/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10650904
III is best via the pixel remaster, and it's the only one that is.

>>10051097
Never fucking happened.

>>9799573
Not him, but FFIII got -shafted- for the longest time. It was going to get a definitive WonderSwan Color remake like the first two (which aren't bad ways to play them because NASIR's programming for the Famicom originals barely held itself together), but something happened and it got canceled and replaced with a cheap, dreadful port of FFIV that became the basis for the terrible GBA conversion. Rumors have it that Square lost the source code mid-development somehow, or they welched themselves out of the Bandai commitment and ran to Sony to discuss a 3D remake of III, which then resulted in them cryng home to Nintendo for it. That's why III didn't have a PS1 or GBA version - the creative talent was all in on the WonderSwan remakes and the PS1 and GBA versions of I & II were just the dollar-store port crew. So then III eventually gets a 3D remake for DS, and it's the worst thing to happen to it. The biggest issue is that the developers were inexperienced with the hardware and perceived limitations, so they shrunk the max number of monsters in encounters significantly (IV 3D wouldn't do this), and compensated by "rebalancing" the entire game by making battles harder than before including unfairly having revived party members targeted on the turn they revive and multiple attacks making Phoenix Downs nearly useless in boss battles. The result is a schizophrenic mess of a playthrough. Worse, Square Enix pretended it was the only version of III for a while, so when time came for PSP and PC rereleases, they never adjusted any of this even when the "limitations" were no longer true (if they even were). So if you're looking for a modernized III, general consensus is that it's the least awful pixel remaster, by sole virtue of having no other 2D remake to compare it to. Even then, it goes a little in the -other- direction and makes the game -easier- but including a lot of the 3D remake changes under the hood and basically doing the equivalent of "no-lives" for an RPG.

>>9773540
>And of course, they up and lost the source code,
I never found a source for this, just a rumor as to why the Wonderswan version was cancelled (which doesn't make sense because..they didn't realize they didn't have it until after development started? What?).
Far as I can tell, the developers got greedy and thought a game like Final Fantasy III deserved a 3D PS2 remake, and Sony or whomever kept laughing them off until they eventually downsized and settled for a DS remake, which Square Enix lazily pretended was the only version until the pixel remaster project finally gave them the chance to give us a modernized 2D version (that pales in comparison to what we woul've had years ago if SE weren't morons).

>>9570560
>My question is, why shouldn't I play the original NES? Is it really that bad? And which even are the original ones?
The programmer Nasir, was unfamiliar with RPGs and barely managed to code the game together. The classic Final Fantasies were always a little buggy, but typically you'd have to really go out of your way to notice - the first Final Fantasy is obviously roughest since it was Nasir's first attempt. Elemental weapons don't work as they should, a good fourth or third of the spells weren't playtested, stat bugs, etc. The game got more or less fully bugfixed in the WonderSwan Color remake and its PlayStation port. Rereleases from GBA onward go further and are based on the latter's easy mode, changing up a lot of the game mechanics to make it even easier. They don't really represent the original experience too well.
As far as the second game goes, reception is generally the opposite. A lot of people didn't care in retrospect about the experimental gameplay, so you see more people vouching for GBA-onward rereleases of II. GBA also adds a postgame, but like almost all the rerelease-padded content, it's not very good, in this case being a remix of the final dungeons. You might want to try GBA or PR if original just doesn't click with you.
Beyond that, III is more enjoyable in either 2D form for myriad reasons, and nearly any version of IV is decent (except WSC/GBA, & 3D TAY is horrible). The rest should be played in original form where possible, give or take a translation/restoration patch.
>I mostly care about translation accuracy
The ChaosRush one is the one you want then, preferably with an enhancement that makes the game play more like rereleases / as intended. Default is probably better since Chaos Edition looks like it makes a bit too much guesswork with DND equivalents. If you play a rerelease, note the script has been somewhat expanded in WSC and again on GBA to account for increased text space. WSC fantranslations are incomplete unfortunately.

>>9443395
>What is the "definitive" version of FF3?
There honestly isn't one since the WonderSwan Color version was unceremoniously canceled and so SE didn't have a base version until the 3D remake. I would recommend against the 3D remake for picrel reasons, it's easily the worst of the 3D remakes. If you've been playing Dawn of Souls, the closts would be Pixel Remaster, despite the Casual of Life improvements.

>>9115839
The SNES trilogy is still fine to this day, but to be perfectly honest, the NES trilogy is kind of..well bad, especially if you're playing them for the first time. Here's the deal...
>I: https://www.romhacking.net/translations/733/
>II: https://www.romhacking.net/translations/734/
>III: This is the only one you can get with playing the Pixel Remaster since the WonderSwan Color remake was canceled and the DS version is dreadful, but the Famicom version is the most playable of the first three original releases.
>IV: https://www.romhacking.net/translations/6467/ but IV is a special case where the DS remake isn't bad, though it probably isn't the best for a first playthrough and if you want TAY then you may want the PSP bundle (do not under any circumstances get the 3D TAY as it is terrible).
V: https://www.romhacking.net/translations/2600/
VI: https://www.romhacking.net/hacks/3813/ (relocalization scene is too swamped so you're probably better off with basic restoration instead)

>>9089869
I did. That's not what killed the game though.

>>9070368
Unironically the only great Pixel Remaster, a modernized 2D III was totally worth it even if it still doesn't look as good as >>9070283

>>9025236
...This one?

>>8971786
Origins by far. It's still considered at least the best version of FFI in many circles. The rest are really forgettable early cart-to-CD conversions.
>>8972309
>Yeah - but then it got the DS then PSP/PC release and ofc PR.
That's because the devs got greedy and had big plans for the FFIII remake as a PS2 game when the WonderSwan Color version was shelved. Apparently Sony blocked it so the devs eventually threw together a very, very, VERY distilled version of that idea for Nintendo DS. The game was stuck in this form with minimal fixes for years until Pixel Remaster came along, and for that reason it's widely considered the best Pixel Remaster.
>>8973365
That's because it's really the unfinished "Final Fantasy Extreme" localization. For context, imagine if Square cared so little that they inserted the so bad it's good rough NES proto translation of FFII in the PS1 version. I'm willing to bet they considered doing that before realizing the WSC/PS1 version expanded the text and so it wasn't compatible, like with FFI.

>>8686118
>3D version ain't too bad though
Disagree. They completely botched the monsters.

>>8542409
The definitive versions are debatable but my picks are the following:
I - WonderSwan - right balance of old & new, intended brightness and no stretching, snappiest load transitions, extra content and MP system in later releases broke the game.
II - WonderSwan - similar to above, plus future releases are too ashamed of this game and try to change too much, and the extra dungeon in later releases is a poor edit/retread of the final dungeon.
III - Pixel Remaster - see pic for why 3D sucks, sadly PR doesn't fix everything but is the closest to in lieu of a 2D remake.
IV - PSP - graphics are iffy at points but it's hard to beat the compilation package, the GBA-ported extras are mostly postgame or near-endgame and don't detract from maingame.
V&VI - SNES - as an audiophile I can't stand the GBA versions of the music and sound efftects (no, "restoration hacks" are a meme).
Modding the previous rereleases is such a finicky, incomplete process that it's not worth it.

>>8193435
>DS is a "great take" of FFIII
lolno. The DS version is killed by the monster limit being significantly reduced to three per battle. This messes with the game like you wouldn't believe, pic related should give you an idea of how they overhauled battles for the worse because of it. The worst part is that Square Enix had multiple opportunities to fix the 3D version when they kept porting it, but the suits would rather save 1000yen by porting the bastardized version basically as-is. For context, the DS version of FFIV didn't have this problem since the devs got around the hardware limitations by that point, and further FFIV 3D ports included a difficulty toggle to closer resemble the SNES version.

DEFINITIVE VERSIONS OF THE FIRST SIX FINAL FANTASIES AS OF SEPEMBER 2021 but let's be honest this isn't changing anytime soon

I&II - WonderSwan Color, PlayStation (just enough modernizing with the least amount of compromising)
III - Famicom, PR (this is currently the only Pixel Remaster that's an acceptable alternative due to slim pickings and the 3D version really just being that insufferable)
IV - PSP, DS (what can I say, I'm just as shocked that there are not one but two decent remakes for once)
V - SNES, GBA (the latter suffers from the usual handheld quirks but can be mitigated with patches, though mileage may vary if the official translation goes a bit far in a few places)
VI - SNES, T-Edition (the latter is an unofficial Japanese hack but it makes GBA obsolete)

Of course, when in doubt, just play the originals as it can be daunting to keep track of these if you're just getting into classic Final Fantasy, you're really not missing much for the most part if you lose out on extra content.

>>8072928
>got filtered by FF3 3D remake.
What a funny way to say "destroyed the original game in every conceivable way possible." For the record, people have a better time with the Pixel Remaster because it's at least better balanced, but it's guilty of going in the other direction and making the game too easy outside of one or two bosses.

>>7986453
I also noticed that they kept the items added to the GBA version that make magic even less useful. Man, this is SO close to being the definitive version, but they had to take away the gameplay options that were available in earlier versions. Looks like the best version is still WonderSwan/PlayStation. I will take this back if the Floating Castle is back to being a space satellite instead of a generic castle in the sky, that was frankly an amazing detail in the NES version that I hope the Pixel Remaster picked up on. Half-kidding.
>>7990620
So essentially PR did to FFII what GBA/PSP did to FFI. Damn. I'm all for fixing things what needed work, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, ya know? Of course, FFII being the controversial game it is, I'm sure this new version will have its fans...But I'm not sure how I feel about it.
Something I noticed: while everyone is singing praises about the music (and don't get me wrong, most of it is quite good), they reverted the FFII overworld theme and gave it a different extension. I like the original extension better, which dates back to the WonderSwan version.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cenY9tBu98Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byhH1z4jukM&t=8m26s
>>7988779
So it's the best version of FFIII at least. Wasn't that hard though, it has no competition. Screw the DS version, especially for botching up the monsters. Pic related.

>>7871139
The biggest crime about FFIII3D is that it had not one, not two, but roughly THREE opportunities to fix the monster limit problem that was worked around by FFIVDS.

>>7774312
Even still,

>>7705657
I agree with FFIII but what's the voodoo shit with everything else? FYI, there are THREE complete English patches out there. For FFIII, the one you want is Chaos Rush's. The other two are pretty dated.

Final Fantasy III DS is an abomination (so is The After Years 3D though FFIV DS ain't bad), the effectiveness of GBA music "restoration" hacks are exaggerated, and the best version of Final Fantasy VI by a mile is the T-Edition. Everything else I'll leave up to personal taste but if you disagree with these proclamations then I sincerely doubt you have taste anyway, kthnxgbai.

>>7341667
Gonna add to this: the DS version encourages grinding more than the Famicom version. In the Famicom version, the boss AI is decided at the start of your turn, whereas in the DS version, the boss AI is decided at the end of your turn. This means that if your character falls in battle in the remake, it's basically a crapshoot if you waste a turn trying to revive and recover him at the expense of your party, since the boss will more often than not manage to keep your character down, especially considering more bosses have more moves per turn. That's kind of the opposite of fixing any problem the game had.