Talk:Final Fantasy VII Remake/Archive 1

Archive 1

Article title

Just to get it out of the way - I'm open to any naming conventions. I just picked one possible one. If it's non-controversial, feel free to go ahead and change. If there's arguing, then change it to whatever consensus dictates. I don't care what we call it, I just felt that, now that its been officially announced, it was time to split it off into its own article. (Final Fantasy VII was pretty big too.) Sergecross73 msg me 12:42, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I think it should be FInal Fantasy VII (2017) instead of (remake). Lembrazza (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Have you got a reliable source specifying that the release date is 2017? Your edit summary in the page move seems like speculation. --The1337gamer (talk) 14:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Makes sense, they want to celebrate the 20th anniversary. Lembrazza (talk) 14:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

That doesn't answer my question. Have you got a reliable source? We shouldn't be naming articles based on your guesswork. --The1337gamer (talk) 14:42, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd be opposed to this suggestion unless/until Square gives that release date. Sergecross73 msg me 15:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

The tentative title is FINAL FANTASY VII REMAKE, stylized in all caps (as most FF titles are), according to Square Enix's press site and the official site. I suggest moving the article to Final Fantasy VII Remake and changing the lead sentence to, "The tentatively-titled Final Fantasy VII Remake is an upcoming high-definition remake of Squaresoft's 1997 PlayStation role-playing video game Final Fantasy VII." WtW-Suzaku (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Support – If SE are using that as their working title, then that's a good enough rationale for me. The1337gamer (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

• The only reason I didn't go with that approach because I felt like a lot of sources were referring to it more as "The Final Fantasy VII remake" - with "remake" being more of a descriptor than part of the name. That's why I put it as disambiguation instead. But if this suggestion is more prevalent, I'm find with moving it to that. Sergecross73 msg me 15:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
• Note - I've locked the page so that only Admin can rename the article, since people keep hastily changing it. I'm open to changing it, but we really need to discuss first and make sure we have a consensus on what it should be. (The last move, to "Final Fantasy VII Renake was especially unacceptable, for obvious reasons.) Sergecross73 msg me 18:43, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Source

• http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-06-17-it-seems-like-final-fantasy-7s-remake-wont-lose-so-much-of-the-crazy Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
• http://kotaku.com/keeping-the-final-fantasy-vii-remake-and-shenmue-iii-se-1712587923 Sergecross73 msg me 01:44, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Copy and pasting

We run "copy and paste" detection software on new edits. One of your edits appear to be infringing on someone else's copyright. We at Wikipedia usually require paraphrasing. If you own the copyright to this material please send permission for release under a CC BY SA license to permissions-en@wikimedia.org per WP:CONSENT. user: Sergecross73 This edit appears to be copy and pasted https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Final_Fantasy_VII_(remake)&diff=667187983&oldid=667185613 . Please be careful with copyvio.--Lucas559 (talk) 19:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

...It was an article split. Moving a section to a new article. If you need to have some sort of mention of attribution or something, fine, but it's not a COPYVIO... It was a move. Sergecross73 msg me 21:56, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

It was split off from Final Fantasy VII#Remake, for the record. Sergecross73 msg me 18:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Move it to "Final Fantasy VII Remake"

Or "Final Fantasy VII REMAKE" as for the official stylization. I just reminded myself they all-capitalize all their titles. --LKAvn (talk) 14:10, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Not Exclusive to PS4

read here--70.162.154.190 (talk) 06:41, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, we know. But SE hasn't even casually mentioned any other platforms, so there's not much to say on it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

On the "Pre-release" segment of the "Reception" section

I feel like this should at least be moved to a new section, as where it stands right now is kind of clunky, breaks the flow of the article, and is kind of awkward. Perhaps "Legacy", or "Fan demand". Something snappier. As it stands, it doesn't make sense to have people's reactions to something that hadn't been announced at the time they were written included in the reception section of an article about an announced product. Perhaps merge it into a new section in "Development', before the "Pre-Announcement" segment. I'll see if I can't do a quick touch-up before you guys mold it into something better. - Kitsunelaine ^{「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」} 04:49, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I made the edit. I removed the "Reception" section and re-positioned the written text, since it's out of place contextually with what's presently written, especially for a game that hasn't yet come out. Feel free to integrate it better into the article if you think it still feels a bit clunky. Do note that I didn't delete any content, I just re-positioned it so it made more sense. I still feel the content needs to be a bit stronger (Surely there's more we can talk about how much an FFVII remake has been talked about and thrown around), but that's a different debate. I would think that some of the content in the Pre-Development segment can also be moved over into demand, since none of what SE were doing at the time indicated a full on remake was currently in developement, and has more to do with how many fans wanted it to be in development. - Kitsunelaine ^{「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」} 04:59, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay! I've moved some of the content in the "Pre-Developement" section into the new "history -> demand" section, where I think it makes more sense. As a result, both segments feel much fuller. - Kitsunelaine ^{「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」} 05:20, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

There needs to be some segway into the Demand section.

As I've been undone twice by two different people with my attempts to provide this, I think it's prudent to open up a discussion about it on the talk page. The opening of the "History" section needs to be either rewritten or added to, to provide more context to the sudden listing of things that have happened. As such, I think we need to discuss how to achieve this in a way people can agree upon. - Kitsunelaine ^{「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」} 23:14, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

I've worked a simple segway sentence into it. I feel like it could be expounded upon a bit, but I shall leave that up to others. - Kitsunelaine ^{「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」} 02:21, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Platforms

People keep reverting/rewording the bit about what platforms this will be released on. I wanted to see what the most accurate wording would be. From what I understand, they've merely said things like "Its coming to PS4 first", which would imply that it'll be released elsewhere. But have they actually said they're releasing it elsewhere? Its true that it probably won't be exclusive, but we also don't want to report things they haven't overtly said yet either. So we've got options:

1. The game has been announced exclusively to PS4.
2. The game has been announced for the PS4, with other platforms to be announced at a later date.
3. The game has been announced for the PS4.

Unless I'm unaware of it, I believe option 3 is the most accurate option. Its best to just say exactly what sources say, and I think that's all they've actually said. But I could be wrong, I don't follow every detail on the game, so I could have missed something. Input? Sergecross73 msg me 14:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

• Some sources state that the game will be "console-exclusive for PS4", however, they also say that it is still possible for the game to get onto PC (and also very probable). Thus, I agree with option three being the best one for now, since it was announced for PS4. Lordtobi (✉) 15:31, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
• While it's most likely coming to PC at a later date, it's just best to go with option 3 for now, until it's officially announced. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:10, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
• It appears to have been announced for a 2019 Release on the Switch and Xbox One Fyrye (talk) 10:15, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • That's a port of the PS1 game. The page you're linking says We’re bringing the original FINAL FANTASY VII to both Nintendo Switch and Xbox One!.--Alexandra IDV^talk 11:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Kazushige Nojima

Anyone like to replace Kitase's image with him in the history section? We already have a pic of Kitase and Sakaguchi on the ff7 page. Why not show Nojima for this page? Dudejets89 (talk) 11:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Has he been prominent in discussing the remake? Sergecross73 msg me 12:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

He helped write the original games story. He was also brought in to help with the remakes story and add new material. Dudejets89 (talk) 12:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Right, I just mean, what images are used in the article should be based around their relevancy to the article's subject in particular, not other articles. I don't see Nojima being mentioned all that prominently in regards to the remake. Sergecross73 msg me 12:52, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

He was announced as the scenario writer by Nomura. I just wanted a picture of him with it saying below, "Kazushige Nojima, scenario writer for Final fantasy VII, will be back as scenario write for the remake." If you agree with this, can you add this? I really don't know how to add images and whatnot. If we can reach agreement, would you please consider adding this to the article? Also, would any image be ok? Dudejets89 (talk) 13:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Your opinion serge? Dudejets89 (talk) 02:46, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't really do images either - Wikipedia's image use policy is kind of complicated and convoluted. So I mainly just comment on images already added, or proposals for new ones. So you'd need to find someone else or upload it yourself, though, I still don't believe it'd be an especially good choice to add to begin with - yes, he's part of the remake and all, but he hasn't especially been mentioned much in the scope of the remake's development so far... Sergecross73 msg me 15:17, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Romanization

@Lordtobi: I think you misread the MOS page I linked - the part I'm referring to says Always capitalize every word in the romanization of the title of any Japanese media (albums, songs, TV episodes, films), except for any of the sentence particles, such as wa, to, and ga, under the heading "Capitalization of the Hepburn romanization".--IDV^talk 09:49, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I probably overread that. Thanks for noting, though! Lordtobi (✉) 12:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Final Fantasy VII at Gamescom 2019 (48605911867).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Box art

So the game's box art was revealed today, and I'm wondering if this (with the PS4/ESRB branding) is preferred over the logo? I checked other well written PS4 exclusive game articles, and all of them had brand-free box art/related promotional art. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:20, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

It might depend if the episodes will have their own articles. I think something similar happened to .hack, a series of 4 chapters CyberConnect2 released for the PS2.Tintor2 (talk) 22:49, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I believe there’s some alphabet-soup guideline that says to not to include the brand/rating in the box art image, but I think that’s largely to avoid those console wars type arguments that flare up, which, for the time being, isn't much of an issue, with only one official platform. Sergecross73 msg me 23:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• FFVII Remake Part 1 Official Box Art.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:21, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Multiple parts?

The lead says:

It is the first in a planned series of releases, and is scheduled for 3 March 2020.

But also:

To avoid cutting content, the team decided to release Remake as a series of games.

So which is it? Is Final Fantasy VII Remake - the subject of this article - the first part of a series of games (possibly followed by Final Fantasy VII Remake Part II, etc)? Or is Final Fantasy VII Remake the name for the entire remake series (with Part I, Part II)?

I realize the details might not be known yet (I haven't followed this game), but this should be written in a way that is clear. Popcornduff (talk) 15:49, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Basically, they’ve been very vague about it. It’s going to be a series. But we don’t know what any other entry will be called, and it’s current name makes no indication that it’s a series. Sergecross73 msg me 18:35, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I've rewritten this to try to accommodate that (ie we can't say this game is the first in a series if we don't know this isn't actually the series itself, if you see what I mean). Popcornduff (talk) 18:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Replace Kitase picture with team picture?

This game has various directors and writers. Can we get a picture of the whole team? Is there any way we could replace that with a picture from 2009 of a single guy on the FF7 Remake team? I have no idea what the code is or how to insert a picture on here. Someone else will have to do it. 82.64.174.205 (talk) 10:47, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

It’s a nice thought, but it kind of hinges on the picture 1) existing 2) a Wikipedia editor having it, and 3) having the legal rights to use it on Wikipedia. Not sure how likely that is. Sergecross73 msg me 11:58, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Date format

DMY format was already established for this article. I've seen plenty of other articles where DMY was established but anonymous users would force MDY out of preference. That's why I tried to maintain DMY for this article. AnimeCargirl (talk) 21:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• Looking back on the history, you're right. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:10, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
  • As I explained in the edit notes, all other Final Fantasy games (including the original VII) use MDY format. If anything, keeping it DMY is a mark of "personal preference" for whoever keeps setting it back. I can think of no reason for this specifically to be DMY while every other game in the series is MDY, other than "whoever made the article set the dates as DMY", which is a pitiful excuse. Unless you can give a concrete reason why this and only this should be DMY (or why the Final Fantasy series as a whole should be DMY, and good luck with that one), leave it be. Buh6173 (talk) 20:37, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
    • MOS:DATERET. I'm not going to fight to keep it DMY. MDY is my personal preference, by the way. AnimeCargirl (talk) 07:01, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
      • The switch reasoning would be for the sake of consistency with the rest of the series.Buh6173 (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
        • I disagree. Other articles shouldn't be forcing this one to use the same format by default, especially since it doesn't have any stronger connection to Europe than it does the US. But that being said, since it's already been established, then changing it for mere preference is against the MOS. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Spoilers - how should we change the article after the game releases?

I'm sure many of you will have seen the spoilers about the game's plot - should we still call the game a remake or should we change it when it comes out? We don't call Rebuild of Evangelion a remake, and that's less explicitly not-a-remake (yet) than FF7R is. Eldomtom2 (talk) 20:05, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

The game’s title makes it rather clear what we should call it. On Wikipedia, we go by what reliable sources most commonly call it. Considering the title, I can’t imagine any other label being more common by reliable sources... Sergecross73 msg me 23:57, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Isn't "Remake" officially a part of the title rather than just a term to differentiate itself from the original? And even if it wasn't, it's so commonly used by sources that it would be the name on Wikipedia anyway per WP:NATDIS. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:41, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

It's officially part of the title, yes, but I don't think that's enough to call it a remake. And I do wonder how many sources will call it a remake when they feel they can get away with spoilers... Eldomtom2 (talk) 07:33, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I really can’t imagine such an approach will outnumber the most basic opening of “Final Fantasy 7 Remake is a remake of Final Fantasy 7” that sources tend to use. Also, be mindful of Wikipedia’s No Original Research policy. If you’re not veering into this territory yet, it feels like it wouldn’t take much to get there. We don’t personally add our analysis, we document what reliable sources say on a subject. Sergecross73 msg me 13:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Both the WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NATDIS of the game's title is Final Fantasy VII Remake. I don't see how any potential spoilers has anything to do with this. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:01, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI, some of the fan base is currently complaining because of some of the changes to the story line. I don’t think he’s proposing actually renaming the article (I’d be a hard “no” on that) but rather, proposing some sort of (questionable) wording changes like “Final Fantasy 7 Remake is a remake reimagining of 1997’s original Final Fantasy 7” or something. I think. He hasn’t actually proposed any actual changes yet, so I’m not entirely sure. Sergecross73 msg me 20:33, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is the sort of thing I'm proposing. I suppose we shall see what sources call it after release, and considering the circumstances I'd give them much higher validity than those published before. Eldomtom2 (talk) 08:37, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh I see. However, "remake" already implies that some elements (plot isn't excluded) from the original game will be altered or removed, while the title itself also gives weight for the term to stay. And since sources go with "remake" (the most important thing for Wiki to consider), I fully oppose this. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:06, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Sources overwhelmingly call it a remake. Popcornfud (talk) 22:29, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. At no point does the term “remake” imply “shot for shot 100% recreation”. Quite the opposite really, usually remakes have changes. No one outside of some misguided/disgruntled fans are going to suggest anything beside the term “remake”. I was trying to be nice, but the notion is just too silly to hold back anymore... Sergecross73 msg me 23:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree, the personal opinion of some fan is irrelevant in determining whether or not this is a remake.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 06:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Well to be fair, the terms (remake, remaster, reimagining) are interchangeably used at times by both publications and the companies themselves, so it's not just a fan issue. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 10:25, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

True, but I don’t think that’s particularly the core issue here is. Feels more like disgruntled fans trying to use Wikipedia as a WP:SOAPBOX, if this guys efforts are any indication. Sergecross73 msg me 23:26, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Can we add a "Similarity to Original" section that details some specifics about how it is similar (or different) than the original 1997 version of the game? I have heard that it is not a straight up remake.[1]KardoPaska (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

We can mention high level stuff (new battle system) but not some sort of dedicated section listing off all in the intricacies (“there’s three cats now instead of five in the alleyway” or “Cloud no longer says hello to Tifa in this one scene”) That sort of stuff belongs in fan wikias, not Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 22:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Right, I'm with you Sergecross73. Now that the game has been released and is out in the wild, there is some key (perhaps obvious) knowledge missing in this article that should further clarify what this video game "is" (and what people reading this wikipedia article are expecting to find out). I can see even the discussions above arise from a confusion of identity... it's definitely not a modern replacement for the original game, but how so? Considering that the definition of Video_game_remake is open to interpretation, I think such a "Similarity to Original" section should focus on this aspect. A lot of people are going to interpret the game title (word for word) as leaning towards a complete remake/remastering, especially taking into account the past 15 years worth of the press announcements, fan rumors, teaser content (e.g., from E3), and etc. were basically suggesting a "remake" was going to be high def remasterings of the original. So simply keeping to the facts, a good place to start is overall story overlap, like FF7R only covers the first 8 hours of the original at the point where you first leave Midgar [2]. Other stuff like use of voice actors and the music (which has actually been remade) could be mentioned here. Like you said, more trivial details, like not being able to give each character your own custom name or being able to save whenever you want, are not suitable here. But perhaps something like playable characters is high-level enough to merit inclusion in this section? or maybe that would go with the new battle system in a "Gameplay" section? KardoPaska (talk) 03:22, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

We already have a “Premise” section thats not particularly long. This sort of info can just be mentioned there. Sergecross73 msg me 13:48, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Possible helpful free image?

I'm not experienced when it comes to free images but I saw this on image on twitter that might be. It might be helpful here and even Cloud Strife in a similar fashion Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance has one with Raiden (Metal Gear). My cents.Tintor2 (talk) 18:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

If the OP is the one who originally took the photo, then the rights belong to them. By default, images should not be considered free use unless explicitly stated, either by a license or granted permission. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Did Cloud Save Zack Fair?

So, the ending of the FF7R is quite ambiguous (and controversial). Some users have put in the plot section that it appears that Cloud saves Zack Fair, even though the only hints at this are Zack Fair supposedly surviving the scene where he would have died in Crisis Core and the scene where he and Zack are walking back to Midgar. I feel like unless it becomes clarified by the developers it should not be stated that Cloud saved Zack, as several others have speculated that Cloud may use the "7 seconds" Sephiroth gives him to save Aerith. NightFire19 (talk) 02:37, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Release date is not world wide

The game is not released in many markets, like Lebanon , and Jordan and others ... I don't know what other markets are still waiting . But yeah the release of 10 April applies to the most markets but not all.

And I couldn't find ANYTHING online about when it will be released for the middle East market ... I mean I saw that UAE has it ... But not confirmed ... Anyway I can confirm that Lebanon and Jordan still don't have it Lebanon is my account , Jordan is my friends account.

So if you could add something there on the wiki it would be helpful Purple hyena (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

You’re taking the usage of “worldwide” a bit too literally. It doesn’t mean literally every inch of the earth. Usually just the major markets Japan, US, Europe, etc) Sergecross73 msg me 14:07, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Is this article about one game or a series of remakes?

I think the lead for this article is a bit confusing right now. I touched on this in a previous discussion, but here are some more thoughts.

Here's the lead as it stands.

Final Fantasy VII Remake is an action role-playing game developed and published by Square Enix. The game is a remake of the 1997 PlayStation game Final Fantasy VII.

OK. Makes sense. Next:

Square Enix developed the remake as a multi-part series, with the first entry released for the PlayStation 4 on April 10, 2020, with timed exclusivity for one year.

So wait, which one is it? Is this article about a remake of FF7, about a planned series of FF7 remakes, or about the first part of a series of remakes? It's confusing to describe it as "a game" (singular), released on April 10 2020, and then describe it as a "multi-part series".

My suggestion would be to make this article specifically about the first part. We can rewrite the lead as something like this:

Final Fantasy VII Remake is an action role-playing game developed and published by Square Enix, released for the PlayStation 4 on April 10, 2020. The first in a planned series of games remaking the 1997 PlayStation game Final Fantasy VII, it covers [whatever part of the original FF7 is covered in this remake].

I can't do the [whatever] part because I've never played any version of FF7. It will need sources either way of course, but people familiar with the games will be better judges of how to describe this.

Popcornfud (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Outside of the game being released, not much has changed since the last time you questioned this. They’re remaking the original in parts. This is part 1. There will be more parts. Otherwise, virtually nothing else is known. Right now, it’s impossible to have this article be about anything but part 1, because we don’t know about anything else. But because Square rarely names the separate parts, we really don’t either. It’s confusing because Square themselves are being weird about defining it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:34, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Uh-huh, but what I'm proposing is changing the article to make this clearer. What do you think of the solution I proposed? Popcornfud (talk) 13:35, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and implemented most of the change, but I think it would benefit from the [bracketed part] I put in the example above, if anyone wants to add that. Popcornfud (talk) 13:42, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

It's actually kind of difficult to add [whatever part of the original FF7 is covered in this remake] to the article without leaning too heavily on in-universe stuff, as that requires readers to already know what happens at the end of game, kind of defeating the purpose of explaining it to newcomers, I'd honestly just omit it until we get more info on part 2, as saying "The first in a planned series of games remaking the 1997 PlayStation game Final Fantasy VII" explains it enough, IMO. It's entirely possible that future parts are presented more as DLC/expansions than standalone, episodic games at retail. We just have to wait and see. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Dissident93, I see your reasoning 100%. However, the main reason I wanted to add that extra bit is that it helps remove ambiguity. It is the first in a planned series of games remaking the 1997 PlayStation game Final Fantasy VII. could be taken to mean "they're remaking the game several times", rather than "they're remaking it spread across several games". By explicitly saying this part covers the first 20% (or whatever) we remove that ambiguity.

Instead of leaning on in-universe stuff, are there sources estimating the quantity of the game it covers? For example "approximately the first third of the story" or whatever.

If there's no good way of adding it then maybe there's a better way to write it. Popcornfud (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Popcornfud, I haven't played the game yet, but I THINK it ends roughly when the party leaves Midgar, which was like 25% of the original game. Of course, that doesn't have to correlate at all in the remake, but I think it's safe to assume that this entire remake series won't just end on two volumes. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:52, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

That's cool. Can we find a source for that? It seems like the article should contain information about (more or less) how much of the original FF7 is covered here, in any case.

And yeah saying how much of the original is covered doesn't make any predictions of whether they cover the rest in two more games or two hundred. Popcornfud (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I mean, looking at it, the article is just outright wrong: Final Fantasy VII Remake retells the story of the original Final Fantasy VII. no it doesn't, it only retells the first 25%, apparently. The game is a full remake No it isn't. Etc. Popcornfud (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

OK, I found some IGN sources covering this so I've amended the article. Popcornfud (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I’m fine with adding estimation, but strongly oppose your contextless addition to it in the lead. Thank you for removing that part. Sergecross73 msg me 16:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure how you managed to turn that thank into a criticism ... Popcornfud (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I mean, it was definitely a criticism - you can’t take one source’s approximation and state it as fact in the lead. And even if you could, you wrote “10%” in the lead” and “10-15” in the body, which is what the source actually said. A contextless “10%” in the lead is not appropriate at all. I said thanks because it appeared you had already come to the same conclusion? Sergecross73 msg me 16:50, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Do you dare me to put it back? Popcornfud (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Sergecross73, just reread my "dare" comment today and it probably looked more sarcastic than I meant. So sorry if it came off that way. Yes, obviously I agree we don't need it, I was just kidding around. Popcornfud (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

It’s okay. Sorry I’ve probably come off more aggressive than I’ve really intended to too. Sergecross73 msg me 17:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

The one thing that still bugs me about that sentence in the lead is the possibility it could be taken to mean a series of multiple remakes, but I can't think of an elegant way to eliminate that ambiguity. Popcornfud (talk) 18:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Parts

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/final-fantasy-7-remake-director-suggests-future-instalment-could-focus-on-smaller-sections/ - Since it’s been a discussion point here, and virtually everywhere else on the Internet - looks like even Square themselves doesn’t know how many parts it’ll be split into. Sergecross73 msg me 12:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)