It came out on VC today in the U.S. (obviously as FFII for the SNES) and I'm thinking of buying it just because I like an occasional old-school RPG. I know it's been a recent favorite among FF fans, a group among which I cannot count myself. Still, each of the games is different enough that I'm usually willing to give them a try.

Anyone care to comment on how similar it is to III (as in the real III) and/or VI? I don't give a shit about aspects like story and translation, mainly just whether it has a decent battle system and tolerable dungeons. I'm gonna guess from VI that the random battle rate is through the roof though. Maybe I should just play Phantasy Star III instead.

The REAL 3? I can't compare the DS versions but if I remember right 3 has the same kinda battle system from the original and 4 introduced the whole Active Time Battle thing. 4 also doesn't have job class. The SNES US version is also seemingly notorious for being based on the re-released Easytype version of the game so it probably isn't too hard.

Sorry, by "real III" I meant Japanese III all versions inclusive, not just the NES original. I was just making it clear that when I said "III or VI" I wasn't referring to the single game known in the U.S. as III.

Eh it's eight bucks I'll probably buy it. I hate handheld RPGs so all of the rereleases have been kinda irrelevant to me.

You meant NES 3 right? Thats what I was comparing it to.

All versions inclusive? Does that mean you wanted DS 3 comparisons? But since handheld RPGs killed your parents I guess that wouldnt matter? NES and DS are the only systems that ever had the real FF3 on it so I'm confused.

Oh yes, indeed I did play Final Fantasy IV back in the day. It was one of the first two SNES games I got and a major memory from my early years.

You're considering buying the VC port of Final Fantasy IV for the SNES and want to know if you'd enjoy it, via gameplay comparison to FF3 and FF6. Well, let me see if I can help you.

Well, the ultimate difference between FF3 and FF4 is the Jobs system: There isn't one. Instead of a team of four customizable Onion Knights, all the characters in FFIV have set classes, which cover the standard spectrum of FF jobs (including Dragoon, Summoner, White Mage, Black Mage, etc). They are cycled in and out of your party according to storyline, rather than your whims, and have their own dialogue and characterization (which drives the story).

FF4 was highly innovative for it's time. The battle system is no longer the turn-based NES model. It is, in fact, the debut of the Active-Time Battle system, pretty similar to 6. Your party size grows and shrinks throughout the game and eventually maxes out at five(!).

In order to keep things interesting, FF4 really pioneered (and ran with) the new concept of the Gimmicky Boss Battle. Nearly every boss battle (and a few random ones) has some special gimmick (or trap), frequently requiring some new tactic (such as taking them out in order, using a particular technique at the right time, or in one notable example, not attacking at all). Battles are usually fast-paced and crisp, unencumbered by long, drawn-out attack animations.

As for dungeon layouts, this was back in the golden era of maze-like dungeons (no ultra-linear FF9 guided tours here) with ample rewards for exploration. Exploring everywhere, even in towns, often will yield secret passages full of extra goodies, and even one or two memorable easter eggs.

Aside from the main progression, there are a handful of optional side-quests which an exploratory player can locate, which provide extra difficulty but often worthwhile rewards.

As to challenge, the US version was deliberately toned-down. Hidden tunnels in walls (invisible in Japanese versions) have also often been graphically highlighted and obvious, to save you some tedium. The encounter rate was lowered, and as long as you don't run away too frequently, you will usually have enough levels to keep moving forward. There will be some periods, especially early on but not uncommon afterward, where you'll find yourself stopping to do some fund-raising with the local monsters, to keep up your equipment. Speaking of equipment, save often, or fall victim to Wutai Theft whenever someone leaves the party unexpectedly.

It really is an early 16-bit SNES RPG, but if I may say, it is the best of the bunch, less tedious than any other. This really was my favorite game for several years (til FF6 came out), and if you want a classic, you really can't do better than FF4.

However, if I may say though: FF4 really is an older game, and a remastered update, for the Nintendo DS, was released not long ago. It featured 3-D characters and environments, extra bonus dungeons, a party you can eventually customize, considerably punched-up dialogue, and even restored some elements of the game that were removed entirely from the SNES version in the US.

If you're going to go for the full FF4 experience, less dated, I would suggest you consider that one. But, if you just want a classic, old-timey RPG experience for a few bucks, go for the VC one. Your choice. Just pointing it out.

Let me know if there are any other points you'd like clarification on.

I spent an hour and a half composing that, even stayed up past my usual bedtime, by the way, you better appreciate it.

K. It's hard to find opinions on these games that aren't from Final Fanatics.

I'm well aware of the DS remake (and the one for GBA), but as mentioned before, I'm really not partial to handheld RPGs. Even were that not the case, the DS game costs almost three times as much as the VC release and features some truly hideous 3D visuals. Though it's hardly the prettiest game from the 16-bit era, I'd take the original over the remake any day. I'll probably be skipping through the dialogue and cutscenes, so any improvements to those areas are really lost on me. I gave it plenty of thought when it originally came out and I really have no interest. I'm speficially curious about the original here.

I really hate to hear that characters join and leave the party on the arbitrary basis of story. That's one of the worst 'innovations' of that era of RPG (along with save points). The rest sounds good enough; side-quests, exploration, fast battles. I'll probably put it on my queue for when I finish New Horizons and Soul Blazer (now there's a series that needs to be on VC).

And WarioFan, good lord do you need to work on your reading comprehension. I'm confused that it's even possible to be as confused as you are.

People aren't usually at their clearest at 4 in the morning. Be nice to th' lad.

I still cant understand.

You were asking for some comparisons between 4 and the REAL 3 and then I gave them to you then you responded sounding like I tried to give you impressions between 4 and the FAKE 3.

No, I just said that I wasn't distinguishing between the versions of III and then your mind got blown. The "real III" means any game called Final Fantasy III that isn't Final Fantasy VI. You brought in all the DS/NES malarky of your own accord.

Thats still not clearing up anything! What the hell are you trying to tell me? If you're not distinguishing between the versions of 3 and then you go and say that you don't mean FF6... Doesnt that mean you mean the NES one? But thats the one I...

Youre gonna have to start from the beginning....

Why?

I cant tell if youre screwing with me or not.

What the hell were you asking about at first, what the hell did you think I was telling you, and what the hell did you shoot me down for?

This is what Im seeing.

"Compare this game to FF3 (not FF6 plz)"

"Ok."

"I said FF3 not FF6 you dumbass"

I mean what's the point anymore. Ask Golem, he probably knows.

God now Im going to have months of sleepless nights wondering what could've been.