Final Fantasy VS Zelda

Legend of Zelda none of its games ever disapointed me so bad that I sold it.D3dr0_0

I have been disappointed since the original game.

LoZ: A Link to the Past was the first game I ever played when I was pretty young and for a kid's first game I thought it was pretty awesome. You're not as focused on plotlines and moral dilemmas when you're young and the black and white idea of being the only one who can save the country from the evil Ganondorf is as simple and satisfying as you can get. If I had started those games as a teenager I would probably not be as in to it as I am now but I've had a good history with LoZ so I have to throw my two cents in.

However, I still voted for FF because on a total level of quality and entertainment, Final Fantasy is far superior.  

is this a serious thread question/poll? :s

FF.

Until now, I cannot comprehend what people saw in Zelda. That Link character is a very generic looking elf. I have only tried the 2D ones and all my experience was a lot of hack n' slash and some grabbing. I just don't know about the newer ones.Fantasy_Gamer

Well , there are better Action games such as Monster Hunter and God Eater , so I don't really see what's the hype for Zelda :X The game doesn't really pick up in content nor excitement but you won't really get bored to the extremities of it.

[QUOTE="D3dr0_0"]Legend of Zelda none of its games ever disapointed me so bad that I sold it.alexjonathan41

I have been disappointed since the original game.

Can't realy be disappointed if never had hope for it now can you.

FF

despite trying, zelda never held my attention for very long at all, around 10 mins at the most...

is this a serious thread question/poll? :s

FF.

Deadlyrain92

My point... exactly.

Until now, I cannot comprehend what people saw in Zelda. That Link character is a very generic looking elf. I have only tried the 2D ones and all my experience was a lot of hack n' slash and some grabbing. I just don't know about the newer ones.Fantasy_Gamer

Final Fantasy's stories are better. Zelda's gameplay is better. Zelda has disappointed me less than Final Fantasy, but Final Fantasy VI.valereth-1

The gameplay of Zelda is repetitive. Most of the Zelda games are more or less the same, with a few tweaks here and there.

As for Final Fantasy's gameplay, Tactics was praised for its gameplay.

Lol , your actually content about Zelda's gameplay? :O Though I must admit that I had fun riding on my good ol' horse while shooting every one else down with my bow , I prefer Final Fantasy despite it's....well , typical JRPG battle standards :Pz827

[QUOTE="valereth-1"]Final Fantasy's stories are better. Zelda's gameplay is better. Zelda has disappointed me less than Final Fantasy, but Final Fantasy VI.alexjonathan41

The gameplay of Zelda is repetitive. Most of the Zelda games are more or less the same, with a few tweaks here and there.

As for Final Fantasy's gameplay, Tactics was praised for its gameplay.

One game having different gameplay does not change the fact that about 11 of the Final Fantasy games play pretty much the same

Gameplay does not only include the battle system and exploration. It also involves the mini-games, how fun or tedious a side quest is, how you interect with the NPCs, the controls, how you customize your characters' equipment and abilities, and many other factors.The_Judgemaster

A debate? :?

Well , truth be told , both series need to evolve from their old shells to be honest. The Zelda series had mainly seen improvements but not entirely new systems whereas Final Fantasy retains it's old system while adding several new systems per game , but not retaining them.

Gameplay-wise , it's hard to compare due to major differences but from a RPG stand of view , Final Fantasy is much more concrete in it's system and gameplay as a RPG game. Zelda is somewhere in the borderline of being an Action game and a RPG. It also lacks a large variety of content compared to typical RPGs , nor is it actually quite as exciting as typical action games.

But Zelda can certainly be compared to the Crystal Chronicles series. Though I don't think that's within the point? :P

A debate? :?

Well , truth be told , both series need to evolve from their old shells to be honest. The Zelda series had mainly seen improvements but not entirely new systems whereas Final Fantasy retains it's old system while adding several new systems per game , but not retaining them.

Gameplay-wise , it's hard to compare due to major differences but from a RPG stand of view , Final Fantasy is much more concrete in it's system and gameplay as a RPG game. Zelda is somewhere in the borderline of being an Action game and a RPG. It also lacks a large variety of content compared to typical RPGs , nor is it actually quite as exciting as typical action games.

But Zelda can certainly be compared to the Crystal Chronicles series. Though I don't think that's within the point? :P

z827

dude I think you just totally nailed it. Completely unbiased. props. 

[QUOTE="z827"]

A debate? :?

Well , truth be told , both series need to evolve from their old shells to be honest. The Zelda series had mainly seen improvements but not entirely new systems whereas Final Fantasy retains it's old system while adding several new systems per game , but not retaining them.

Gameplay-wise , it's hard to compare due to major differences but from a RPG stand of view , Final Fantasy is much more concrete in it's system and gameplay as a RPG game. Zelda is somewhere in the borderline of being an Action game and a RPG. It also lacks a large variety of content compared to typical RPGs , nor is it actually quite as exciting as typical action games.

But Zelda can certainly be compared to the Crystal Chronicles series. Though I don't think that's within the point? :P

JukedSolid

dude I think you just totally nailed it. Completely unbiased. props.

They're two different types of RPG

I like Zelda, But I also like FF, but which is best?

There's only one way to find out!!

FIIIIIGGGGGHHHHHHTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!

Zelda is an Action/Advnture series. The only Zelda RPG was Zelda II: Adventure of Link.

That being said, I prefer Zelda's gameplay. Except for Twilight Princess, which was far too boring/easy.

Zelda is an Action/Advnture series. The only Zelda RPG was Zelda II: Adventure of Link.

That being said, I prefer Zelda's gameplay. Except for Twilight Princess, which was far too boring/easy.

Yonathin3155

[QUOTE="Yonathin3155"]

Zelda is an Action/Advnture series. The only Zelda RPG was Zelda II: Adventure of Link.

That being said, I prefer Zelda's gameplay. Except for Twilight Princess, which was far too boring/easy.

valereth-1

Fun is not something I have had when playing Zelda games. Final Fantasy is fun to play, has intriguing storylines, and is beautiful to look at. Zelda's gameplay is repetitive and boring, the storylines are predictable, and the graphics are nothing to brag about.

is this a serious thread question/poll? :s

FF.

Deadlyrain92

I find it hard to belive people actually voted for Zelda. *cough*Nintendo fanboys*cough*

Hard question, I'm a junkie of both series!

why isn't there a neutral option :cry:

[QUOTE="Deadlyrain92"]

is this a serious thread question/poll? :s

FF.

samanthademeste

I find it hard to belive people actually voted for Zelda. *cough*Nintendo fanboys*cough*

[QUOTE="Deadlyrain92"]

is this a serious thread question/poll? :s

FF.

samanthademeste

I find it hard to belive people actually voted for Zelda. *cough*Nintendo fanboys*cough*

But I don't like Mario I'm more of a Zelda fan boy.

I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.magitekk

[QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.valereth-1

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.samanthademeste

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

[QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.valereth-1

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

Stellar gameplay=rip-off and unoriginality.

Oh and just because Nintendo has Mario, Zelda, Metroid and Pokemon dose not automatically make them better then Playstation/Xbox. And older does not always mean better, sometimes someone can come along and outdo the older version.

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.samanthademeste

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

stellar gameplay=rip-off and unoriginality.

[QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.valereth-1

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

stellar gameplay=rip-off and unoriginality.

yes you can, its called being repetitive.

Final fantasy is NOT reptitive in that sense. Each Final Fantasy has a differant story, gameplay, graphics, characters, world ect.

Zelda is pretty much the same thing over and over.

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.samanthademeste

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

stellar gameplay=rip-off and unoriginality.

yes you can, its called being repetitive.

Final fantasy is NOT reptitive in that sense. Each Final Fantasy has a differant story, gameplay, graphics, characters, world ect.

Zelda is pretty much the same thing over and over.

[QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.valereth-1

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

stellar gameplay=rip-off and unoriginality.

yes you can, its called being repetitive.

Final fantasy is NOT reptitive in that sense. Each Final Fantasy has a differant story, gameplay, graphics, characters, world ect.

Zelda is pretty much the same thing over and over.

OK, there have been one or two truly unique Zelda games, but the gameplay has not evolved that much over the years, but Final Fantasy has not had the same gameplay since X. Twilight Princess did not change the formula very much, hell with TP I felt like I was playing a fancier version of OoT. Skyward Sword is blending Wind Waker and Twilight Princess and essentially has the same formula of gameplay of all the Zelda games before it. FF11, FF12, and FF13 played nothing like each other at all. FF14 will hopefully be more enjoyable then 11.

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="magitekk"]I've never actually played Zelda, but the very thought of playing as a boy dressed in green that looks like an elf in every single game is just plain retarded. Same with having the same villain in just about every game in the series: lame.samanthademeste

Almost every Zelda game is more or less a rip-off of its predecessor, and Skyward Sword is no different.

Lttp: more or less a rip-off of the first Zelda game

OoT: more or less a rip-off of Lttp

TP: more or less a rip-off of OoT

SS: more or less a rip-off of WW and TP

stellar gameplay=rip-off and unoriginality.

yes you can, its called being repetitive.

Final fantasy is NOT reptitive in that sense. Each Final Fantasy has a differant story, gameplay, graphics, characters, world ect.

Zelda is pretty much the same thing over and over.

OK, there have been one or two truly unique Zelda games, but the gameplay has not evolved that much over the years, but Final Fantasy has not had the same gameplay since X. Twilight Princess did not change the formula very much, hell with TP I felt like I was playing a fancier version of OoT. Skyward Sword is blending Wind Waker and Twilight Princess and essentially has the same formula of gameplay of all the Zelda games before it. FF11, FF12, and FF13 played nothing like each other at all. FF14 will hopefully be more enjoyable then 11.

I gave you 4 prime examples of distinct looks for the Zelda series. Do not ignore it. From a graphical standpoint, it is no more repetitive than the Final Fantasy series is.

You say there has been no gameplay changes or innovations in the Zelda franchise, which makes me wonder if you have even played them. Seriously, Twilight Princess had you playing as a wolf a good portion of the time. Wolf Link played nothing like Human Link. It played nothing like any previous Zelda game. They changed up the format in a big way, once again, when they did the DS games. They controlled entirely with the stylus, giving them their own unique feel. This means that the Zelda series has evolved it's gameplay with the last few entries, which means that your statement about Final Fantasy finally changing it's format with FFXI, FFXII and FFXIII (FFX does not count because it played like the first 3. It got rid of the time bar. It, essentially, devolved itself.) is also true about the Legend of Zelda series.

Once again, your arguments sound more like the desperate cries of a fanboy who knows they are wrong than actual arguments

Lets see all the BIG so-called changes, shall we?

First Zelda:This is the first Zelda game. And, since then, has remained pretty much the same story and gameplay. Zeld gets captured, you must save her by going in dungeons to get iteams and defeat the boss, and then beat Ganon.

Lttp: Other then removing the religious imagry (which has nothing to do with the gameplay at all) and expanding on the mythology of the series (nothing to do with gameplay, AGAIN) it played more or less the same: Zelda is captured, you must go into a dungeon pick up items, beat the boss, and then beat ganon at his tower. The end.

OoT: The mythology of the series was even more expaned (nothing to do with gameplay) Ok, you can ride a horse for the first time. OOOOH, so much differant, NOT. Its STILL: Zelda is captured, you have to go into a dungeon, beat the boss in that dungeon, go in the next dungeon, ect, and then beat Ganon at the end.

TP: OOOH, look at me, I can turn around as a wolf, so much change to the series! Yet I feel like I have played this game before, hmm strange.

If you ask me, YOUR being the fanboy who does not want to hear any criticsm of Nintendo/Zelda. Final Fantasy has its falts, but it is the superior series because it is differant each time. Not to mention it sold more.

Lets see all the BIG so-called changes, shall we?

First Zelda:This is the first Zelda game. And, since then, has remained pretty much the same story and gameplay. Zeld gets captured, you must save her by going in dungeons to get iteams and defeat the boss, and then beat Ganon.

Lttp: Other then removing the religious imagry (which has nothing to do with the gameplay at all) and expanding on the mythology of the series (nothing to do with gameplay, AGAIN) it played more or less the same: Zelda is captured, you must go into a dungeon pick up items, beat the boss, and then beat ganon at his tower. The end.

OoT: The mythology of the series was even more expaned (nothing to do with gameplay) Ok, you can ride a horse for the first time. OOOOH, so much differant, NOT. Its STILL: Zelda is captured, you have to go into a dungeon, beat the boss in that dungeon, go in the next dungeon, ect, and then beat Ganon at the end.

TP: OOOH, look at me, I can turn around as a wolf, so much change to the series! Yet I feel like I have played this game before, hmm strange.

If you ask me, YOUR being the fanboy who does not want to hear any criticsm of Nintendo/Zelda. Final Fantasy has its falts, but it is the superior series because it is differant each time. Not to mention it sold more.

 

samanthademeste

What about Links Awakening? Bam! Zelda without Zelda. 

Sales figures do not prove anything. The fact that you are bringing up sales figures at all is proof that you are nothing more than a Final Fantasy fanboy that desperately wants to be right when you know you aren't

[QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

Lets see all the BIG so-called changes, shall we?

First Zelda:This is the first Zelda game. And, since then, has remained pretty much the same story and gameplay. Zeld gets captured, you must save her by going in dungeons to get iteams and defeat the boss, and then beat Ganon.

Lttp: Other then removing the religious imagry (which has nothing to do with the gameplay at all) and expanding on the mythology of the series (nothing to do with gameplay, AGAIN) it played more or less the same: Zelda is captured, you must go into a dungeon pick up items, beat the boss, and then beat ganon at his tower. The end.

OoT: The mythology of the series was even more expaned (nothing to do with gameplay) Ok, you can ride a horse for the first time. OOOOH, so much differant, NOT. Its STILL: Zelda is captured, you have to go into a dungeon, beat the boss in that dungeon, go in the next dungeon, ect, and then beat Ganon at the end.

TP: OOOH, look at me, I can turn around as a wolf, so much change to the series! Yet I feel like I have played this game before, hmm strange.

If you ask me, YOUR being the fanboy who does not want to hear any criticsm of Nintendo/Zelda. Final Fantasy has its falts, but it is the superior series because it is differant each time. Not to mention it sold more.

valereth-1

What about Links Awakening? Bam! Zelda without Zelda.

Sales figures do not prove anything. The fact that you are bringing up sales figures at all is proof that you are nothing more than a Final Fantasy fanboy that desperately wants to be right when you know you aren't

Its like talking to a wall.

[QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

Lets see all the BIG so-called changes, shall we?

First Zelda:This is the first Zelda game. And, since then, has remained pretty much the same story and gameplay. Zeld gets captured, you must save her by going in dungeons to get iteams and defeat the boss, and then beat Ganon.

Lttp: Other then removing the religious imagry (which has nothing to do with the gameplay at all) and expanding on the mythology of the series (nothing to do with gameplay, AGAIN) it played more or less the same: Zelda is captured, you must go into a dungeon pick up items, beat the boss, and then beat ganon at his tower. The end.

OoT: The mythology of the series was even more expaned (nothing to do with gameplay) Ok, you can ride a horse for the first time. OOOOH, so much differant, NOT. Its STILL: Zelda is captured, you have to go into a dungeon, beat the boss in that dungeon, go in the next dungeon, ect, and then beat Ganon at the end.

TP: OOOH, look at me, I can turn around as a wolf, so much change to the series! Yet I feel like I have played this game before, hmm strange.

If you ask me, YOUR being the fanboy who does not want to hear any criticsm of Nintendo/Zelda. Final Fantasy has its falts, but it is the superior series because it is differant each time. Not to mention it sold more.

 

samanthademeste

What about Links Awakening? Bam! Zelda without Zelda.

Sales figures do not prove anything. The fact that you are bringing up sales figures at all is proof that you are nothing more than a Final Fantasy fanboy that desperately wants to be right when you know you aren't

Its like talking to a wall.

Except walls don't troll and act like epic douche bags.

[QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

Lets see all the BIG so-called changes, shall we?

First Zelda:This is the first Zelda game. And, since then, has remained pretty much the same story and gameplay. Zeld gets captured, you must save her by going in dungeons to get iteams and defeat the boss, and then beat Ganon.

Lttp: Other then removing the religious imagry (which has nothing to do with the gameplay at all) and expanding on the mythology of the series (nothing to do with gameplay, AGAIN) it played more or less the same: Zelda is captured, you must go into a dungeon pick up items, beat the boss, and then beat ganon at his tower. The end.

OoT: The mythology of the series was even more expaned (nothing to do with gameplay) Ok, you can ride a horse for the first time. OOOOH, so much differant, NOT. Its STILL: Zelda is captured, you have to go into a dungeon, beat the boss in that dungeon, go in the next dungeon, ect, and then beat Ganon at the end.

TP: OOOH, look at me, I can turn around as a wolf, so much change to the series! Yet I feel like I have played this game before, hmm strange.

If you ask me, YOUR being the fanboy who does not want to hear any criticsm of Nintendo/Zelda. Final Fantasy has its falts, but it is the superior series because it is differant each time. Not to mention it sold more.

magitekk

What about Links Awakening? Bam! Zelda without Zelda.

Sales figures do not prove anything. The fact that you are bringing up sales figures at all is proof that you are nothing more than a Final Fantasy fanboy that desperately wants to be right when you know you aren't

Its like talking to a wall.

Except walls don't troll and act like epic douche bags.

Yeah, talking to a wall is better.

[QUOTE="samanthademeste"][QUOTE="valereth-1"][QUOTE="samanthademeste"]

Lets see all the BIG so-called changes, shall we?

First Zelda:This is the first Zelda game. And, since then, has remained pretty much the same story and gameplay. Zeld gets captured, you must save her by going in dungeons to get iteams and defeat the boss, and then beat Ganon.

Lttp: Other then removing the religious imagry (which has nothing to do with the gameplay at all) and expanding on the mythology of the series (nothing to do with gameplay, AGAIN) it played more or less the same: Zelda is captured, you must go into a dungeon pick up items, beat the boss, and then beat ganon at his tower. The end.

OoT: The mythology of the series was even more expaned (nothing to do with gameplay) Ok, you can ride a horse for the first time. OOOOH, so much differant, NOT. Its STILL: Zelda is captured, you have to go into a dungeon, beat the boss in that dungeon, go in the next dungeon, ect, and then beat Ganon at the end.

TP: OOOH, look at me, I can turn around as a wolf, so much change to the series! Yet I feel like I have played this game before, hmm strange.

If you ask me, YOUR being the fanboy who does not want to hear any criticsm of Nintendo/Zelda. Final Fantasy has its falts, but it is the superior series because it is differant each time. Not to mention it sold more.

 

magitekk

What about Links Awakening? Bam! Zelda without Zelda.

Sales figures do not prove anything. The fact that you are bringing up sales figures at all is proof that you are nothing more than a Final Fantasy fanboy that desperately wants to be right when you know you aren't

Its like talking to a wall.

Except walls don't troll and act like epic douche bags.