/vr/ - Retro Games

>>8748425
I'm not quite that old, but I still see people younger than me saying FF1 is their preference. Out of curiosity, I looked at a (five year old) R*ddit thread on ranking the games, and the top 10 commenters that played both:
>played 9 games, FF1 #6, FF2 #8
>played 15, FF1 #13, FF2 #11
>played 13, FF1 #12, FF2 #13
>played 21, FF1 #15, FF2 #11
>played 18, FF1 #13, FF2 #18
>played 10, FF1 #5, FF2 #7
>played 15, FF1 #12, FF2 #11
>played 12, FF1 #8, FF1 # 11
>played 12, FF1 #9, FF2 #10
>played 18, FF1 #12, FF2 #13
In summary, that's 7/10 that preferred FF1. If I total the rankings (lower is better), they come out as 105 points for FF1, and 113 pts for FF2, out of a range of 10 to 143.
I feel like FF2 is getting the Zelda 2 treatment. Adventure of Link was a fucking blast, but 90% of the statements I hear about it are "haha that weird shitty one". I remember trying to play Dark Souls and getting bored partway through, then coincidentally giving Zelda 2 a try shortly afterward, and realizing that it was actually very similar, yet way more to my taste. I don't know how the former spawned a massive fanbase and the latter is mostly derided. Maybe Zelda 2 was received as just a shitty Castlevania or something; I haven't played many action platformers.