![]() | Ivalice has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | Ivalice is the main article in the Ivalice series, a featured topic. It is also part of the Final Fantasy XII series, a good topic. These are identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve them, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
I failed the article because it lacks citations for necessary parts, is not yet broad in its coverage, and goes into excessive detail in some areas. We still have a lot of work to do with this one. — Deckill er 13:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
We should merge it here, since it appears to be the exact same topic, and may make it to GA combined. Judgesurreal777 21:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this has been broached before, but maybe we could add a part highlighting repeated locations throughout the games? Additionally, locations and items that have been retranslated yet hold common themes through the games deserve a mention. How does this sound? Finally, I'm seeing almost no mention of FFTA's mobile geography or apparent climate (mentioned to be hot, except in snowy passes). ShiraShira 23:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I propose that each subsection be reordered according to the release dates of the games. The current sections are in fictional chronological order and that contradicts Wikipedia's policy on fiction article. Kariteh 17:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I suggest we cut out the information in the history section. That's in-universe, and should be well-suited in FFWiki instead. — Bluerで す。 18:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The timeline has been transferred to the FFWiki, if anyone asks. — Blue 。 16:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I find this article a little bit too biased with the Ultimania in comparison with the Ivalice=FFXII/FFT timeline, and sans the correction of gender in localization, almost completely ignores any type of game canon being presented in favor of the timeline. Heck, even the timeline is being read wrong here, such as the statement "Even though the Glabados religion didn't exist...", incorrect. FFXII takes -place- in 706, FFXII's -ending- takes place a year LATER, 707. Even -according- to the timeline -itself-, the religion is established upon the time FFXII and Tactics timeline begins to diverge and the "Ajoras" appear. Yes, its several decades later, but you are also making -predecisions- that the female Ajora and male Ajora are the same (a question posed by the timeline itself) and countless other bits of speculation that are not needed yet are cited as credible in this wiki. In other words, if we're going to continue to rely on one little timeline so much, be thorough when doing so? 67.142.130.42 02:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Could this article pass GAC even though FFTA2 isn't released yet? It would make an awesome Featured Topic with FFT, VS, FFTA, and FFXII (the pre-Ivalice Alliance games). Kariteh 13:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Certainly a good article, however some issues:
-- David Fuchs ( talk) 19:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
A Good addition to the Wikiproject. And the dates... what a coincidence :) — Bl ue 。 21:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Article says: "Though described often as a world, this was only physically true of Ivalice in Final Fantasy Tactics Advance."
False. Ivalice is a country in FFTA. http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/9256/31752944dh9.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.39.42.227 ( talk) 02:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
In Final Fantasy Tactics Advance article it says "The fantasy Ivalice is supposedly a reincarnation of Mewt's memories from a Final Fantasy game." this game could be Final Fantasy XII, because it has the characters from that game in it. Also it could be Final Fantasy Tactics because it has the systems from it. I think it is Final Fantasy XII. I don't have proof of this. if someone knows that this is true, then they should add this to the article, or if it is not suitable for this article, and it would be better in another article, then it should be put in that article, or in any article that would benifit from this information.
Now that the game is out and has been for quite some time, I've noticed (mostly in the religion section) that there are some differences between the original version's translation and the new one. The mannerisms of everyone tends to go toward saying "gods" when referring to deities, especially in the Germonique Scriptures. What I propose is this: The addition of the discrepancies or retcons under every Final Fantasy Tactics section. I'll probably add the religion part when I get a chance to read some of the dialog of the game again. LanceHeart 03:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
The first quote of the 'Reception and Criticism' is taken from a 1-Up article, where Vagrant Story is noted as being the only 'outstanding' title in the Ivalice series which has not been brought into the Ivalice Alliance. Outstanding is used in the sense of being incomplete and not brought up to date, yet the quote uses it to say that Vagrant Story is the only quality game in the series. I have tried removing this quote before, but it is routinely put back, which is why I've created this post. Moogle activist ( talk) 03:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't see any mention of Jylland, the region that Final Fantasy Tactics A2: Grimoire of the Rift takes place in. I would think that a section for this is needed as well. - Nahald ( talk) 06:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Should it be included somewhere here that hte first game was, in essence, a retellign of the War of the Roses (War of the lions in ivalice) taking palce after the 100 years war (50 years war in ivalice)...except, you know, with magic stones and demons. Which would have made it a much more interesing play. Comedy in my words aside, I want to know if anyone thinks it has a place here? Since it could amount to "trivia" (although I dont think it does, i think its morei mportant) its close enough to that trivia/influence/original reserach/interpretation fine line that i'd not put it in untl there was some sort of consensus on the matter. 74.132.249.206 ( talk) 01:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ivalice. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:20, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Ivalice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:24, 16 April 2017 (UTC)