/vr/ - Retro Games

Woof.
>>9577723
>FF1+2 are best enjoyed in the GBA remake/port. They fixed literally everything. There are TONS of bugs in the original games, and the translation was always limited due to space constraints.
That re-release already existed and it's called the Wonderswan/PlayStation version. Versions past that aren't interested in being those overdue bugfixed versions so much as incrementally casualizing the game for newbies.
>FF3, they never had a proper western release until recently. The light 3D iPhone/android port/remake is acceptable. its also just clunky enough to give you that old hardware feel without all the bugs.
That remake completely overhauled enemy encounters for no good reason* and made bosses insufferable by giving them many more attacjs per turn, often attacking just-revived allies.
*ostensibly due to DS limitations, but then IV kept the monster limit intact.
>For FF4,5,6, the GBA ports are acceptable.
Friggin' eww. Maybe V at best since it's been the least accessible and the PlayStation translation was horrid, but IV has a bunch of laggy bugs and misc glitches that don't exist in any other version (and the European revision, while it removes a gamebreaker, doesn't fix everything).
>if you want to experience FF4 at its original jap difficulty, the DS port retains this, the NTSC SNES (FFII) does not.
Every post-SNES release of IV is based on the OG JP difficulty, EXCEPT the 3D versions which do their own thing ans are generally harder if you don't game the new augment system.
>If you like to cheat/bug your way through the game rather than play FF6, play the NTSC SNES (FFIII)
Oh yeah, everyone who played the original game didn't play it, they were actually cheaters.
>7-8-9 work acceptably in an emulator 99% of the time, there is an antiquated but functional PC version of 7-8, and then the Steam rerelease that packages most of the critical bugfixes with it.
PC versions also have texture errors, and the resolution makes the graphical flaws more obvious.