Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

I Shoulda Picked The Awesome Masamune

Moderator Edit

You should have not double-posted, mate. Seems that the new forumgoers just don't look at the rules any more, eh?

Also, I guess I should move this, it's not really about FF7, is it?

-R51

This post has been edited by Rangers51 on 16th May 2010 02:56

Squall's gunblade. So cool!

I have spoken.

--------------------

Snooping as usual, I see?

I'd like a combination of sword and the claws Sabin uses. I'd like to use a Musketeer style sword, or a rapier. Actually, I didn't notice at first, but in FFI one of the first weapons you can use is a rapier. That's awesome, I love that weapon.

--------------------

Praise Be To Helix!

Rifles are Just Better.

Someday, this romanticism of the sword and loathing of the gun for its efficiency will end. Take a look at modern history. No one who won a war in the last 100 years used mostly swords and bayonets to win it, did they?

Guns can beat swords in any environment, swords need specific locations and proximity to be effective. Guns have a role in pretty much any scenario. It's high time the FF series remembered that and stopped pretending swords are more romantic. The primary is the gun. Stick a bayonet on it or carry a crowbar for close encounters. Or invest in a shotgun for when they're coming out of the walls.






--------------------

"Only the dead have seen the end of their quotes being misattributed to Plato."
-George Santayana

"The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here..."
-Abraham Lincoln, prior to the discovery of Irony.

^^^^
So you're saying Final Fantasy should ditch the fantasy? Last thing I need is another shooter game.

Magic for me. It's got everything: it's cool, it's easy to conceal, you always have the element of surprise, you can add magic attacks to whatever other weapon you have, and in response to what Del has written, I think magic beats guns on the 'necessary' hierarchy. If mages can act like artillery without needing to carry a Howitzer around with them then they probably beat gunners. The only downside of magic is that you don't get to carry around a terrifying weapon to intimidate people, but I would prefer hiding magic until it's time to use it, much more effective.

--------------------

Scepticism, that dry rot of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his mind.

Me on the Starcraft.

Quote (crims0nf0rtune @ 16th May 2010 20:19)

^^^^
So you're saying Final Fantasy should ditch the fantasy?  Last thing I need is another shooter game.

Nope. A sword is less effective than a gun, and as Sweetdude notes, magic should beat both. Therefore, in a setting with both guns and magic, using a sword has no reason other than rule of cool - And frankly, my mileage does vary. I just want a little more common sense applied to the weapons used by characters.

But magic is usually only open to a few select characters, or, is rare or otherwise has flaws. Guns are usable by anyone and level the playing fields, making it more believable a street urchin and his two orphan friends can really take down the local equivalent of the SAS in a fight in a setting where the aforementioned elite mooks have their own guns. If they have swords against guns in reality, they'd be toast, and it stretches my suspension of disbelief in most cases where swords meet guns in your average RPG.

Besides, Fantasy is a loose label. It most commonly means swords and sorcery or high fantasy, but there's many subgenres, and more than a few FF's have a Science Fantasy setting or elements of Sci-Fantasy. It's just no FF game ever tries to justify using a sword in a world of guns and magic. Not even a handwave like firearms are outlawed by the government but swords are legal to fight off monsters.

This post has been edited by Del S on 16th May 2010 21:15

--------------------

"Only the dead have seen the end of their quotes being misattributed to Plato."
-George Santayana

"The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here..."
-Abraham Lincoln, prior to the discovery of Irony.

Quote (crims0nf0rtune @ 16th May 2010 16:19)

^^^^
So you're saying Final Fantasy should ditch the fantasy? Last thing I need is another shooter game.

I completely agree. This is fantasy. Guns can beat swords in fantasy. Because fantasy does not follow realistic rules.

--------------------

Praise Be To Helix!

Quote (BlitzSage @ 16th May 2010 21:22)

Quote (crims0nf0rtune @ 16th May 2010 16:19)

^^^^
So you're saying Final Fantasy should ditch the fantasy?  Last thing I need is another shooter game.

I completely agree. This is fantasy. Guns can beat swords in fantasy. Because fantasy does not follow realistic rules.

But why? Why does it just follow different rules without explanation? If swords beat them, why do the guns even exist in that universe? I apologise for the incoming Wall of Del ranty defence of my point here, but I still don't quite understand why that kind of handwave is used. It doesn't convince me, and I'm sure it doesn't convince others.

It may be better to live in a world with the MST3K Mantra as the guiding principle, but there comes a point where "Just Because" isn't acceptable. Questions must be asked, reasons must be given. It's not the biggest plot hole in the universe but it's a tiny crack. A crack in the suspension of disbelief, one of the key reasons IMO only a relatively small niche of people play this type of game. Take FF13 as an example. As the fastest selling FF game to date, it's a shining example of a success story from the series and another reason to regret that the Reds lost the Cold War*.

Approx 5 Million sales worldwide, a copy for one in four people in New York State. Modern Warfare 2 got around that number on its first day and total sales to date give everyone in New York a copy with enough left over for about a million people from New Jersey to get a copy too. Even GTA IV sold 4 million on its first day. Realism sells, guns sell.

Now, I'm all for a good reason why the sword still has a place in a setting. I play Warhammer 40K, where they have chainsaw swords and gauntlets that can help you punch through a tank, and in that universe the justifications come in many forms. Orks and Chaos forces like to get up close and personal, fighting can be at close quarters, or the units involved are so heavily armoured that they can wade through walls of bullets to get to your trench and stamp on your face.

I don't recall seeing any FF where they had a reason why a man with a gun over twenty meters in the open from a swordsman had a reason to find his head removed when the swordsman should have new ventilation holes in his lungs instead. Without a concrete reason or even an excuse there is nothing but a niggling annoyance to those who like realism, a glaring lack of common sense to me and possibly a turn-off to those 20 million people who buy things like Modern Warfare.

Give guns their due, or give them to someone else. Unless you treat it right, you shouldn't have it, just like in real life. I think I cleared up why I'd use a gun over the last few posts and why I think others should use them. Tell me the merits of the sword now, without handwaves.


*I haven't insulted the game for a couple of weeks now, and I can't recall the last time I bemoaned the victory of corrupt and decadent imperialist capitalism...

This post has been edited by Del S on 16th May 2010 22:21

--------------------

"Only the dead have seen the end of their quotes being misattributed to Plato."
-George Santayana

"The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here..."
-Abraham Lincoln, prior to the discovery of Irony.

Well, this topic doesn't say in what environment you would want this weapon (real life? FF universe?) so I'll take something that would be awesome in both; (white) magic.

Think of the possibilities of being able to heal people and stuff... It would just be awesome. And if a zombie apocalypse would happen... Hehehehe.

Quote (Del S @ 16th May 2010 18:18)

But why? Why does it just follow different rules without explanation? If swords beat them, why do the guns even exist in that universe?

Without explanation? Well, all I can say is, if we go deeply into Final Fantasy's rules, I mean, chocobos, magic, airships that probably couldn't really get off the ground.

But either way, I have another question for you. Since guns do exist in both FF6 and FF7, why aren't the majority of cast members using them? Is it perhaps because Cloud's sword is just as powerful as Barret's gun?

Also, and I didn't think of this at first, Edgar uses a Crossbow with unlimited ammo. It's not about explaining. The thing I love about these worlds they create is that they are magical, outside the realm of realism.

It's like watching a Looney Tunes Cartoon. If Daffy Duck can be shot in the face and not die, then a sword can beat a gun in Final Fantasy.

This post has been edited by BlitzSage on 16th May 2010 23:19

--------------------

Praise Be To Helix!

Quote (BlitzSage @ 17th May 2010 00:17)

Quote (Del S @ 16th May 2010 18:18)

But why? Why does it just follow different rules without explanation? If swords beat them, why do the guns even exist in that universe?

Without explanation? Well, all I can say is, if we go deeply into Final Fantasy's rules, I mean, chocobos, magic, airships that probably couldn't really get off the ground.

But either way, I have another question for you. Since guns do exist in both FF6 and FF7, why aren't the majority of cast members using them? Is it perhaps because Cloud's sword is just as powerful as Barret's gun?

Also, and I didn't think of this at first, Edgar uses a Crossbow with unlimited ammo. It's not about explaining. The thing I love about these worlds they create is that they are magical, outside the realm of realism.

Del is right that there should be some kind of justification for using a sword. Even with airships we see their inner workings and we're at least given some clue as to how they work, even if it's just cogs and steam, and FFIX goes even further in giving them mist power. Something really simple like having a basic shield which deflects bullets would be fine. Of all the games, FFVIII has Edea using a magic shield to stop a bullet. It works and is believable, until guns then go back to being weak again afterwards.

But in making a game that resembles reality the whole gameplay must be focused around that, and FF is about taking turns to hit eachother which doesn't really accommodate it. Good examples of games using swords and ranged weapons are Assassin's Creed 1 and 2 and Deus Ex, because let's be fair any ranged weapon is pretty similar to a gun. A dagger in the body should really incapacitate somebody like it does in AC. In Deus Ex there's swords, and they're cool whilst being believable at the same time. The Triads fight with swords in traditional battles to prove their strength which is believable and allows for some toe-to-toe slashing. Also swords are better at cutting down doors and destroying cameras and so on because they're permanent and you don't have to use explosives or a lockpick. And even moreso, you can use a sword or a knife for the whole game, but running at a target head on will get you killed by guns, so you have to be stealthy or invisible. It makes for a much better swordsman experience. So I suppose I would like a sword if I was some kind of ninja or had magic to back it up.

In answer to what you're saying BlitzSage I would say that it's easier to offer a bit of justification than to leave it to sceptics to point out the flaws. In FFVII there's a certain scene involving a certain character being shot to pieces near Midgar, outside of a preset battle, and also the entire Dyne episode shows more death by gunshots. It goes back to the gameplay point: turn-based battles need guns to damage like any other hit in order to work, but in the rest of the game guns act like guns in our world. To be honest I'm not too bothered about it, but I don't agree that guns are just much weaker than in reality, it's just that they've been poorly woven into a lot of fantasy games, and that fact should be recognised.

Last point, about Edgar's crossbow and anything else that isn't explained directly, there are still plenty of explanations that can set my mind at ease, like supposing he collects them after the battle. Usually these things just pass unnoticed because there is an adequately plausible explanation, I presume. Another example is water-breathing in FFX, there's just an assumption that humans either have gills somewhere or they process water into oxygen somehow. However with guns and arrows and anything else, it's just as implausible and poorly explained as saying humans can die from toxic poisoning but don't die from drinking a tank of petrol.

--------------------

Scepticism, that dry rot of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his mind.

Me on the Starcraft.

Well, I'm going to take my part in this to PM now, because it is going a bit off topic. Suffice to say though, I'm not convinced by "just because" and for my part, I feel that the flexibility and efficiency of a firearm makes it the best choice to wield of all the options in this thread here.


--------------------

"Only the dead have seen the end of their quotes being misattributed to Plato."
-George Santayana

"The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here..."
-Abraham Lincoln, prior to the discovery of Irony.

I'll take a gun. Superior range, superior stopping power, superior accuracy. I don't have to worry about little things like running out of MP or sword breakers. What's that? You have a 7 meter Katana? Whatever, I'll stand 8 meters away and double tap in the chest with one in the head for good measure. Oh wait, you have a sword of overcompensation? I'll just take a few shots at your limbs to slow you down or completely remove your capacity for carrying the weapon.

Close Quarters combat? Slap a bayonet on it or just use CQM principles.

Multiple enemies? Shotgun with buckshot

Long Range? I'll take a light fifty

Pistols, Shotguns, Rifles, Machineguns...just give me guns.

--------------------

This is a webcomic and gaming blog where I rant about nonsense. Enjoy.

I was a soldier, now I just play one in video games.

Quote (Nytecrawla @ 17th May 2010 13:27)

I'll take a gun. Superior range, superior stopping power, superior accuracy. I don't have to worry about little things like running out of MP or sword breakers. What's that? You have a 7 meter Katana? Whatever, I'll stand 8 meters away and double tap in the chest with one in the head for good measure. Oh wait, you have a sword of overcompensation? I'll just take a few shots at your limbs to slow you down or completely remove your capacity for carrying the weapon.

Close Quarters combat? Slap a bayonet on it or just use CQM principles.

Multiple enemies? Shotgun with buckshot

Long Range? I'll take a light fifty

Pistols, Shotguns, Rifles, Machineguns...just give me guns.

"Worry about little things like running out of MP"? What about ammo?

I voted for the Buster Sword but I would really want a combination of four swords that can fuse into one Buster sword that has magic properties. One of lightning, one of darkness, one of light, and one that can cut through magical energies and when they fuse they have all of the combined powers. I do love guns so I'd have a DE on my side just in case magical swords don't do the trick, which I highly doubt.

--------------------

Without darkness there can be no light, so how can darkness be truly evil?

Quote (Gigantuar @ 17th May 2010 10:39)

"Worry about little things like running out of MP"? What about ammo?

The difference is, I don't use 40 rounds on one target for one attack.

--------------------

This is a webcomic and gaming blog where I rant about nonsense. Enjoy.

I was a soldier, now I just play one in video games.

Quote (Nytecrawla @ 17th May 2010 17:04)

Quote (Gigantuar @ 17th May 2010 10:39)

"Worry about little things like running out of MP"? What about ammo?

The difference is, I don't use 40 rounds on one target for one attack.

Uh... What? Think like this; small magic attacks (Fire and stuff) takes very little MP (could be compared to two or three rounds of a gun) and their damage is equivalent if not superior to that of a bullet. So both a small magic attack and a shot from a gun could be used in the same situation without much difference.

Now, let's say a huge enemy or something like that attacks you. If you have the gun, what do you do? Combine all of your rounds into one, powerful attack? No.

If you have magic? You could simply use a lot of MP to cast a powerful spell.

MP is also easier to restore than ammo, just rest and stuff. Ammo you have to find/buy.

Quote (Gigantuar @ 17th May 2010 12:11)

Quote (Nytecrawla @ 17th May 2010 17:04)

Quote (Gigantuar @ 17th May 2010 10:39)

"Worry about little things like running out of MP"? What about ammo?

The difference is, I don't use 40 rounds on one target for one attack.

Uh... What? Think like this; small magic attacks (Fire and stuff) takes very little MP (could be compared to two or three rounds of a gun) and their damage is equivalent if not superior to that of a bullet. So both a small magic attack and a shot from a gun could be used in the same situation without much difference.

Now, let's say a huge enemy or something like that attacks you. If you have the gun, what do you do? Combine all of your rounds into one, powerful attack? No.

If you have magic? You could simply use a lot of MP to cast a powerful spell.

MP is also easier to restore than ammo, just rest and stuff. Ammo you have to find/buy.

You are blurring the line between fantasy and reality here. My preference is based on Guns doing realistic amounts of damage as compared to everything in the world. I.e a single head shot can kill anything, as opposed to being riddled with bullets and losing an arbitrary amount of imaginary health points.

The size of a creature has no effect if it is shot in the right place. A heart shot kills, period. A head shot kills the majority of the time. Therefore, 2 shots to the chest, center mass and a head shot for good measure is all I need.

--------------------

This is a webcomic and gaming blog where I rant about nonsense. Enjoy.

I was a soldier, now I just play one in video games.

There's a reason why I usually think these topics are a bit daft.

Note also that this topic is in the Squenix forum, thereby putting it pretty squarely in the realm of fantasy. Or maybe just leading to it getting closed.

--------------------

"To create something great, you need the means to make a lot of really bad crap." - Kevin Kelly

Why aren't you shopping AmaCoN?

On the case of why guns should not be used in FF I present to the court Exhibit A: Dirge of Cerberus

Square makes a shooter like they make Main Characters i.e. badly

Also why not just fuse the two? oh right the gunblade. And was that really such a good inovation? Yes but they did it badly. It should have been able to actually, I dunno SHOOT instead of just increase Attack power. But yeah pretty cool nonetheless.

Also I can go shoot people with a gun here in the real world. Can't kill people with a sword without getting my head served on a platter by the police.

This post has been edited by R8.50 Mango on 17th May 2010 16:36

--------------------

Since I advertise CoN there I think it's only fair that I advertise The Wiki here.

Quote (Nytecrawla @ 17th May 2010 17:21)

Quote (Gigantuar @ 17th May 2010 12:11)

Quote (Nytecrawla @ 17th May 2010 17:04)

Quote (Gigantuar @ 17th May 2010 10:39)

"Worry about little things like running out of MP"? What about ammo?

The difference is, I don't use 40 rounds on one target for one attack.

Uh... What? Think like this; small magic attacks (Fire and stuff) takes very little MP (could be compared to two or three rounds of a gun) and their damage is equivalent if not superior to that of a bullet. So both a small magic attack and a shot from a gun could be used in the same situation without much difference.

Now, let's say a huge enemy or something like that attacks you. If you have the gun, what do you do? Combine all of your rounds into one, powerful attack? No.

If you have magic? You could simply use a lot of MP to cast a powerful spell.

MP is also easier to restore than ammo, just rest and stuff. Ammo you have to find/buy.

You are blurring the line between fantasy and reality here. My preference is based on Guns doing realistic amounts of damage as compared to everything in the world. I.e a single head shot can kill anything, as opposed to being riddled with bullets and losing an arbitrary amount of imaginary health points.

The size of a creature has no effect if it is shot in the right place. A heart shot kills, period. A head shot kills the majority of the time. Therefore, 2 shots to the chest, center mass and a head shot for good measure is all I need.

Does this apply to monster as well, even if they lack a head or a heart? I can understand gunshots killing small beasts, but giant ones felled by 2 shots to the chest and the head? Sounds strange to me...

Also, considering magic doesn't exist, I say it's only logical we have to view this in a fantasy-esque perspective.

This post has been edited by Gigantuar on 17th May 2010 16:32

Never mind...it seems I have failed to clarify my opinion and therefore will discontinue my participation in this silly argument.

--------------------

This is a webcomic and gaming blog where I rant about nonsense. Enjoy.

I was a soldier, now I just play one in video games.

I chose masamune.

I would like to see a action devil may cry type with a masamune where you cut their heads off and slit their throats with it and cut their chest.

The end part with raiden in mgs2 was pretty cool and reflecting bullets was nice.

Although,i would prefer a realistic size masamune and not something 5 foot long.


--------------------

We are stardust.Our bodies are made from the guts of exploding stars.

Neil Degrasse Tyson.

OK first of all i have to say people in many ways swords are better than guns but here are a few issues i have first of all swords don't need to hit certain places but guns do magic is extremely dangerous but usually it takes time to use it and effective armor make it loose effect when you get shot with a gun you can have armor that would be probably durable enough to sustain it as long as its not that powerful but that gets into another topic cause people are more likely to survive a bullet would to the chest than a big piece of metal going across there body where they loose large and dangerous amounts of blood magic has the range of guns and the power of swords but it doesn't have the speed I'm not saying there bad weapons i am saying you have to consider all scenarios

--------------------

[FONT=Impact][SIZE=14]BLAMO

you have been ninjad

Masamune surely.
No way you can go wrong wielding so long a sword as a Masamune.

There's a terrible lack of non-sword weapons in this poll.

--------------------

Wha? Thanks to me?

i would definetely have to go with squalls lion heart it has both the elegance of a true sword but the same firepower as a shotgun. as pointed out in parasite eve 2 were you load shotgun shells into it...btw isnt lightnings sword a ''gunblade'' too level it to the max i swear she shoot something..

--------------------

Why is it that rpg's are now a dying breed?

I'd enjoy Chloe's throwing-knives from Noir, but since we're talking the Squenix metauniverse here...

How about both swords and sorcery, so something like what Terra has?

@ El Panachino: Blame the needless glorification of swords in fantasy settings.

This post has been edited by Glenn Magus Harvey on 3rd August 2010 03:41

--------------------

Check the "What games are you playing at the moment?" thread for updates on what I've been playing.

You can find me on the Fediverse! I use Mastodon, where I am @[email protected] ( https://sakurajima.moe/@glennmagusharvey )