Final Fantasy 1

[Anonymous No.10827394]

Have never played FF before. Should I play the NES release or a translated Famicom version?

[Anonymous No.10827401]

PSX

[Anonymous No.10827403]

>>10827401
I'm just in the mood for some 8 bit RPGs

[Anonymous No.10827408]

>>10827403
Play NES.

[Anonymous No.10827409]

>>10827403
Well you've answered your own question.

[Anonymous No.10827416]

>>10827408
>>10827409
So NES it is then, okay. I was just wondering if the Japanese (Famicom) version is different. Everything on the internet suggests that gameplay-wise it's essentialy the same game so I guess the US version is alright to play

[Anonymous No.10827423]

>>10827416
The NES release is a translated Famicom version...

[Anonymous No.10827451]

>>10827394
US version is fine. There is some censored graphics but also some improved sprite work

https://tcrf.net/Final_Fantasy#Version_Differences

[Anonymous No.10827527]

>>10827451
So, basically the US have a problem with crosses being on churches, evil monsters having a six pointed star on their dungeon's floor, and some titties on a fucking monster that literally take less than 10 pixel (I counted them. Still would. Imagine the smell....)

[Anonymous No.10827537]

>>10827527
it's just your typical censoring to abide by Nintendo of USA regulations

[Anonymous No.10827539]

>>10827394
NES version is fine, just pull up a guide on what spells/items don't work. (There's a LOT that doesn't work)

[Anonymous No.10827575]

>>10827539
>NES version is fine
>just pull up a guide on what spells/items don't work.
>(There's a LOT that doesn't work)
Is this what cognitive dissonance looks like?
It almost goes into 1984 doublespeak territory.

[Anonymous No.10827579]

>>10827575
Speak for yourself...

[Anonymous No.10827583]

>>10827579
>Speak for yourself...
Okay. But why?

[Anonymous No.10827603]

>>10827394
I'd play the ChaosRush translation, but once I saw "Garland was a good night" I died a little inside (I think it's fixed by now but JESUS it's one of the first lines of the game, that's why his other hacks are pseudo-textports).
I've given up on fan translations on games that have official translations unless the localization has substantial gameplay-altering differences. Just use graphics-uncensoring hacks if you need them. And if you want a bugfixed version, just play Origins.

[Anonymous No.10827667]

>>10827583
>But

[Anonymous No.10827734]

Might be slightly related but how is the PSP version compared to the psx version?

[Anonymous No.10827739]

>>10827537
But have you actually imagined the smell? Disgusting, isn'it?
Still... would?

[Anonymous No.10828357]

>>10827539
>(There's a LOT that doesn't work)

It's a lot compared to the number of bugs you'd expect in a game, which of course is very small. It's not a lot compared to what you NEED to work correctly in a simple, easy JRPG. You certainly don't need a guide for it and recommending one is silly. Stats and weapons that don't entirely work will only subtly affect your experience in various ways that generally make an easy game into a slightly more difficult easy game or a slightly easier easy game. You won't notice them. Spells that don't work are not very numerous, despite what people here frequently claim, and they tend to be minor ones that you wouldn't use much anyway even if they did work. There is exactly one spell whose brokenness seriously affects the game. (You don't need to know what it, but for the reference of other anxious nerds here, it's TMPR.)

Here's what will happen if you buy a broken spell: You'll try it in battle, and you'll think it's doing something. It won't do anything. You might struggle a little to see what it's doing, and random variations in damage numbers and such might convince you that it's actually working even though it isn't. But you won't think it's doing very much, so you'll assume it's not a very strong spell, and you'll lose interest in casting it often. From then on, it'll uselessly occupy approximately 2% of your party's spell inventory. It will never significantly harm you.

So yeah, don't bother with a guide to compensate for bugs. Instead, if you want, use the printed guides that US players could easily get back in the day:
https://www.reddit.com/r/retrogaming/comments/9pc6ow/final_fantasy_nes_ff1_us_packin_magic_weapons_and/
https://www.reddit.com/r/retrogaming/comments/9p25h9/final_fantasy_original_monster_sheet_packin_dont/
https://www.reddit.com/r/FinalFantasy/comments/yu8gtg/ffi_nes_included_maps/
Note that these are arguably LOADED with spoilers, and that the game is pretty easy with or without them.

[Anonymous No.10828482]

>>10828357
>It's a lot compared to the number of bugs you'd expect in a game, which of course is very small.

Every 8-16 bit RPGs has bugs, and this also extends to 32 bit ones to some degree (and my knowledge of RPGs and even games in general beyond that lessens so I can't tell). The usual fanfare is menu/stat manipulation stuff, that is to say menu inputs leading to stat changes or item duplication, something which carried even to Final Fantasy VII but which FF1 doesn't have which tells you how solid its core programming is.

Point being bugs in RPGs were actually the norm and the ones in FF1 are NOTHING compared to what can you found in other games, even compared to Dragon Quest, like DQ2, 3 and 4 all 3 had bugs that could cause serious graphical issues to the point the bugs themselves could have prevented the games to be released as is had they been caught by Nintendo (and actually got fixed for the US versions, most likely because they had to), but Dragon Warrior III still has a pretty serious bug in the US that can break gameplay (the one which involve creating too many party members).
But that is still nothing compared to something like the sketch bug in FF6, that's a grade A glitch right there which also would have prevented the game from recieving certification had it been caught by Nintendo.
FF1 glitches just reached meme status, same as gen 1 Pokémon.

[Anonymous No.10828491]

>>10827734
Better, PS1 version is the worst.

[Anonymous No.10830715]

>>10827575
You're an idiot.
There's no unhacked NES version that doesn't have those bugs and OP specifically wants an 8-bit version. You need to pay better attention before going aggro.

[Anonymous No.10830721]

>>10827394
Play whatever the fuck you want. No one cares. Go play the game you faggot

[Anonymous No.10830724]

>>10827575
Half the users on the board think like this. Keep that in mind next time you take advice from them.

[Anonymous No.10830734]

>>10830724
There's no cogdis there, though. You are just demonstrating lower brain function by not understanding the context.

[Anonymous No.10830802]

>>10830721
How would he know the differences between them without having played them first?

[Anonymous No.10830808]

>>10828357
Intelligence does nothing so all magic damage doesn't work properly, and critical hit rate is based on weapon ID.

[Anonymous No.10830810]

>>10830802
Who fucking cares? Pick one

[Anonymous No.10830947]

>>10827403
Play a hacked version, 8bit versions of FFs are all filled with bugs. I think the good one was called FF Restored or something like that. There should also be a more accurate translation patch that you can install on top of that if you want to

[Anonymous No.10830949]

>>10830947
See: >>10828357

[Anonymous No.10830951]

>>10830949
the game is fucking buggy as hell dude, going
>well the basic stuff works so you dont need a patch to fix shit like magic damage not scaling
is retarded

[Anonymous No.10831142]

>>10830951

It's not retarded to be correct. You're being robotic. Yes, there were errors in the programming, and yes, we usually want errors to be corrected. I don't claim the game becomes worse when a romhacker fixes its bugs. But yes, I do claim that you don't NEED them fixed, because you don't. I think that if OP played a version of FF1 with just a little hack added to it that fixed the bugs, that'd probably be good. And if OP played the originally published version with bugs, that'd also be fine.

The robotic part is assuming that every bug is important just because your unexamined robotic faith tells you that errors are fundamentally evil. If for some bizarre reason we were serious scientists with good funding and we really cared about this, we might have a thousand people representative of relevant populations (ordinary players, "hardcore" players, children, adults, etc.) play each version of the game for the first time ever with minimal spoilers. And then we'd measure their experiences somehow and compare them. We wouldn't simply apply a magical "errors are bad so they must be fixed" rule. We would actually CHECK WHETHER THE ERRORS HURT THE GAME. Nobody's actually going to do this so we're never going to find out for sure. But if that experiment were run, then it'd probably find that both versions of the game produce equally good and equally bad experiences.

If you really care about your dopey nerd religion that tells you "errors must be fixed errors must be fixed the world isn't clean until errors are fixed", then go into every thread and start complaining about bugs in the games discussed there. You'll have lots to say, as >>10828482 suggests. If you're just piling on some bandwagon and wasting energy on the repetition of unimportant ideas you heard from others, then consider stopping.

(And if you want a bug-free game, don't bother trying to anachronistically filter one out of the historical record. Instead, just go write it yourself.)

[Anonymous No.10831178]

>>10830808

And if that weren't the case, would the game be worse? We're only talking about this game because people loved the buggy version of it - probably without ever even noticing a single one of the bugs, in at least 99% of cases. A random hacker comes in later, once anachronistic technology has allowed lots of people to easily poke around in the game's data, and after careful analysis that has nothing to do with what an ordinary player does, discovers some errors. Does that imply that the ordinary players who had already enjoyed the game didn't genuinely like it?

Why are you people such robotic repeaters of popular ideas? Somebody says "Final Fantasy 1" and you pop out of obscurity and say your catchphrase: "Don't play it because it's full of bugs!" What's the point of that? It's like the "Did you know that Mario 2 was actually Doki Doki Panic" thing. Yes, it's a fact, but why pop up and vomit it out every time like a car alarm that got bumped? You can be a person too, and say your own ideas that you came up with yourself.

I should probably stop fighting on this silly hill though.

[Anonymous No.10833067]

>>10831142
>>10831178
Not reading any of this shit but FF1 had a proportionally high number of significant bugs that make the already too-simple game even simpler. They aren't the biggest obstacles to enjoying the game but they are nevertheless severe and it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise.