Final Fantasy I & II: Dawn of Souls

"The NEW Old-School"

Dawn of Souls is a compilation of the first two games in the classic Final Fantasy series: Final Fantasy, and Final Fantasy II. Final Fantasy was released in 1989, and set the standard, at the time, for fantasy RPGs to come. Final Fantasy II was released sometime later and is almost universally regarded as being a superior story fettered to an inferior game.

The graphics and sound of the first two Final Fantasy games were almost identical, athough the game systems were vastly different. In Final Fantasy, the standard system of RPG advancement was and is used: a party of four with a complimentary mix of character-classes (Warrior, Thief, Monk, and White, Black and Red Mages) unite to save the world. The members of the party gain discreet levels of experience through combat, and with each level gain more powerful combat and magical abilities.

In Final Fantasy II, there are no discreet character-classes or levels: it would be called a "skill-based system" in modern RPG terminology. Power is still gained through combat, but as each character uses an ability (say, swings an axe or casts a spell), his skill in that ability increases. This system, while theoretically viable, was badly implimented: for instance, characters had to attack each other to gain hit points at the end of a battle.

Final Fantasy: Dawn of Souls preserves the most important aspects of these games - those who have played through them before will recognise almost everything about them. The plot, monsters, and systems remain, for the most part, exactly the same. The exceptions are the bestiary and the bonus dungeons. The bestiary had no interest for me whatsoever; the bonus dungeons do have some effect on the overall gameplay, which I will make clear below, in addition to giving you something to do after the main story has been completed.

The graphics, of course, have been much improved over the NES graphics of the originals: they are closer to SNES in quality, and the menus and other systems have been, more or less, conformed to the style which later Final Fantasy games have made consistent. Fully painted backgrounds take the place of the flat-black combat scenes of the NES versions, and of course spell effects have been vastly improved. Unhappily, monster graphics remain static, with a "black flash" indicating that a monster is currently attacking. The world-map screen (TCELES B HSUP) is quite pretty.

The challenge of the two games has been drastically toned down. This is due, in part, to a simplification of the strategic element, which I will explain here. In the NES versions of Final Fantasy and Final Fantasy II, if a character attacked a monster which had already been killed, his attack was rendered "ineffective" and wasted. This fact produced a certain depth of strategy in combat: if a strong fighter attacked a certain monster that he could kill in one round, it was necessary to have other fighters attack different monsters so that their attacks were not wasted.

In Dawn of Souls, this is no longer the case. If a character is set to attack a monster which has already been killed, he will automatically choose another target, apparently at random. This means that, in battles against many opponents, often the best strategy is simply to keep tapping the "A" button until all the monsters are dead. (Either that, or plain old Black Magic, or both.)

I found Final Fantasy especially to be much easier than I remembered it (having played it through about a year ago). Part of this is due to the fact that "ineffective" attacks have been done away with. Another factor is this: after the first of the major plot points (in Final Fantasy I), access to one of the bonus dungeons is granted. Although it is not possible to actually defeat the dungeon at this point, it is possible to progress all the way to the bosses, and in the process more than a few levels can be gained: a fact which makes further progress in the main game much easier, of course.

In addition to this, however, there seems to be a factor which I am unable to put my finger on, that makes the game seem - well, much easier than it should be, even with the removal of "ineffective" attacks. Perhaps the party I chose (Warrior, Monk, White Mage, Red Mage) is over-balanced; perhaps I will have to play through Final Fantasy on NES again to be certain of what the difference is. It does seem certain, though, that the Dawn of Souls version is much easier than the NES version.

One more gameplay-related change, which is a positive point, is that the Bane Weapons, which do extra damage against particular types of opponents and which were broken in the NES version, now work as advertised (for instance, Wyrm Bane now does notably more damage against reptiles). This is a minor point, to be sure, but worth noting.

Every other review has noted the "save anywhere" function - this is, indeed, a great change from the "towns-only" save-game system of the NES Final Fantasy; but it is frankly essential for the GameBoy, since you never know where you'll be at when the bus stops or your name comes up at the dentist's office.

Now: what is the final judgement of Final Fantasy: Dawn of Souls? Final Fantasy I is definitely worth playing, in any version. For being such an early RPG, entirely old-school in style, it remains a fun and interesting challenge, and the updated graphics and sound take the edge off what might otherwise be a strictly nostalgic trip. It set the stage and the style of Final Fantasies to come. Final Fantasy II, in my opinion, is strictly for the completist and, because of its backward game system, the masochist; although its story is much advanced, the system is too frustrating to be worth investing the time to see it through to the end.

I believe that the removal of "ineffective" attacks detracts greatly from the strategy of the game; players wanting more of a challenge, therefore, should try the NES version of the game, either a used cart or on emulator. However, I still recommend Dawn of Souls, both to players well familiar with Final Fantasy and desiring to play it again, and to those coming to it for the first time.

Final score: 8 / 10

Reviewer's Score: 8/10, Originally Posted: 01/25/07