Final Fantasy Adventure: Square's Lost Gem on GB & History

[Xeogred]

I LIKE Sword of Mana a lot but I tend to look at it as a stand alone game from Final Fantasy Adventure since so little of Final Fantasy Adventure really comes out in Sword of Mana. A few plot elements, characters, and musical scores make the jump but that was about it.

Sounds a lot like comparing Tactics Ogre SNES/PSX to the PSP remake to me, so both versions are probably something I'll have to check out sometime. I wonder if I'd at least like Sword of Mana more than Legend of Mana... that one I honestly wasn't a huge fan of, but SoM/SD3 are some of my top favorites I feel like I play once a year, lol.

[noiseredux]

Gotta agree I love the look of the original, haven't played either versions though so that's all I can say. I probably just love the look since it's typical Links Awakening / Pokemon-ish graphics, hehe awesome.

that's the other thing, within the context of when it was released -- it was mind-blowing. There was no portable Zelda's yet. I remember spending soooooooo much time with this game, and it was just unbelievable what they had accomplished on the GB.

also, thinking back -- I feel like FFLegend pre-dated this. If so that game also had a battery. But I'm going on fuzzy memory. I'm not looking anything up haha.

AND BTW I'm not really sure I could call FFA a "lost gem," as I don't really feel like it's all that obscure.

[BlockMan]

Thanks for the feedback guys!

Believe it or not, the audio here is the "better" version. My voice is no Bill Crosby or Frank Sinatra, for that matter. It's muddled most of the time, so I opted to raise my pitch for a more clearer sound as evidenced by my earlier videos.

But I'm curious by what you mean that my pacing need work and that I'm hammer an issue too many times, please specifically elaborate.

[Flake]

But I'm curious by what you mean that my pacing need work and that I'm hammer an issue too many times, please specifically elaborate.

You tend to elaborate on examples in three's. For instance, in the introduction to your series of retrospectives, you talk about 'Mario explores worlds, but what about the lands? ect' which is nice but it's a technique you only want to employ sparingly as it can hammer in a point that the viewer already understands, slowing down the flow of the video.

Like I said, you never want your audience to wonder when you're going to get to the point.

[nightrnr]

I have to say "Thank You Sunsoft for the re-release". Without them, I would probably never have gotten a copy of the game (just think of how rare and expensive it would have been otherwise).

Love the game though. It's definitely one of my top 10 GB games. I used to rent the game back in the day.

As for the video review, I didn't watch most of it. It does show your enthusiasm for the game (and related games), but definitely drags on. Also, the viewer doesn't need every detail about the game; that's what FAQ's and guides are for (for ex, the player is sure to discover what the silver sword can kill on his/her own).

Also, Youtube videos have a sweet spot for length. Most people shoot for the 3-5 minute range (a 3 minute video is much more appealing than 10+ minutes).

Of course, I probably have the same problem (as I tend to ramble and abuse parentheses), but I haven't made any vids yet either.

[noiseredux]

I have to say "Thank You Sunsoft for the re-release". Without them, I would probably never have gotten a copy of the game (just think of how rare and expensive it would have been otherwise).

I never fully understood HOW that happened. How did SunSoft of all publishers get the rights to those games? It's so odd.

[Flake]

I have to say "Thank You Sunsoft for the re-release". Without them, I would probably never have gotten a copy of the game (just think of how rare and expensive it would have been otherwise).

I never fully understood HOW that happened. How did SunSoft of all publishers get the rights to those games? It's so odd.

Square didn't see the profit in putting those games on the Gameboy and Sunsoft contracted with them to localize and publish games under the Final Fantasy moniker, in this case SaGa 1-3 and Seiken Densetsu.

[noiseredux]

Square didn't see the profit in putting those games on the Gameboy and Sunsoft contracted with them to localize and publish games under the Final Fantasy moniker, in this case SaGa 1-3 and Seiken Densetsu.

nope. They were initially released in the US by Square. They were re-released in the US by SunSoft.

1991:



1998:

[Flake]

Square didn't see the profit in putting those games on the Gameboy and Sunsoft contracted with them to localize and publish games under the Final Fantasy moniker, in this case SaGa 1-3 and Seiken Densetsu.

nope. They were initially released in the US by Square. They were re-released in the US by SunSoft.

Oh? THAT I did not know. Okay, how did that happen then?

[nightrnr]

I never fully understood HOW that happened. How did SunSoft of all publishers get the rights to those games? It's so odd.

Well, they sure as hell weren't going to give it to Enix, as they were rival companies back then. (Then again, I wonder if a classier company would have colorized them?).

I just think it was weird to re-release them so much later (a full 7 years for FF:A). Like I said though, I'm glad it happened. I remember doing a double-take in the store (Holy Cow!, it's the GB FF games).