Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
FINAL FANTASY VS DRAGON QUEST (TITLES 1-6)
Posts
Mr_TagoMago
View playlists
CloseWhich series do you think was better based on the first 6 games or the sprite era. I'd go with DQ hands down as it had more creative dungeons and DQ 5 has a better story than any FF despite the cliche idea that DW never focused on story. Also I think DQ 4 was probably the first RPG to really focus on story and had a main villain who was more than just some cardboard brute out to take over the world.
ultima did it first
also both dragon quest and ff games have been particularily influential, especially on each other. i don't really think pitting them against each other is that fruitful an exercise
also DQ8/10 are the only games without sprites. dq9 is only kinda-3d, like dq7.
also both dragon quest and ff games have been particularily influential, especially on each other. i don't really think pitting them against each other is that fruitful an exercise
also DQ8/10 are the only games without sprites. dq9 is only kinda-3d, like dq7.
Ephiam
8579
Although I started out as a fan of Final Fantasy FAR before playing ANY Dragon Quest games (VIII was my first), I've come to enjoy Dragon Quest much more overall. I love how it's (usually) all about the adventure, and just how the games play; grinding is somehow made enjoyable in the Dragon Quest series. The exploration, characters, ideas, designs, and ATMOSPHERE the earlier entries had won me over. While I've yet to play VII, VIII was also a spectacular experience.
author=Craze
ultima did it first
also both dragon quest and ff games have been particularily influential, especially on each other. i don't really think pitting them against each other is that fruitful an exercise
also DQ8/10 are the only games without sprites. dq9 is only kinda-3d, like dq7.
Well I meant pre playstation era and I was comparing them as major JRPGs while Ultima is american. I don't see why they cant be compared and I know Final Fantasy was influenced by Dragon Quest but not sure when DQ was influenced by FF. I guess it did the job system first with the first game but since DQ 3 came about 2 months after FF 1 I don't think it got inspiration from FF.
author=Ephiam
Although I started out as a fan of Final Fantasy FAR before playing ANY Dragon Quest games (VIII was my first), I've come to enjoy Dragon Quest much more overall. I love how it's (usually) all about the adventure, and just how the games play; grinding is somehow made enjoyable in the Dragon Quest series. The exploration, characters, ideas, designs, and ATMOSPHERE the earlier entries had won me over. While I've yet to play VII, VIII was also a spectacular experience.
I think most western people were FF fans before they got into DQ. Of course I owned Dragon Warrior as a kid but that was really early and bare bones in fact its the probably the weakest in the series though it has a sorta nostalgic charm 2 was such an improvement and 3 was a behemoth.
I think it's mostly like comparing apples and oranges. Both handled gameplay and story in their own ways, and both were great for different reasons. Each one satisfied a different kind of RPG itch. So I choose to just love them both XD
author=unity
I think it's mostly like comparing apples and oranges. Both handled gameplay and story in their own ways, and both were great for different reasons. Each one satisfied a different kind of RPG itch. So I choose to just love them both XD
I never got how DQ and FF are apples and oranges I mean if that's the case then you can only compare carbon copies lol. I think the older ones were similar enogh and FF was considered a DQ clone when it came out.
nurvuss
958
Humm. Things really began to branch out with FF4. Dragon Quest has stayed largely the same in that plot has always been in the backseat and firmly tongue-in-cheek, but Final Fantasy went on to tell increasingly complex, convoluted and bizarre stories with differing settings.
Compare the world of DQ1 to DQ6, and the world of FF1 to FF6. DQ is happy with minimal changes to its world.
Compare the world of DQ1 to DQ6, and the world of FF1 to FF6. DQ is happy with minimal changes to its world.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
There weren't many RPG series that were more similar than FF and DQ, during the NES and SNES eras. Final Fantasy started branching out into extremely different types of games starting with FF6 though, while Dragon Quest understood what the word "series" meant and kept doing the same stuff. Both of them did so to a fault; the name Final Fantasy stopped having any meaning beyond "big budget Square game," while the Dragon Quest games failed to update even the most basic things that other game developers learned over the decades.
Ultimately FF's boundary-pushing obviously produced better sales. It's questionable whether those sales actually translated into better profits, since they had hugely higher budgets and massively longer development times. Though there was actually more time in between Dragon Quest games - but from what I understand, this wasn't time spent making the next DQ game, it was just time when nobody wanted to pay the developers to make any more DQ games. (And obviously I'm not going to claim that the sales are an indication of better games, anyway.)
Both series ended after releasing a single PS2 game, for all intents and purposes. They both pretend to not be dead, and they each do so in a different way, but neither of them is fooling anyone.
Ultimately FF's boundary-pushing obviously produced better sales. It's questionable whether those sales actually translated into better profits, since they had hugely higher budgets and massively longer development times. Though there was actually more time in between Dragon Quest games - but from what I understand, this wasn't time spent making the next DQ game, it was just time when nobody wanted to pay the developers to make any more DQ games. (And obviously I'm not going to claim that the sales are an indication of better games, anyway.)
Both series ended after releasing a single PS2 game, for all intents and purposes. They both pretend to not be dead, and they each do so in a different way, but neither of them is fooling anyone.
LockeZ, you're talking about America. Dragon Quest games are absolutely massively profitable in Japan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Quest#Cultural_impact
Also, FF is definitely more of a self reinventor, but although DQ's worlds stayed mostly the same (especially the ones that take place in, uh, the same world?), it's not like DQ didn't change itself up.
DQ1 - Lone warrior saves the princess
DQ2 - Three-character party
DQ3 - Large, somewhat non-linear game with adjustable parties (only one set hero character) and class changes
DQ4 - Huuuge world, with the first four "chapters" being the party members gathering up before finally joining together in the fifth chapter
DQ5 - Generations of playable characters, monster recruitment
DQ6 - Physical techniques for characters to use, graphical upgrade similiar to DQ3 SNES remake
DQ7 - lol
DQ8 - The best world map in any game ever, a refurbished menu system, the first fully 3d DQ game
DQ9 - see DQ3
DQ10 - lol
for comparison/general talking points in the thread, here's my interpretation of each FF's changes
FF1 - four heroes of your choice go on a non-linear adventure
FF2 - inventive dungeon settings, an action-based skill growing system, more fleshed-out characters, chocobos
FF3 - job system with a more ff1-esque story (but far more linear), first summons
FF4 - active-time battle system, first game with a major focus on storytelling through text boxes
FF5 - a less punishing job system, this time with actual costume changes for story-relevant unique characters, blue magic
FF6 - the largest FF cast, more fleshed-out party split dungeons (FF5 has one that splits your four-person party up), a weird way to improve your stats (but not as weird as FF2), weird-ass limit breaks
FF7 - materia system for interchangable jack-of-all-trades characters, the first modern limit breaks, another big push toward text box storytelling
FF8 - junctions as the latest weird stat thing, funky magic system, first card game, first summons that grow in power
FF9 - a return to genre tradition, except for FFT's skill-learning system; more unique limit breaks
FF10 - sphere grid as the latest weird stat/skill thing, introduction of the ctb, first mainline sequel, first lack of consistent world map
FF11 - mmo
FF12 - the first fully active FF, but still ATB; more permanent summon attachment
FF13 - completely redone battle system (it's a real paradigm shift), uh, everything? has firaga though
FF14 - best mmo
FF15 - trenchcoats for everybody
Dragon Quest has become a cultural phenomenon in Japan. According to Ryutaro Ichimura and Yuji Horii, Dragon Quest has become popular enough that it is used as a common topic for conversation in Japan, and is considered by the Japanese gaming industry as Japan's national game. William Cassidy of GameSpy claims that "the common wisdom is that if you ask someone from Japan to draw 'Slime,' he'll draw the onion-like shape of the weak enemies from the game." There is an urban myth that the release of Dragon Quest III caused a law to be passed in Japan banning the sale of Dragon Quest games or video games in general except on certain days such as weekends or national holidays. When III was released in Japan, over 300 schoolchildren were arrested for truancy while waiting in stores for the game to be released. The rumor claims there was a measurable dip in productivity when a Dragon Quest game was released and although muggings of Dragon Quest titles became so widespread there were hearings in the Japanese Diet, no law was ever passed. However, the Japanese release of every Dragon Quest title continued to be on a Saturday until the release of Dragon Quest X, which was released on Thursday, August 2, 2012. Nevertheless, each new Dragon Quest launch is widely anticipated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Quest#Cultural_impact
Also, FF is definitely more of a self reinventor, but although DQ's worlds stayed mostly the same (especially the ones that take place in, uh, the same world?), it's not like DQ didn't change itself up.
DQ1 - Lone warrior saves the princess
DQ2 - Three-character party
DQ3 - Large, somewhat non-linear game with adjustable parties (only one set hero character) and class changes
DQ4 - Huuuge world, with the first four "chapters" being the party members gathering up before finally joining together in the fifth chapter
DQ5 - Generations of playable characters, monster recruitment
DQ6 - Physical techniques for characters to use, graphical upgrade similiar to DQ3 SNES remake
DQ7 - lol
DQ8 - The best world map in any game ever, a refurbished menu system, the first fully 3d DQ game
DQ9 - see DQ3
DQ10 - lol
for comparison/general talking points in the thread, here's my interpretation of each FF's changes
FF1 - four heroes of your choice go on a non-linear adventure
FF2 - inventive dungeon settings, an action-based skill growing system, more fleshed-out characters, chocobos
FF3 - job system with a more ff1-esque story (but far more linear), first summons
FF4 - active-time battle system, first game with a major focus on storytelling through text boxes
FF5 - a less punishing job system, this time with actual costume changes for story-relevant unique characters, blue magic
FF6 - the largest FF cast, more fleshed-out party split dungeons (FF5 has one that splits your four-person party up), a weird way to improve your stats (but not as weird as FF2), weird-ass limit breaks
FF7 - materia system for interchangable jack-of-all-trades characters, the first modern limit breaks, another big push toward text box storytelling
FF8 - junctions as the latest weird stat thing, funky magic system, first card game, first summons that grow in power
FF9 - a return to genre tradition, except for FFT's skill-learning system; more unique limit breaks
FF10 - sphere grid as the latest weird stat/skill thing, introduction of the ctb, first mainline sequel, first lack of consistent world map
FF11 - mmo
FF12 - the first fully active FF, but still ATB; more permanent summon attachment
FF13 - completely redone battle system (it's a real paradigm shift), uh, everything? has firaga though
FF14 - best mmo
FF15 - trenchcoats for everybody
Avee
5794
author=Mr_TagoMago
I think most western people were FF fans before they got into DQ. Of course I owned Dragon Warrior as a kid but that was really early and bare bones in fact its the probably the weakest in the series though it has a sorta nostalgic charm 2 was such an improvement and 3 was a behemoth.
Actually DQ was my first RPG, soon followed by FF, then DQ2 (I didn't like it much) and DQ3 (My favorite NES RPG).
All four NES DQs were released in North America. We did get 3 other FF games on the Game Boy, but those were actually SaGa games and differed greatly from FF1.
In my opinion, DQ did far better than FF before the SNES era.
FF2 was ported to PSX 14 years after its Famicom release (13 on the WonderSwan but nobody bought that obscure console).
FF3 was ported to the DS 16 years after its Famicom release.
Both FF2 and FF3 on the Famicom are quite bad. The FF2 ports are equally weak, and the DS FF3 is mediocre.
Things changed when Squaresoft began to release several great SNES games. FF4 and FF6, along with other titles such as Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire, Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger. DQ5 and DQ6 were not released in North America due to Enix' lack of confidence in potential sales (Square was actually also struggling at the time despite having released those excellent RPGs).
If I had to pit each original release in the series against one another and focus on the gameplay, my personal preferences would be:
FF1: 5 interesting classes (Thief sucks). Less linear, less grindy.
DQ1: Fun open world. Too redundant and grindy.
DQ2: Unique characters. Occasional lack of directions.
FF2: Boring from beginning to end. Poorly balanced.
DQ3: 6 interesting classes (Merchant and Goof-Off are useless). Fun battles and character growth. Lack of freedom in battle strategy near the endgame.
FF3: See FF2.
DQ4: Lack of control over allies in Chapter 5. Otherwise a great title.
=
FF4: Similar to yet better than FF1 in strategy and character growth.
DQ5: Hands down one of the best titles in the series.
FF5: A few fun classes. Poorly balanced after the halfway point.
FF6: Hands down one of the best titles in the series.
DQ6: Haven't beaten it yet, but not as good as DQ5.
Max, I suggest emulating DQ3 for SNES, or if you have a ps2/can emulate ps2 games, DQ8. DQ8 is lonnnnnnggggggggg but pretty and has a ridiculous story. And, like all other DQs, heavily rewards exploration -- this time just in 3D!
...if you're into trying one, I mean.
...if you're into trying one, I mean.
author=nurvuss
Humm. Things really began to branch out with FF4. Dragon Quest has stayed largely the same in that plot has always been in the backseat and firmly tongue-in-cheek, but Final Fantasy went on to tell increasingly complex, convoluted and bizarre stories with differing settings.
Compare the world of DQ1 to DQ6, and the world of FF1 to FF6. DQ is happy with minimal changes to its world.
DQ 6 was basically a draw back to classic DQ. DQ 5 was very different from the first DQ and IMO had a far more mature and unique story than any FF at the time. Hell the first five FFs are all in a very similar world and have a save the world from the big bad eveil type plot.
author=Aveeauthor=Mr_TagoMagoActually DQ was my first RPG, soon followed by FF, then DQ2 (I didn't like it much) and DQ3 (My favorite NES RPG).
I think most western people were FF fans before they got into DQ. Of course I owned Dragon Warrior as a kid but that was really early and bare bones in fact its the probably the weakest in the series though it has a sorta nostalgic charm 2 was such an improvement and 3 was a behemoth.
All four NES DQs were released in North America. We did get 3 other FF games on the Game Boy, but those were actually SaGa games and differed greatly from FF1.
In my opinion, DQ did far better than FF before the SNES era.
FF2 was ported to PSX 14 years after its Famicom release (13 on the WonderSwan but nobody bought that obscure console).
FF3 was ported to the DS 16 years after its Famicom release.
Both FF2 and FF3 on the Famicom are quite bad. The FF2 ports are equally weak, and the DS FF3 is mediocre.
Things changed when Squaresoft began to release several great SNES games. FF4 and FF6, along with other titles such as Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire, Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger. DQ5 and DQ6 were not released in North America due to Enix' lack of confidence in potential sales (Square was actually also struggling at the time despite having released those excellent RPGs).
If I had to pit each original release in the series against one another and focus on the gameplay, my personal preferences would be:
FF1: 5 interesting classes (Thief sucks). Less linear, less grindy.
DQ1: Fun open world. Too redundant and grindy.
DQ2: Unique characters. Occasional lack of directions.
FF2: Boring from beginning to end. Poorly balanced.
DQ3: 6 interesting classes (Merchant and Goof-Off are useless). Fun battles and character growth. Lack of freedom in battle strategy near the endgame.
FF3: See FF2.
DQ4: Lack of control over allies in Chapter 5. Otherwise a great title.
=
FF4: Similar to yet better than FF1 in strategy and character growth.
DQ5: Hands down one of the best titles in the series.
FF5: A few fun classes. Poorly balanced after the halfway point.
FF6: Hands down one of the best titles in the series.
DQ6: Haven't beaten it yet, but not as good as DQ5.
I honestly think FF 3 is the most underrated in the series and I enjoyed it a lot. I played the new version on emulator and didn't get super hard till the last dungeon which was huge. I think people have trouble because it actually expects you to think and strategize which is rare for FF.
Also kinda disappointed that's all you had to say about DQ 4. Could've mentioned its innovative storyline and its awesome dungeons. People say DQ isn't about story but DQ 4 had a stronger story than any FF at the time.
author=Aveeauthor=Mr_TagoMagoActually DQ was my first RPG, soon followed by FF, then DQ2 (I didn't like it much) and DQ3 (My favorite NES RPG).
I think most western people were FF fans before they got into DQ. Of course I owned Dragon Warrior as a kid but that was really early and bare bones in fact its the probably the weakest in the series though it has a sorta nostalgic charm 2 was such an improvement and 3 was a behemoth.
All four NES DQs were released in North America. We did get 3 other FF games on the Game Boy, but those were actually SaGa games and differed greatly from FF1.
In my opinion, DQ did far better than FF before the SNES era.
FF2 was ported to PSX 14 years after its Famicom release (13 on the WonderSwan but nobody bought that obscure console).
FF3 was ported to the DS 16 years after its Famicom release.
Both FF2 and FF3 on the Famicom are quite bad. The FF2 ports are equally weak, and the DS FF3 is mediocre.
Things changed when Squaresoft began to release several great SNES games. FF4 and FF6, along with other titles such as Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire, Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger. DQ5 and DQ6 were not released in North America due to Enix' lack of confidence in potential sales (Square was actually also struggling at the time despite having released those excellent RPGs).
If I had to pit each original release in the series against one another and focus on the gameplay, my personal preferences would be:
FF1: 5 interesting classes (Thief sucks). Less linear, less grindy.
DQ1: Fun open world. Too redundant and grindy.
DQ2: Unique characters. Occasional lack of directions.
FF2: Boring from beginning to end. Poorly balanced.
DQ3: 6 interesting classes (Merchant and Goof-Off are useless). Fun battles and character growth. Lack of freedom in battle strategy near the endgame.
FF3: See FF2.
DQ4: Lack of control over allies in Chapter 5. Otherwise a great title.
=
FF4: Similar to yet better than FF1 in strategy and character growth.
DQ5: Hands down one of the best titles in the series.
FF5: A few fun classes. Poorly balanced after the halfway point.
FF6: Hands down one of the best titles in the series.
DQ6: Haven't beaten it yet, but not as good as DQ5.
I honestly think FF 3 is the most underrated in the series and I enjoyed it a lot. I played the new version on emulator and didn't get super hard till the last dungeon which was huge. I think people have trouble because it actually expects you to think and strategize which is rare for FF.
Also kinda disappointed that's all you had to say about DQ 4. Could've mentioned its innovative storyline and its awesome dungeons. People say DQ isn't about story but DQ 4 had a stronger story than any FF at the time.
Avee
5794
Oh I'd say DQ4 is my fourth favorite out of the first eight. It's pretty good in all aspects. I just didn't mention much because I wanted to compare the gameplay only and I can't decide which one I prefer between DQ4 and FF4.
Seconded. DQ3 is a must play classic but if you want a more modern take on the series, DQ8 is amazing.
author=Craze
Max, I suggest emulating DQ3 for SNES, or if you have a ps2/can emulate ps2 games, DQ8. DQ8 is lonnnnnnggggggggg but pretty and has a ridiculous story. And, like all other DQs, heavily rewards exploration -- this time just in 3D!
...if you're into trying one, I mean.
Seconded. DQ3 is a must play classic but if you want a more modern take on the series, DQ8 is amazing.
author=Avee
Oh I'd say DQ4 is my fourth favorite out of the first eight. It's pretty good in all aspects. I just didn't mention much because I wanted to compare the gameplay only and I can't decide which one I prefer between DQ4 and FF4.
author=Craze
Max, I suggest emulating DQ3 for SNES, or if you have a ps2/can emulate ps2 games, DQ8. DQ8 is lonnnnnnggggggggg but pretty and has a ridiculous story. And, like all other DQs, heavily rewards exploration -- this time just in 3D!
...if you're into trying one, I mean.
Seconded. DQ3 is a must play classic but if you want a more modern take on the series, DQ8 is amazing.
DQ 4 is probably my second. I'd say IMO DQ 3 > 4 > 5 > 8 > 6 > 2 > 1
Haven't touche 7 or 9 yet.
Darken
3952
Dragon Quest Monsters is superior to its own main series. Though not joker, fuck that shit.
