMO."Neo Bahamut 04:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
My mistake. Although I wouldn't be surprised if an MMO superboss had even more than 275 million. -Nokareon
Who was that NB?
Back on topic, I've never played any of the games before VII, so have never fought that version of Shinryu, but yes, Yiazmat was a bit of a bore by the end of it (particularly with growing threat/cyclone), though the amount of health does make it sort of worth it IMO. TomServo101 20:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Its name was "Carnax." The RP was Adventure Quest. I haven't played it since, because the company is being retarded. So, ironically, the game pretty much died with Carnax.Neo Bahamut 21:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Vampyro said everything I wanted to say. Including the comment on the artwork. I hated the way dragons looked in FFXII. And most of the Lucavi. Everything else was fine, though.Neo Bahamut 09:05, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
If you hate XII dragons, you'll need a new word to describe your dislike of VI dragons. The Eight Dragons...well, only two even look vaguely like a lizard, never mind a dragon. Only one looks like a dragon in specific. The other six...well, one of them looks like a fossilized Sandworm with legs. And it goes downhill from there. The.DreadnoughT 13:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Having not yet read all of these postsa, i can honestly say that the peanut gallery is slightly more interesting than most of the fights posted. Also, BigCubby Has had a figght on the ready to be posted list since christmas and i have seen no indication that's gonna take place. Is TA really that against status ailment fights? --Gerdat14 06:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
You know, now I feel sorry for that one poor anonymous user with the gigantic paragraph-long vote for Shinryu...because they put in all that effort in their vote, and it isn't going to count because they didn't sign... The.DreadnoughT 13:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I think it's four different votes without pound signs.--Werefang 14:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
You can find older fights in the Archives for the Dragon's Neck Colosseum. All of these fights are closed, so don't bother voting. All new votes will be removed.