FANDOM


(Votes)
(Leave with tier 1 coverage)
Line 47: Line 47:
 
#Agreed with Drake. Square Enix deliberately invoked Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy elements in its development. Once we know how FF-based Bravely Second is then we can talk about whether it should be split, though imo the original (Default Flying Fairy) should always remain on ffwiki. [[User:Catuse167|Cat]] ([[User talk:Catuse167|meow]] ∙ [[Special:Contributions/Catuse167|hunt]]) 02:14, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
 
#Agreed with Drake. Square Enix deliberately invoked Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy elements in its development. Once we know how FF-based Bravely Second is then we can talk about whether it should be split, though imo the original (Default Flying Fairy) should always remain on ffwiki. [[User:Catuse167|Cat]] ([[User talk:Catuse167|meow]] ∙ [[Special:Contributions/Catuse167|hunt]]) 02:14, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
 
#As long as I am an editor on this wiki and as long as I have fingers to type a # I will always vote for full coverage. {{User:BlueHighwind/Sig}} 03:08, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
 
#As long as I am an editor on this wiki and as long as I have fingers to type a # I will always vote for full coverage. {{User:BlueHighwind/Sig}} 03:08, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
  +
#What's in the original game is enough for me to say it falls under our web, though I would be willing to revisit the point if Bravely Second turns out to be a departure from the original. {{User:Jimcloud/Sig}} 03:49, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
   
 
===Reduce to tier 2 coverage===
 
===Reduce to tier 2 coverage===

Revision as of 03:49, January 3, 2016

FFWiki forum logo
Forums: Index > Rin's Travel Agency > Archive > Coverage of Bravely series

Technobliterator


RedWizard-ff1-psp
Some Color Mage / Talk Contribs / Let's Stream Random PS4 Crap. / 02:41, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
Due to some issues we've had with this discussion before, we're laying down some rules for this discussion.
  1. Do not create a list of your arguments then pass it off as a "fact sheet". If all the facts were on one side of the issue, we wouldn't be having this discussion. If you do wish to make one, it must fairly cover both sides, like Techno has done in the OP.
  2. Do not try to bring in users of another site to help your cause. If you've come here from another site, we do appreciate any opinion you can give, but attempts at another site brigading the discussion will not be tolerated. If you break this, depending on your conduct both here and on the other site, you may be considered to be trying to import drama and eat a block.
  3. We request that anyone getting involved please read previous discussions first. There's no rule against not doing this, but we do not want to be endlessly retreading old arguments.
  4. Keep in mind that this is a fan project at the end of the day, and not an official encyclopedia, so it should be a fan's interpretation of coverage.

So yeah, try to keep the discussion clean, OK?

Discussion

Technobliterator

Votes

Leave with tier 1 coverage

  1. At the moment I'm hesitant to call it "its own series" for one sequel. That aside the game is a Final Fantasy title in execution - while the translation botched some of them, a lot more of the Jobs in the series are FF jobs than is first apparently (the Arcanist is the Magus, to name one), it uses many of the same gameplay and story elements as the Final Fantasy series, it began as a successor to a Final Fantasy title, and the name of the original game was intended to invoke the series with "FF" in it. Now, if a third game comes along, okay, they are definitely making BD its own entity and yeah, let's split. But for now I don't see the problem. DrakeyC (talk) 01:56, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
  2. Its effectively a FF game. That's all I care about. Hexed 01:59, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
  3. Agreed with Drake. Square Enix deliberately invoked Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy elements in its development. Once we know how FF-based Bravely Second is then we can talk about whether it should be split, though imo the original (Default Flying Fairy) should always remain on ffwiki. Cat (meowhunt) 02:14, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
  4. As long as I am an editor on this wiki and as long as I have fingers to type a # I will always vote for full coverage. --BlueHighwind 03:08, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
  5. What's in the original game is enough for me to say it falls under our web, though I would be willing to revisit the point if Bravely Second turns out to be a departure from the original. Jimcloud 03:49, January 3, 2016 (UTC)

Reduce to tier 2 coverage

  1. Spiritual successor or not, millions of similarities or not, it's just not a Final Fantasy game.--Magicite-ffvi-ios Technobliterator TC 01:49, January 3, 2016 (UTC)

Other

  • I've stated before that I'd rather see Second in English before I pass judgement on it and I'm going to stand by that. I don't really see why we have to do this now instead of waiting - what, a month and a half - and have our userbase more informed in the process. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 03:32, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.