FFWiki forum logo.png
Forums: Index > Rin's Travel Agency > Archive > Canonicity of Bravely Default

FFVII Cait Sith Battle.gif
PFF PuPu.png
BlueHighwind TA.png

This is completely absurd and out of question.

Bravely Default does not have Final Fantasy in the title (though Flying Fairy is obviously a name-reference to Final Fantasy)

Because the fact that its subtitle was meant to be shortened to "FF" to reflect "Final Fantasy" is completely dismissable.

Flying Fairy was only added to the wiki by a newbie user because it was a gaiden of the obscure spinoff Final Fantasy: The 4 Heroes of Light

No. It was added to the wiki by an editor who did his research and found out that it was the successor to a spinoff of the Final Fantasy series, whose subtitle was a "subtle" reference to the mother series. And its content was subsequently developed by several users including editors who have been around for more than 5 years.

By extension, Praying Brage was only added to the wiki because Flying Fairy was here. That makes it a spinoff of a spinoff of a spinoff. Pretty sad.

Oh lord. We are terrible people.

We could always lower this game's significance to an MMO

Now this is sad.

The name I think is hugely important, and no, without citation, the FF coincidence is just that

Only that it's no coincidence.

Also, take a look at the game: It uses a myriad of Final Fantasy elements, including the original six jobs, and the series' Dark Knights, Time Mages, and 4 Heroes of Light's Merchant job, as well as elemental crystals and warriors of light. These aren't coincidences: they're decades-old aspects of the Final Fantasy series, and this game belongs on this wiki. (FFIV defined the series' Dark Knight on 1990; FFV created Time Mages on '92 (Dungeons and Dragons adopted this class in 2003.))

But you can always make another wiki for a FF title. It wouldn't be the first. - Henryacores^ 22:26, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

FFVII Cait Sith Battle.gif
PFF PuPu.png

Might it be worth mentioning that when games or series feature references to the Final Fantasy series, they get just a game page and not full coverage? Except in the case of Super Mario RPG we didn't even keep that for some reason ;p

I somehow didn't notice that Bravely Default didn't have Final Fantasy in its title. Although now I know that it is related to T4HoL, being in the same universe says it should be fully covered...

But having said that, we cover Final Fantasy Adventure and Final Fantasy Legends (after a long period of arguing against it, I should add) because they are Final Fantasy games, as noted by their title. Yet we do not cover the rest of the SaGa series or the Mana series despite being in the same world. They are really their own serieses after all.

Which then brings up an issue: If this sub-series expands into its own series, then do we really consider the games within our scope bar the first?

Thoughts. 23:15, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

BTW, canon relates to storyline, so whether a game is a member of the Final Fantasy series does not concern canon. 23:19, December 13, 2012 (UTC)
I'd generally be more willing to let one game slip rather than if it sprawls into its own series that spirals away from FF entirely. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 04:53, December 14, 2012 (UTC)

New Proposal[edit source]

Just thinking about this again; seeing as how the "Flying Fairy" is indeed a reference to Final Fantasy and also seeing how it's a gaiden of a gaiden with a mere handful of similarities, I would propose a compromise: that we keep we coverage of this game, but shrink it down to a single page, a la Kingdom Hearts. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 01:15, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

If no one replies I'll just go ahead and do it myself, since the majority of the pages don't exist and the ones that do are completely barren save for a paragraph or two and a deluge of images. Everyone seems to want to give this game full coverage, but no one want to actually put the work in to do it. Having Type-0 not be localized didn't stop us from at least having passable coverage on it, so that's not an excuse for this game either. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 01:16, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
Well, forum topics generally don't get all that many replies (especially with JBed not being as active recently) and it's only been 24 hours. That said, this is far from the only game we don't have decent coverage on; the Chocobo games are first-tier releases in our scope, but our coverage of them is no better than Flying Fairy. Using Chocobo no Fushigi na Dungeon as an example, we don't even have a category for the game, and we don't have the English translation of the game's name. The main character is just a section on a parent page. A lack of coverage isn't a reason to remove the game from our scope. C A T U S E 01:32, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
I read but have no significant opinion. But my preference is towards only having one page for the series will satisfy me. That said, a part of me would like to cover it here so one day it gets to a level where it is a good amount of coverage, and then we can make a new wiki specifically for the series/move it to SE Wiki.
But if we aren't covering it well right now, then maybe we shouldn't bother with that at all. JBed (talk) 01:38, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
I don't know where I stand on this, honestly. I think it should be covered, but I haven't played it, so I can't say for sure. 4WoL was a great game and totally a Final Fantasy in name and spirit, and this game is its spiritual successor. We cover other spiritual successors, too. The Crystal Defenders games (and Dive II Hunt) do not have FF anywhere in their titles but because they are spiritual successors to the Ivalice games, we include them. If Bravely Default is meant to be a continuation of the style, spirit, themes, and gameplay of 4WoL (and by extension, Final Fantasy), then it and anything that comes from it (like Praying Brage) should be included.
Now, on the other hand, I vehemently oppose this wiki having anything to do with The Final Fantasy Legend, Legend II, Legend III, or Adventure. I love all those games to death, but I have never considered them FF's regardless of their names. Adventure is a Mana game, period. The Legend games are SaGa games, period. Put them on their appropriate wikis, leave one page for each game here to explain what they are and what they are not, and why we do not cover them, link to their wikis, and that's it. But, obviously the wiki majority doesn't feel this way, so I don't make a fuss, and just ignore their presence on this wiki entirely.
As you can see, my stance on Bravely Default borders on hypocritical, then. I just have to go with my gut on it and say I support full coverage of it on the wiki and while I'll never edit a single page related to Legend or Adventure, I would not feel the same with Bravely Default or any game that comes from it. Espritduo (talk) 02:28, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
EDIT: I guess I can try and explain my stance on Adventure and Legends a bit (emphasis on try). The fact is, Legends were NEVER FF's, they were SaGa games from the beginning, and simply had FF added to their English names. They were never meant to be FF's, and the remakes of the games have since retconed whatever tenuous FF-hood they may have had out of existence, as far as I'm concerned. Adventure is different because its original title was FF Gaiden. However, it has since been ret-coned out of FF-hood as well with its own remakes, and is now a full-fledged Mana game with all of its ties to Final Fantasy cut as well. 4WoL is a Final Fantasy, and will always be a Final Fantasy, barring SE being really stupid. Because the root game of the spin-off series is and always will be an FF, any game that is directly tied to it as a successor should also be covered fully by us regardless of name. It just makes sense to fully cover the lineage of any FF title or series here. If we cover 4WoL, we cover everything that comes after it. If we do not cover everything that comes after Adventure or Legends, including the remakes of the very games themselves, we should not cover Adventure or Legends at all. Espritduo (talk) 02:37, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
BDFF has summons, a job system, and limit breaks, and according to its Development section began as a sequel to a FF game, so I say we cover it as a FF game with full coverage. And while it's brought up, we should not cover Legends beyond a single page, like with Kingdom Hearts, since as said it has been retconned out of the series and wasn't really a FF game in the first place. Doreiku Kuroofangu 03:17, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
We only cover the version that has "Final Fantasy" in its title. If this kind of thing were to happen today with any of the existing games I doubt you would have the same opinion.
You can't just say it's being retconned out. The Final Fantasy Legend is (not was) a game for the Game Boy Advance. So we cover it. JBed (talk) 03:40, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
The only merit that argument has is "began as a sequel to a FF game", which Legends and Adventure had approximately the same importance being released with an FF title. Summons, a job system and limit breaks don't mean much when all three are general RPG staples. While BDFF may have been considered a FF game in the beginning of development, it was retconned out just like Legends and Adventure were. So I'll stick with my proposal above. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 03:41, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
Oppose vehemently and forever. Bravely Default has more to do with Final Fantasy than the mainline FFs SE has been making lately. Full coverage, nothing less. You people put too much stock in the words "Final Fantasy". All the Bravest is worthy despite being a screensaver and a money vacuum to steal money from kids? But Bravely Default is not. Utter crap logic. I have no future on this site, I can fight this forever. I don't care. ----BlueHighwind 14:21, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
lolwut? On a FFWiki we cover Final Fantasy games. What most FF games are defined by is containing the word "Final Fantasy". "Final Fantasy All The Bravest"? Win. "Bravely Default: Flying Fairy"? Nope.
You put too much stock in products you like rather than actual Final Fantasy products. 15:50, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
When actual Final Fantasy products are barely products at all, you have to go back and think for once. Maybe this wiki is a failed concept to begin with if this is the limit of our selective powers. --BlueHighwind 22:40, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
That's the idea, Blue. I recognize I haven't played neither ATB nor BDFF, and remember vaguely the other ones, but maybe I understood the subject. "Names don't matter. What's important is how you live your life." (Ramza Beoulve, FFT). I can see the point that a game is seen initially by its title; but if some game has a striking similarity and have the "spirit" of FF, was intended to be a FF and is a indirect sequel to FF, I support full coverage (although I'm afraid I can't help in the cover...shame on me!). When it comes to Legends, I can't talk too much about its coverage, 'cause I don't know if it's origin is "legitimate" (not in a strong meaning, only refering to the SaGa origin) and if the "FF" name was really a link or only a means of making money (would be glad if someone could explain something in this issue). JCHK 00:36, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Let's review the facts: 1)It's a spiritual successor to T4HoL. Not a sequel, not a gaiden. There is no further established link than one game that paved the way for another. 2) It's confirmed that BDFF was originally supposed to be a FF game, and the "Flying Fairy" is supposed to an indirect nod to "Final Fantasy", most likely as reference to the one singular game, T4HoL, that came before it. 3) It has summons, a job system and limit breaks, which are all tropes of the general RPG genre at large. 4) At some point early on in development, it was decided that BDFF was not to be a FF game, which is the point that I believe most everyone is skimming over. It isn't a Final Fantasy, and it's closest relationship to one was piggybacking off of a FF gaiden to ease players into a brand new world of this new series. There are no other ties. How do we quantify "spirit"? How do we relate a game such as BDFF having more or less similarities to FF than a game such as Kingdom Hearts, which also has summons and limit breaks? When the Bravely Default series starts to drift ever more slowly away from FF and the next titles don't have subtitles with FF initials, how do we justify covering it?

BDFF was once in consideration to be a FF game. It no longer is, and it's clear that SE is taking it in a different direction by not including Final Fantasy in the title. Once Sa·Ga stopped renaming their overseas releases as "The Final Fantasy Legend", we decided to stop devoting full coverage to it. This is the same situation. Both were given links to FF to improve marketing of the new series, and now that we decided finally that that isn't a good reason to cover the three Legend games anymore, it's time to realize just because BD is the new thing and everyone wants to play it and it looks like a really cool game (it does), but none of those reasons are good reasons to devote full coverage to it, and I think that's playing more of a role than some would like to admit. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 00:47, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Of course the quality of these games matter, and how much I feel these games fit the spirit of Final Fantasy matters. My subjective understanding of quality matters deeply to me to. I see "Final Fantasy" as meaning something more than simply "it has Final Fantasy in the title". Its utterly ridiculous to draw the line simply there. Its a disgrace, AN INSULT, to thirty years of gaming tradition to have "All the Bravest" up there in the pantheon of games. I get the impression think I was joking when delete that page, I was serious. It should be deleted, immediately. And its not subjective understandings of what makes a game, its a universal opinion shared by basically all humans that All the Bravest is crap. Utter crap. Insulting, miserable, disgusting, hateful, crap. Even games I don't particularly love, FFVIII, FFXIII, FFXIII-2, are insulted, sullied by All the Bravest. Mystic Quest took hours of effort, many months of hard work by devoted people to make that reality. And even that is disgraced by All the Bravest. And that's within your line. Perfectly fine to you. As long as some corrupt executive decides it has the words "Final Fantasy" its good enough. Well, I reject them. I reject that game.
You know what game actually is true to the long traditions of this series? Bravely Default. What actual does do a service to the heritage of what we care deeply enough to make a wiki around? Bravely Default. You know what game we're so embarrassed about that the only intellectual response to keep ourselves sane is laughter towards? All the Bravest. So let's include Bravely Default. Cover the other SAGA games. Cover Chrono Trigger. Cover Kingdom Hearts. Cover Super Mario RPG. Hell, cover Xenogears. But let's not cover corrupt frauds pretending to be games. Let's have some dignity. --BlueHighwind 02:14, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
But the SaGa, Seiken, and KH series games had a lot fewer of the classic FF tropes to start with. Not to mention that the SaGa games only got the FF name in one language! My position is that it's the number of classic FF tropes and references that make a game worthy of inclusion here--not quality, or the name. I say: Chocobo's Dungeon games stay (and need expansion), MMOs stay (and need expansion), and BDFF stays (and needs expansion). Yeah, and ATB stays too, although I'll hardly begrudge anyone who doesn't feel like expanding the entry on it and if it stays incomplete forever I don't care. FFA barely belongs here and FFL doesn't really belong here at all--but it doesn't get in the way much, so I'm not going to campaign for its removal. Hashmalum (talk) 02:41, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
All the Bravest is a terrible game. It's a terrible marketing ploy to suck money from people who have their nostalgia glasses on all the time, but we cover it, not just because of the title, but because of the recurring characters and monsters and weapons. Bravely Default, a great a game as it is, is still a marketing ploy. "If you liked Final Fantasy: The 4 Heroes of Light, try this!" It has since cut ties to Final Fantasy, just like SaGa has. Plain and simple, we cover games because they're Final Fantasy, not because they feel like Final Fantasy. What Final Fantasy means to each person, and why this discussion is so difficult to have, is that some people will feel like it's totally FF in spirit, while others won't think so. If we covered everything anyone thought was FF in spirit, we'd have devoted full coverage to SaGa, Chrono Trigger, Kingdom Hearts, Super Mario RPG, etc, yet we don't. Bravely Default is simply the new entry into that category. - +DeadlySlashSword+
i agree that quality doesn't matter. its purely subjective. DSS hates FFATB, but i loved it to bits. completed it. probably won't play it again.. but hey, i felt it was worth that 50$~ for a brief game with moments of fun and cheap thrills. While I think applying the rule of "It has FF in its title, it is an FF game" generally works, the converse isn't always true (doesn't have FF in title, shouldnt be covered) and we shouldn't abide by the opposite strictly. The important thing to infer is whether the DEVELOPERS intend for the game to be an FF, as opposed to what the players think.. because seriously, some people can think the stupidest things. with BDFF, its clear that the devs could have easily given it a title with Final Fantasy in it, but for whatever reason it is, they chose not to, even if it were a spiritual successor of whatever.. so it would mean a deliberate dissociation from the brand name. therefore I too feel that BDFF doesn't deserve full coverage--Arciel Spira (talk) 03:13, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
It's true that spirit is intensely (and polarizingly) subjective, but recurring Final Fantasy tropes and references are significantly more quantifiable. And BDFF is just loaded with them--jobs, abilities, weapons, armor, accessories, items, and spells are absolutely stuffed with classic Final Fantasy goodies. I could do a translation page for the game with all those categories and you'd recognize nearly every single entry in nearly every category (summoned monsters are the only category that is dramatically different). If you showed somebody who had never heard of the game and didn't know what it was called what series it was part of, they'd say Final Fantasy.Hashmalum (talk) 03:20, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Other than possibly Blue (who was just using his Insane Troll Blue Logic as always) I don't think anybody's using liking the way Flying Fairy -- or even/especially Praying Brage -- is turning out as a serious reason to keep Bravely Default on the wiki. But let's not kid ourselves: Flying Fairy (and possibly Praying Brage, but I know jack squat about that game) has far more objective things in common with Final Fantasy than Chrono Trigger, Kingdom Hearts, Xenogears, SaGa, and Super Mario RPG. Using Chrono Trigger and Super Mario RPG as examples since those are two I know best: Chrono Trigger has the graphics, sound chip, ridiculous spiky hair, and battle system right. However, graphics and sound chip were used by most of SquareSoft's SNES games, and ridiculous spiky hair is just a stupid anime cliche, so none of them are really clearly intended as a reference to Final Fantasy per se. Super Mario RPG uses a completely different (and higher-quality, I might add) graphics and sound system than FFIV-VI. It also uses a different battle system (though FFIV's skill system), different style setting ... the list goes on and on. In actuality the most notable things it has in common are Bahamutt (which isn't accurate to the Bahamut we know and love anyhow) and the Culex, Dark Knight of Vanda (and his musical themes) in Monstrotown.
Contrast with Flying Fairy: we have a huge amount of jobs in common. These jobs look similar to past games, and have similarly-named abilities. We have crystals. We have an ability called Deathblow. We have stupid teenagers trying to save the world from big bad evil dudes. The list goes on and on, and if I knew more out the game, this paragraph would be much longer.
tl;dr: Flying Fairy has much more in common with Final Fantasy than the games that keep getting listed as not covered are, as well as Vagrant Story, which we do cover (though this isn't a proposal to get rid of Vagrant Story); Flying Fairy should be covered. C A T U S E 03:23, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
This somehow got back to a discussion of whether we should cover it or not. We should cover it. But it's a matter of full coverage, or one page of coverage. How much do those similarities warrant how much coverage of a game that isn't Final Fantasy? EDIT: I should stress that it doesn't really matter as to why it isn't. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 03:29, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Define Final Fantasy. Does it mean that the words Final Fantasy are in the title? Because if we do, we have a lot of chopping to do.
Full coverage is given to Vagrant Story and some of SaGa, and one-page coverage to Kingdom Hearts. So this is still " matter of full coverage, or one page of coverage" C A T U S E 03:33, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I just said that. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 04:07, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
I was acknowledging that you said it, but that it doesn't affect the wall-of-text I wrote. C A T U S E 04:35, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Full coverage of BDFF, without question. From what I've been reading on the JP Praying Brage wiki though, PB is more different from the FF main series games than BDFF was--or rather wasn't. Considering that it's likely to be a JP-only game of short lifespan, I'd be fine with PB coverage being truncated.Hashmalum (talk) 05:55, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, and one last thing. I'd just like to say this: wikis live and die by the passion of their users, not by rigid rules on what's covered and what isn't. If contributors put in a lot of work to create an article, only to have it all deleted by some anonymous little wiki-bureaucrat hiding behind "the rules say" and a screen somewhere, that's quite off-putting and that contributor is likely to either stop contributing, or get angry and start a fight which may drive off other people and get them to stop contributing. Obviously, that's not good. On the other hand if a wiki has a lot of blank/stub pages everywhere because "the rules" say they should be covered, but no one wants to do it, people will come here, see the vast expanse of empty space, and say "this place sucks" and leave. So, if we have a lot of people who want to do full coverage of BDFF, then it's better just to modify or ignore the rules to suit the situation.Hashmalum (talk) 06:53, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

I see we are pressing ahead with full coverage despite not reaching a formal resolution here. You guys disappoint me. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 20:27, May 4, 2013 (UTC)


Keep on it. It's currently in full-coverage status.

If we decide to remove it later we can just move the content to a designated wiki. No point halting work that will be valid in either outcome. JBed (talk) 20:50, May 4, 2013 (UTC)


It's really not silly at all. If it has nowhere else to be then its own wiki is suitable.

We could otherwise move it off to Square wiki. That's a thing. But Square wiki's scope is too massive for it, thus: own wiki. Single games get wikis all the time. JBed (talk) 20:57, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

FFVII Cait Sith Battle.gif
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.