Alternate Plot Interpretation

[Neo Bahamut]

I'm still not sure I'd say it doesn't work, but that's a good place to stop, at least for now.

There are other aspects of the game, though. For instance, the origins of Chaos & Cosmos, whether it comes before or after FFI, & what happens to Garland at the end of it all.

On a tangent, why exactly does Cloud say Firion looks like Zack, anyway? They don't even look like they're from the same continent.

 

[Ryushikaze]

The specific creation of Cosmos and Chaos absolutely doesn't matter to the plot. No, seriously, the plot doesn't give a categorical shit about that. Nor is it a major failing of the game not to explain that.

Before, or after- both. The nature of a timeloop, natch. As for whether the timeloop is severed or it's one left to go, again, it doesn't really matter either way, but it's more likely that it's been severed. WoL has battled Chaos and lived. Previously in the loops, he hadn't, as Chaos says in FF1.

As for why Cloud says Firion looks like Zack, it's because they act similarly, have similar focus on dreams, and all that good stuff.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

The specific creation of Cosmos and Chaos absolutely doesn't matter to the plot.

You seem to think everything is unimportant to the plot.

No, seriously, the plot doesn't give a categorical shit about that. Nor is it a major failing of the game not to explain that.

I think you're wrong on both accounts, as I think the game does explain the origin of both of them.

As for why Cloud says Firion looks like Zack, it's because they act similarly, have similar focus on dreams, and all that good stuff.

That all really has nothing to do with looks.

 

[Ryushikaze]

You seem to think everything is unimportant to the plot.

I think the plot is important to the plot. I think you think things totally unrelated to the plot are absolutely vital.

I think you're wrong on both accounts, as I think the game does explain the origin of both of them.

You think the game DOES give a shit and explains their specific origin and that this is a failing? Also, not to be too horribly pedantic, but the phrase is 'on both counts', not 'accounts.'
But now you've made a claim- the game specifically details the origin of both.
Please, do elaborate and substantiate this claim. For both individuals.

That all really has nothing to do with looks.

And yet, that's the most sense you're going to get out of the translation- the original line 'You remind me of a friend' was far more straightforward.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

I think the plot is important to the plot.

Apples are similar to apples, right? And redundancy is so redundantly redundant.

I think you think things totally unrelated to the plot are absolutely vital.

I think this is a prime example of bias.

You think the game DOES give a shit and explains their specific origin and that this is a failing?

No. You're taking my transition sentence too literally. Although it obviously gives a shit if it takes the time to explain it, it wouldn't necessarily be a failing if it didn't.

Also, not to be too horribly pedantic, but the phrase is 'on both counts', not 'accounts.'

Whatever.

But now you've made a claim- the game specifically details the origin of both.
Please, do elaborate and substantiate this claim. For both individuals.

http://degosroleplaying.aceboard.com/231338-10678-9029-0-Plot-Dissidia.htm

"What's the Deal with the Chaos/Cosmos Reports?" Pretty much just up until the first quote is the relevent portion. I will say ahead of time that there is a slight hole in the information. I'm working on patching that up.

And yet, that's the most sense you're going to get out of the translation- the original line 'You remind me of a friend' was far more straightforward.

Yeah, I thought it might've been botched.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

What are the odds you guys are going to get along before this thread's over?

I'm still not sure I'd say it doesn't work, but that's a good place to stop, at least for now.

There are other aspects of the game, though. For instance, the origins of Chaos & Cosmos, whether it comes before or after FFI, & what happens to Garland at the end of it all.

I'll look at the Ultimania scans that Mako made and see if any of this is addressed in more detail than we currently have.

As for whether the timeloop is severed or it's one left to go, again, it doesn't really matter either way, but it's more likely that it's been severed. WoL has battled Chaos and lived. Previously in the loops, he hadn't, as Chaos says in FF1.

I often wonder if the Warriors of Light in FFI had ever fought Chaos and died. Honestly, I'm not sure I think they ever fought him until the occasion where they defeated him.

I say this because they had to kill the Four Fiends in the Chaos Shrine in order to get to him -- and if the Fiends were killed in the past before Garland could send them to the future, they wouldn't exist in the present to perform actions vital to the time loop.

That's actually one of the primary reasons I believe that Dissidia is a prequel to the events of FFI. I believe the Warrior of Light we see in Dissidia didn't have his crystal shard until the events of Dissidia were over, and, thus, when he and the other three warriors went on their adventure prior to the events of FFI, at best they defeated the Four Fiends in the present, but then never traveled to the past to break the time loop -- due, of course, to the lack of the blue crystal shard.

Anyway, whatever Dissidia's place in time relative to FFI's events, some anomaly came along that produced a variable significant enough to alter the time loop. I think Dissidia must have been that anomaly, with the blue crystal shard most likely being that variable.

Of course, FFI's story is itself an anomaly, made all the more confusing now due to Dissidia adding the detail that the Warriors of Light don't have any memories of who they are.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

What are the odds you guys are going to get along before this thread's over?

That's a complicated question. The simple answer to which is that, right now, I'm not exactly fighting with him.

Of course, FFI's story is itself an anomaly, made all the more confusing now due to Dissidia adding the detail that the Warriors of Light don't have any memories of who they are.

Here's what I think. Now, bear with me, I have FF1, but I haven't started it yet. And I wanted FFII, anyway. But I digress:

Dissidia needn't have produced an anomaly. If a timeframe is repeated enough times & it can change at all, then it probably will. There is also something in the game about the Fire Fiend--Marlith, I think its name is--being awakened ahead of schedule. That implies that minor events in the timeline can change for no apparent reason.

From there, it becomes Chaos Theory. If a minor event changes, it changes the entire timeline from that point. For instance, without all of the Fiends defeated, they could not have travelled back in time. If Marlith was not supposed to awaken for another couple of centuries, then they could not have beaten it.

Now, I don't know whether the Warriors of Light ever fought Chaos, but I honestly have a hard time believing that the crystal Warrior of Light has is an elemental crystal in the first place. It isn't impossible, but the crystals just took forms significant to the ones who obtained them. I don't necessarily believe that Terra's crystal is magicite--a distinctly chaotic object--let alone Maduin's, for instance.

Besides, if the Warriors of Light had to fight in the War of the Gods to get their crystals, then how did the other 3 get theirs?

I also have to wonder how Garland ended up serving in Cornelia's military & whether or not he still had his memories at that point or, indeed, how he lost them. I suppose Dissidia could explain at least that, if dying causes one to lose their memories.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Here's what I think. Now, bear with me, I have FF1, but I haven't started it yet. And I wanted FFII, anyway. But I digress:

Dissidia needn't have produced an anomaly. If a timeframe is repeated enough times & it can change at all, then it probably will. There is also something in the game about the Fire Fiend--Marlith, I think its name is--being awakened ahead of schedule. That implies that minor events in the timeline can change for no apparent reason.

From there, it becomes Chaos Theory. If a minor event changes, it changes the entire timeline from that point. For instance, without all of the Fiends defeated, they could not have travelled back in time. If Marlith was not supposed to awaken for another couple of centuries, then they could not have beaten it.

Naw dude, it was the Warriors of Light killing Lich, that disturbed Marilith and caused her to awaken 200 years ahead of schedule. The change in the time-loop then, was caused by the direct action of the Warriors of Light, not a hiccup in the timeline.

Now, I don't know whether the Warriors of Light ever fought Chaos, but I honestly have a hard time believing that the crystal Warrior of Light has is an elemental crystal in the first place. It isn't impossible, but the crystals just took forms significant to the ones who obtained them. I don't necessarily believe that Terra's crystal is magicite--a distinctly chaotic object--let alone Maduin's, for instance.

You only have to look at the ending of Dissidia, which heavily implies that the opening of FF1 is about to take place, to see that yeah, its kinda hitting you with the fact that FF1 is the next part of the plot. Also, the Cosmos Reports pretty much confirm that the coming of the Warriors of Light had yet to happen, at least, in terms of FF1's time frame. This isn't after FF1, this is before.

Besides, if the Warriors of Light had to fight in the War of the Gods to get their crystals, then how did the other 3 get theirs?

That's a mystery. We have no clue at all what trials or tribulations the warriors went through to find their crystals, but we know what the lead WoL went through. That's what's shown in Dissidia.

I also have to wonder how Garland ended up serving in Cornelia's military & whether or not he still had his memories at that point or, indeed, how he lost them. I suppose Dissidia could explain at least that, if dying causes one to lose their memories.

I'd say he'd have some of his memories since he still is aware of the fact he's caught in a time loop, and is enacting his/Chaos's plan to live forever, etc. He probably lost some of though since, yes, he did die.

 

[Ryushikaze]

Apples are similar to apples, right? And redundancy is so redundantly redundant.

And taking things out of context, in this case, the second part of the reply, to respond to them, is a strawman.

I think this is a prime example of bias.

And I think people in glass houses should not throw stones.

No. You're taking my transition sentence too literally. Although it obviously gives a shit if it takes the time to explain it, it wouldn't necessarily be a failing if it didn't.

So, I should take 'You're wrong on both counts' figuratively? I had two parts to the sentence, the game really doesn't care, and it's not a failing. Those are my two 'counts'

Whatever.

When our argument as a whole is roughly what words and phrases mean, getting words and phrases correct is more than a 'whatever.'

http://degosroleplaying.aceboard.com/231338-10678-9029-0-Plot-Dissidia.htm

"What's the Deal with the Chaos/Cosmos Reports?" Pretty much just up until the first quote is the relevent portion. I will say ahead of time that there is a slight hole in the information. I'm working on patching that up.

The clone of Cid's wide was made to control Garland. It is not Cosmos, and nothing says it becomes her. Garland was the being created from Chaos, and his creation is detailed long before the Cid's wife Clone is made. Cid also had NOTHING to do with cloning his wife, as he and his wife were in prison at the time, and yet Cid is the one who speaks of creating the being of harmony. So, no, Cosmos cannot be CWC.
As for Chaos, he is described first as being a being, and then a being being created to utilize power he wasn't using being created.

Yeah, I thought it might've been botched.

Some, but it's the difference between 'you look like' and 'I see in you,'

What are the odds you guys are going to get along before this thread's over?

Likely nil.

I'll look at the Ultimania scans that Mako made and see if any of this is addressed in more detail than we currently have.

I often wonder if the Warriors of Light in FFI had ever fought Chaos and died. Honestly, I'm not sure I think they ever fought him until the occasion where they defeated him.

I say this because they had to kill the Four Fiends in the Chaos Shrine in order to get to him -- and if the Fiends were killed in the past before Garland could send them to the future, they wouldn't exist in the present to perform actions vital to the time loop.

That's actually one of the primary reasons I believe that Dissidia is a prequel to the events of FFI. I believe the Warrior of Light we see in Dissidia didn't have his crystal shard until the events of Dissidia were over, and, thus, when he and the other three warriors went on their adventure prior to the events of FFI, at best they defeated the Four Fiends in the present, but then never traveled to the past to break the time loop -- due, of course, to the lack of the blue crystal shard.

Well, true. Chaos doesn't say he killed them, but he does say they died on every previous turn. Perhaps they just died at the fiends each prior turn.

Anyway, whatever Dissidia's place in time relative to FFI's events, some anomaly came along that produced a variable significant enough to alter the time loop. I think Dissidia must have been that anomaly, with the blue crystal shard most likely being that variable.

Could be. I sort of view Dissidia as a different version of the final conflict.

Of course, FFI's story is itself an anomaly, made all the more confusing now due to Dissidia adding the detail that the Warriors of Light don't have any memories of who they are.

In part, that makes me think at least part of the FF1 cycle has gone by, what with WoL knowing Garland as well as he does, despite the amnesia of cycles, indicating they knew each other beforehand- hence 'knock you all down' has happened at least.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

Naw dude, it was the Warriors of Light killing Lich, that disturbed Marilith and caused her to awaken 200 years ahead of schedule. The change in the time-loop then, was caused by the direct action of the Warriors of Light, not a hiccup in the timeline.

They aren't mutually exclusive. The fact is that if Marlith was supposed to wake up 200 years ahead of time & it didn't, well, that implies a change in the timeline.

You only have to look at the ending of Dissidia, which heavily implies that the opening of FF1 is about to take place, to see that yeah, its kinda hitting you with the fact that FF1 is the next part of the plot.

I look at the ending of Dissidia & see 3 things:

1. A reference to the original game.
2. Warrior of Light is heading back to Cornelia after finally achieving victory.
3. Warrior of Light is just beginning his mission.

The last 2 are mutually exclusive, but pretty much equally possible.

Also, the Cosmos Reports pretty much confirm that the coming of the Warriors of Light had yet to happen, at least, in terms of FF1's time frame. This isn't after FF1, this is before.

No they don't. Think about the very nature of a report. It will stay in-tact even if it isn't found until long after the relevent events have happened. Unless it's destroyed by the elements...whatever. You get my point.

That's a mystery. We have no clue at all what trials or tribulations the warriors went through to find their crystals, but we know what the lead WoL went through. That's what's shown in Dissidia.

No. We don't. You're seeing that he obtains a crystal & coming to the conclusion that he's obtaining his elemental crystal. You don't "know" that. It's an inference.

I'd say he'd have some of his memories since he still is aware of the fact he's caught in a time loop, and is enacting his/Chaos's plan to live forever, etc. He probably lost some of though since, yes, he did die.

Is he? He only demonstrates knowledge of the time loop when you travel into the past. There's also another fact here that threatens the interpretation that Dissidia came before FF1: Garland & the Warriors of Light don't seem to know each other. In fact, I'm told they're surprised to see him still alive in the past.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

And taking things out of context,

What are you talking about?

in this case, the second part of the reply, to respond to them, is a strawman.

That implies that it was an argument, which it wasn't. Of course, I could easily turn it into one. It would not be a straw man, either. It would be pointing out that you have yet to give any criteria for what is/not important to the plot, so it's basically "whatever I say is important."

So, I should take 'You're wrong on both counts' figuratively? I had two parts to the sentence, the game really doesn't care, and it's not a failing. Those are my two 'counts'

The sentence was a bit awkward, I admit, but you were supposed to focus on the 2nd half. As I said: It was a transition sentence. Its purpose was to transition into the next topic.

I'm just elaborating since you've raised an objection. That's all.

When our argument as a whole is roughly what words and phrases mean, getting words and phrases correct is more than a 'whatever.'

Disregard the fact that a common phrase has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with my argument....

The clone of Cid's wide was made to control Garland.

A being to control a being of discord. A being of harmony to control discord, as it were.

It is not Cosmos, and nothing says it becomes her.

Not explicitly, no.

Garland was the being created from Chaos, and his creation is detailed long before the Cid's wife Clone is made.

Cid mentions using the power of discord more & more before he had created the being of harmony. The only experiment that's mentioned in this regard is Garland. Applying Occam's Razor to this, that would mean that the being of harmony was made after Garland.

Cid also had NOTHING to do with cloning his wife, as he and his wife were in prison at the time, and yet Cid is the one who speaks of creating the being of harmony.

He would have most likely contributed to the clone's ascension.

So, no, Cosmos cannot be CWC.

1. CWC?
2. Cannot be or probably is not? I think that's an important distinction to make. I, of course, think that neither is the case, but still.

As for Chaos, he is described first as being a being, and then a being being created to utilize power he wasn't using being created.

Where?

Likely nil.

Is that a jab at me or an admission that you don't like me?

Well, true. Chaos doesn't say he killed them, but he does say they died on every previous turn. Perhaps they just died at the fiends each prior turn.

See, all I really know of that last scene is:

Warriors of Light: !
Garland: 2000 years in the future, you killed me.
*Fight.*

Could be. I sort of view Dissidia as a different version of the final conflict.

That's a possibility I really hadn't considered. Would that necessitate a parallel universe?

 

[Makoeyes987]

They aren't mutually exclusive. The fact is that if Marlith was supposed to wake up 200 years ahead of time & it didn't, well, that implies a change in the timeline.

You're attributing the change to something wholly different though. The fact that she woke up early was because of the newfound intervention of the Warriors of Light, in the timeloop where they finally managed to change destiny. It's completely caused by the fact that they were able to defeat the Fiend of the Earth. She says so, herself.

Which in turn would imply that, if Dissidia was before FF1, that it was the catalyst that allowed the timeloop of FF1 to be severed.

I look at the ending of Dissidia & see 3 things:

1. A reference to the original game.
2. Warrior of Light is heading back to Cornelia after finally achieving victory.
3. Warrior of Light is just beginning his mission.

The last 2 are mutually exclusive, but pretty much equally possible.

It's all three, if by "mission", you mean, the beginning of his quest that is shown in FF1.

No they don't. Think about the very nature of a report. It will stay in-tact even if it isn't found until long after the relevent events have happened. Unless it's destroyed by the elements...whatever. You get my point.

...Well in terms of when they were written, they were written before the Warriors of Light had come to be. Which would then imply that the conflict of Dissidia happened after that. And then going by Dissidia's ending, the start of FF1 would then be next in that sequence of events. Because the Cosmos Reports certainly weren't written during FF1's time. Dissidia even calls the reports secrets that shed light in the backstory on the nature of the conflict, in the Museum.

No. We don't. You're seeing that he obtains a crystal & coming to the conclusion that he's obtaining his elemental crystal. You don't "know" that. It's an inference.

It's a pretty damn logical one, given that the Dissidia Ultimania compares the ending of Dissidia to the exact opening of FF1, and Dissidia's story is directly connected to FF1's plot line by its very nature. The crystal Warrior of Light is holding is the exact same crystal he is shown walking into Cornelia with at the beginning of FF1. He's back in his own world. Dissidia's conflict is heavily rooted in the beginnings of the conflict of FF1.

Is he? He only demonstrates knowledge of the time loop when you travel into the past. There's also another fact here that threatens the interpretation that Dissidia came before FF1: Garland & the Warriors of Light don't seem to know each other. In fact, I'm told they're surprised to see him still alive in the past.

Garland knows WoL, it's WoL who doesn't really know Garland in Dissidia. And that makes sense because due to the time loop's repetition, WoL wouldn't fully know or be able to stop Chaos's plot, because after he defeats the rogue knight in the Chaos Shrine at the beginning of the story, the timeloop would begin, everything would be reset due to the Elemental Fiends resurrecting and destroying the world, and thus WoL would be back again, trying to save the princess, and fighting Garland only to either lose or kill him, and then end up dying as the world was destroyed once more. The time loop has more or less repeated until FF1's plot happens that allows for the Warriors of Light to overcome their fate and defeat all of the Elemental Fiends.

I don't know what you mean, regarding Garland not knowing the Warriors of Light in FF1. He calls them by name and expects them to come try and stop him. There's no surprise at all. Furthermore, the Warriors of Light don't speak, so I'm not sure how you can say they were surprised or anything.

....And are you still implying that Cosmos is a clone of Cid's wife?

 

[Neo Bahamut]

Which in turn would imply that, if Dissidia was before FF1, that it was the catalyst that allowed the timeloop of FF1 to be severed.

Let's not forget that Dissidia came out like what, 20 years after the original Final Fantasy? Nothing in FF1's plot definitely implies that Dissidia was necessary.

It's all three, if by "mission", you mean, the beginning of his quest that is shown in FF1.

...It can't be all 3! He can't come back from successfully breaking the loop then go out to break it!

...Well in terms of when they were written, they were written before the Warriors of Light had come to be. Which would then imply that the conflict of Dissidia happened after that.

But not before the events of FFI.

And then going by Dissidia's ending, the start of FF1 would then be next in that sequence of events.

Dissidia's ending does not clearly prove anything.

It's a pretty damn logical one, given that the Dissidia Ultimania compares the ending of Dissidia to the exact opening of FF1, and Dissidia's story is directly connected to FF1's plot line by its very nature.

How many times do I have to point out that the Dissidia Ultimania lists references to the original games? It doesn't necessarily mean anything.

I don't know what you mean, regarding Garland not knowing the Warriors of Light in FF1. He calls them by name and expects them to come try and stop him.

Even so, I don't see how you can say that he's clearly enacting his plan. He...says that he wants to rule Cornelia.

There's no surprise at all. Furthermore, the Warriors of Light don't speak, so I'm not sure how you can say they were surprised or anything.

From what I was told, there is an icon demonstrating surprise when they find out that Garland is still alive.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Let's not forget that Dissidia came out like what, 20 years after the original Final Fantasy? Nothing in FF1's plot definitely implies that Dissidia was necessary.

Yeah, but nothing implies the exact catalyst of FF1's time loop changing in the original story, like Dissidia does, either.

...It can't be all 3! He can't come back from successfully breaking the loop then go out to break it!

I thought you meant achieving victory in the conflict of Dissidia. Since that too was a conflict he had won. Dissidia itself is a loop of death and rebirth as well.

But not before the events of FFI.

Why are the events of Dissidia not before FFI? What is your exact reasoning for this?

Dissidia's ending does not clearly prove anything.

Actually it does, in black and white text. If the creators made a direct comparison and recreation of the beginning sequence of FF1, and then call it out as a link to the original story of FF1, then it doesn't take anything more than connecting the dots to their common sense conclusion. Dissidia's story is FF1's story. The sequence of the ending of Dissidia, is the opening of FF1's story.

How many times do I have to point out that the Dissidia Ultimania lists references to the original games? It doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Why do they not mean anything? The references are in regards to its very story. Easter eggs with no relevance to the plot are listed as such. They don't mean anything because you choose to dismiss them? The very fact that they confirm the fact that Garland and Chaos are one, and that the time loop connection between the two is also manifested and relevant to Dissidia's plot, is pretty damn telling that it "means something." I don't understand why you keep trying to dismiss the Ultimania in favor of every theory you come up with. It's ridiculous. If it didn't mean anything, and was just an easter egg, it'd be labeled as such or referred to as such in context.

Even so, I don't see how you can say that he's clearly enacting his plan. He...says that he wants to rule Cornelia.

So Garland doesn't lie in order to further his own schemes? It'd be pretty self-defeating for him to explain his entire plan and give them the clue to break the time loop.

From what I was told, there is an icon demonstrating surprise when they find out that Garland is still alive.

They were surprised to see him step out and confront them. To say that it was surprise that he was alive *period* when the Lufenians explained to them that they had to go back into the past and KILL Garland/Chaos, doesn't make sense, unless they have really short term memories.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

Yeah, but nothing implies the exact catalyst of FF1's time loop changing in the original story, like Dissidia does, either

This sentence doesn't even mean anything. It makes no sense gramatically.

Why are the events of Dissidia not before FFI? What is your exact reasoning for this?

The fact that the Cosmos Reports exist does not imply that Dissidia came before FF1. That's what I said.

To say that it was surprise that he was alive *period* when the Lufenians explained to them that they had to go back into the past and KILL Garland/Chaos, doesn't make sense, unless they have really short term memories.

Where do the Lufenians say that Garland was Chaos?

So Garland doesn't lie in order to further his own schemes? It'd be pretty self-defeating for him to explain his entire plan and give them the clue to break the time loop.

You said the fact that he was "clearly trying to further his time loop plot" was evidence that he had his memories. Since there IS no clear indication that that's what he was doing, that indication--which does not exist--is not evidence that he still has his memories. Especially when he says that he loses his memories after 2000 years.

Asserting that he lied about his plans is also nonsense, because the only proof you could give that he WAS lying is, "It's obvious that he was trying to create the time loop," which is just circular reasoning.

I don't understand why you keep trying to dismiss the Ultimania in favor of every theory you come up with. It's ridiculous.

The same goes with EVERY SINGLE REFERENCE being cited as irrefutible evidence to something. They're references! In Kingdom Hearts, it's said that Sephiroth was "once revered as a hero," but that doesn't mean Midgar is one of the worlds. It's said that he has a past with Cloud, but Aerith & Zack dying doesn't seem to be part of it. But, when I point this out, all I get is some handwave "it's different" bullshit.

No. It's not. "This thing that happens is similar to what happens in the original game" is pointing out a reference. If the FFIX Ultimania pointed out that Kuja kicking Garland to his death is similar to what Kefka did to Gestahl, it would not mean that Kuja & Kefka were hanging out in a bar one day & Kefka said to him, "You know what'd be a GREAT solution to your little android problem?"

 

[Makoeyes987]

This sentence doesn't even mean anything. It makes no sense gramatically.

Congratulations, now I can add grammar nazi to your list of faults.

I said, that nothing implies what the exact catalyst was, that made FF1's time loop severe. Like...Dissidia. There's nothing that explains why the loop finally ended.

The fact that the Cosmos Reports exist does not imply that Dissidia came before FF1. That's what I said.

The fact the Museum calls the reports a backstory to the events of Dissidia, however, does.

Where do the Lufenians say that Garland was Chaos?

Actually it was the Circle of Sages, my mistake.

You said the fact that he was "clearly trying to further his time loop plot" was evidence that he had his memories. Since there IS no clear indication that that's what he was doing, that indication--which does not exist--is not evidence that he still has his memories. Especially when he says that he loses his memories after 2000 years.

Asserting that he lied about his plans is also nonsense, because the only proof you could give that he WAS lying is, "It's obvious that he was trying to create the time loop," which is just circular reasoning.

.....Are you talking about his memories of Dissidia, or his memories of the time loop plot in FF1? I'm talking about his memories of Dissidia. Are you only referring to the memories of his future self?

The same goes with EVERY SINGLE REFERENCE being cited as irrefutible evidence to something. They're references! In Kingdom Hearts, it's said that Sephiroth was "once revered as a hero," but that doesn't mean Midgar is one of the worlds. It's said that he has a past with Cloud, but Aerith & Zack dying doesn't seem to be part of it. But, when I point this out, all I get is some handwave "it's different" bullshit.

Have you not the read the "references?" There's a difference between a reference like:

- Destiny Odyssey I-5 features a scene of Garland and Warrior of Light fighting, in which one of the poses the Warrior of Light makes is the same as the original NES game’s cover illustration by Yoshitaka Amano. Warrior of Light also makes this pose for his final attack in his EX-Burst.

Which is an OBVIOUS easter egg/design reference, or...a reference to the direct plot of the original game such as:

- In Shade Impulse C3-4, Garland says to Chaos that, “You are me.” This is because Garland and Chaos are one and the same. In FF1, after almost being defeated by the warriors of light, he travels back in time 2000 years and became Chaos in that era.

By common sense and context, they are NOT the same type of reference. The book is pretty damn clear when something is just an easter egg in terms of design, appearance, or cameo, and when its something that is actually relevant to the plot of Dissidia and its respective Final Fantasy. Each one IS different, and it doesn't take anything but context and an 8th grade reading comprehension to see the difference. You trying to lump them all together as "easter eggs" is your shallow attempt at discrediting any sort of canon declaration that would prove what you say as wrong.

No. It's not. "This thing that happens is similar to what happens in the original game" is pointing out a reference. If the FFIX Ultimania pointed out that Kuja kicking Garland to his death is similar to what Kefka did to Gestahl, it would not mean that Kuja & Kefka were hanging out in a bar one day & Kefka said to him, "You know what'd be a GREAT solution to your little android problem?"

Yeah, because the context makes it clear that its only denoting a similarity between two scenes of two different stories. It doesn't take anything but common sense to know when its listing a design recurrence and an actual connection between the two games.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

I said, that nothing implies what the exact catalyst was, that made FF1's time loop severe. Like...Dissidia. There's nothing that explains why the loop finally ended.

Are you saying that there's nothing that says why Dissidia's loop finally ended? Because there is. First of all, Dissidia is not a time loop. It is just a bunch of battles which, every time one ends, Shinryu restarts everything. It does not go the same way every time.

Second of all, the reason the conflict cycle ended was because of that "true death" shit.

The fact the Museum calls the reports a backstory to the events of Dissidia, however, does.

...No. It doesn't. The reports are the backstory of Dissidia. That doesn't mean FF1 didn't come between them.

Actually it was the Circle of Sages, my mistake.

Well, then, when do they do it?

.....Are you talking about his memories of Dissidia, or his memories of the time loop plot in FF1? I'm talking about his memories of Dissidia. Are you only referring to the memories of his future self?

I'm referring to his memories of FF1, but either works, I suppose.

By common sense and context, they are NOT the same type of reference

.

I'd say you're wrong, actually. The references are the same. However, there is other material besides that reference that indicates that Garland in Dissidia & Garland from FF1 are the same Garland, in the Reports. That's what proves the connection, not the reference.

You trying to lump them all together as "easter eggs" is your shallow attempt at discrediting any sort of canon declaration that would prove what you say as wrong.

First of all, I've never used the term "easter eggs." That term was used by--well, pretty much everyone else--in order to create an unnecessary distinction between the references.

Second of all, I'm going to re-enact how the rest of this argument is going to go:

Me: You're a mind reader now?
You: No, it's obvious what you're doing.
Me: The Hell it is.
You: It is. Every time someone brings up the Ultimania, you say that it's "just a reference."
Me: That's because every time someone brings up the Ultimania, it IS just a reference.
You: Which you say because you don't want to admit that you've been proven wrong.
Me: You haven't proven jack shit.
You: You just don't want to admit it.
Me: Ad hominem.
You: It isn't an ad hominem if it's true.
Me: It's true because you say it is, naturally.
You: No, it's true because you do it.
Me: *Finally stops responding because I'm sick of the "I'm so obviously right" crap.*

I'm so glad that we could skip over that bullshit, aren't you?

 

[Ryushikaze]

What are you talking about?

Things exactly like that.

That implies that it was an argument, which it wasn't. Of course, I could easily turn it into one. It would not be a straw man, either. It would be pointing out that you have yet to give any criteria for what is/not important to the plot, so it's basically "whatever I say is important."

I note you haven't given any evidence that things you say are important to the plot are actually important to them.
Or for the very specific reading of very loosely worded sentences that you have said mean X and not Y.

The sentence was a bit awkward, I admit, but you were supposed to focus on the 2nd half. As I said: It was a transition sentence. Its purpose was to transition into the next topic.

Transitions are supposed to make sense. Somehow, I get the feeling this is endemic of a lot of problems here.

I'm just elaborating since you've raised an objection. That's all.

I 'objected' because you didn't make sense.

Disregard the fact that a common phrase has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with my argument....

I never said it did. I said the meaning of phrases is at heart, what all this shit is about, so one should take care to get them correct and using them correctly.

A being to control a being of discord. A being of harmony to control discord, as it were.

The Clone was not made by Cid. It cannot be the being Cid created.

Not explicitly, no.

Not at all.

Cid mentions using the power of discord more & more before he had created the being of harmony. The only experiment that's mentioned in this regard is Garland. Applying Occam's Razor to this, that would mean that the being of harmony was made after Garland.

No. Cid mentions the country ASKED HIM to find a way to strengthen it, to use it more and more, but that the BEING with the power to control it had no desire to use it more than necessary, so the country culled his memories to create the being to control it, CID did this. CID did not create a clone of his wife. Hence, it cannot refer to the clone.

He would have most likely contributed to the clone's ascension.

Which you claim based on, what?

1. CWC?
2. Cannot be or probably is not? I think that's an important distinction to make. I, of course, think that neither is the case, but still.

Cid's Wife's Clone.
Cannot. Cosmos and Chaos ruled together long ago, before Chaos was culled to create Garland.

Where?

Chaos Report 1. 'Wanted to destroy no more than was necessary' so the country created a being culled from his own memories to control him.
Chaos Report 2. Cid created this being.
Garland is such a being, he was created from Chaos, he IS Chaos and Chaos is him.

Is that a jab at me or an admission that you don't like me?

Neither. But it's telling.

See, all I really know of that last scene is:

Warriors of Light: !
Garland: 2000 years in the future, you killed me.
*Fight.*

You should really play FF1. Knife to a gunfight and all that.

That's a possibility I really hadn't considered. Would that necessitate a parallel universe?

No. It would take place post battle with Garchaos in the temple of the fiends, but before the ending. It would be Garchaos's last ditch effort to make himself retroactively more powerful.

This sentence doesn't even mean anything. It makes no sense gramatically.

Actually, it does make sense. The catalyst that changed the events of FF1 to be different than 'before' wasn't evident in FF1, but elements that would change things are present in FF1.

The fact that the Cosmos Reports exist does not imply that Dissidia came before FF1. That's what I said.

This is true, technically, it cannot come 'after' FF1, since there'd be no prophecy in the timeloop broken existence.

Asserting that he lied about his plans is also nonsense, because the only proof you could give that he WAS lying is, "It's obvious that he was trying to create the time loop," which is just circular reasoning.

The same goes with EVERY SINGLE REFERENCE being cited as irrefutible evidence to something. They're references! In Kingdom Hearts, it's said that Sephiroth was "once revered as a hero," but that doesn't mean Midgar is one of the worlds. It's said that he has a past with Cloud, but Aerith & Zack dying doesn't seem to be part of it. But, when I point this out, all I get is some handwave "it's different" bullshit.

Because all that is different. Sephiroth very well could be a former hero with a past with Cloud in the KH universe without it having anything to do with Zack etc.
It doesn't, however, treat that Sephiroth or any of the other FF characters as in any way the originals.

No. It's not. "This thing that happens is similar to what happens in the original game" is pointing out a reference. If the FFIX Ultimania pointed out that Kuja kicking Garland to his death is similar to what Kefka did to Gestahl, it would not mean that Kuja & Kefka were hanging out in a bar one day & Kefka said to him, "You know what'd be a GREAT solution to your little android problem?"

That's not the same analogy. This isn't saying 'is like' 'is a reference' or 'resembles', the Ultimania says 'Kuja was XYZ and Did ABC in IX. In Dissidia, He...'

You're trying to say that all of this is nothing more than going 'hey, look at the similarities' but it's not doing that. It's treating the characters from the games as the same as from dissidia.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Are you saying that there's nothing that says why Dissidia's loop finally ended? Because there is. First of all, Dissidia is not a time loop. It is just a bunch of battles which, every time one ends, Shinryu restarts everything. It does not go the same way every time.

Second of all, the reason the conflict cycle ended was because of that "true death" shit.

No, I'm talking about the time loop of FF1. We don't know why the time loop finally got cut by the Warriors of Light.

...No. It doesn't. The reports are the backstory of Dissidia. That doesn't mean FF1 didn't come between them.

Okay. So when the Cosmos Reports, which you have now agreed to be the backstory of Dissidia, say:

I see... Thank you.
I give my word that we will keep the
history you have allowed me to record
in confidence.

...Lukahn, if you would allow me to ask you a
question for once?

The ones of whom you have prophesied, the
four Warriors of Light... You say they will save
the world from disaster. Will warriors bearing
the crystals truly appear?

It is true men call me a sage, but in truth
I am a historian. The omen echoes from
worlds that have been and worlds that
will be.

The Warriors of Light will most certainly
appear.

And with them, this world-no, the
people of this world-can finally be
freed from this endless cycle of death
and rebirth.

..It makes sense to place Dissidia's plot AFTER Final Fantasy's? The reports state that the Warriors of Light have yet to appear...that they have not yet saved the world from the Fiends and Chaos. It hasn't happened yet.

In Dissidia, Garland is still chained to the cycle of time and tied to Chaos. He has not been freed from the time loop of FF1 and defeated.

So..how does it make sense that Dissidia is after FF1?

Well, then, when do they do it?

You really should play the game, dude. It happens after defeating Tiamat at the Floating Fortress.

I'm referring to his memories of FF1, but either works, I suppose.

In regards to his memories of FF1, yeah, his memories would be gone. The whole time loop reseting and basically putting his future self (which is unaware of the plot of Chaos) in the same situation to be defeated by the Warriors of Light, so that the Four Fiends can send him back to the past and lay ruin to the world from the past, thus allowing him to exist eternally, would be the entire scheme. Chaos/Garland of the past would need to ensure that the Garland of the future doesn't do anything to break the cycle, and would thus have him be ignorant of what purpose he was serving.

.

I'd say you're wrong, actually. The references are the same. However, there is other material besides that reference that indicates that Garland in Dissidia & Garland from FF1 are the same Garland, in the Reports. That's what proves the connection, not the reference.

The Ultimania is LISTING the references that ARE confirmed by the game itself. That's what the whole section is about! It's confirming and reaffirming what's already IN the game. For each "reference" that connects Dissidia with each numerical Final Fantasy, there are other in game materials that exist as well. So of course there'd be proof. So...what are you talking about? The Dissidia isn't just making shit up that wasn't in the game.

First of all, I've never used the term "easter eggs." That term was used by--well, pretty much everyone else--in order to create an unnecessary distinction between the references.

Second of all, I'm going to re-enact how the rest of this argument is going to go:

Me: You're a mind reader now?
You: No, it's obvious what you're doing.
Me: The Hell it is.
You: It is. Every time someone brings up the Ultimania, you say that it's "just a reference."
Me: That's because every time someone brings up the Ultimania, it IS just a reference.
You: Which you say because you don't want to admit that you've been proven wrong.
Me: You haven't proven jack shit.
You: You just don't want to admit it.
Me: Ad hominem.
You: It isn't an ad hominem if it's true.
Me: It's true because you say it is, naturally.
You: No, it's true because you do it.
Me: *Finally stops responding because I'm sick of the "I'm so obviously right" crap.*

I'm so glad that we could skip over that bullshit, aren't you?

Great job posting completely unrelated bullshit.

What you're saying each reference the Dissidia Ultimania lists, would be basically easter eggs. No, you didn't use that word, but that's the meaning you conveyed. You've stated that the Ultimania lists a bunch of easter eggs and cameos in the game that have no real contextual or storyline significance. They're just "easter eggs." It doesn't matter that you didn't use that exact term.

I'm disagreeing because the Ultimania does NOT just list easter eggs. They list direct plot points that link the storyline proper of each respective FF to the actual plot of Dissidia. From Cloud's grief and loss he felt after FFVII, to Firion's remembrance to all the people who died in FFII from war. Those aren't just 'easter eggs.' Those are direct nods of continuity that reference the past events of the characters.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

Things exactly like that.

Yeah. That cleared everything right up.

I note you haven't given any evidence that things you say are important to the plot are actually important to them.

Except that part where I explained, quite clearly, how everything I mentioned was backstory information, & therefore quite important to the plot.

Just because you don't read, it doesn't mean I'm a hypocrite.

I 'objected' because you didn't make sense.

And I've explained, so we can move on.

No. Cid mentions the country ASKED HIM to find a way to strengthen it, to use it more and more, but that the BEING with the power to control it had no desire to use it more than necessary,

"Use it more & more" implies that it was used once.

so the country culled his memories to create the being to control it, CID did this. CID did not create a clone of his wife. Hence, it cannot refer to the clone.

Wait a second. It's as you said. The text says that the COUNTRY culled the being's memories. Going by your logic, it can't be Garland, because Cid does not say that he did it.

Which you claim based on, what?

If Chaos did not exist until Garland turned into him, then something similar must have happened with Cosmos.

It's a hypothetical syllogism. If the first part is proven, then the second part follows.

Cannot. Cosmos and Chaos ruled together long ago, before Chaos was culled to create Garland.

Or did they? The line I see justifying this is the one about the being wielding the power of discord not wanting to destroy more than necessary. If that line refers to Garland, then that logic is invalid.

Neither. But it's telling.

What is telling of what?

You should really play FF1. Knife to a gunfight and all that.

I'm so sorry that I haven't beaten FF1 before I even owned it.

Are you even aware of how ridiculous your "knife to a gunfight" remark is? You're suggesting that I should have foreseen this argument ahead of time, went out, & played FF1--let alone beat it before this even came up.

When the argument strays to other games, you'll probably utter the same line.

Does it occur to you that most people don't play every game in a series the second they get the chance just in case an argument about it comes up?

No. It would take place post battle with Garchaos in the temple of the fiends, but before the ending. It would be Garchaos's last ditch effort to make himself retroactively more powerful.

So, in other words, he shatters the world after being beaten?You're trying to say that all of this is nothing more than going 'hey, look at the similarities' but it's not doing that. It's treating the characters from the games as the same as from dissidia.

So has been claimed over & over again, & so is still not true.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

No, I'm talking about the time loop of FF1. We don't know why the time loop finally got cut by the Warriors of Light.

Then I stand by my earlier remark: Your sentence made no sense. Your new sentences to explain the sentence that made no sense also make no sense.

Okay. So when the Cosmos Reports, which you have now agreed to be the backstory of Dissidia, say:

I've always said they were the backstory of Dissidia. Not once have I said they weren't.

The reports state that the Warriors of Light have yet to appear...that they have not yet saved the world from the Fiends and Chaos. It hasn't happened yet.

Because the wording of the Reports should have changed since they were written?

So..how does it make sense that Dissidia is after FF1?

Where is he freed from the cycle in Dissidia?

You really should play the game, dude. It happens after defeating Tiamat at the Floating Fortress.

And you should really back up your claims.

So...what are you talking about? The Dissidia isn't just making shit up that wasn't in the game.

Umm...what?

 

[Makoeyes987]

I'm so sorry that I haven't beaten FF1 before I even owned it.

Are you even aware of how ridiculous your "knife to a gunfight" remark is? You're suggesting that I should have foreseen this argument ahead of time, went out, & played FF1--let alone beat it before this even came up.

Here's the thing. When we have to keep telling you things that you'd clearly be able to figure out on your own or understand if you just actually argued from a position of knowledge and experience, instead of ignorance, the debate could go much smoother.

In fact, why are you even arguing the points in the first place when you have no direct knowledge of the plot or information yourself? It's ridiculous. I don't go arguing One Piece canon without having actually read the manga or watched the anime. Why are you debating shit about FF1 without having played it first, AND THEN reaching your own conclusions?

Does it occur to you that most people don't play every game in a series the second they get the chance just in case an argument about it comes up?

Then don't argue over the facts of the game. Again, why inject yourself into the debate without the whole story or facts?

Then I stand by my earlier remark: Your sentence made no sense. Your new sentences to explain the sentence that made no sense also make no sense.

....Then have you somehow lost the ability to read? How the hell does it not make sense? Everyone else seems capable of extracting the meaning and subject of the sentence. What happened to you?

Again. The original plot of FF1 did not specify or give reason as to why the time loop of FF1 was severed. Why did the events in FF1 THAT TIME finally result in the time loop being stopped?

Did you get it now?

Dissidia offers a perfect reason as to why FF1's time loop got severed. By its very nature.

Because the wording of the Reports should have changed since they were written?

Change to what?

The reports talk about the coming of the Warriors of Light as an event that has not yet come to past. Which would mean that it would be BEFORE FF1 when...The Warriors of Light came to the world.

By the reports being before Dissidia, and before FFI..that would mean that Dissidia is before FF1. Along with all of the other context and information in Dissidia that leads to that conclusion as well.

Where is he freed from the cycle in Dissidia?

He isn't. That's my point. Garland is NOT freed from the time loop cycle of FF1 in Dissidia. In fact he bemoans it. Therefore, Dissidia being AFTER FF1 makes no sense, because the time loop was CUT then.

If you look at the Dissidia FAQ Tres and I wrote, you'd see the full explanation.

And you should really back up your claims.

If by "backing up" you mean, holding your hand and telling you obvious plot line events that you'd know if you played the game, then no. Its tedious and ridiculous. Either play the game or get the information yourself. This is farcical. A debate isn't where one debater gives their opponent all the info they should've brought to the stage themselves.

Umm...what?

Again, did you not read or lose your ability to read? I replied to your bizarre point of, the reference of Chaos and Garland being connected as in FF1, is confirmed because it in game..not because the Ultimania said so.

ALL of the references in the Dissidia Ultimania are IN GAME.

 

[Neo Bahamut]

A bunch of bullshit.

Here's the thing: When I expressed my viewpoint, I specifically stated that I had not yet played the game. Any argument started with me was done so with that knowledge in mind. You had understood this before you began debating me. To bring this fact, which you knew from the very beginning, as though it is an actual point in your favor, is just smoke & mirrors.

This "you should play the game" nonsense is the same as it always was: A pathetic excuse to justify not citing your claims.

Then don't argue over the facts of the game. Again, why inject yourself into the debate without the whole story or facts?

What in the bloody Hell are you even talking about now?

Did you get it now?

Sweet shit, it took you long enough to actually speak English.

...I don't know what caused the break? What's your point?

Dissidia offers a perfect reason as to why FF1's time loop got severed. By its very nature.

No it wouldn't, because you still have to ask the question of why the Dissidia loop started, when it apparently hadn't occured during any of the other loops.

By the reports being before Dissidia, and before FFI..that would mean that Dissidia is before FF1.

No it wouldn't. It would mean that the Reports were before Dissidia & FF1. Dissidia could still be before or after FF1.

Along with all of the other context and information in Dissidia that leads to that conclusion as well.

He has a crystal! That proves it's a prequel!

He isn't. That's my point. Garland is NOT freed from the time loop cycle of FF1 in Dissidia. In fact he bemoans it. Therefore, Dissidia being AFTER FF1 makes no sense, because the time loop was CUT then.

Garland was still alive at the end of FF1. Presumably, he still could have gone into the past.

If you look at the Dissidia FAQ Tres and I wrote, you'd see the full explanation

.

You mean that one I read the whole way through & had a lengthy argument over, which is still continuing to this day?

Its tedious and ridiculous.

That's always been the difference between you & I. I bring quotes to back up my points. I don't hide behind this lame-ass "you should go figure it out for yourself" excuse. If you're not going to bother providing citations when asked for them, then this is a waste of time. You are not debating, you're just being pissy with me.

ALL of the references in the Dissidia Ultimania are IN GAME.

Cool story, bro.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Here's the thing: When I expressed my viewpoint, I specifically stated that I had not yet played the game. Any argument started with me was done so with that knowledge in mind. You had understood this before you began debating me. To bring this fact, which you knew from the very beginning, as though it is an actual point in your favor, is just smoke & mirrors.

This "you should play the game" nonsense is the same as it always was: A pathetic excuse to justify not citing your claims.

Aww, are you getting mad? I sense some hostility here

Yeah, you expressed you never played the game, which in and of itself is ridiculous. The fact you're carrying on and arguing so vehemently, points you have no knowledge of, is silly. You're expecting us to carry you through a debate and feed you information.

Stop being lazy and find the info yourself. We have no obligation to tell you shit you could easily get yourself if you either used google or picked up the game from gamestop for 15 bucks. FF1's plot is not esoteric, new, or hard to find. These aren't translations for a book not everyone knows exists.

Hell, you could download it for free as an ROM for an emulator.

What in the bloody Hell are you even talking about now?

If you can't keep up with the conversation, maybe you shouldn't involve yourself in it. Maybe I'll cease quote-replying you since apparently you either don't read the respective text I'm responding over, or your reading comprehension just hiccups at inopportune times.

My point was the same point I was referring to before. Namely, you not playing the game. If you haven't played it, maybe you shouldn't be discussing it.

Sweet shit, it took you long enough to actually speak English.

...I don't know what caused the break? What's your point?

Funny how Ryu and everyone else got the point but you didn't.

Exactly. The original plot doesn't say what caused the break. It's never discussed. Dissidia being integrated into FF1's story, specifically, as its backstory, fills that hole with the answer on why FF1's events were suddenly able to be stopped. Warrior of Light got his last crystal from Cosmos, the event of FF1 was the anomaly that allowed the Warriors of Light to realize the truth in how to cease the time loop, and then FF1 proper goes along.

No it wouldn't, because you still have to ask the question of why the Dissidia loop started, when it apparently hadn't occured during any of the other loops.

Because of the events that went on with Cid of the Lufaine and Shinryu, which were enacted thanks to Cid finally getting his ducks lined up from inside the Dimensional Rift. The whole loop of Dissidia happened because of Cid of the Lufaine and Shinryu, wanting it to. The game itself says why the loop happened, so what don't you understand?

No it wouldn't. It would mean that the Reports were before Dissidia & FF1. Dissidia could still be before or after FF1.

How that hell would that make any sense?

The Reports are before Dissidia. Dissidia shows us that Garland is still stuck in the time loop cycle created by his future self which is Chaos.

...So how could Dissidia be before FF1? If FF1's time loop was cut, and Garland was freed from it? That makes no sense.

He has a crystal! That proves it's a prequel!

Good job missing the point, there.

Garland was still alive at the end of FF1. Presumably, he still could have gone into the past.

And this is where your lack of playing FF1 shows again. Garland could NOT have gone back into the past, because the time loop was severed thanks to the Warriors of Light killing the Elemental Fiends in the past, and Chaos. The ending specifically states the loops is gone, and its been cut for good. So no. He could not.

You mean that one I read the whole way through & had a lengthy argument over, which is still continuing to this day?

If you read it, then you wouldn't have to be asking me to explain, since its already done there.

That's always been the difference between you & I. I bring quotes to back up my points. I don't hide behind this lame-ass "you should go figure it out for yourself" excuse. If you're not going to bother providing citations when asked for them, then this is a waste of time. You are not debating, you're just being pissy with me.

I bring quotes too when the info of said quotes aren't widely known or available, but sorry I can't be arsed to give you synopsis and explanation for every single point of a game you have by your own admission, have not played. Ever since middle school, I've felt icky doing the homework of other people, or letting them copy off me. Sorry.

Either look up the game, which you are arguing over, and haven't played.... Or step in when you have the materials. I can't believe you really expect everyone else to constantly feed you answers and shit to what happened in X game, when you haven't played X. It's shit like that, that's ridiculous.

Cool story, bro.

Great. Concession accepted then.

 

[Ryushikaze]

NB, telling you to 'don't bring a knife to a gunfight' means that if you want to bring up a subject, in this case, FF1 and its relation to dissidia, you ought to be familiar with it ahead of time. So yes, you SHOULD have anticipated that when you bring up FF1, FF1 will be discussed.
You are doing yourself measurable disservice by bringing up this subject without already playing the game, and only going by secondhand knowledge.