Talk:World of Final Fantasy VIII

Where are the Moombas?

Moombas seem to have vanished at some point when Races of Final Fantasy was spliced between various articles and when these articles were edited. We should retrieve the text about them and put it here. Kariteh 17:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Moombas are mentioned in a couple sentences in the Shumi paragraph. — Deckiller 17:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

There should be more than that. Moombas appeared in Chocobo Racing for instance. Kariteh 18:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to elaborate on it, but I think you'll find little to work with, other than their appearance in Chocobo Racing. But I'd love for you to prove me wrong :D. --Teggles 07:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

GA Notes

The article is looking pretty good. Since the article is so new, I'd like to let it sit for a while to ensure stability. Here are some notes:

• The lead paragraph jumps around a little. It says FFVIII is set on a world with a moon, then switches to the financial success of the title, then goes to pre-rendered backgrounds.
• Check links—I found a link to a dab page. Just going to take your word, I don't want to check every link.
• The reception section is mostly concerned with graphics. It would be better if the main emphasis was on the design on the world itself. Quotes like "fantasy elements with a high-tech, sci-fi look, a world at once unique and instantly recognizable, familiar but full of surprises" from IGN.
• Check all images for article-specific fair use rationale. Some have rationale, but are not specific to the article.

Pagrashtak 04:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

There are no longer any disambiguation links. I've also fixed the rationales. (by the way, you were wrong in saying "some" have rationale, but the problem has been taken care of) --Teggles 07:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Added a bit more on the design of the world in the reception section. Reorganized lead. — Deckiller 11:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks better. I don't believe I was wrong about the rationale, I seem to remember that I checked some images and found rationale that was not article-specific. It's ok now, though. Pagrashtak 18:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Dollet Dukedom

Dollet is a Dukedom according to the FFVIII OST back cover.[1] Shouldn't this be mentioned? Kariteh 09:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

III and VIII Connection

I added a small note to the history section mentioning the possibility that FFIII and FFVIII may be connected. In both games a character appears named Hyne. In FFIII, which happens during a medieval setting, Hyne was a sorceror that terrorised the people and uprooted the Elder Tree. In FFVIII, in a futuristic setting, all the sorcoresses (don't think I spelled that right) are called Hyne's decendants and are are said to have received their power from him. Square has never confirmed or denied that the two are connected in some way, but considering how they have begun connecting games recently (FFX and FFVII, FFT and FFXII) and releasing sequals (FFX-2, FFTA, FFCC:TCB, FFCC:RoF, FFXII:RW, FFXIII, FFXIIVersus, FFXIIIAgito, etc.) there is a very big chance that this may be more than just a coincidence. Either way, I kept it factual and unbiased, presenting only the facts that the possibility does exsist.67.170.180.215 00:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Ralis

Too many inline citations

I am concerned that the level of inline citations in this article makes it hard to read. I know it does for me. Perhaps reducing some of the excess citations to general references would improve the readability. FrozenPurpleCube 01:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

This article actually has a fairly small amount of inline citations compared to many FAs out there (100+). It's been the trend on Wikipedia (mostly as overcompensation for all the media complaints, methinks). As for not knowing enough about the world, we provide external links to the Final Fantasy Wikia, which provides an in-depth coverage of each location and continent. — Deckiller 12:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about the number of citations in other articles, perhaps those articles have a need for so many citations, perhaps they don't, but I'll give two examples from the Reception and Criticism section:

Multimedia news website IGN stated that the game's pre-rendered backgrounds mix "fantasy elements with a high-tech, sci-fi look, a world at once unique and instantly recognizable, familiar but full of surprises".[7] On the whole, IGN gave the graphics a 10 out of 10 and the presentation a 9 out of 10, stating "absolutely nobody does graphics better than Square, and it's never done a better job than [Final Fantasy VIII]".[7]

GameSpot awarded Final Fantasy VIII a perfect score in the graphics section, stating "while the limitations of the PlayStation hardware rear their ugly head from time to time, the sheer artistry and detail of the movement, the models, and the textures are beyond reproach".[33] GameSpot was also particularly impressed with the backgrounds, noting that "the detail in the backgrounds is frighteningly meticulous, and almost all backgrounds contain some animated elements".[33]

Is there some need to use *two* citations to the same place? And that's not the only case where I see it happening. I'm sorry, but it really is distracting to see so many citations. As for the world itself, that's another issue, which I'm not going to worry about right now since I really don't care to play the games thus I wouldn't have a baseline for which to work to improve it. OTOH, I can judge the appearance of the article, and I remain unconvinced with your justifications. I suggest you go through the article and at least remove the ones like the above. FrozenPurpleCube 07:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Quotes have to be cited, even if they appear back-to-back (WP:CITE). There isn't any real way to expand the in-universe information in this article without going into excessive detail; the history section as it stands already scrapes from the bottom of the barrel, and adding more fair-use images would result in the fair use brigade marching in. — Deckiller 12:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, first, I'm confused, why are you bringing up things I'm not talking about? I don't recall mentioning anything about images, or saying anything about the history section here. Really, one issue is all I'm trying to address. If I wanted to address other things I would say so here. And while I did say elsewhere that I had concerns about the information quality of the page, I know I haven't said anything about pictures at all.

Back to the concern I am expressing, sure, you used quotations there. I don't think it's really necessary for you to inline cite them twice, but if you do, then perhaps you could just reduce the direct quotations, which would not be a bad thing. I don't feel it is really a good case of prose there. They would look much better rewritten instead of relying on somebody else's words. That may just be my preference though. Besides, I see no direct quotations in:

The planet comprises five landmasses; the largest (Esthar) covers most of the eastern portion of the map.[1] The second largest continent (Galbadia) lies to the west,[1] and contains many of the game's locations. The northernmost landmass is Trabia, an arctic region. Positioned roughly in the middle of the world map lies the smallest continent (Balamb),[1]

or

However, another prominent race is the "Shumi", a small tribe of creatures with yellow skin and large arms.[11] The tribe lives in an underground village on the Trabian continent.[11]

So that explanation doesn't fly there. FrozenPurpleCube 16:15, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I tend to address several potential issues in advance; issues with the portrayal of the fiction usually lead to discussions about both details and images. Quoting reviews for criticism sections is definitely just a matter of preference. For the other two examples, they can be described as "defensive referencing" to avoid WP:OR. But I'll address it, since nobody else has expressed concern either way. — Deckiller 16:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, as long as you're looking at it in the future, that works for me. FrozenPurpleCube 17:55, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

sales figures... most impressive sales ever? Only 50 million dollars made?

In the wikipedia article Best_selling_video_games it says:

1. Final Fantasy VII (9.8 million, includes Final Fantasy VII International)
2. Final Fantasy VIII (6 million)

Not very accurate if part 8 sold more than 7, as the article and elsewhere seems to have suggested.

The article reads Final Fantasy VIII was released to high sales and mostly positive reception; thirteen weeks after its release, Final Fantasy VIII had earned more than US$50 million in sales, But there is a link to an article [2] that says it sold The game broke industry pre-sell records with more than 2 million units on reserve before it was available on store shelves. Within the first four days of release, 2.5 million units were sold, and more than 3.3 million units were sold in Japan within the first month. It didn't take it 13 weeks to earn 50 million dollars, it doing more than that from pre-orders alone. Any idea how to get some accurate numbers? Dream Focus 21:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Opinion about screenshot highlighting what is mentioned in that section of the article

[3] I reverted the deletion of this, but then that same editor took it out again. Opinions please. Does this screenshot not help explain the description in that section of how the artwork is done? If you talk about something, you need a picture showing them what you are talking about. Much better than expecting them to just use their imagination. Dream Focus 03:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Based on the edit summary provided, it appears Kung Fu Man's concern is not that there's a picture, but rather the picture doesn't clearly demonstrate the difference between the pre-rendered background and the polygon characters. I agree that it'd be better to include a picture, so if a better one can be found, perhaps all parties can be satisfied? Bhamv (talk) 03:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm considering the fair-use limits too: this is a rather short article and we already have two images, one detailing the worldmap and the other the design process. Since this is under the scope of GA sweeps we need to be wary of anything that would give credence to delisting it.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

What exactly are GA sweeps, and would we care? We aren't here to impress anyone, most never noticing all those Wikipedia article quality list or even caring. Having a screenshot of a game to show what its like, is perfectly reasonable. The picture of the world map is utterly pointless, it not having any detail, nor does it have more locations than a normal game map would have. The Leviathan picture is also useless. It shows the wireframe used in every game out there, to design something, then the finish product. Every single 3D modeling program does this, it the standard method used by every single 3D game there is. No point in having it at all. If you worry about the number of pictures, get rid of the two pointless ones, and put a decent looking screenshot that shows what sort of things people can expect in the game, specially something that shows off its graphics. Dream Focus 15:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually I agree the leviathan's pretty useless too, in fact the world map's the only one this article needs. And no you don't need to show people "what they can expect in the game": that's what the game's article is there for. Either way the same logic for that shot can be applied to one detailing the whole pre-rendered bit. It's used in a lot of games, and not needed here. If people want to see an example of what a pre-rendered background looks like, that's what the article on the subject is for, not this one.

As for GA Sweeps, its basically a collaborative effort to review GA-class articles from before a certain point to see if they measure up to the current standards. And as far as "We aren't here to impress anyone, most never noticing all those Wikipedia article quality list or even caring", shut up already it's annoying enough on your userpage.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

There was no merge discussion

So, one editor, on the same day he decides its not GA anymore [4] eliminates the article, redirecting elsewhere. There was NO merge discussion here, nor did anyone tag it for a merge. I have undid this. Discuss it here. Dream Focus 15:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• See here for discussion. It was rather brief I'll give you that, but you're whole issue of "OMG DON'T DELETE" is moot when all information was simply relocated, and that that wasn't was already repeated in the other two to begin with. There's no "one editor deciding it isn't GA anymore".--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

One person seems to agree with you, another questions if it should be done. The discussion should be done here. Form consensus properly. Dream Focus 15:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a wonder we get anything done around here...--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)