Talk:Final Fantasy XIII/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 12

Spoilers?

Is there anything we can do to warn people about the spoilers on the page? I just unexpectedly read a huge spoiler about the ending in the characters section about Fang, and I'm rather unhappy about it, since there was no warning whatsoever that there were spoilers.76.181.162.217 (talk) 04:17, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree. There should be a spoiler tag or something. I'm fairly upset at having read the same spoilers, for a game that isn't even out yet (in NA at least.) Spoilers were definitely not something i was worried about encountering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.82.250.194 (talk) 17:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:Spoiler, no spoiler tag should be put in articles. nickin/conversation/contribution 18:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Plot Section

I'm updating the Plot section with confirmed information from interviews and the trailers. If you want to edit it back, say why. It's written a lot better than the current text and it's more accurate to what Square Enix has told us. Vibriante (talk) 02:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Development section

Someone keeps adding the following into the development section.

The Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 versions will be released simultaneously in the US and Europe

I removed it because all of this is already stated in the preceding sentence, where it reads:-

...[Final Fantasy XIII] would see a multi-platform release on the Xbox 360, which would ship simultaneously with the previously announced PlayStation 3 version in North America and Europe.

It's not necessary to have the same statement twice right after eachother. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 10:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Farsi = fal'Cie, Lusi = l'Cie

Any reliable sources to confirm that fal'Cie and l'Cie are the official English spelling for it? — Blue。 13:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah well, saw the trailer already ^_^; And just in case anyone else asks, it's from the Microsoft press conference trailer. — Blue。 13:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I put the references to the trailer there for a reason, but someone removed them. Good that you spotted the trailer eventually. I actually quite like the translated names, by the way. SamSandy (talk) 14:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they were pronounced in that way in the E3 2009 trailer. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 11:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Release date speculation

Remember: all release dates that Square Enix does not announce themselves or confirm should be considered false. Thanks, Ffgamera (talk) 03:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Possible release date

Over on 1up, the FFXIII for PS3 now has a release date of 11/15/2008. Not sure if this is true or not, but make of it what you will. They just had an interview with the producers Shinji Hashimoto and Yoshinori Kitase so maybe 1up knows something that we don't. Link can be found at http://www.1up.com/do/gameOverview?cId=3148417 Niksko (talk) 12:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

If they had been told the release date it would have been in the interview. Square Enix have told us to disregard anything not confirmed by them, and they haven't confirmed anything. Vibriante (talk) 02:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

A few editors also quoted Gamespot by saying the release date is on Nov 20, 2008. What I know is that's the release date of The Last Remnant. There has been no statement given by Square Enix to support the supposed release date, and until there is one, please don't just quote from gaming websites without sourced statements. — Blue。 13:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Impossible. The Japanese release for PS3 is 2009. And the demo release is March 2009 (PS3). There are no other possible release dates related to FFXIII.Ffgamera (talk) 12:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• Release date not same for 360 and PS3

The game will not be released simultaneously on 360 and PS3 in North America and Europe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.204.79 (talk) 15:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC) http://www.gameplayer.com.au/gp_documents/080725-FFXIII.aspx?catid=Features —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.204.79 (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

That's not an official statement from S-E, just some theory. The official trailer shown at E3 said simultaenous release upon launch, so who can go against it? SamSandy (talk) 10:00, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

It is only confirmed that Japan will be first.Ffgamera (talk) 11:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

New interview, Hashimoto's wording suggests that PS3 version will be released first. http://kotaku.com/5099719/square-enix-xbox-360-final-fantasy-xiii-is-not-a-betrayal-or-disappointment —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.88.1.199 (talk) 05:42, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

It says that the PS3 version will be completed first, yes, but as much as I hope that they will release it ASAP and then worry about the XBox version, that doesn't mean this is any kind of confirmation we can use in an encyclopedia. =/ KhalfaniKhaldun 10:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

• FFXIII Confirmed Release date for UK on PS3 and 360

For UK Residents i have found out that you can pre-order the game for PS3 and 360 now and it will be released on March 27 2009 at BlockBuster Game. If you don't beleive me then call them up and find out yourself.

78.145.86.45 (talk) 22:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Axel

A) This is original research. B) Blockbuster and other stores are not reliable sources. GameStop, for example, has had all kinds of predicted release dates that have come and gone, and none of them were right. C) What makes you think a release date would be set in the UK before it's set in Japan? KhalfaniKhaldun 23:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Well for one thing all Release dates that i have seen here have all been on time, Gamestop can sometimes be a little slow in the info. But anyway £100 that it will be released in the UK on March 27, and also FFXIII will be released around the same time as Japan and before US in the UK. If we don't get it this year im blaming Microsoft Because they already stole the fallout 3 Updates for 360 and denied them being released for PS3 and now stole the Exclusive title for FFXIII so now im not gonna let them take FFXIII longer to be released

Axel2801 (talk) 02:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it has been confirmed. Though, Wada already confirmed it as being 2010 for our version. Please, do not post anymore false release dates. Because any dates outside of Square Enix is supposed to be considered erroneous and only thought of as irrelevant. Zeta Nova 01:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC).

PC version

Don't make anymore comments regarding this, there is no such thing! Thanks! Ffgamera (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• PC version!!!

http://n4g.com/dev/News-174069.aspx Wooo. Can I add this already? LuGiADude (talk) 12:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Update: I did. If anyone wants to comment on it please post here and we can talk about it BEFORE any revertions are made. LuGiADude (talk) 12:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, my mate just sent me link to that wii thing *COUGH* so i copied and pasted that by accident.. wait I don't have to explain myself! Cough! real link changed XD LuGiADude (talk) 12:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You read the article wrong: Final Fantasy XIII is being developed on PC, not released on PC. 121.73.88.110 (talk) 09:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

• The PC version is not confirmed!

The link to n4g.com and later to nzone.com only confirms that Square Enix uses PC as a developing platform, not that it's gonna get released for PC. Although this makes it likely that FFXIII is gonna get released for PC, it's not a confirmation and as such the only confirmed platforms for FFXIII are Playstation 3 and Xbox 360. Don't edit this article because you make assumptions from internet articles. It's not even an official statement from Square-Enix. - Coco-Love (not an user) 78.69.82.39 (talk) 15:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

To correlate this, a more extensive question and answer question had the status of FF XIII on the PC left somewhat "equivocal. Asked if it would follow multi-format stable-mate Last Remnant onto Games for Windows, he said, "For now, it's to be decided."" (cite). As the user above points out, the n4g article confirms nothing more than its development on the PC, something noted in the Eurogamer article.

Few people would be happier to see FF XIII on the PC than me, but the evidence just is not there at the moment. Mallocks (talk) 15:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"Although this makes it likely that FFXIII is gonna get released for PC" No it doesn't. I work in the games industry and can confirm that a large majority of console games are developed on a PC platform because its easier to modify existing PC development tools to work on a console than to make new ones. There is a wider range of compilers available and its easier to debug problems. This rarely leads to a PC release. On the 3 games ive worked on, all 3 were developed on PC, only one was released on PC and that was planned from the start. 118.208.134.143 (talk) 13:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• PC Version: Denied!

Yep, you heard it guys from SQUARE ENIX. It seems that this was a misinterpretation on their part. Even though it seems that the game is running on PC hardware. The game WILL NOT be released on PC. Zeta Nova 19:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure plenty of games are developed on PC whether they're released for it or not. That was just the press being stupid.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 02:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

First and Foremost

How gullible can you guys get? First and foremost. These news sites are just mere theories (speculation ONLY). SQUARE ENIX however, said no such thing about a 2010 release. Don't just believe in everything that the game news sites tell you. Zeta Nova 20:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC).

They only said a definite demo release and PS3 Japan release.Ffgamera (talk) 11:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Japanese 360 release speculation

There is no such confirmation, so please don't add it, thanks! Ffgamera (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• PS3 & Xbox releases

I keep seeing a rumor pop up on the net claiming that FFXIII will only come out on the PS3 in Japan, and only on the 360 in America. People alway reply that the Japan only thing means it will only be available for the PS3 in Japan but still coming out on the PS3 in America where it will also have the 360 release. Which is correct, the rumor or the rumor put downs? --The Virginian (talk) 15:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

See the Release section of the article. Kariteh (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Final Fantasy XIII is NOT coming out for Japan for Xbox 360.Ffgamera (talk) 11:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• 360 Asian version announced?

See here. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 07:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe not? Frvernchanezzz (talk) 07:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

All I know that SQUARE ENIX stated the 360 will be for the North American & European markets. There was no word on an Asian 360 version Zeta Nova 18:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC).

What source shows that Motomu Toriyama is the scenario writer?

Motomu Toriyama is listed as the scenario writer in the first paragraph. I'm not sure if this is true. Please give me the source, since I don't remember this being announced yet, thanks! Dragonblades (talk) 08:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

In an interview with Famitsu early this year, Tetsuya Nomura said that Toriyama was writing the story and wanted Lightning to be not look very feminine but Nomura said that he wanted to make her look feminine to appeal to the player more. Also at E3 2008, Yoshinori Kitase called Toriyama both the Director and Scenario Writer. 79.68.7.203 (talk) 16:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Fully restored HP after battle?

Do we have a source for this assertion "Because magic cannot be used outside of battle, the HP of the party is completely restored after each battle." Im assuming the usage of HP is refering to Hit Points. I would understand if this was a typo and was supposed to be MP which is Mana Points. If in fact you DO regain all Hit Points after each fight this would be a major step away from any previous battle system they have thus developed as far as I know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.175.65.200 (talk) 23:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Battle System Pt. 2

According to the latest Famitsu scans. It seems that XIII will be returning to it's roots of turn-based combat. Which players will choose actions for all party members. Zeta Nova 19:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC).

But it is still active and not random encounters. And it will be much faster than FFXII battle.Ffgamera (talk) 11:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but I already knew that. Zeta Nova 08:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC).

Sweet, it just sort of sounded like when you said "turn-based", maybe you thought it would not be like FF12, but like FF7 or something. Ffgamera (talk) 03:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I've actually watched the live gameplay stream and I must say that the encounter battles resembles to Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories where you can either hit or get touched by a target enemy to trigger an encounter battle. Blueknightex (talk) 11:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

FFXIII Demo Packaged with FFVII ACC

According to Famitsu, it seems that gamers who purchase the Blue-ray edition of Final Fantasy VII AC, subtitled; Complete. They will get to experience a 90 minute demo. Told through the beginning. Though, it's not confirmed whether this'll make it stateside. As always, check back on IGN PS3 and RPGamer for the latest. Zeta Nova 19:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC).

I thought they said two-hour long?Ffgamera (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Well 90 mins is roughly close to 2 hours. Well it's equivalent to a Disney Original movie Zeta Nova 12:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC).

Correction, Square has confirmed that it'll be an hour's worth of game time. Zeta Nova 21:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC).

Copyedit completed

I did minor copyediting/cleanup on this article and removed the tag. Congratulations to all the contributors—this is a well-written article. I do have a few suggestions for improving it:

1. The mention of Lightning in the Gameplay section is confusing because she isn't identified until the Characters section.
2. The Plot and Characters sections are confusing to readers who don't know much about Final Fantasy games, such as me. For instance, I can't tell what "Crystal" and "floating shell of Cocoon" are. Clarification is also needed in the sentences that say "(the character) is seen...". Where? In a trailer? A screenshot?
3. In the Development section the use of "previously" could be misinterpreted as the person only did that job for part of the time. You might want to consider removing those.
4. Try to use only English-language sources; see WP:VUE.

Keep up the good work! --*momoricks* (talk) 10:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I edited the plot section for clarification's sake, I realize that the poetic nature of the text is very confusing to someone who hasn't been following the flow of news about the game (mind you, I didn't write the text. ;P ) I also edited the "has been seen" sentences, although to me it's pretty obvious that the sentence relates to the source it's marked with (ie. a recent trailer). The problem is that some people don't want the article to be filled with "As shown in a trailer/screenshot/etc", but i think we can find a compromise here. Oh, and I removed the tag now that the text has been edited, just say if it's still confusing. SamSandy (talk) 06:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Character names

Now that the names for the characters are trickling in, it is absolutely CRUCIAL that we know the names for sure before putting them here. Sourced, verified, everything - mere rumors will not do!

Just now I had to edit the entire article because someone had confused Lightning as the blonde girl from Versus, whose name was just revealed to be Stella. For clarity's sake: Lightning and Stella are totally different characters in two different games!

So let's be extra-careful now, and only go with facts, not speculations. Thanks! SamSandy (talk) 13:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

there is an error in the article stella is from versus xiii not this game theres no character aclled "sera" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nomchan (talk • contribs) 14:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

"Sera" is the reported name of the pigtailed girl, but I don't think there are any reliable sources at the moment. Closed Mega Theater and all that.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 19:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

"Sera" deleted since no source was mentioned in the article and I couldn't find anything to prove so. ~~Matthew 28-Oct-2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 12:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC).

Who added Sera back? Don't we still need some kind of proof before we can add this? I'm removing until someone can find any mention of the name by Square Enix or we can get the full lengh video of DKΣ3713 2008 -Adunian Prophet(Just to lazy to log in) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.119.15 (talk) 00:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

What else proof do you guys need? It's already been confirmed that pigtails girl IS Sera. Due to the trailer impressions and various game news impressions of the trailers. Seriously do YOU even pay attention to the game news sites (I bet not), most notably Final Fantasy-XIII.net. Incase you didn't know by now. Square Enix already stated themselves that the pigtails girl has been revealed as Sera. Zeta Nova 08:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC).

Hey, if you can find a reliable source that confirms your claim then feel free to add it, however sites such as the one you mentioned are not reliable sources as they don't have a reliable publication process... they're more like a news blog. KhalfaniKhaldun 17:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Already have. See, the Final Fantasy wikia (wikipedia for all things Final Fantasy) has stated it long time ago. So have the game news sites. I really don't need to point you in the direction that it says the pigtailed girl is Sera. You guys just haven't been PAYING ATTENTION to gaming news sites where they mention Final Fantasy XIII and Square Enix in the same topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeta Nova (talk • contribs) 01:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Well if you've found a reliable source because you're "paying attention", then please link it here. The one you previously posted did not meet Wikipedia standards, and the Final Fantasy wikia you referred to also wouldn't meet these standards because it is not stable and has no reliable publication process (anyone can post whatever they want without a source). KhalfaniKhaldun 02:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please do not cite FFWiki. Even there, they state that Sera is yet to be the confirmed name. — Blue。 02:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

This' getting annoying and tedious. I think you guys should know well by now. For those that have actually been catching these news during the time of the Tokyo Game Show 2008. Square Enix HAS made an official statement that pigtails girl is indeed Sera. It was stated on game magazine publications; EGM, Game Pro + online game news sites IGN and FF news site FF-XIII.net Zeta Nova 12:54, 29 November 2008 (UTC).

You're clearly not getting it. If all these sources exist, post a link to use as a reference! You can't attribute this information to those sources unless you can prove that they said those things. KhalfaniKhaldun 22:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I've found an audio track on YouTube, taken from a trailer that was only presented for the medias. Not only that it reveals that the pigtailed girl is also the girl with the hood and white robe, but also that her name is Sera. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-oN1JnTiug&NR=1 yet I don't know if you guys consider this to be a reliable source. (WebJiCi (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC))

Her name was finally revealed to be Oerba Dia Vanille. [[1]] Fan speculation at the moment seems to point out that "Sera" is most likely her race. Snow Villiers (talk) 19:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Got to http://www.square-enix.co.jp/fabula/ff13/ and see their names: Lightning, Snow and Vanille. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.54.211.183 (talk) 15:00, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

• Blonde woman

Just wanted to drop a line here to say that the blonde woman working for the military was featured in the new trailer at Square-Enix Party 2008, and as such is not a figment of my imagination or attempt of trolling. I've provided valid source for this character as well, so I hope she isn't deleted from the article without discussion first. SamSandy (talk) 14:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes it was announced at DKΣ3713 2008. The Square-Enix Party 2008 is also known as DKΣ3713 2008.Ffgamera (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• Sazh Katzroy Revealed as Next Character

S'up guys, Zeta here. Just came back from FF-XIII.net. Thanks to them (as usual) that we have a brand new character joining the fight with Lightning, Vanille and Snow. They revealed him as; Sazh Katzroy (サッズ・カッツロイ) Zeta Nova 09:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC).

I believe the thanks go to V-Jump and Square Enix, not FF-XIII.net... SamSandy (talk) 08:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeap, thanks to V-Jump magazine for the exposure. Not just FF-XIII.net, other websites have also reported this. — Blue。 10:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Possibly Sazh Kalzroy, spelling isn't confirmed yet. Some sites are reporting Kalz, others Katz. aeriwyn (talk) 03:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.138.158 (talk)

Off-topic from article improvement, but I like his design. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 07:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Also off-topic, but BABY CHOCOBO!!! CUUUUUTE!!! ...Sorry, I couldn't help it. Yellow Mage (talk) 10:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

"Sazh confirmed as orange-afro guy" ... umm, where? The internet is full of people swearing they are two completely different characters.TomDæmon (talk) 03:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I can't read japanese, but the placement of the kanji spelling Sazh Katzroy (Kalzroy) convinces me that he and the afro guy are the same. However, the word orange doesn't appear anywhere in the article....~Itzjustdrama ^{C ?} 03:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

The man with the afro and the chocobo IS Sazh Katzroy (Sazzu Kattsuroi). In a trailer there was a man with orange hair as well as the asian lady and the goggles-kid. My question was what evidence was there that orange-hair-guy was really Sazh (who people swear is not the orange guy). TomDæmon (talk) 08:57, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Multiple reports from the Jump Festa say that there is an dark-skinned, orange-haired man in the trailer, but he does NOT have an afro and he has totally different clothes than Sazh. Thus, Sazh is a different character from the orange-haired man in the reported trailer. You guys just have to be patient until they publish the material from the trailer shown at the Closed Mega Theater. SamSandy (talk) 11:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah. That's why I was lost. I'm not as updated as some of you. ~Itzjustdrama ^{C ?} 04:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Source of confirmation of names?

Why are there made up names for the revealed characters? I'm changing these names back to what we actually know until I get a source that proves me wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.43.239 (talk) 09:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

• Team Nora

From IGN (http://au.ps3.ign.com/articles/957/957010p1.html) ... Famitsu has the names of the three as Repuro > Lebreau; Gadou > Gadot and Maaki > Maqui. The article also talks about the demo. TomDæmon (talk) 21:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Awards

Final Fantasy XIII wins MTV Game Award http://finalfantasy-xiii.net/2008/11/22/final-fantasy-xiii-wins-mtv-game-award.html http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTV_Game_Awards#Do_Believe_The_Hype --Christian140 (talk) 23:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Ridiculous, a game can't win an award when only three trailers have been shown for it. Ffgamera (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

It's not ridiculous at all. If they think that then so be it. Zeta Nova 21:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC).

New information concerning DKS3173 Trailers

Found two links that have DKS3173, this may provide some information on pigtails and other rumored information. I'll provide the links but you'll have to be able to read japanese(?)(sorry fareastern languages not my forte(?)) Here's one [[2]], and two [[3]]. Sorry if I'm regergitating information, but I believe most of us have been waiting for these vids, so good luck to those who want to translate them. ;}Adunian Prophet (talk) 20:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

New SJ Scan

Thanks to [4] (as usual). They also have a new Shonen Jump scan, which shows the "pigtails girl" which shall remain unknown until we get more info. And the new revamped battle menu. In the new scan, there is no "Command Reel". But rather a list of commands spread throughout the bottom screen and the ATB cost bar. Right above that seems to be where the character would line up their attacks for quick attack chains. Zeta Nova 07:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeta Nova

Question Regarding the Revamped System

Well, I have just a few. Mostly pertaining to the new Bonus gauge meter in the upper right hand corner of the screen. What does this do exactly? Because it mostly centers on your attacks. Zeta Nova 09:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC).

We don't know that yet, really. Besides, you should be asking that kind of questions in a message board of a fansite, where I'm sure you'd get lots of speculation about the topic. Wikipedia isn't the right medium for that, unfortunately.SamSandy (talk) 10:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Official Websites

(Courtesy of FinalFantasy-XIII.Net) There are now official Square Enix Europe and North America sites for FFXIII: EU: FinalFantasy13Game.com NA: na.square-enix.com/ff13 Both of these currently just have a week-long countdown. - TomDæmon (talk) 20:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

K, I'll add these two to the External Links. And guys, please do not delete the links once they've been officially added. Thank you :) Zeta Nova 14:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC).

Why isn't the official NA website listed? 173.66.171.102 (talk) 03:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

A user hid that site because Avast Antivirus (and it seems only Avast - other Avast users also reported this, but no-one else) registered the site as harboring viruses. In my personal experience, neither Norton nor AVG detect any problems. I don't see why it shouldn't be reinstated, if it hasn't already while I type this. TomDæmon (talk) 06:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Release Date

Having read the release date section it's far from clear. We all know that the Japanese PS3 version is out first, but what isn't clear is what happens after that, will the US/UK version come out on the PS3 next, or do people in the States and UK have to wait for them to finish developing a 360 version first before we get a release? I've seen that it looks like Japan will get it in sept/oct 2009, with US/UK having to wait until Q4 2010, with that in mind it would appear that the English language localisation will be put on hold while the build an engine to run it on the 360, has anyone got any clarification on this because the release section makes it as clear as mud? MattUK (talk) 14:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

No one has a clue. The only info we're given is that the Japanese version is set for 2009, and the other versions are set for approximately April 2010. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 09:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

North America April 16th release of FF7 ACC

I'm not too sure about the Gametrailers source for North America April 16th release of FF7 ACC. It says scheduled for worldwide release. But it said separately, that it was scheduled for an April 16th release... Any comments? Because lots of people are importing this Blu-ray, because it wont release until late. And Square Enix did not announce this NA release. Ffgamera (talk) 03:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

As good as that would be, I've seen people shooting that video down as cheesy and fake, so its not promising. Maybe, wait for something more solid (eg from Square)... TomDæmon (talk) 21:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, seems too good to be true. 'Sides yo, Square already stated that any release date outside of their descretion is considered as "erroneous" Zeta Nova 21:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC).

Verifiability

To those who keep adding the {{fact}} tag to the infobox: you're completely misinterpreting the challenging rules for verifiability.

Wikipedia:Verifiability says: "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation."

This means that material is challenged based on veracity, and a challenge says that you as an editor believe it needs a secondary source to back up the statement because you are unsure of it being fact. Not that it needs to be supported by sources based solely on the fact that it's on wikipedia and therefore needs to be cited. If we backed up every minute detail on wikipedia, it would be incredibly bloated. Not only that, but it would also discourage IP editors (who are equally allowed to edit wikipedia, whether you like it or not) from ever participating or joining in on the project, since practically every single edit they made would be reverted.

In particular in this article: single-player mode. This actually can quite easily be backed up: see any of the trailers with gameplay in them that are referred to on this page.

Format: PS3 games are all Blu-ray, and Xbox 360 games are all DVD-DL, both are mandated by the console producers (Sony and Microsoft). Challenging the format is downright stupid.

Almost as stupid is challenging the input for the game. Standard input for each console is via their standard controllers, and Square-Enix has absolutely no reason to make their own controllers for the game. They never have in the history of Final Fantasy games, and this is number 13. Why would this change now? Besides, even Guitar Hero and Rock Band allow you to use the standard controllers to play. I'm not as sure about this one, but I could also see requiring the standard controllers to work with any game being a requirement set by Sony and/or Microsoft as well.

So yes, you're right. This is all original research to some minor extent. At the same time, it's obvious and common sense to practically everyone who can open their eyes. Please just stick to using the {{fact}} tag when it's actually reasonable.

KhalfaniKhaldun 22:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not arguing the likelihood, I'm challenging the verifiability. Find a cite. If you can find a cite, cite it; otherwise it's speculation. Adding {{fact}} to unverified information is not controversial; I'm surprised it bothers people so much. - Chardish (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm surprised that you're surprised. The template page for {{fact}} says this: Many editors object to what they perceive as overuse of this tag, particularly in what is known as "drive-by" tagging, which is applying the tag without attempting to address the issues at all. Consider whether adding this tag in an article is the best approach before using it, and use it judiciously. Once again, you seem to be the only user here that thinks adding citations for every little thing is reasonable. For this, I refer you to WP:BURO. Please, stop nitpicking and contribute! KhalfaniKhaldun 04:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Information in the infobox (aside from release dates and a few other tidbits) typically doesn't need a citation. Look at any of our recent FAs. Anyhow, further edit warring will lead to 3RR blocks, so resolve your issues through discussion. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 04:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core defining principles, and throwing it out just to include speculative minutiae in an article seems contrary to the spirit of the project. I stand by my demand for a citation. Information that is impossible to cite should not be here, period. - Chardish (talk) 06:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I really doubt you will find a citation on the format of the disk. I doubt the format of the disk will be changing. Maybe that one can be let go? ~Itzjustdrama ^{C ?} 06:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

A better question to ask, in my opinion: "Why must a Wikipedia article contain unverified (and possibly unverifiable) information that is not critical to the understanding of the subject?" I don't understand the purpose of compromising our guiding principles in order to stuff an article with details. - Chardish (talk) 00:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you just hit on a good point there. They aren't critical to understanding the subject, and as such they aren't mentioned in any secondary sources that the editors here can find. I think there is a point on Wikipedia where you have to let the verifiability rules slide for minor details that aren't covered in secondary sources - as long as they aren't doubtful in veracity - because any possible sources themselves find them to minor to mention. While the threshold for inclusion on Wikipedia is supposed to be verifiability, there are some times when some simple truths just can't be found actually stated anywhere outside of Wikipedia. Personally I don't believe that's a good reason to exclude facts from an encyclopedia. It's like building logic rules for our understanding of reality: we have to start with a foundation of things we just assume to be truths, because we don't know of anything that is absolutely certain. Well, excluding math. XP KhalfaniKhaldun 01:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

For minor, noncontroversial details, I would think that the subject itself would be an appropriate source. (For example, the year of a movie's release could be found on the movie box itself; I think that'd be fine.) For a game that doesn't exist yet, this is guesswork. So not only is it unverified, but it's also uncertain. Granted, it's 99.9999% certain, but I don't think it's good practice for our encyclopedia to engage in guesswork of any kind, because otherwise a threshold of certainty must be defined. - Chardish (talk) 04:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I think that threshold doesn't need to be a hard line, though. That's why Wikipedia is edited by a community, so if there is any kind of debate on whether or not something is legitimate enough to be included in an article without a citation, a consensus of editors can determine whether or not inclusion is appropriate. The consensus, then, is that threshold you're looking for, I think. KhalfaniKhaldun 05:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

But when what we're dealing with is speculative and unverifiable, we need to consider if it's contrary to the purpose of the encyclopedia to even include it. I think it should something more than consensus to violate the core pillars of Wikipedia's purpose. Consensus only works to uphold principles if the editors determining consensus care about the principles to begin with.

In the issue of including these details, I think we need to weigh both sides: including the details does nothing to improve the article or the encyclopedia, since we're including speculation about minor details we can't be certain about, while not including them upholds WP:V and WP:CRYSTAL. The choice seems clear to me. - Chardish (talk) 10:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

We're just going to have to agree to disagree with each other and let the other editors here take care of that, then. While I understand where you're coming from, I still think that in minor cases of almost certain veracity, regardless of verifiability, it's better to ignore the rules, since it only increases the article's coverage on the topic and is probably not going to cause any harm.

As a side note, I also feel like WP:CRYSTAL is there more to prevent blatant guesswork (like problems this article had previously with character names based on what people may have heard in the trailers and such) or predictions (like going ahead and creating a FFXIV article), rather than rational judgments based on things we know, like that FFXIII is a game coming out on PS3, so it has to be released on Blu-ray. KhalfaniKhaldun 16:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Gameplay Section

Who's ever editting the Gameplay section, can you divide it into general gameplay and battle system? Because it seems to be all jumbled into a big paragraph that some may not be able to read. Zeta Nova 14:17, 08 April 2009 (UTC).

I've been doing some edits, but so far all gameplay information provided is restricted to the battle system. So making such a division would be futile at this point. SamSandy (talk) 09:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

FF13 Article in Japanese - TRANSLATORS PLZ!!!

http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/20090430_167921.html

Found an article with pics,, but I don't know Japanese. Could someone translate and add stuff into the article? 75.107.254.11 (talk) 02:15, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

New email from Square-Enix details:
The gleaming city of Cocoon floats high in the clouds, safe from the taint of Pulse, the primitive land abandoned by land more than a thousand years ago. But in the midst of this technological paradise, forces are stirring which could change things forever.
It's time to take your next step into the world of Final Fantasy XIII. source Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 11:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Summons

Here's an E3 '09 press release from SE that possibly hints at this game's term for summons:

"In FINAL FANTASY XIII, players will embark on a journey through the cityworld of Cocoon and the outerworld of Pulse, encountering and fighting alongside a diverse group of allies. Execute powerful attacks with weapons and magic, and summon the enigmatic Eidolons [emphasis mine] with an evolved Active Time Battle™ system. Experience seamless transitions between real-time gameplay and in-game cinematics. Do you have the courage to face your destiny?"

link: http://release.square-enix.com/na/2009/05/29.html TomDæmon (talk) 09:00, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it worth noting that FF9 also used eidolons, but no other FFs? Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 11:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, FFIX used Eidolons. But the system that XIII (as seen in the E3 demo), uses XII's approach to the summons. In that the players will summon 1 beast at a time, which all party members except the fighter and the beast are left to fight the boss. Unless such cases happen; A) Beast dies, or B) Beast performs their signature Gestalt attack. Zeta Nova 20:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC).

It says that summons play a major part in the story, much as in FF6, 9 and 10. Summons play a large part in the story of FF8, too, although admittedly this isn't revealed until late in the game. If someone could add this, it'd be great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.226.1.229 (talk) 22:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Too many fair-use images

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The Characters section has four concept-art images of characters, as well as a screenshot of four characters. This is redundant; we don't need multiple images of each character to understand the content. Something's gonna have to get taken out. On the one hand, removing the four individual images and keeping the screenshot would show the most characters with the fewest fair-use images; on the other hand, the individual images are higher quality. Personally, I think the screenshot's quality is good enough for these purposes, and the four individual images should be removed. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

copied from User talk:Rjanag:

Personally I think it is important to reduce the amount of images, however I do believe that removing the 4 high quality images and leaving an extremely low-quality image is a flawed idea.

As we know, the 5th character in the E3 screenshot has little information for a full profile such as Lightning, Snow, Oerba and Sazh.

Removing the E3 would only be minor, where as removing the 4 renditions of the Fully Profiled main characters would damage a lot of work as well as the ability to allow people to fully alalyse the characters, where as the E3 shot is poor and only shows the characters faces where as the 4 pictures show their full renditions.

If you feelthe size of the Image gallery containing the 4 images and links to the larger images of the 4 Main "Stated" characters of FFXIII, please reply stating the the size of the gallery is too big, as this is easily changable. The Cosmo 19:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. from a different perspective,

What makes you think the quality of the E3 screenshot is more acceptable than links to 4 fully-fledged images, the gallery can be made smaller to seem more barable if you wish.

The whole idea of these images is for reference, the E3 screenshot is poor where as the 4 individual Pngs give an Entire prespective. The buety of the individual images is that the gallery on the Main article can be as small as we like while still giving a link to the Fully Sized ones, the E3 screenshot is the same size as it is on the Main article.

Plus the images in the gallery are not technically free licensed, they are used for promotional reasons, such as being publisised with information about the game, such as wikipedia articles. The Cosmo 19:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The problem is not the size of the gallery, it's the number of images—in general, when it comes to fair use, one image is better than four. If we can accomplish with one image what we were accomplishing with 4, we should do it—one of the main rules for non-free content is to use as little of it as possible. The real question, then, is whether the one image really can replace the four.

I believe it can. While the screenshot is small, it shows enough to identify the characters' faces and see what they look like. Yeah, they're not full-body shots, but I really doubt most readers are trying to "fully analyze" the characters—this isn't exactly rocket science, it's a video game. I would venture to guess that anyone who plays Final Fantasy knows how to do a google image search and find hundreds more pictures.

If these characters eventually become notable in their own right and have their own articles (a la Squall Leonhart) then those images might be justified in those articles. But for this article, I think the single screenshot works fine, and there is strong precedent for using group photos where possible; see, for example, Ghostbusters and The Order of the Stick (those are just off the top of my head). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

(out) I guess my other question for you is, is File:FF13NoraCrew.png really a screenshot, or is it five screenshots spliced together? rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Gallery removed

Images
File:Final Fantasy XIII - Lightning*.png File:Snow Villiers*.png File:Final Fantasy XIII - Oerba Dia Vanille*.png File:Sazh Katzroy*.png File:FFXIII NORA's 5th Member Character.png

I decided, on second thought, that none of the individual shots are justified, and have removed them all (J Milburn also did so just a couple minutes earlier , diff). There is no precedent for a gallery like this; even character-only pages, such as Characters of Final Fantasy X and X-2 and Characters of Final Fantasy XII, do not have individual shots. None of these pictures are justified. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely right. A gallery is never an appropriate format for non-free content, and these images are adding very little to the article. Their use is not justified. J Milburn (talk) 21:40, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The individual shots are Justified, and have been justified and I can supply truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XCosmoX (talk • contribs) 21:38, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Then please supply it already. Just saying "they are justified" doesn't make them justified; you need to provide a reason, as you have been told time and time again. Keep in mind that

1. You do not own the copyright for any of these images, even the ones that you edited yourself
2. Non-free images cannot be used on Wikipedia unless they make a significant contribution to the reader's understanding of the topic (FFXIII, in this case) and that same contribution cannot be made with text alone.

rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

They are giving a significant contribution to the reader's understanding of the Topic, "FFXIII" - "Characters", would it count If I recommended viewing Traffic Statistics on the 4 png files that were put into a gallery on the main article. The Cosmo 21:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

No, page views don't have anything to do with this. Please read WP:Non-free content criteria to better understand what the issues are here. And take a look at the other Final Fantasy articles I linked above—notice that none of them have images like this. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:58, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Does it matter weather the images I uploaded are different from others uploaded in related articles, or are you reffering to the descriptions, reasons for existance and license tags?

We're not talking about the license tags right now. We're talking about whether these images should even be in the article at all. As I said above, J Milburn and I both believe the images do not belong in an article and should not be used anywhere on Wikipedia. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Why do you feel that they are not necessary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by XCosmoX (talk • contribs)

I have already answered that question over and over again. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but this time I have asked the question directly and require a full answer. The Cosmo 22:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

[5][6][7] And, again, just to summarize: because the images don't contribute anything to the reader's understanding that a simple text description wouldn't. You don't need a picture of a character to know who they are in the game. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Please! I have come to a decision, my adding of the 5th NORA crew character may have been intollerable, you may delete this image if you wish. But from this point may we refer to the Gallery Images Only. As this section states. Do not give any reference to the NORA 5th Character image. The Cosmo 22:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I have deleted it accordingly. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The Text does tie-in well with the images, even I was surprised. However this is not the reason the images were uploaded, they were uploaded to give readers a Visual Reference just as the Text Reference does. Text and Visual Image are extremely different, a Persons Imagination could never create the images uploaded and comprised into the gallery, otherwise they would be psycic to the works of Square-Enix. And it will enhance a readers understanding by allowing the Images to relate to the Characters name, to make reference and describe the character in other articles with correct precision and being able to set up a link to the images to supply further reference to their descriptions. These images are not to just to describe or be described, they are to show the characters of FFXIII to the world in their full selves so that the readers will not be stuck thinking of what the characters will look like, creating images in their minds by reading the text which is always guaranteed to be un-accurate with the truth. The Cosmo 22:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

A lot of flowery prose, and no mention at all of Wikipedia policies or tangible issues. As I said above, none of the other Final Fantasy articles have image galleries like these, and there is no precedent for having one here. I am going to be offline for an hour or so running errands; if nothing at this discussion has changed since then, I will list all four images at Files for deletion to start a discussion there. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I understand you are unimpressed with the galleries due to untangible use and no similarities between Final Fantasy articles.

But May I propose Text Base links to the Images. That way it will not infridge on the article page and when you are back from your errands we may discuss any other details to resolve the issues with the Images I have uploaded, such as reasons for existance, licensing, and whatever you feel is missing. I look foward to hearing from you again soon. The Cosmo 22:38, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok now I will begin with licensing claims 1st.

The images uploaded for use in the main FFXIII article were released vie Magazine articlesin various places within Japan and in other countries worldwide. All magazine content is seen as copyright yet some of it "Promotional" material. All images uploaded to the internet such as the 4 Png's uploaded by yours truly for use within the wikipedia article FFXIII are promotional based as they were included in information packs within these magazines. The images have been distrubuted all over the internet numorous times for similar reasons (if not the same) as they were uploaded on wikipedia (to give reference to th characters from the text). This does not infrindge the copyright claim as the images have yet again been paired with information regarding Final Fantasy XIII as they were in the original Japanese Magazines containing information regarding the title. They were extracted from the magazines and released onto the web via various and countless websites for promotional distribution which is completely non-profit for the using organization or website as of such is wikipedia but with a more genuine reason for them to exist on the article, To Give Visual reference to the Characters in Question! and in Topic! as they were in their original uses within Promotional material which has been extended for the same purposes. The Cosmo 22:55, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The internet websites using the images shoud also acknowledge this as content they do not own, otherwise they would not or should not be using them on their website, websites for referencing are the sources to the 4 Images I have uploaded. They all came from the same source, Square-Enix's magazine articles.

I understand wikipedia Policies and have answered to this accordingly, if you stil require me to add more information or edit any information on the image files pages then please do not hesitate to tell me. Please do not remove the images without answering these concerns 1st.

Plus my flowery prose was a bit liberational in that respect... But it does asnwer the reason for existance even if it contains no policy statements. The statements have been discussed in a later paragraph above. I would much prefer these matters be resolves and the images returned than to have them completely deleted. And I will complete as much information as I need to make it fully ledgible that the images are there for a good genuine reason (which I have done, but if you need me to add more). If the gallery proposition seemed too bulky I will compromise down to Text Based links (such as replacing the Characters names with Characters Names which are also links).

I look foward to hearing from you. The Cosmo 23:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, the gallery proposition was mearly a way to keep the 4 images neat within the article, leaving the images completely individual would most likely cause out of line text ot un-neat layout to the article, such as placing each individual shot to the right of the Characters description (this I have tried, it did not work very well at all so the Gallery formation seemed more acceptable, then I did try placing the Gallery Vertically on the right hand side, this was more acceptable, but in the end I decided placing them in succession order beneath all 4 descriptions horizontally the best idea as it did look most neat out of all the solutions I tried)

If they still seem too large then please advise me of how much smaller you would like for acceptance.

Also, I'm guessing you have the same rights on wikiedia as I do (Just with more experience), and I am looking for people who can help me with my wikipedia knowledge (not destroy it), so if you help me with this I would be most greatful. (unless you are an Administrator, but then a decision would have been reached by now)

As I a not a random person who prefers to use a name tag rather than my IP adress to edit and add whatever the hell I want into wikipedia articles. No, I only wish to supply accurate content and keep much content in correct order. So I'd like help, rather than countless warnings which is beginning to look very biased towards what will happen in a turnout situation.

If I do not recieve a reply assisting me upon these factors and instead recieve messages informing me they have been put up for deletion. This will be seen as infrindgement of wikipedia policies also. Plus it will invalidate this claim you have made: This editor is listed at Highly Active Users, and is willing to provide you with assistance and advice.

So far you've only given me warnings, no advice and no assistance (apart from maybe deleting the NORA 5th Character image I made and uploaded), and I'd like you to stand by that claim.

If I still have not explained their reasons for existance clearly enough, please do not hesitate to inform me upon what I have missed. The Cosmo 23:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

A response to several of your points.... first of all, listing an image for deletion at FFD is not a violation of any Wikipedia policy; the whole reason FFD is there is for editors to interact and discuss images. As for "willing to provide you with assistance and advice", I have bent over backwards for several hours today providing you advice on how to address these issues, how to avoid getting yourself blocked, etc. If you think I haven't been helpful enough with you, well, that's your problem; I have certainly given you a lot more assistance than many editors get.

As for my rights on Wikipedia...no, I am an administrator, as is J Milburn. But that doesn't mean "a decision would have been reached by now" just because of who we are; being an administrator doesn't mean people like me just come in and delete things whenever we want. We have to abide by consensus just as everyone else does, which is why we've gone through this whole tiring discussion. Since your mind has clearly not changed, I will be listing these images at FFD now; I will provide you a link to the discussion once it is posted. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

But the images need not be deleted, I have changed them already, removing them now would seem more un-sound, I have proposed that they be used for Text Based links, this will not be untangible at all. The Cosmo 01:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

See the non-free content criteria. Non-free images have to be used as images within an article, or else they are deleted. If there is no article to use them in, they should not be on Wikipedia at all. It is of utmost importance that we respect other companies' rights. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

When you say that my mind is unchanged, does that mean I had no choice in the matter? Or do you mean I hav'nt changed what I am required to by now, you still hav'nt stated what needs to be dealt with, Specifically, where I should start, what needs more info more, how to resolve this issue. Destroying it is not Resolution.

"Know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy." - Obama, January 20th 2009

The Cosmo 01:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

You can rant and rave all you want, the fact of the matter is that these images are not appropriate and not necessary, and you have done nothing to convince me otherwise. I will list them at FFD. I really don't need your taunting; anyone with any experience working on a collaborative project knows that, to build a good encyclopedia, you also need to destroy the junk. Destruction is part of creation :P rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Destruction will never be part of Creation, if you must Destroy to Create, then Whatever was Created has been Destroyed. And your sarcasm is Intollerable, and how dare you accuse me of attacking, you attacked my Files 1st with your suspicions emphisised by someone else hinting in. You will only hold us in the dark ages. And will Destroy anything Created to create what? To Create Destruction, Thats whats being Created. The Cosmo 14:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

FfD

All four files have been listed for deletion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 June 15#Final Fantasy XIII - Lightning*.png. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I have done enough information for any reasonable person to realise that I may need assistance, you're just trying to take it away, I've tried to convince you otherwise but you're dead set on removing them. And obviously if you're that dead set, How can I convince you otherwise? The Cosmo 03:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I have been trying to help you understand the non-free content criteria so that this doesn't happen again. As for these particular images, the only possible way you can help yourself keep them from being deleted is to find proof that they are freely licensed for use on Wikipedia, since you said here that you would look for a statement. If you had provided such a statement before, then none of this would have happened. As it stands, I doubt such a statement exists—the FFXIII website says all its material is copyrighted—but you are welcome to look. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

New Comprised FFXIII Characters Image

This has been created to comply with Minimal use and rejection of the high-resolution images originally used within a gallery formation. If anyone would like to submit any concerns, please notify me aswell as add here. Please do not edit the Image. The Cosmo 01:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Whoa, hold your horses. I specifically said to start a discussion here before creating, uploading, or adding new images. The composed image is just as non-free as the others were, and all the same problems still apply. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

It says it's a non-free image god damnit, stop twisting this, and what prevents it this time? I have met the criteria we discussed, the misuse of there being too many, too large, hints at licensing, and the fact that even though I have acknowledged it countless times, plus it says in the license of the Image and maybe I should add it to the description of the file itself to further try and please you that this image is "Not Free".

Personally this now seems extremely biased to your favour, no-one else has said anything, and you're already at removing pieces of work, Again. What do you want? You can not just say that the same rules apply when differences to compromise have been met as agreed. The image will remain up until you have said exactly what is wrong with it. And be fair about it and Leave it up and help me with this or so help me I will find a better way to deal with these problems. The Cosmo 02:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

It's still four images, the fact that you loaded them into one file doesn't change that.

As for adding it to the article...you really should not be adding disputed images to the article when a consensus has not been reached. You already got warned once for edit warring.

I have listed this discussion at Wikipedia:Third opinion to get outside advice. In the meantime, you should not edit war over this. I will not respond to further messages from you because we have already been around the same circle numerous times; I am just going to remove the image from the article (current consensus is against including it, like it or not: both J Milburn and I have opposed the image, you are the only editor who wants it in). If an outside editor comes in and says they think the image is justified, I will re-add it; in the meantime, further attempts to add it will be considered edit warring. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I would not be the one edit warring, You would be, you may be an Administrator but that does'nt mean you have significant power over me, you would pass over the 3rd revert rule before I could. Yet again you are being unfair. And it is one image, just because it has a transparant background due to it being a PNG I'd expect an administrator to understand that. And what other sources could I give, those are the 4 sources where they are originally from until being edited into 1 image. Would it make a difference If I made them a JPG with a fixed white background so then you would acknowledge that it is 1 image? The Cosmo 03:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you also stop mentioning J Milburn, he has no longer anything to do with this subject, this is a New Image, I'd expect you to understand that as an administrator, the fact he helped you wth the previous case is now Invalid, so do not think that re-enforces your case. The Cosmo 03:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not one image, it's four images spliced together into one upload. This is one image. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

1 file = 1 Wikipedia image, I cannot edit the license tag by saying that it's multiple images spliced together, I could edit the Files summary to indicate this if you wish. The Cosmo 03:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, the image you've shown me has given me a creative idea. So basically If I put each character abve, below, behind, but in a Group shot wher the characters overlap in some way or another, Plus add the FFXIII logo (I would use the one already uploaded) to further validate the image, would that seem acceptable enough? The Cosmo 03:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

No, that wouldn't change the fact that you created it using 4 copyrighted image. The best thing to do is wait until a full-cast image like this is published (either by a screenshot that happens to show all the characters at once, like in the Ghostbusters article, or in a posed picture like the one above). Then, after the game comes out and there is a Characters of Final Fantasy XIII article, such an image could go at the top of the article. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

They are still promotional pieces of work, down-scaled and comprised into 1 file (or one image if prefered) to meet all the criteria and compromised as previously discussed. The images cama from promotional media elements and are being used here for the same purpose in an economical setting to meet criteria. The thumbnail used on the main article could be seen as generally acceptable as it gives perferctly good reference in one viewing. The size of the file in dimension is significantly smaller than their originals which invalidates copyright infrindgement under low-scale terms, for furter copyright work I may add a background (random colours personally chosen, like grey fading into a lighter shade of grey or white) to prevent the images being used in a similar way to how they were originally to enforce the copyright license. The Cosmo 03:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

3rd opinion

Please don't remove the 3rd opinion request. The only reason it links to the "too many non-free images" section is because that section is the beginning of the discussion, and I wanted outside reviewers to know where to start reading; I also gave the link to the most recent discussion, about the new images, so that reviewers would know which discussion is currently relevant. The request shouldn't be removed, because the disagreement about your new image is not yet resolved. The very reason I put the third opinion request there is because I know you don't want to hear my opinion; please leave it up so that another editor may weigh in. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 04:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Wrong, this is no longer the discussion, that was a previous discussion we resolved, we are now on a new discussion. Do not twist this. I have added information on the Third Opinion accordingly, I did not removed I edited to to be fully correct. The Cosmo 04:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by XCosmoX (talk • contribs)

Finishing image issues -- notice

Since you have said you are ok with having the images deleted and you would prefer to make a composite images, I have done so. All the image data is now copied to User:XCosmoX/Image data if you need a copy of it. Since you don't need Wikipedia copies of the images to do your work (you can make a composite just by finding them on external websites) I am removing the images for now. Further discussion of whether or not a composite image is necessary can continue at Talk:Final Fantasy XIII. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 14:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally I do believe this is necessary, it meets with the criteria discussed, I was permitted by you to do such work and now you're contradicting yourself. I think this requires multiple opinions from general article viewers, editors and users rather than high-end administrators only. Then we will be able to establish that the image is fully necessary and that it may remain on the article page.
Readers please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Final_Fantasy_XIII&diff=prev&oldid=296666783 to see for yourself and add your personal views below. The Cosmo 04:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I didn't give you "permission" to add the images to the article; I said have a discussion here and we will decide whether or not to add the image.

As for requiring multiple opinions; yes, I agree, that's why I added a request for a third opinion; please do not remove the request. But also, do not characterize editors like J Milburn and myself as "high-end administrators only". Administrators are still editors and article viewers first and foremost; being an "administrator" just means I have extra buttons, it doesn't mean I'm no longer an editor. I care just as much about editing the encyclopedia as everyone else does. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Wait you agree about having these images on the article? So all we need now is more opinions. As for uploading to the Article, It is a great way to give reference to what the article would look like with the image in the correct section with all the text. The Cosmo 04:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't agree. I have said time and time again, I don't think they belong, I think they should all be deleted. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

"And The Truth, Shall Set you Free" - Jim Carry ~ Liar Liar / 1997

Well I do not think it/they should be deleted, they contribute nicely and significantly to the article, something you reject to understand since you're still dead set on destroying them.

There has been a significant increase in the amount of promotional material and information surrounding Final Fantasy games, Square-Enix's future releases within the past month, especially on this Final Fantasy XIII, by now it would seem significant enough to display the 4 characters on an article such as this. The Cosmo 04:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

3rd Opinion: People Please Add your Views to this Situation Below

Finishing image issues -- notice

Since you have said you are ok with having the images deleted and you would prefer to make a composite images, I have done so. All the image data is now copied to User:XCosmoX/Image data if you need a copy of it. Since you don't need Wikipedia copies of the images to do your work (you can make a composite just by finding them on external websites) I am removing the images for now. Further discussion of whether or not a composite image is necessary can continue at Talk:Final Fantasy XIII. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 14:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally I do believe this is necessary, it meets with the criteria discussed, I was permitted by you to do such work and now you're contradicting yourself. I think this requires multiple opinions from general article viewers, editors and users rather than high-end administrators only. Then we will be able to establish that the image is fully necessary and that it may remain on the article page. Readers please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Final_Fantasy_XIII&diff=prev&oldid=296666783 to see for yourself and add your personal views below. The Cosmo 04:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

(section intentionally blank or now, readers please add your third opinion below)

---

The "composite" image is still a violation of fair use. If you put 4 fair use images together in one picture, they will still be four separate images - it doesn't matter how many thumbnails are in the article, but how many outside images are used. Creating a derivative work by copying and pasting still doesn't make it OK. Just forget it - it doesn't really matter in the long run because Square Enix will undoubtedly release a cast photo.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 06:24, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The fact that it is a single file does not stop it being four images, as ZXCVBNM said. The non-free content criteria are not rules to be manipulated to fit the latest cool image in- they are criteria that should be respected to help judge whether a file truly is needed on the project. This one just isn't. What do pictures of the characters really add to this article? J Milburn (talk) 10:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally I agree a lot more with what Zxcvbnm has stated than what J Milburn has, yet again J Milburn does'nt seem to understand the concept of visuals and what they stand for. I Guess you don't have any books with pictures in... or a front cover. But thats a different dispute. Plus the only helpful infomation here came from Zxcvbnm, Thank you, you have actually stated that they will release a group photo which actually is extremely likely considering they do make a group photo of every main character in a Final Fantasy game such as these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:FFVIInomuracastdesigns.JPG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ff4jbox.gif http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:FFIX_characters.png and so on. With this information at hand, I will keep a look out for an image that fills this sole purpose as even Rjanag gave a reference to a group shot of Ghostbusters. This will be the aim for a new image.
Respect upon this issue is given to Zxcvbnm for giving the most valuable information upon finalizing, and to Rjanag for being a Ruthlessly Strict Wikipedia Guidelines Enforcer at any cost. "When I See Something More Buetiful, Only Then Will Let It Happen." The Cosmo 11:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

All I want to say that the article needs some sort of image of the cast (and more images in general), because now it looks very bland, with just the logo and a single screenshot in it. There are screenshots from the newest trailer floating around the net with all the main characters pictured in them, so perhaps one of those would be suitable for this article? SamSandy (talk) 12:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the New E3 2009 promotional trailer does contain instances where the Characters are seen together. And I especially agree with you about the articles Blandness, as a matter of fact an original reason I uploaded the image(s) was to decrease it's bland laborious feel though this was a minor reason, pictures add colour and dimension to any article, and thus is good to use them more often but not too much. I always strive to make it look neat for whatever I upload and insert into an article, so far this has only met with disagreement for people stating that they're significantly challenged. Your statement is very refreshing SamSandy, it's good to see someone who is supportive at long last. The Cosmo 12:44, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

SamSandy, hold on, you think the article needs "more images in general" because "now it looks very bland"? You're welcome to throw in some related free images, but we do not use non-free content simply to stop articles looking bland. That's what your argument seems to revolve around, and I don't think your random stabs at myself and others are particularly useful. If you have some policy based thoughts, you're welcome to let us know, but until then, don't be surprised if no one takes any notice of your comments. J Milburn (talk) 12:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

We have been through that a group image would suffice, that's the part we've been refering to (or I have anyway), just because I say that a supportive comment is refreshing to hear does'nt mean I agree entirely aswell, obviously making something less bland and laborious is a poor reason, even you approved of there being a group photo rather than spliced images and so I will seek on for these purposes. And I have stated time and time again what the intention of a group image would be (you seem to now think my main intention was to 'Stop it Looking Bland', no no no no no, My intention has always been to give visual reference to the characters, but you and Rjanag have denied that every step of the way even though compromises are being met). When I find a group photo that has been seen in the E3 2009 Trailer, that will be the solution as we have discussed. The Cosmo 13:00, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever said that a group photo would be acceptable. It may be, it may not be, that's a discussion we can have. I don't think I've ever seen you explain what the intention of the images is, though I have asked. Why do you believe that there needs to be a "visual reference to the characters"? J Milburn (talk) 13:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

1stly I think it's important to establish that every single Final Fantasy article has links and references to pictures of the characters, I don't see why this should be an exception even at these early stages even though a lot of material to support this has been release (especially in the past month). It's also important to give readers a visual reference for instantly recognise and understand their visual concepts (in an un-analytical way if you will), visual concepts paired with their correct section of the article which has descriptions of them individually. So I feel that it is fully acceptable to have at least 1 group photo (low-resolution) from a good source paired with these descriptions just like with any Final Fantasy characters in many related articles. You must be assured that it is a group photo we are after and nothing else for the time being until a demand and information has escalated to make it significantly acceptable to use any of the originals uploaded previously. The Cosmo 13:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Simply stating "it's important to establish that every single Final Fantasy article has links and references to pictures of the characters" doesn't make it so. In an article on a character- yes, a single image just to show what they look like would be a good thing. In a videogame, the boxart is representative of the game as a whole- only if the appearance of the chacters is somehow significant to the game (perhaps if we have sources discussing the unique clothing, or a discussion of the cutscenes, or whatever) do we need images of the characters. There is no automatic entitlement to a character image. Why do you believe that one would be useful in this case? J Milburn (talk) 13:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

1 would be useful in this case as not only would it be displaying the 4 main characters of the upcoming title but it also would give reference to the E3 2009 Trailer which contains the most current and significant amount of promotional material and information generated by Square-Enix upon their upcoming Final Fantasy Title, the image would have been taken from the E3 2009 trailer so it would'nt have to be anything outstandingly detailed as previously uploaded images were, plus th image will be displayed next to a description of th E3 trailer itself and beneath the characters desciptions giving a source that would be significantly adding to this section of the article. It would not be a character image, but an Image of the Characters in the E3 2009 Trailer seen together.

It would be useful for the sole reason of excellent informational reference supplying sources, visual reference from the E3 Trailer in a down-scaled image to meet NFCC criteria (especially of minimal use). The Cosmo 13:35, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

When further details have been released (IE the game is closer to release and is getting in-depth previews/reviews) then there may well be a case for including an image of the main cast, but that's in the future and the 4-into-1 spliced image isn't the one. Images are used in a functional context, not for being pretty or for 'livening up' articles, if they're copyrighted then they need robust fair-use rationales. Someoneanother 15:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I have aready acknowledge all of the above, you're relating to previous issues which have been resolved, a screenshot from an E3 Promotional trailer containing the characters will be much more appropriate on a low-scale. I will await and seek down an appropriate image and update upon what I have found. The Cosmo 17:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, since the issue appears to be temporarily resolved I am archiving this discussion to prevent further arguing. So many different things have changed since this began that most of it is no longer relevant anyway. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Voice Actors

I notice that there aren't any references for the voice actors. Where has this information come from? ~Itzjustdrama ^{? C} 19:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

English or Japanese voice cast? The Japanese cast I'm not sure about (though apparently Vanille's actress has a blog somewhere mentioning that they've wrapped up). The english voices, only Hope's is "confirmed", as per here. Lightning's english actress is, as far as I'm aware, unknown, whether it's Debbie-whoever or Alison Keith (?) is based purely on speculation by fans re: the trailer shown at E3 2009. TomDæmon (talk) 02:28, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Remember that blogs aren't a reliable source.--Megaman en m (talk) 09:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe that's why Tom put "confirmed" in quotes. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 11:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Both languages. But at least, Maaya Sakamoto's site, provided by Victor Entertainment, confirms her role here. And that's all I could find to confirm any of them. vincentmartella.com seems to be Martella's official site, so I guess it can be used. ~Itzjustdrama ^{? C} 18:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The Japanese voice-actors were revealed in an interview with the producers. I'll try to dig it up and add it as a source. SamSandy (talk) 08:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I found this translation of Dengeki PS3 magazine from April that reveals four of the voice actors: http://finalfantasy-xiii.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6815 SamSandy (talk) 08:54, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Using what we have (and what FinalfantasyXiii.net has here). The cite looks something like this:

"Creator's Voice for Final Fantasy XIII". Dengeki Playstation 3 (in Japanese). 445. Japan: ASCII Media Works: 48-51. 2009-4-02. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

for Nomura, Toriyama, and Ikeda. Kitase's is

"Title". Dengeki Playstation 3 (in Japanese). 445. Japan: ASCII Media Works: 56-57. 2009-4-02. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help).

Still trying to figure out the title. That confirms most of them. ~Itzjustdrama ^{? C} 19:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Redoing for Eng release

According to IGN here, the facial animation and lip syncing will be redone for the English release. Where exactly does this go in the article? ~Itzjustdrama ^{? C} 23:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It's got to do with production so um... "Development"? ...Unless someone feels it is more of a "Release" thing... --TomDæmon (talk) 00:58, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

"Sqaure" Enix Premier Party Trailer

Totally plagiarized from "http://ps3.ign.com/articles/102/1022014p2.html". Removing it. Ghffshrine (talk) 21:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

March 2010 Release Date

This is confirmed for a March '10 release date in the EU, I changed the article but some dufus changed it back.

http://www.n4g.com/News-395238.aspx Moogleboi (talk) 15:04, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, "Spring 2010" is in the March/April region. So I'd say that' it's close for EU and North America Zeta Nova 20:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

That's excellent news! I hope everyone has seen the TGS 2009 trailer, so they can continue to make updated edits to the article! Cheers everyone. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 09:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Um, technically they removed it as it's not a concrete date. Kitase only said that they wanted to narrow the release date. They didn't say anything about the finalized U.S/EU date. As of now, it still remains as Spring 2010 Zeta Nova 10:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC).

Final Fantasy XIII Elixirs Confirmed

I recently added it to the release section. Looks like Suntory and Square-Enix are at it on those drinks again...

Link: http://release.square-enix.com/news/j/2009/09/afiv24qfe.html

Blackgaia02 (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

FFXIII FF Wikia page

It is OK to add it now?Fractyl (talk) 22:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Request for IP address block

All the IP addresses do to this article, as I have noticed from the History, is vandalise or ruin the article. May I request a semi-protection on the article? Thank you. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 10:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

If you think semi-protection is needed, there's requests for page protection, but I'm not sure the level is currently high enough that it's likely to be granted. Best, umrguy42 15:05, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep... there are occasional constructive contributions, and plus a lot of the unconstructive ones are not vandalism, just cluelessness. I don't see a need for page protection yet, just judicious editing (for example, I see User:SamSandy has been keeping an eye on things). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:09, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

And boy, it can be a chore sometimes! XD But at the same time, I wouldn't do it if I didn't get some perverted kick out of it. ;P SamSandy (talk) 07:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for guarding it =) ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 09:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh heck, seriously, it's getting quite hard to find the correct revision, and even then, reverting won't help as there are genuine edits in between. Someone keeps putting in Sony Computer Entertainment Japan as the publisher. Please add a source, cos I dont think thats true. Someone also keeps changing the input method to only the PS3 controllers. And someone also keeps changing the game mode to multiplayer. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 09:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Permanent semi-protection vandalism, there was a previously implemented block on IP addresses and new users, but I think it's time to permanently block them. They offer absolutely no help to the article, and they go in large edits, so it is very hard to find genuine edits in between, after and before. There is no way anyone can try to manage this. The only option is a permanent block. Besides, if they really wanted to put their vandalism on the page, they can request it on the talk page. I have put this request on the requests for page protection page. Hope it is passed.★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 20:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Hope's Summon

Remove it. This was never confirmed. No proof. Keep it down until we see the source that they provide. Remember the lightning in dissidia UT hoax?Faythoffenrir (talk) 00:05, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey! Somebody who isn't brand new change this! Now! Faythoffenrir (talk) 02:46, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

There is a source already, this. It's linked in the article.

And by the way, please don't shout. When you want someone to do something, using all caps and making demands with exclamation points is not the best way to get it done. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I have seen the link before and been there. No link to a scan of the article. Therefore, no proof.Faythoffenrir (talk) 04:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I stand corrected, scans are now shown. My apologies. Faythoffenrir (talk) 17:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Before shooting your mouth like that. Why don't you check for FFXIII updates hmm *gets ticked due to the sheer stupidity* Zeta Nova 10:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC).

Hey, it's all good man, don't worry about it. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 08:43, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Seriously though. With all due respect guys. You should check the game news sites. Instead of having that "wah, show me the proof". When confirmation hits SQUARE ENIX or famitsu then it's pretty much a done deal. Thus the "middle man" that has that "show me the proof" is eliminated Zeta Nova 14:58, 14 November 2009 (UTC).

That's why I requested a permanent semi-protection, but I don't think it was fulfilled. I don't even think it was denied. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 03:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Music - North American + European Theme Song.

Can someone confirm that Leona Lewis is doing the theme song for the North American and European release? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.42.131 (talk) 16:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Right here is your proof U.S Site and EU Site Zeta Nova 08:55, 13 November 2009 (UTC).

The creator said it out of his own mouth. Can't beat that proof hahaha. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 08:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

lol No doubt yo. Afterall it's Square Enix. Once statements go through them, it sticks. Zeta Nova 08:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC).

Video Upgrade

I think there should be something in here about this being the first of the Final Fantasy series that was designed with HD in mind. It's the first FF to take full advantage of high-definition. I'm not sure on resolution (hopefully 1080p).

Kilgannon2113 (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Georgia Van Cuylenburg

This is the source given that says she's voicing Vanille. The article doesn't specify the character she plays though, it just says she voices someone in the game. The Clawed One (talk) 18:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Here's a video of the actress saying she is the voice of Vanille, i dont know if that will help. Zidane4028 (talk)

Don't see why that shouldn't be allowed. Thanks. The Clawed One (talk) 00:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Latest Trailer

Courtesy of Final Fantasy XIII Official Site (JP), they revealed more of the game's story. And also they showed new characters as well. Most in particular, this game's iteration of Cid. Called; Cid Reinz (which bears a slight resemblance to Noctis/Sasuke), a priest and a brown-haired man

All of this is fact, because it came from Square themselves. Like XII, Cid is also one of the antagonists as well. (Zeta Nova) 09:25, 25 November 2009 (UTC).

Updates?

Aren't you guys supposed to keep track of the updates? Because the one on the Final Fantasy wikia site seems to be ahead of you guys. It's not that hard of trying to find the source (that is Square Enix confirming the news themself) and reporting it here. Zeta Nova 0:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC).

Who is "you guys"? You are welcome to edit the article whenever you want. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 10:31, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I edit both this article and the FF Wikia article. The latter is just looser with references, so it's easier and faster to edit.SamSandy (talk) 19:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Official EU Box Art

Can you guys add this box pic European Box Pic to the main as it's been confirmed by SQUARE ENIX themselves Zeta Nova 08:56, 01 December 2009 (UTC).

Classifications

If sources are wanted for the classifications, See here for Australia; here for North America; and the (expected) EU rating is on the box art in the infobox TomDæmon (talk) 12:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

IP vandalism

There is an IP vandal that keeps removing information about the game being released on Xbox 360. I've warned him but I don't know if he'll stop. Thoughts? ӣicҟin\\talk with me\\\\\\\\\\ 16:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

virus

The north american site, as of this writing, has a set of malware viruses on it. Temporarly disable it, please, until/unless they get it cleaned up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.149.131.242 (talk) 03:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

PS3 and Xbox 360 Differences Announced

"Square Enix has just confirmed a couple of differences between the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 release of Final Fantasy XIII. In an interview in Famitsu they state that the video and audio is compressed on the Xbox 360 DVDs while the Playstation 3 version will be uncompressed and appear on a dual-layer blu-ray disc. The 360 version will obviously be released on multiple DVDs. This means that the uncompressed game will be 25GB minimum."

Source: http://finalfantasy-xiii.net/2009/12/09/final-fantasy-xiii-ps3-and-360-differences-announced.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.121.84 (talk) 05:19, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

As much as I would love this to be true so that the PS3 has a version that uses it's full potential, I've tried this link several times with and without the stuff on the end and with and without a www. at the beginning and still doesn't work. I would not add this as this is a pretty big piece of information and the source is unreliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilgannon2113 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Weird. Because this link has never failed whenever I click on it. And I find it dubious to think that this is unreliable when the same thing is said from different more reliable sources, although they are in Japanese, so it's hard to source here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.19.150 (talk) 04:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's another link, although it mentions Famitsu as its source, which is a paid Japanese magazine. http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/ps3xbox-360-final-fantasy-xiii-differences-confirmed--758.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.19.150 (talk) 04:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The Game has been officially released in Japan

I think it's time to update that bit :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.120.71.176 (talk) 17:24, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Famitsu Magazine Score

I think the reception section of this game should be established as there has already been a company that rated this game :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.120.71.176 (talk) 06:06, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Electronic Theatre review poor quality or fake?

The Electronic Theatre review seems to be either fake, or an early impression attempted to be passed off as a completed review. The review was posted on the 18th (in the UK, no less), supposedly a retail copy. Quotes from the review seem to suggest that the game was either played very little, or not played at all (ie. written after watching online streams or collecting factual information and impressions online).

I can provide examples if necessary. I understand that this is a bit of an iffy issue, but it's not just a matter of my opinion on the game differing from theirs, so much as the review states things that would appear factually incorrect. Those factually disparate statements, coupled with the speed of the review, is dubious.

An attempt to submit the review at the website N4G was debunked by the community as fake: [8] . Thoughts?Superbeltway (talk) 09:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Merchandise

Elixir and perfume sources for a future FA push, guys. :D Cheers, Axem Titanium (talk) 09:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Music

Please stop attempting to revert the Music translations. The new versions that I have put up are either there due to Square Enix's English text in game, decreased the awkwardness of the translations, or fixed the meanings themselves.Requiem of Birth and Birth are much more preferred translations as they are more simple, concise, and easy to understand in English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.183.157 (talk) 09:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Paul Scholes?

Paul Scholes as Sazh? I don't think so. This might be a joke by somebody, it says nothing about this on his page nor can I find any reliable links. Someone should take it down until this is confirmed or falsified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krisweddle (talk • contribs) 01:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Previews

Hi guys, I realise a couple of people keep removing the sourced comments by for instance, Wired, reflecting what has been well-commented on by those who played the game about its linearity, including lack of shops and so on. This really does need to be noted because as the articles state these are areas that reflect a marked change in the series' usual style and as such are of note in an encyclopedic article. The fact remains that the reliable sources that have been removed from the section have played the Japanese release and have comments to make on it - despite not giving it a full review - and so this falls under the category of the game's "Reception". Cheers. 62.56.113.249 (talk) 01:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I didn't make those changes, but it makes sense to remove them. Previews are incomplete, partial impressions, and so even if what they express is generally true, it still can't really be counted as reception. There is nothing that the previews are saying that won't be expressed as more reviews trickle in. For example, RPG Fan just recently posted their import review, addressing the concerns about linearity and changes in this iteration. Superbeltway (talk) 05:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I updated someone who wrote about a French complete review by Gamekult.com and someone removed it. Anyway, by looking at the reception section, I get the feeling some people remove any negative comment about the game and just keep the good ones. Linearity or something else, I think it would be easy to find negative aspects of the game that have been noted in full reviews (though it's not reviews from IGN or GameSpot...) From my point of view this looks like some fans want to sell their long awaited game despite some relatively bad reviews by influencing people on this section of the article. --BahaFura (talk) 16:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Agreed - someone has just modified the Play.TM review to take out the review score and the reason for it as seen in the reference. Please keep an eye out and make sure that the reception section is balanced. 62.56.116.179 (talk) 16:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Quick reminder that personal opinions on the reviewer aren't relevant, so the play.tm review should stay in. For further reference, the reviewer is fluent in Japanese ([9]) so language is not an issue. 62.56.116.179 (talk) 02:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Sazh Katzroy

It says under Sazh Katzroy's entry in the Playable Character section that "Sazh is a cool black dude with a 'fro whom Lightning knows from her time serving in the military".

Now while I don't doubt his blackness or his coolness, perhaps there can be a more refined way to phrase that? I'd suggest African American, but obviously there is no America or Africa in FF13. Perhaps 'dark skinned' man with a 'likable personality' featuring a 'distinctive Afro haircut'?

Plus, I'm not sure its even necessary to have a topic about this, but "cool black dude with a 'fro" stood out at me when I read it, so... what say you? 68.2.243.121 (talk) 18:21, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hecatoncheir

The article states that the Hecatoncheir is a newcomer to the Final Fantasy series. This is incorrect, as is has appeared once before in the third installment. Should I simply delete it, or do I also have to cite something else? Or could someone else fix this? Alex.liu064 (talk) 18:27, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps it's meant that Hecatoncheir is a new summon to the series; in Final Fantasy III, it was merely a boss with little storyline significance. 146.151.103.217 (talk) 22:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)