[Squeek]

Yukari: Sorry, but no. We make plenty of decisions without knowing all the facts in our daily lives.

I saw an in-depth retrospective that spanned well over two hours covering the entire series. I saw nothing different between the games. Oh sure, some games have jobs and some don't. The battle system slightly changes over time. The graphics improve. Nothing else really changes. FF12 tried to change the system to real-time, and once I heard this I got excited thinking there might finally be a worthy Final Fantasy game, but the battle system is a joke. It just sits awkwardly in the middle of real-time and turn-based, not knowing which side to take.

I just got this "you hate it because it's old!" argument earlier today. Why do people assume this? MegaMan was at its best during the SNES era. Nothing from the PS1, PS2, or GBA have ever been better than MegaMan X, X2, or X3. Metroid has never been better than when it was on the SNES, and I'm including Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 3 in this. Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario World are, to me, better than Mario 64 and Galaxy. And honestly, was Donkey Kong or Sonic ever better than when they were 16-bit?

I wasn't into video games when I was young. Especially not Japanese games. I didn't even play an RPG until Pokemon, and I didn't even know about Final Fantasy until several years later. I don't see how I could have a bias against the game since I played Final Fantasy X long before I even knew what Tales of Symphonia was.

But I don't even need any of that argument. There's nothing that says I need to spend 500 hours playing every Final Fantasy game in order to make a judgment on whether I like it or not. Really, if we had to play every game from start to finish in order to make a decision, we wouldn't be able to make any decisions in our lives. We'd be too busy playing games to even talk about games. That's why we have reviews. We trust reviews to tell us whether a game will be good or not before we decide to play it.