Hey G1s! My primary gaming system these days is the NES; I don't have any of the current-generation systems (used to have a Wii), and my PS2 is collecting dust in a box in my mom's basement. I have some computer games to eventually get through, but right now I'm working on going through NES games that I never had a chance to the first time around. Mostly I'm playing through games that I simply couldn't find or afford when I was younger, but that are both affordable and easily found now. Lately, I've been replaying through the original Final Fantasy, which I own along with all the original maps, manuals, everything but the box. I purchased it on eBay for pretty cheap ($10? 15? No more than that) and just started playing it about two weeks ago. I did a little research first to find out the best starting party, etc., but otherwise have been flying blind so to speak. It's interesting to replay a game from ~20 years ago and discover that it is every bit as good as today's games. It doesn't just "hold up," it competes favorably against today's RPGs. In short, it reminded me that game success doesn't necessarily increase with each subsequent gaming generation or advance in hardware. All the ingredients of a successful RPG are present: large game world, several classes of characters to choose from and develop, many unique items to unearth and wield, memorable boss fights, NPCs you become curiously attached to, fun and varied quests, varying modes of transport, etc. etc. etc. Perhaps most importantly, it has an easy, fluid gameflow. The game is simply easy to play, easy to get into. I'd like to expound on those elements for a minute. First, the large in-game world. The first game I remember with a truly large game world was The Legend of Zelda, which I tried to play recently but discovered, to my dismay, the game's battery had died, meaning I had to complete it in one sitting - which I just didn't have time to do. My favorite game world from the NES was Crystalis (my favorite NES game, actually), which had a really huge and varied game world. Caves of differing textures, ocean, mountain, fire, ice, swamp, grassland, castles, towns, you name it - everything was present, everything was memorable, everything was different and affected the play, and it all worked perfectly. Another game I remember having a truly immense world was Ultima VI, which I had a ton of fun exploring in great depth. Neverwinter Nights ... The Shadow of Yserbius ... Wizardy 7 and 8 ... and of course, Final Fantasy. That's not to say that a large map with tons of different spaces to explore is mandatory - tons of classic games were pure dungeon crawls - but I think it does help involve the imagination, and probably aids game design too, but allowing more kinds of creatures, graphics, etc. The second item I thought about was the ability to choose your character and develop them. Those are two separate but important elements, I think: there are games where you can't choose what kind of character you are, or who you travel with, but can still develop your character uniquely, and I think that is just as important. Using my previous examples: in the Legend of Zelda you can't help that you're Link, but you can develop Link (upgrading his weapons and health); in Crystalis you don't have control over who you play, but you can select his weaponry, magic, and increase his life and magic by leveling up; in Ultima 6, you have some limited ability to change your main character, but have a set cast of characters in your party, and can improve everyone as the game continues; in Wizardry 8 you can select every element of your character, and that of your party; in Final Fantasy you select everything about all four people in your initial party, and also upgrade their gear as the game progresses. So there is a trend here: successful RPGs allow your alter-ego to grow as the game goes on. Another is the presence of unusual items to discover and use. The most obvious example of this is probably Diablo, which is the action RPG that is simply chock full of weapons of all kinds. Sets, rares, uniques, etc. This adds the dimensions of luck, discovery, and perfectionism to the mix. In Final Fantasy, unfortunately, all the weapons that are supposed to be useful against specific creatures (coral sword against water creatures, were sword against were creatures, and so on) are bugged and don't work; so this sort of backfires, and leaves the player searching for weapons that simply has the most damage. But in general, the idea holds: in games where progress is often defined by killing or defeating enemies, having better equipment is vitally important. And if a game can imbue the weapons with the aura of being rare, or somehow insert them into the gamer's imagination, so much the better. The game world becomes richer, more fun to access, more fun to experience, more fun to explore. Next up: memorable boss fights. This is pretty self-explanatory, and I won't waste a lot of time on it. If you have memorable adversaries, the entire adventure becomes memorable. Case in point: Shadow of the Colossus. That game was memorable in large part because of the incredible bosses. While I'm not sure it classifies, technically, as an RPG (which would be an interesting sub-article on its own) it has a lot of the other elements I mentioned. Colorful NPCs can really enrich a game world also. Final Fantasy has a few (Dr. Unne!), even Zelda did, in a roundabout way, with its Engrish-influenced "Dodongo is afraid of smoke" or however that goes. I remember the talking rabbit in Crystalis (Deo?) and the dolphin, vividly, along with the sleeping guy in the windmill, or any number of NPCs. Ultima 6 had an incredibly rich universe, where a lot of the NPCs really seemed alive and capable of independent thought; excellently written. Wizardry 8 had the same phenomenon, as did Neverwinter Nights. Smart games have smart characters. Memorable games have memorable characters. RPGs, maybe more than any other genre, are dependent of conversation with the world around your alter-ego, dependent on talking to gain information and make progress through the story. RPGs are notoriously talky and text-heavy... and so the better the text is, coming from the mouths of the characters, the better the game. Then, of course, are the quests - both main and side varieties. Since RPGs are plot-driven, the plots better be damned good. It helps if all the little things you do along the way are interesting as well. But it's interesting to note that games with good enough mechanics can get by with little or no plots at all. Zelda on the NES has a vague and frankly uninteresting plot, but the gameplay is so good that it doesn't really matter. Crystalis has a plot that pretends to slowly unfold, but it really doesn't make sense until the final moments. Final Fantasy has a plot but its poorly communicated to the player. In those above games, its the side quests that take over. In Crystalis, its the progression of small quests that advance the larger narrative forward. In Final Fantasy, it's largely the same. On the PC, Ultima 6 was a perfect example (as was Wizardry 7 and of small quests, each fascinating, that slowly built up the main quest. Shadow of the Colossus - if it's an RPG - is a strange anomaly in that the side quests ARE the main quest. Lastly, skipping modes of transport, the gameflow itself. The game has to be easy to play; even if there are a million spells and menus and options, it has to be easy to play. Games that are difficult to play remove the player from the equation, creating distance. Games that are simple do the opposite - draw you in, allow you to immerse yourself in the other things the game has to offer. I know this is very self-explanatory, but I don't think developers pay enough attention to it. Final Fantasy only has a handful of menus and can be very easily navigated with a controller that only has four buttons and a directional pad. It also has the very smart option to make the text scroll faster if the player happens to be able to read very fast - a subtle but important detail that makes navigating the game that much better. Every game I mentioned earlier is easy to play in a fundamental way, whether it's a simple mechanic of exploring (Zelda, Crystalis) or a game with complex stats that are easily managed (Wizardy, Neverwinter Nights) or whatever. A great example of this are the Elder Scrolls games, especially Morrowind and Oblivion. They have complicated game mechanics made easy by a great interface, making a potentially overwhelming game experience easy to pick up, and essentially fun. So Final Fantasy led to all these thoughts; it wasn't the first to do anything it does, and it is derivative of many or most RPGs that came before it, but it puts all the pieces together in an attractive package - it does everything right. It gets the player involved, it rewards exploring, it has all the little things right. It's a model RPG - a standard-bearer to hold up other games against; it's certainly not the only RPG yardstick, but it is a good one. So hopefully you weren't bored by all the facets of the genre that I found thought-provoking! Final Fantasy on the NES is worth a close look - and, of course, has earned quite a few over the years - and sheds light on the gears that move the whole Role Playing Game genre, the architecture of why things succeed, and perhaps why they don't. Perhaps soon I'll do a piece on RPGs that DON'T work... but for now, I'm done. Thanks for reading!