Talk:Final Fantasy

"Final Fantasy XVII" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Final Fantasy XVII has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 15 § Final Fantasy XVII until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:26, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

TTRPG

There is no mention of the new TTRPG of Final Fantasy XIV. 121.112.213.65 (talk) 07:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Series Creators

It's ridiculous to credit only Sakaguchi as creator. The topics, themes and style are defined by the visuals and the music, not even mentioned the programming. Yoshitaka Amano, Nobuo Uematsu and Nasir Gebelli must be credited as well.

And credit Nomura as the only artist is even worse Josecharlie (talk) 07:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts is NOT a FF spin-off

I have no idea why it says that Kingdom Hearts is an FF spin-off on this page and on the Kingdom Hearts wiki page, that is just plain wrong. KH has always been considered its own series that just so happened to include FF cameos to fill up some character roles that they hadn't created original characters for. Disney fully owns the KH IP and all its characters.

This is not a subjective opinion, it's literally not an FF spin-off just because it has borrowed some elements from it (like calling items and spells things such as hi-potion, firaga etc...) By that logic every spiritual sucessor is a spin-off. Wheatley30331 (talk) 01:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Wheatley30331 This has been repeatedly debated over the years and reliable sources do refer to Kingdom Hearts as a spin-off of Final Fantasy. The talk page archives have several such discussions, with sources. -- ferret (talk) 03:04, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I have checked the sources from the archives and from what I can gather, 2 of them are inaccessible now, seemingly taken down. The only acessible reliable source that says Kingdom Hearts is a FF spin-off is the IGN article.

I don't think we should base a video game with a label that can be seen as extremely misleading over 1 IGN article that was written by a single freelance journalist. IGN has also called Bravely Default an FF Spin-Off yet I don't see that listed here either.

I would consider official word from the company a reliable source in this regard, which we do not have yet. By the way, The "List of Final Fantasy video games" wikipedia page does not list KH as a spin-off either, they removed it all the way back in 2010 with a consensus.

At best the issue could be considered undetermined, but in that case it shouldn't be labeled as a FF spin-off until further information is given. Especially considering that, comparing the information we have, all we got to go off of for labeling it a spin-off is 1 old IGN article (more specifically, the information by Nathan Meunier, who I could try to contact in order to find out his reasoning for labeling it so, and if it has any official reliable backing or is just something he wrote for the heck of it).

Indeed, the KH development history itself did not start off as anything FF related, they just decided to add some FF inspired elements and characters(to fill up roles, which are now essentially been removed) as they went along. (Sorry for the long reply) Wheatley30331 (talk) 11:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@ferret I forgot to ping, tell me your thoughts of my above reply though ^^ Wheatley30331 (talk) 12:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

The fact that a source is no longer available doesn't mean it isn't being cited. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski So if the average wikipedia reader comes across this article, and sees that KH is a FF spin-off, and wants to check the cited sources for said information but finds out that it doesn't exist anymore, are they just supposed to accept the "just trust me bro"? That ruins the credibility and integrity of wikipedia as a source of information. Besides, we don't know why the sources were taken down in the first place, it might have been because of faulty or outdated information etc.

For a piece of information with tons of sources, having a couple of them be inaccessible isn't a big deal sure. But when a more niche issue like this with barely any citations is being discussed, it's important to have the actual information be available for full integrity transparency. Wheatley30331 (talk) 13:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Wheatley30331 As Lee notes, the fact the articles are no longer accessible doesn't make them invalid. They're probably on the Wayback archive.org site. Even then, those 3 were just examples quickly dug up during the last time we had this discussion. There were many more available. I think you have a misunderstanding of how Wikipedia is written. It reflects what is written in reliable secondary sources. Because IGN (and the other sources noted before) are considered reliable publications by Wikipedia, what they say is what we reflect. Yes, IGN is a reliable source in the eyes of Wikipedia. Here's those other archives for you: Paste archive, GameInformer. -- ferret (talk) 16:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@ferret I still do not understand why the opinions of game journalists is considered to be the only required source to definitively include it in this wikipedia page in this regard. It's almost guaranteed that the journalists are only basing that label on their own personal interpretation of what KH is rather than any official company statements or credibly sourced information. I'd genuinely even be willing to contact the writers of each of those articles to clear it up.

Surely Square Enix and Disney themselves should be the judge whether it's considered a spin-off or not.

Also, why is Bravely Default not considered an FF spin-off in that same vein? It is present in this IGN article [1] Wheatley30331 (talk) 16:46, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia cares much more what third party sources say about a subject than what primary ones do. If reliable sources, which is what these journalists are, say they think it is a spin-off, then it is.

I've asked before regarding Bravely Default, I'll see if I can dig out the archive. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:49, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Last time Bravely Default was discussed is Talk:Final Fantasy/Archive 4#Bravely Default as a Final Fantasy Spin-off Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:51, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

My only participation there so many years ago was the boilerplate "Where's the sources?". I don't know if I really followed the discussion after that, but if 3-4 solid sources discussing it as a spin-off are found it should be listed. -- ferret (talk) 16:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I suppose the rules of wikipedia ain't in favour of the no spin-off camp, even though this topic is really niche and the journalists who listed it as such probably only did so after playing KH, saw the FF characters and went "wow this is an FF game!". Gaming journalists aren't exactly known to be the brightest of minds, but if by wikipedias rules they are considered reliable then so be it. Even though nobody on this planet would ever consider KH as a spin-off, not even the two companies making and owning the games themselves. Not to mention how misleading it can be with how the expectations of spin-offs in gaming tends to be (Persona being much more strongly connected to SMT and indeed part of the same overall franchise, while Metaphor Refantazio is not, for example.) Wheatley30331 (talk) 17:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)