Final Fantasy is Square's Trademark. If they were to stop making it they'd have to come up with something better which isn't likely. I might also sue them if they stop.

Ok, FF3 is the last and only Final Fantasy not released in the US. It is also the only FF I have not yet played. I am buying a Nintendo DS for the sole purpose of playing this game. I can't wait, I'm getting all hyper just thinking about it lol

I find Cid from FFVII to be a repeat personality of Cid from FFIV cept with a few more swears lol. But FFIV cid grabs my vote. Don't you agree that FF8 Cid was a wimp?

I never got to play the story of either since I refuse to own an xbox. However, the multiplayer is fun in both and Halo 2 grabs it with those swords. *drool over the swords*

I used to have several trailers/videos on my computer. I probably still do, except they are hidden deep with in the archived section of my computer lol. I don't remember where I got mine, it was such a long time ago. I think they should hurry up and release it in america though

I'm the first and only to vote for FFIX? Oh well, I truly think it was wonderful. I prefer old school games and when FFVII came out, I was horrified by how far they took it away from the way they had it before 3-D was available. Don't get me wrong, it was a great game, but it was missing that familiar feel to it that got me comfortably into final fantasy games. Final Fantasy 8 was fun, it helped me adapt more to the new age of Final Fantasy a bit since it also had a similar feel to that of FFVII. But when Final Fantasy 9 came out, I got everything I wished for. I got that old feeling I got from playing games like FFIV and FFV and I got to adapt more to the new style games as well. The best of the old combined with the best of the new, what more could you ask for? FFX and X-2 were great but by then I was already, and still am, stuck on FFIX.

edit: I agree, missing out on beating FF8 is a bummer. Of course, you've had the privilege of seeing me beat it twice mr ...um mistermog

I don't think I can pick certain games but I still find the SNES to be the best system of all time. All these new systems are great and all but they aren't living up to the potential that they have. That gameplay of the old school games are better and almost everything came from them to begin with. Most of my friends can't stand old graphics but, unless they are horrid by old school standards as well, I find the old graphics refreshing.

How can you make me choose? I rule Xbox out without a second thought. I'm sorry to let all you xbox fans down when I say that I despise microsoft and therefore despise it's xbox. On the other hand I'm extremely faitful to nintendo, but I'm equally faithful to Square. So I can't choose between nintendo(gamecube) and playstation 2(where most Square games are)
I play Playstation 2 more though so I'll just give it my vote even though I honestly can't decide.

I haven't played many yet. It was 2 during the age of the nintendo

But I'll list the top few(up to five) that I have played.

1) Zelda
2) Mario
3) Zelda II
4) Ninja Gaiden
5) Megaman

Be honest in your vote. I found Halo to be waaaay overrated. I found it to be made out to be much better than it actually was. No doubt it was a good game, but I've definately played some older and better first person shooters. Halo 2 wasn't as hyped up as the first one though, but it did get excellent ratings that it deserves. So I think that Halo was over rated but Halo 2 was/is not yet.

I saw that episode as well. Don't forget to mention that they did it TWICE just to prove that it wasn't a one time thing. The results were exactly the same but they didn't show the second test.

That's a tough decision. I'm so faithful to the Zelda and Final Fantasy series that whenever a new game from one of the two is coming out I go crazy. I have every screenshot from ign.com saved in my photobucket.com account and FF12 is almost putting me through more suspense than I can handle.

Link to the Past, no doubt about it. OoT is wonderful too, and despite what my brother says, it is not a repeat of A Link to the Past.

I'm a new age gamer with an old gamer mind set lol
My favorite game is The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past hands down. I also immensely enjoy Chrono Trigger. In fact I started Chrono Trigger yesterday and I'm now about half way through my 4th time through the game. My all time favorite series, though, is the Final Fantasy series. It's everything you could ever want in your games, for RPG'ers like me that is. FF9 is my fav there.

I go to a Baptist church when I'm able to. I don't have any way of getting to an appropriate church for myself other than friends who also go. But I feel like I'm being rude to ask for a ride but I go as much as I'm invited.

Originally posted by Davideo7

---

I actually heard area's WITH the death penalty have a lower crime rate. The highest crime states dont have the death penalty.

I'm not entirly for it, but if their gonna be in prison, I think prison should be worse than what it is. The prison's now days are just a shelter it seems like. I mean, one of my friends brother was in prison, and he said he was better off in prison because life was easier.

---

Since I'm strongly against killing of any kind, save warfare, I believe that using the prisons to shelter criminals is a good thing because it also shelters the world from them. This way there is no death or crime from the individual and they still get to live the life they were given, even if it is restricted greatly.

Originally posted by John

---

First of all it saves money. Less time we have to house these killers and thugs.
Second its not all about discouraging criminals. Did it ever occur to you that maybe it is the right thing to do?

---

I don't like the thought of putting a value of someone's life, whether they be a theif, murderer, or a law-abiding citizen. I think the concept of the death penalty is used for this reason, however, and for discouraging criminals. I don't think it's used just because it's the right thing to do or else it wouldn't be limited as much as it is. I personally find the death penalty the wrong way to deal with things.

Originally posted by John

---

You guys are failing to realize the obvious... People who kill are bad criminals. What right do you have to live you take someone elses life? You dont have the right. You shouldn't have the privilage. You killed somone and they are never coming back, just because you were being a stupid f***. You die now and never come back. I believe this is what God would do.

---

You made a couple good, if not obvious, points here. But if you've killed someone I don't think your forfeiting your life. There are other ways of dealing with a murderer than murdering him/her yourself. And the way God deals with it comes when the time comes. There's no reason to play God and that's exactly what that statement of yours means.

How do you figure legal immigrants take over our jobs? That doesn't make sense to me. I have trouble viewing immigrants as theifs and such, as long as they get it legally. If an illegal immigrant comes along and gets a job, that can rightfully be considerred stealing it because they haven't earned their right to enjoy American rights. That just my opinion.

In the world of debating this forum is about as fair as it's gonna get, as several have already said. If you have unpopular views just think more about what your doing and get some facts to support yourself. If you debating against people who are just stubborn it doesn't make you a bad debater if they are the majority and refuse to see your point, it just means that they are stubborn lol. I don't think discussions should have only certain individuals tagged to it because there are going to be people who can barely keep themselves from inputting their thoughts, such as myself. I find debating fun myself, even when I'm losing. I just like learning about important topics and debate is by far the best way to do so.

Most of the commercials that are being put out don't make sense anyways. The ones that do make sense get a good point across but there is the sacrifice of possibly putting labels on smokers. But then again, in many places, there already exists labels for smokers. It's a good effort, but they could have gone about it in a much better way than they did. As for second hand smoking...I hate it. I can't hardly breathe around cigarette smoke and as a long-distance runner I avoid it whenever I can by usually holding my breath.

I was recently discussing this topic on another board. I'll just quote exactly what I wrote so I don't have to type it all out again.

"I haven't read every post and I mostly skimmed through the long ones but I'll try and get my point across. I'm semi-religious. I say this because I sort of follow biblical morals but I established them and the rest I have on my own and not through Church, which I unfortunately don't have much opportunity to attend

Anyways, my thoughts tell me that I don't have a problem with Gay people in general. I remember one tried to come on to me and it took another moral of mine and a very strong willpower not to hurt him since he had no business

...anyways, I don't have a problem with them in general but I do have a problem with marriage. Marriage, since as far back as anybody can remember and as far back as anything has ever been recorded or passed on, has been a tradition between the male and female that is consecrated on a god's name. I say a god because, obviously, not all people were/are christian.

As for the comment on why, if God is against Gay people being Gay, he doesn't "smite" them. My question to you is, if he doesn't believe in lying, murder, pride and many other things we know are against the teachings he once gave and are now given in our churches today, why doesn't he "smite" the people who do those anyways? He did this once, remember? What did the flood do? It let the human race do it all over again starting from scratch.

Enough religion...throughout history, disease and plague have haunted us through certain time periods. Probably the most notable is the "Black Death" which wiped out the majority of the population of Europe. Viruses, if you don't know, have no definite cure. This is why there is no cure for AIDS or the common cold. Mutations have no cure, and if I'm not mistaken, Cancer is sort of like a mutation of body cells. If we, the human race, were to be struck by a virus that moved and spread at an incredible rate, which is not impossible, it could wipe out a great deal of the world population due to the increased commerce and travel of the world.

Ok, enough of that. I'd like to now try and find a way to relate this all back to the way this topic started. God is against Gay relationships, this has been established among most of the christian world. Another thing that has been established is that He is not going to doing anything, directly, about it as far as we know. So stop stepping in with religion. Gay people are not evil. They're not going to get together and launch a massively nuclear strike on the world or create a super virus such as that which has been discussed. A gay person is no more evil than your friend who lied to you so as not to hurt your feelings or the person down the street who murdered your brother. So stop bringing the whole "end of the human race" arguement into the debate. Let's face it, everything dealing with this boils down ethics. What do you believe in? What do you think is right, and what do you think is wrong? How far do you think this can go? There isn't a large variety of answers to these questions to be honest and so this means that if the whole world were to ask this you pretty much get A LOT of similar answers. You'll also get a lot of similar answers, this you can tell just by reading the arguements throughtout this board, I read enough to know this is supported. You can argue what you want, but there are few arguements that can be logically or strongly supported on this matter.

Asking whether or not being gay is right or wrong is like asking whether or not people should lie. Think about it."