Gilgamesh-ffv-ios-portrait.png
Gilgamesh: Enough expository banter!
This talk page is used for discussing improvements to the page "Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars". It is not the place for general discussion or sharing stories about the topic of this article.

Why is this even here?[edit source]

It's a Mario game, sure it's an RPG and has references to FF, but is that enough to give it it's own page? Maybe have another page called 'Other Squaresoft Products' and give it a mention on there StijnX 14:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Because you touch yourself at night. No, really, it has FF references, created by Squaresoft, has music by Yoko Shimomura. It has as much reason, perhaps even more than Vagrant Story to be here. --Auron Kaizer 15:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Surely references shouldn't be a consideration when deciding what to put on a FF wiki. And don't get me started on staff. Just because Square made it, and Yoko Shimomura wrote the score, that doesn't qualify it as a FF. I don't see an article for the main series of Dragon Quest on here, and that is more FF than Mario RPG. I might have missed this, and if so, I apologise, but there should be some form of standard as to what can be on the wiki and what cannot IMHO StijnX 15:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Well... it has the four elemental crystals? That's all I know, since the UK never got the game.
And Vagrant Story is here because it is set in the same world as XII and Tactics (Matsuno himself said so), in case anyone was wondering. Diablocon 15:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
This is why it is important to read one's welcome message (and not delete it, hint... hint). --Hecko X 16:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
ooops, lol. But it clashes with the background darling :P StijnX 16:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It does belong here. For it is a child of final fantasy.

This argument, however, was settled long ago. Just this article for the game, nothing else. Capiche? --Auron Kaizer 08:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

is this final fantsay wiki or square wiki?

I really don't think that is a relevant question. We so happen to allow games that seem to be influenced by/related to the Final Fantasy series, and SMRPG: LSS is greatly influenced by/related to it. ScatheMote 21:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Uhh...[edit source]

NeA-Leon.png

Because we allow fan-related works. This surely has more importance.  ILHI 15:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Release dates?[edit source]

Drake, why did you repeal Eric's edit that added in release dates for Virtual World versions? Do they not exist? o.O 8bit 22:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Because it fucked the formatting up something fierce, I was gonna add the dates back but my PC was overheating, so I had to shut it down and restart it, at which point I had forgotten about it. I have to ask though, which lottery did I win where it seems every time I undo an edit, someone is there to ask why? Drake Clawfang 22:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps because you don't explain why you undo the edit?  ILHI 22:46, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Often times my revert are self explanatory, such as this one where the formatting of the dates was thrown out of whack. Drake Clawfang 22:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I was expecting so see a "Virtual World version was released simultaneously in all area of the world" or something similar in the summary, but I did not. I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but ILHI didn't. XD Oh wells, doesn't matter. 8bit 22:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

It's alright, few people give me any sort of benefit. Drake Clawfang 22:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

This makes me think that I should upload an Australian flag image to make Yuan and Hexededed happy. 8bit 22:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Mario Hoops?[edit source]

Is an article of Mario Hoops 3-on-3 relevent in this wiki? Since it has Final Fantasy characters in it and is a crossover between the two series, I figured it there should be on. There's already an article on Itadaki with Final Fantasy, I would ask. Magiciandude 17:11, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

It is relevant. It ranks exactly the same importance as Ehrgeiz: God Bless the Ring.  ILHI 17:13, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

If the wiki has this page, then it should at least have Mario Hoops too, since that is also developed by Square. The Yoshiman 97 22:36, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Dragging relevancy back up.[edit source]

This discussion has been moved to Forum:Discussing "related" games.

It's pretty clear that many people over the years have asked the question why we even have this page. I've asked it myself and now I'm voicing it. The whole of this page is completely irrelevant to FF as a series except a couple of trivial links that could just as easily be put in trivia sections of relevant pages. Instead we have a full account of non-FF characters, a non-FF story, and other things, with very simplistic trivia drawn out in length because of the conversational tone. It could easily be dispersed into bite-size bullet points in articles we already have, like the Four Fiends article and Bahamut. Reading this talk page, I see a lot of ILHI and others spouting "it's already been decided," but if it was already "decided," there wouldn't be so many people asking the same question. Meaning no disrespect to JBed or anyone else, I think it's time it stops being "decided" and really gets a second look taken at it. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon.png BSA 20:44, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

Tough I'm more of a user of this wiki then an editor I would like to give an imput. I reckon this page is unneeded and most of the similarities could be mentioned on other pages i do however think that if this page if removed a page should be made for Culex in its place since that seems to eb a direct reference to the serries rather then a plot, enemy or gameplay similarity. Oni Dark Link 21:38, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out that similarities to games that hadn't been released yet and wouldn't be for years hardly count as "references." That takes out FF7, FF8 and FF9, meaning a chunk of the content. Levels, magic, shops, common weaponry, theme dungeons, transforming bosses, and stats aren't unique to FF, either. Furthermore, let's be honest here, the "classes" of the characters for the most part are things that the characters were doing anyway, like Mario jumping and shooting fireballs, which simply does not make him a Dragoon, since Dragoons have no fire connection in FF anyway. Cuylex looks nothing like Kefka minus having purple skin, and Geno looks nothing whatsoever like a Time Mage. That leaves us with a dummied enemy, an un-dummied enemy, and some FF5 music in the Cuylex battle. Basically the entire article is full of stuff that does not hold up to scrutiny. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon.png BSA 05:34, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I definitely think this page does not belong. It really isn't within our scope at all. A majority of pertinent information can and should be placed in trivia/reference sections of FF pages instead of having its own page. The story and characters of this game are once again not within our scope.. and as for Culex, its already referenced in the Crystal page. All that needs to be done left is a note of the FF4 boss music being used in that battle somewhere in the music pages, or "trivia/references to FF4" page (already done)--Spira 06:55, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I'm gonna see how much I can argue for the other side before I make myself look dumb. Ok lets start with the obvious, why do we have an article over something that's clearly not Final Fantasy? The answer as this far is it does have references to Final Fantasy series. Now could we only make references to Mario RPG without an entire page? Possibly, but consider carefully if somebody was specifically looking for a certain game on our Wiki. I'm sure that some people have come on the Wiki looking to see if we had a page for this. Mario RPG has it's own article to make it easier for someone to find what they're specifically looking for without going through our other pages to find the references. Also keep in mind we have other articles on here that are covered somewhere else. http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Kingdom_Hearts is probably a very good examble, although it does have actual Final Fantasy characters in it, it's still not within "our" scope. In fact I believe correct me if I am wrong, another Wikia covers this for us! I know you can make a large list of arguments why to keep this one over Mario RPG, but we have an article over both. I don't know if Mario RPG has another Wikia that covers it, if anyone could show me, I'd greatly appreciate it.

I think the biggest thing is however, we do have some people who played Mario RPG and they do come here to see if we have the references from the game. With it all being in one place, they don't have to look through several other articles they are not firmilier with to find it. I will say this, I'm not in favor of removing or keeping this article, but I can tell you no matter what decision is made, you're not going to make everyone happy. If we do decide to remove the article we will have people comming on complaining why we did so, keep that in mind. Razordash09:07, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Kingdom_Hearts is probably a very good examble, although it does have actual Final Fantasy characters in it, it's still not within "our" scope.
Have you READ our scope? KH is covered under point six, and so is this. However, the links here are quite weaker, IMO. Even if we keep this page, I think some editing will have to be done, especially the references to games that hadn't been made when this came out. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 09:47, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
No I have not read that, I was just assuming anything unrelated to FF was based on that. I was kinda reacting towards the "scope" comment with that assumption. Seeing that both games are indeed covered by this makes it more interesting, thanks for showing. I'll keep that page in mind. Razordash10:06, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Citing the Scope page is irrelevant since discussions such as this one here are what determines the Scope page in the first place. Anyway I think we should delete all the non-FF game articles and put the trivias in the article Final Fantasy in popular culture. Bluetash 10:24, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't really trying to cite the scope, the point I was making there was people should really research their damn arguments first. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 10:44, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
Something I do notice about the articles listed under the scope is that this page is there and is the only one that neither has FF characters in it nor ever bore the title of FF at any point in time. Seiken Densetsu is a spin-off of FF, SaGa went under the FF title, the Chocobo games all are spun off of FF, and KH has a ton of important FF characters in important roles. Broken down, the only part of this article that really stands is the Cuylex battle and it seems the rest of the article was either stretched or made up to support it. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon.png BSA 13:42, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
honestly now, SMRPG doesnt even belong in the scope list. It is neither "related to the Final Fantasy universe through SquareSoft (or Square-Enix)" nor related "through the inclusion of Final Fantasy icons or characters." If you want to qualify SMRPG through the first point, then games like Parasite Eve should be covered (omg its a SE game and omg in PE3 Aya wears lightning outfit and has a l'cie brand!) but they're not there because they are just references/easter eggs. Similarly, it cant be qualified through the 2nd point because there are no Final Fantasy icons or characters in SMRPG. Whoever placed it under the scope didn't consider it carefully because the 'conditions' to justify it being there are not met. edit: in other words, to that end, the relevant content on this page belong somewhere on the wiki, but not this page itself--Spira 14:47, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

The consensus seems to be not to delete any of these articles. I suggest closing this discussion ASAP. .:. 16:20, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Don't be stupid. There's a fair consensus that things like the Kingdom Hearts article should stay, yes, but the issue of this article (you know, the one this is the talk page for) remains open, and if anything, is leaning towards a consensus that it should go. Try reading the whole discussion before making ill-informed remarks... unless of course you were being sycophantic, which is probably worse -- Sorceror Nobody Flan.PNG 18:35, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
EDIT: Also, judging by your authoritative tone, you seem to have the mistaken impression that you're running the wiki. Well, if you're making sugestions, I will too. I suggest closing your mouth (well, keyboard, technically) until you have something useful to say -- SN, 18:47, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I think we should delete this article because it's not closely enough linked to the FF series to warrant its existence. After reading this article it doesn't seem the links are that strong. It uses terms like "Final Fantasy cameos" and "vague likeness to Final Fantasy jobs." The battle system is like a generic RPG battle system so of course it resembles the FF series somewhat. Plus it has links to other series than just Final Fantasy, so it's supposed to be a kind of...mash of everything. The few direct references can be listed under trivia sections of the appropriate articles.Keltainentoukokuu 20:11, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not running this wiki. Everyone knows Drake Clawfang is. I said that because when I put links to this discussion on the relevant pages they were swiftly removed by two other editors. .:. 20:52, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

"I said that because when I put links to this discussion on the relevant pages they were swiftly removed by two other editors." - meaning of course, you slapped VfD templates on every non-FF article there was and linked here as rationale for such. Try again, with less fail. Doreiku Kuroofangu 20:59, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I think that under Final Fantasy pop culture, we can just cite anything revelent the game has with FF and delete this article. SquallRocks 21:07, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I think that the scope definately needs updating, with support for barely-related games like SMRPG, Bahamut Lagoon, Blood of Bahamut, Gyromancer, Lord of Vermillion and Ehrgeiz dropped. At the same time however, I believe that the Chocobo-series needs to move up in scope. Out of all the Final Fantasy spin-offs without FF in the title, it is the most closely related, with its main character being a FF mascot and it otherwise being full of references. I know a small handful of users have been working on expanding this and nobody's really said anything to deter that, and an official upgrade on the scope page can promote further work on that subject and turn them into quality articles. (I know I only barely touched on SMRPG here, but was trying to keep the conversation in one place, as it is currently all over the wiki. why hasnt a forum been opened on this issue?) --Adonzo 23:26, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I completely disagree with the dropping of Bahamut Lagoon, Blood of Bahamut and Ehrgeiz: Blood of Bahamut features the traditional summons of Final Fantasy series, and the very plot revolves around them. Ergheiz features Cloud, Tifa, Sephiroth, Zack, Yuffie, Vincent and a character similar to Red XIII with a skillset filled with references to him. It's not a trivial reference. Bahamut Lagoon bears several resemblances to FF VI. None of these are "barely-related games".
Lord of Vermillion truly has weaker relations to the series, being more of a Square Enix mash-up. The first installment even featured Valkyrie Profile protagonists, while the second has several special cards of Final Fantasy characters. It is Square Wikia's scope rather than ours.
The Chocobo series is part of the Final Fantasy series (The latest titles are released under "Final Fantasy Fables") and there's no discussion possible regarding it. - Henryacores^ 23:41, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Henry here. Although the Chocobo series should probably be bumped up to point 2, as it is a side series. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 04:21, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Here is how I see it, IMO:

Bluetash 14:29, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

I haven't looked enough at the other pages to have an opinion either way, however, in view of THIS PAGE, I think it should go an a trivia be put in the proper place. Bond em7 14:49, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Bluetash has the most radical and worst-thought approach of this. The Chocobo series is a subseries of Final Fantasy. Dragon Quest & Final Fantasy in Itadaki Street Special HAVE Final Fantasy in their name, and deleting them would be rediculous. Blood of Bahamut and Knights of the Crystals also revolve around Final Fantasy elements, and should be considered spinoffs. If we are to discuss anything, it should be the inclusion of Ehrgeiz, Super Mario RPG and Lord of Vermillion. - Henryacores^ 16:08, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

I think this has become more than broad enough to create a form, so I'mma do that. All this will be copy/pasted, as will the DQ discussion and the Gyromancer discussion. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon.png BSA 17:10, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

@Henryacores: I thought Bluetash said to KEEP the Chocobo series? .:. 18:32, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

I see no reference anywhere about its nature as part of the FF series. - Henryacores^ 18:37, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
Then why did you mention it?? .:. 18:44, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
Obviously, because it wasn't mentioned. - Henryacores^ 18:45, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Any game that includes multiple, easy to recognise, references to the Final Fantasy series should have its own article in my opinion. You can say as much as you want about how they can go on individual pages, and yeah, they can. But where do you go if you want to see all the references at one time? I can go to the Bahamut page to discover he appeared in Mario RPG. What do I do next? I think "oh, that's nice". Now, my next reaction would be to either ignore it, and keep on reading, or choose to research more connections.

In this situation, there are more connections. So I'll end up happily reading the page. As I probably have since I've definitely read this page before. Or will you deny me interesting FF-related trivia, and delete the page, leaving me to look externally for what I seek? Think about what your visitors might want to actually see at the wiki.

Also, don't add delete tags to the article until this is very clearly resolved. I.e., get admin opinion that leads to consensus. 79.69.194.131 19:21, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

I'll throw my opinion in and suggest that the link be redirected to the "Final Fantasy in popular culture" and within said article be externally linked to both the Wikipedia article AND the article over at the Super Mario Wiki which is incredibly more comprehensive than our article here. BLUER一番 14:16, October 2, 2011 (UTC)

I would support this plan.Keltainentoukokuu 15:56, October 2, 2011 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.