Jump to content

Talk:Final Fantasy XII

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleFinal Fantasy XII is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic starFinal Fantasy XII is the main article in the Final Fantasy XII series, a good topic. It is also part of the Final Fantasy series series, a featured topic. It is also part of the Ivalice series, a featured topic. These are identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve them, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 16, 2011.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 7, 2006Featured topic candidatePromoted
February 23, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
February 24, 2007Good article reassessmentListed
March 25, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
March 31, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
September 17, 2007Featured topic candidateNot promoted
June 24, 2008Featured topic removal candidateDemoted
September 20, 2008Good topic candidatePromoted
October 10, 2009Good topic removal candidateKept
April 30, 2013Good topic removal candidateKept
December 28, 2015Featured topic candidatePromoted
April 13, 2017Featured topic removal candidateDemoted
April 13, 2018Featured topic candidatePromoted
August 27, 2018Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Ultimania development information

[edit]

The following sources should be translated and used to expand the current incomplete article:

Final Fantasy XII Battle Ultimania
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 1 – Character Section
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 2 – Program Section
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 3 – Battle Section
Final Fantasy XII Scenario Ultimania
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 1 – Art Section
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 2 – Movie Section
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 3 – Sound Section
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 4 – Scenario Section
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 5 – Map System Section
  • FFXII Development Staff Interview 6 – Directors
Final Fantasy XII Ultimania Omega
  • Creator Interview
  • Special Column
  • Voice Actor Interview Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5
  • Hitoshi Sakimoto Interview
  • Movies Text Commentary

Anyone willing to help translate even one page is welcome! Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 15:50, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the links per WP:COPYVIO. – Allen4names 17:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who wrote this?

[edit]

It's like it was written by a super-fan, there's hardly any criticisms in this article, and this game should have a whole lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.164.37.128 (talk • contribs)

What part of the article are you talking about? Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To be perfectly honest, I thought the same thing. The whole article simply reeks of the "best FF ever" attitude I've seen displayed here and there on the internet. Especially on the FFXII GameFAQs message board, where they practically queue up to bash other FF games... which is weird, cause back in the old days, if you were an FF fan, you liked all the games. I guess VII changed all that. Regardless, this is a very biased article and needs to focus on more of the criticisms, such as going into better detail why some thought the soundtrack wasn't as memorable, or discussing how hard the game tries to distract you from the plot with a multitude of sidequests and excessive backtracking coupled with lengthy hikes through enemy-filled locations. The latter of which often requiring you to hold down a button to avoid battles the entire way through. Nothing wrong with wanting to boast about a game's good features and aspects, but you gonna include the blemishes, too.--Dakmordian (talk) 10:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, count me with Sjones23 - which parts are you having problems with? A quick look through at least the first half of the article (through Gameplay) reads as pretty bog-standard for describing what's going on, without any particular support or criticism either way of how good the game is (or isn't). umrguy42 20:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I totally forgot I'd written this or I'd have responded since my original comment (this is Dakmordian). What I think wasn't clear in my comment is that there really isn't any sign of negative criticism within the article. There's a minute comment, almost tossed in, about GameSpot regarding "back and forth" wandering around but that doesn't even begin to cover the amount of criticism I have seen people bring up; they're not hard to find, but probably not from proper sources. Even reading back through it, I still get the feeling there's a lot of bias in favor of this game. Considering the length of the article, I guess it just feels one-sided.--68.111.242.222 (talk) 08:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article feels about standard for a WP video game article- a bit enthusiastic feeling (no problem there) and a reception section that glosses over the negative bits. Most vg articles are written by people who like the game, so they don't focus as much as they should on criticisms as opposed to praises. The game was well-received, but even the reviewers that gave it high scores had points that they didn't like, and the reception section right now does a poor job of expressing what they were. If anyone wants to pull in some quotes from the reviewers used in the article about what they didn't like, feel free. --PresN 00:04, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The whole page needs to be redone. There's a lot of negativity surrounding FFXII that this page doesn't address, same as the FFXIII page. Be patient, I'm working on rewriting the entire FFXII page (it's my fave FF) and including all criticisms (I know them all from being on the GameFAQs board for the game since it came out) and how the development staff have responded to them according to the Ultimania interviews. I've been too busy in the real-world since early September so haven't been on Wikipedia for 2 months. In the mean time, read the section on FFXII on the Daisuke Watanabe page. G-Zay (talk) 17:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox cleanup

[edit]

Updated the infobox with the current formats and changed the credit fields as they did not use the currently established conventions:

  • changed to order shown in the game
  • scenario writers first, story writers last
  • added Miwa Shoda as scenario writer, removed Jun Akiyama (not a scenario writer)
  • removed producer (only people who worked on the original version are credited)
  • removed programmer (field only used for notable people or single programmers with significant new concepts/technological breakthroughs in older games)
  • removed some composers (only main contributors to the soundtrack are listed, Matsuo and Iwata are also both debatable, but I left them for now)
  • removed Ivalice Alliance (only independent standalone articles on game series allowed in series field)

I also removed the link to Final Fantasy X-2 at the top of the article as I just don't think people have problems distinguishing the two games, hyphen plus arabic numeral and all. Prime Blue (talk) 14:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Product Development Division 4.

[edit]

There is no hyphen used in the official logo.

Image for proof: http://img713.imageshack.us/i/pdd4.png/

G-Zay (talk) 01:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, that is the official logo. It's taken directly from the event where FFXII was officially announced by Square Enix.
Video of FFXII announcement event
So can you please stop reverting my edits calling them "G-Zay's usual stuff" when you're the one putting incorrect information on Wikipedia. Thank you. G-Zay (talk) 16:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Final_Fantasy_Tactics_Advance&diff=prev&oldid=419643075 . Last I checked, you're the one that keeps getting notifications for inserting unsourced stuff and pro-Ito opinions in articles. Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 16:50, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I insert what is fact. The only problem is that there's no available sources for people that want citations before it can be accepted. When I obtain sources for my contributions then people thank me for them. This was the case in how I managed to obtain sources that prove that there are now two Hiroyuki Ito's currently working for Square Enix.
Anyway, the FFTA intro does not have the official logo. We're looking for how it's officially written. Further still, in the Japanese URL reference provided on the FFTA and FFXII pages, there's no hyphen. Regardless, here's further proof that there is no hyphen in the official logo of Product Development Division 4:
Famitsu magazine job advert for FFXII
FFXII announcement event booklet page 5
FFXII announcement event booklet page 6
FFXII announcement event booklet page 7
This and the previously mentioned video are enough proof that there is no hyphen in the official logo. All you have in your argument is the FFTA intro which is not even how it's officially written. My proof is there and solid and you're being stubborn and ignoring it. If you still continue to revert then I will have to send you a warning. G-Zay (talk) 17:35, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
....is this seriously worth getting worked up about? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 18:09, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry. This debate is over. It's important to me that accurate information gets provided to the readers, though. G-Zay (talk) 18:44, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review table.

[edit]

The current table with stars doesn't appear bloated to me. Further still, it can be hidden and therefore disappear off the page. I don't see how it's bloated or page consuming when the ability to hide 95% of it is given to the reader.

This is like Gambits in FF12 all over again; people complained that Gambits made the game "play itself" but the developers gave the ability to turn them off for all party members. Similarly, the table is not even that bloated or long; the entire thing can fit on the screen at once. Further still, if you wanna remove it from view then the ability to do so is there for the reader with the "Hide" command. I really don't see how a reversion to a table with far less information for readers is an improvement to the page. If anything, it's a downgrade. G-Zay (talk) 00:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well obviously since YOU see it that way, you're obviously right, huh? Depsite the fact that it seems that everyone on this page and on WT:VG disagrees...♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 02:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I always edit pages thinking of the reader. The more information, the better. How is less information a good thing? The claim that there are too many reviews is also not that solid as the whole table can fit on the screen at once. It's not like the reader will have to scroll to see the whole thing. Lastly, there is a "Hide" command, so if they feel the table is in the way then they can just make it disappear. All that taken into account, the table is fine the way it is. It has lots of reviews, all from famous publications and they're all referenced. G-Zay (talk) 02:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid there is no consensus to include so many reviews in the review table. Not only are there at least four people here who disagree with you, the accepted usage notes on Template:Video game reviews/doc explicitly direct to keep it down to 5-6 reviews which represent a wide variety of sources (region, print vs. web, platform-specific, aggregate, etc.). Axem Titanium (talk) 03:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will never stop reverting the table as the table on the FFVI page is even longer and yet there are no complaints about it. If this FFXII table has to get reduced then so does the one for FFVI. If the FFVI table stays as it is then the FFXII one is worthy of staying in its current form. G-Zay (talk) 23:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. You can not make arguements based on other articles. Blake (Talk·Edits) 23:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My point still stands. If the FFVI table can be even longer than the FFXII one and stay then the FFXII one is fine the way it is. I don't think people took the FFVI table into account when the original consensus was reached so I hope this can be redone and fair agreement reached this time. Honestly, this is just overblown. The table is fine how it is. We need to drop this and move on to more important issues. G-Zay (talk) 00:33, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, we should drop this. As in, you should stop this idiotic long-term edit war. This table is too long. So is FF6s. The solution is not to say that this one stands because that one is too long. The solution is to cut both of them, which I will now do- review tables should have 6 representative reviews or so at most, and should never contain any reviews that aren't in the text. --PresN 00:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are probably some ten people now who you oppose and keep reverting. Consider this your final warning. Prime Blue (talk) 00:49, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Final Fantasy 6 is now down from 3 aggregates/18 reviewers (some with several reviews per reviewer) to 2/8; I left a bit extra since there's 2 and a bit game versions included in the table. Agree with Prime Blue above- your reverting and long, slow edit warring is really getting out of hand. Keep it up and I'll block you; you've done some good work here, but for the past while you've done nothing but waste everyone's time by continually going against consensus and staying just shy of 3RR on 10 articles at once. If you don't like the consensus, get it changed, don't keep fighting on your own. --PresN 00:59, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:08, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guest characters/gambit

[edit]

It says guests are controlled by AI, but they're controlled by gambits, which you can modify in the Zodiac versions of the game. Jeandeve (talk) 17:31, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

International version

[edit]

Why do we think the "International Zodiac Job System" edition classes as "an international version" of the game? Even in the original press release, cited in the article, it says that there are no plans to release the game outside of Japan, and doesn't use the term "international version". The way I see it, they took what was already the international (i.e. North American) version of the game, and localized it for Japan, also adding the new job system. Hence the name "International Zodiac Job System". This is a bit different from calling it "an international version". Kidburla (talk) 01:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because, way back in 2007, an "International Version" was an expanded, English-language version released only in Japan of a game. Hence the name "International" Zodiac Job System. SE was the biggest user of the term, but it never caught on very widely, and it's not used at all in 2018. I'm going to remove it from the article, it just causes confusion. --PresN 02:48, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe just add "marketed as an international version" instead? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit reverted

[edit]

My edit got reverted on suspicion that I am G-Zay. Dissident93 (talk · contribs) has already started investigating as he should. However I'd like to know where have I erred in my edit. I've looked at the references that were at the top of the talk page, incorporated them into my edit and added all the references. The rest was just following the template that was on Final Fantasy X especially when it comes to the Legacy section, which only uses single references to proclaim that the game has been a pioneer for things such as 3D RPG maps where I've used several references to show that several writers have claimed FFXII was "ahead of its time". My edit is not praising the game any more than the FFX page does and it is also FAC. I'd like to be vetted now on the content of my edit so I know better next time. Wachenroder (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Posting some context because that wikipedia's diff system is awful sometimes, and it's been a long time since there was something more publically explanatory than a revert for this kind of thing. Here's the bits that were added:

Matsuno was personally appointed by series creator Hironobu Sakaguchi to direct the game. Sakaguchi was impressed with the work of Matsuno and his team in creating the fully polygonal Vagrant Story on the Playstation 1, as well as the genre breakout success Final Fantasy Tactics which was a personal project that Sakaguchi had entrusted to Matsuno.<ffring ref><shmuplations ref>. Matsuno, who was already a popular name for his work on the cult classic Tactics Ogre in creating grittier, politically-driven stories had brought back much of the same team that had worked on all his games up to Vagrant Story: Akihiko Yoshida as character designer, Hiroshi Minagawa as visual designer and Hitoshi Sakimoto as the composer are some of the most popular names that occupied key positions in the development of the game.

...

Takashi Katano, one of the producers of The Zodiac Age remaster who worked as a project coordinator for the original game said in an interview that the game "pretty much" followed on the same track after Matsuno's departure BLOCKQUOTE: "There wasn't a huge overhaul or anything like that. The playable version of the game had been shown at E3, and at that point it was really a matter of polishing up the final product. Once he left, it was just a matter of, 'We'll take it from here,' and following the path."<polygon ref>

The other edit was just adding refs to existing content, though the cite to a Fandom blog is questionable at best.

The G-Zay context is that the guy's been trying to sneak in false or biased content promoting Ito, Matsuno, and Koizumi (and FFXII/their games), and denegrating Kitase and Toriyama (and their games, such as FFX) for literally 6.5 years. At this point it's like an allergic reaction when anyone edits like that, even if it's non-promotional, so apologizes if you aren't them. That said: popping out the gate on your very first 4 edits to add content to FFT and FFXII, with correctly formatted refs and obscure templates like blockquote, followed up by immediately understanding what "G-Zay sock" meant? Kind of a red flag. As to the content- the first section is overly praising of Matsuno, positioning him as Sakaguchi's scion as well as praising him for other games. The second half is the worst, and uncited, while the first half is cited to 2 cites that are doubtful at best for reliability- and also not, as you imply, from the list on this talk page. The second chunk isn't awful and is cited to one of the RS's listed on this talk page, but is essentially (and especially in the context of the first chunk) just praising Matsuno again, this time for essentially directing the whole game and relegating anything that came after his departure as mere polishing. The total result is revertable, though maybe bits could be salvaged, but combined with your talk page message here, which is textbook G-Zay in how you framed your edits and focused on the minor ref changes and not the actual content additions, it's well beyond any reasonable doubt. --PresN 15:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First of all thank you for answer. My changes were more extensive than that, though I might have misinterpreted "existing content" in your case. The legacy section is my edit for example.
I did not want to get on the issue of G-Zay right off the gate considering those are my first edits and I didn't know how personal we could get in talk pages but you have to realize that G-Zay is named on pretty much every talk page and has a dedicated page on reverting his edits. Any person even remotely serious to make a change in pages related to Ivalice content and devs will have to encounter what he did one way or another. I've "tried" to make due process before making changes to the page (which wasn't enough as I understand). I've had no idea that blockquote was an obscure template considering it is still featured in Template:Quote , that I have used VisualEditor, and "block quote" is one of the prime options in the paragraph tab (and I admittedly didn't feel comfortable enough to know if my paraphrases would keep the meaning of the quote intact). As to the Fandom reference, the article was hosted on the website's main page, and commission freelance writers as well as at least having a game editor at some point (not anymore for that specific game editor I linked). This didn't strike me as a personal blog and felt it was warranted enough to become a credible source.

"[...] the first section is overly praising of Matsuno, positioning him as Sakaguchi's scion as well as praising him for other games."

There's two things to this that pushed me to write it this way. First was the shmuplations translation of a Famitsu interview (I do not know if it is a viable source, but in itself Shmuplations has never been vetted as inaccurate and was featured before outside of me on FFT page) between Matsuno and Sakaguchi, which begins about how Sakaguchi had thought up this project for years but didn't have the time to work on it:

'Sakaguchi:' The title “Final Fantasy Tactics” was actually something I thought up four years ago. We even took out a trademark on the name. I’m a strategy game fan myself, and I had been thinking about what Final Fantasy would look like as a strategy game. I’m the type of person who comes up with a name first, so nothing much else had been concretely set down, but there was a “Final Fantasy Tactics” design document that I had made then. Unfortunately I was caught up in the development of the main FF series—which were coming out at a quick pace, one every 12-18 months—so my plans for FFT remained unrealized. But it is true that the kernel of the development goes back 4 years, to 1993.

and :

'Sakaguchi:' Actually, the truth is I showed Matsuno my 5-6 page design document… although, looking at it now, it seems they adopted a very different system from the one I described, and a lot of my ideas were dropped. (laughs) It was fully up to Matsuno and Itou to decided which ideas to use, you see. My role was more one of watching from the sidelines; as a strategy game fan, I’ve really been looking forward to playing it!

And in order to not be seen as cherry picking:

'Sakaguchi:' I’m sure many people must see the title of this game, “Final Fantasy Tactics“, and think that we headhunted Matsuno and reached out to him first, but it’s actually not like that, just as he says. You can write this down for posterity: (laughs) the idea for a Final Fantasy strategy game was one that I had been brewing and fermenting for quite awhile before.

which is why I said Sakaguchi entrusted the project to him, rather than becoming Sakaguchi's disciple. Another source, named "La Légende Final Fantasy XII & Ivalice" in French roughly translated "The Legend of Final Fantasy XII & Ivalice" (legend word being closer to word chart) from Third Editions. The book is French so for transparency I will offer the french quote and then my translation

"Extrêmement touché par Vagrant Story pour lequel il admettra avoir lâché quelques larmes, Hironobu Sakaguchi a décidé tout naturellement de confier la réalisation du douzième épisode de la saga à celui dont il se considère lui-même comme un fan, Yasumi Matsuno."<footnote>

<footnote>"Une confession faite à Famitsu, à laquelle il ajoute avoir pensé « Merci, Mattsuu », le surnom qu’il donne à Matsuno."'
my translation:

"Extremely moved by Vagrant Story to which he would admit shedding some tears, Hironobu Sakaguchi naturally decided to entrust the direction of the twelfth episode of the saga to the one he regards as being a fan of, Yasumi Matsuno."<footnote>

<footnote> "A confession made to Famitsu, to which he added having thought "Thank you, Mattsuu", the nickname he gives to Matsuno."'
My own edit on the matter was much tamer only because I didn't trust that the book would be seen as a viable source despite being a well-reputed publishing house. And that it is still in French made me think it would have seen me vetted, and it is itself a translation of a Famitsu interview, to which I do not know the exact source and do not read Japanese even if I could.

"The second half is the worst, and uncited, while the first half is cited to 2 cites that are doubtful at best for reliability- and also not, as you imply, from the list on this talk page"

You are right. The FFRing interview is a reference that I have merely taken from the existing and current FF12 wiki page. That reference is the only cite for the basis that Basch was meant to be the main protagonist, but was switched to Vaan and Penelo and also that it was because of Vagrant Story's Ashley Riot bad reception that this decision was made (ref 61). Considering this reference alone is doing a lot of the heavy lifting by itself, I did not think once that it would be seen as doubtful. This interview has Akitoshi Kawazu claiming that "Sakaguchi [...] had decided FFXII should also be different from the others, which is why he decided to entrust it to the team responsible for Vagrant Story". That's what I tried to go with that.
French quote for transparency:

M. Sakaguchi qui est le créateur des Final Fantasy avait décidé que Final Fantasy XII devrait être encore différent des autres, c'est pour ça qu'il avait décidé de le confier à l'équipe qui avait été responsable de Vagrant Story.

I agree that the praise was unwarranted for "genre breakout success Final Fantasy Tactics", even though it was the first SRPG to become a million seller, and the tangent on Tactics Ogre wasn't necessary all things considered. I wanted to show that Matsuno was already known among hardcore gaming circles at the time of making FFXII and there was a throughline from his time at Quest to now with his "core" team, but I realize it wasn't necessary. As to this part being uncited is another one of my mistake. I did not know what to cite in order to reference that the same core team has been working with him since Tactics Ogre, and them having already a wikipedia page felt that it was enough. Maybe a credits page of the game?

"The second chunk isn't awful and is cited to one of the RS's listed on this talk page, but is essentially (and especially in the context of the first chunk) just praising Matsuno again, this time for essentially directing the whole game and relegating anything that came after his departure as mere polishing."

This is overall an interview of a person who worked as project coordinator of FFXII and one of the producers of its remaster. There isn't anything that is remotely negative about the game in it and pretty much is the first interview since 2006-7 where someone from the original staff is speaking out about the game's development with any level of candidness. I have not removed a single sentence that would indicate that Matsuno didn't direct the whole game, I added several bits from a person that I felt had a position that made him involved in the project that would make his claim have weight and be worth being displayed on the wiki page. His claims does not contradict that Matsuno had left and others took care of the direction, just that the project kept being on track. I wasn't the one who said that either. I'd like more details on that point.
If you think there is reasonable ground that I am not he, then I would like some good faith to be assumed regarding my edit. Wachenroder (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously edits that improve the article and are well sourced should be kept, but you shouldn't fault me for thinking you are a newly created sockpocket of an editor who has been blocked multiple times to add in the same general subject matter on this article (and almost nothing else). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:43, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissident93 (talk · contribs): I do not fault the thinking and I was half-way expecting that any substantial edit would raise eyebrows. I do hope that my edit, while clumsy and too focused on praise, is somewhat sourced enough that there is merit to keeping some of the content when the matter of sock-puppetry is resolved. I'm also willing to dispel the anonymity to anyone who wants confirmation that I am just a person from France who wanted to improve the article and make it more in line to FFX and maybe work on a Zodiac Age article like FFX HD Remaster received one. There is no malice behind my intent, but there wasn't any way to announce my innocence before I made an edit. There's no point in starting an edit war over something so trivial so I hope you will get back to me if there are any updates on the matter and I shall just leave it be if the suspicion can't be dispelled. Wachenroder (talk) 17:05, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Considering this matter has seen no progress and I have seen no reply, I've opted to make smaller changes to the page from my reverted revision that should not be controversial. This should give editors the ability to closely monitor my activity on this page rather than just defaulting to a blanket revert. Wachenroder (talk) 18:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basch was initially meant to be the main protagonist of the story?

[edit]

I've seen this repeated elsewhere, but I can't find a usable cite; the cites currently in the article don't seem to support it. The only remotely relevant part of the French interview merely says (via Google Translate):

  • Q: Why is the hero design so effeminate?
  • Akitoshi Kawazu and Hiroshi Minagawa: (Laughs) It's true that we don't really know either. What happened is that the previous game we worked on which was Vagrant Story, which was a pretty beefy hero in the prime of his life, hadn't worked at all and wasn't too popular. . So we decided to go on a teenager to see if it would interest the public more.

...so it actually says less than the other source (which says something similar); neither interview mentions Basch at all, and the French interview doesn't even indicate that the lead character was changed in development at all, though the other one does go over how he was revised. It's easy to see how a fan who was searching for evidence to support an argument they were trying to make in that regard could interpret those as meaning that the protagonist was literally originally supposed to be Basch (since Basch fits that description), or that their attributes were split between different characters or the like, but it's not what the sources say, so using them like that here seems like it's WP:OR. Are there any sources specifically saying this? This is the closest I could find, but even then it carefully makes clear that what it's saying is speculation ("presumably..."), and even that source doesn't even speculate that Basch was originally the main character, it just speculates that Presumably, many of the original hero's traits went to Basch (who arguably fits the role of main protagonist better, anyway) while others when to Balthier.--Aquillion (talk) 06:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The polygon source in refideas already confirms Basch was supposed to be the main character.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 12:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that wasn't cited in the article! I've added it and changed the wording back (with some tweaks.) --Aquillion (talk) 20:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some further edits to this paragraph because of a recent Gamesradar article that purports to debunk the "rumor" that Basch was the original main character. Yes, in response to someone asking him "Well, I guess the confusion here is the rumor Basch was supposed to be the main character of FFXII. Shot in the dark here to see what's true", Matsuno tweeted "That rumor is a fake story". But that directly contradicts the FFRing interview with Minagawa and Kawazu, who were involved with the project from start to finish. Thus, out of an abundance of caution, I reworded it to even more closely follow the source. There's no indication in contemporary sources that it was "executive meddling"---this seems to be a detail that was added/embellished in the retelling (e.g. Polygon source from 10 years later). The Screenrant source appears to be just a lightly edited copy of Wikipedia (WP:CIRCULAR) so I removed it. Axem Titanium (talk) 08:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Final_Fantasy_XII&oldid=1207223826"