Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2007 19:59:02 GMT
Red chocobos can get over it *punishes joo for not using chocobos *
|
|
|
Post by ajcrescent on Apr 19, 2007 20:31:12 GMT
Chocobos are one of the best things to happen to FF. XD
|
|
|
Post by daimaoumyutsuu on Apr 20, 2007 2:47:22 GMT
We never figured out the equator on the old Gaia thread. The climates are so oddly placed, the seeming lack of tropics (Chocobo locations show a skew on temperate environment, however), and the eternal climate conditions over various locations.
If you drew an equator horizontal from the midpoint of the map, climates you would expect in places do no show up. Esto Gaza and its continent are obviously arctic, but how it's oriented on the upper left quadrant of the map belies its likelihood as a polar cap. It could be a choice in cartography, but then it begs the question why the Mist Continent is placed on the lower right quadrant. A world map from a given region would orient everything according to its land, in this case the Mist Continent would be at the center of the world.
In FF8, Centra is the center of the map, but Centra was at one time the center of civilization, so the justification is that the map reckons to that time rather than contemporary. Also, satellite imaging was already done in that world, because Esthar had space technology. Tropical climate is present.
FF7's map was centered between Junon, Northern Crater, and Wutai (I'd give other western places, but Wutai was important enough to compete with the eastern power, Shinra), each location with considerable weight on global issues. Tropics are also present. The inner sea was also harnessed by Shinra, while the outer sea remained unexplored. This is a trend from all earlier FF games.
FF9 throws at us the primary civilization as being the Mist Continent, with extensions to Esto Gaza and the Outer Continent. Given the remarkable cartography (where is the equator), I'm going to go wild here and suggest that maybe too much of the world is omitted. Treno was brought up, but looking at the map, there isn't a line a mountains to obscure the sun from Treno if Treno is south of the equator. Treno is only open to the north, where you expect the sun to be. The sun would have to be south of Treno to have it obscured by the extreme mountains. We joked before on the old forum that the gravity would be too light since Gaia looks too small. Well, maybe Gaia is earth-sized if the rest of the surface was only ocean and irrelevant to the story, thus omitted. Imagine drawing the equator, about x or 2x distance of the current map's y axis length, south of the map. Then skew that equator counter-clockwise by up to 10 degrees. Now the general climates correspond to earth-like orientation. The only caveat is Chocobo Paradise, which would be north of Esto Gaza, it seems. Perhaps Esto Gaza is actually near the pole and going further north would wrap around to going south, south enough that at Chocobo Paradise, is temperate climate?
On the old forum, I discussed how Burmecia would host systems to harness the water. As nice an idea it was, it might not be the only solution. Think, what would keep an area unflooded even with massive rainfall? A hole. A very big hole. Given the amount of rain at Burmecia, it would take something like an abyss to contain that much water while the surface remains only wet and not inundated. I say this because if the rainfall isn't completely handled by the Cleyra tree nor Burmecian water systems.
I also proposed that the Cleyran sandstorm rotates in a direction that moves moist air from north (where the sea is met) to east (where Burmecia sits south of mountains). It would have to be strong winds to move the moist air rapidly enough that it doesn't precipitate over the desert.
At the time I write this sentence, I spent about 2 hours intermittedly writing this post and reading whatever the wiki articles appeal to me. I think I have taken in too much information than I can process, so I lost alot of the energy for discussing the topic. Some of what I wrote above, at least half an hour ago, seems less plausible now. I'll post again when I remember what I really wanted to say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2007 11:31:32 GMT
If you thought about it, the equator could be drawn diagonally across the map, crossing the Forgotten and Outer Continents. It would sort of explain desert areas, and also that of Cleyra's.
|
|
|
Post by Robshi on Apr 21, 2007 21:53:24 GMT
That is a good theory Mel, and it would also put the Lost Continent at the pole which would explain it's arctic-like weather.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2007 20:09:48 GMT
Of course the rain of Burmecia isn't explained unless it was some sort of tropical rainforest, and it's hardly that ^_^' which comes back to the spiritual or geographical theories.
|
|
|
Post by Robshi on Apr 22, 2007 20:16:14 GMT
Well, you could explain it with geography due to the nearby mountains. Although I like to think of it as magical, in the same class as Treno's everlasting night.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2007 20:26:49 GMT
Same here, I like to think of it as spiritual <3
|
|
|
Post by LancerZero on Apr 23, 2007 15:21:55 GMT
But if that continent were the north pole, where's the south pole? Personally, I still favor the idea that the world map isn't necessarily a literal mercatur (sp?) projection of Gaia's surface. Then again . . . if the period of its wobble coincided with the time it took to circle its star, then one pole might be always facing away, and thus be the only really frozen pole.
|
|
Eudemic
Moderator
Your Local Sword-Fighter
Posts: 302
|
Post by Eudemic on Apr 23, 2007 17:23:28 GMT
Of course the rain of Burmecia isn't explained unless it was some sort of tropical rainforest, and it's hardly that ^_^' which comes back to the spiritual or geographical theories. Rain forests needn't be tropical. Just out on the Olympic Peninsula there's a temperate one. That said, the plants of a rain forest do not produce the rain (though they do add a lot the humidity!). The rain has to come from somewhere else. It's possible that there is simply too much water for trees to survive in Burmecia, and that the plain is more of a huge semi-marsh than an actual plain.
|
|
|
Post by daimaoumyutsuu on Apr 26, 2007 0:50:25 GMT
If the explanation for Treno's "permanent" night is not sufficiently explained by the high mountains to the south that block the general sunlight (the equator is not on the map we see), then perhaps a secondary, natural pheonomenon can explain it. Suppose the moon's revolution, at a very slow pace, coincided with Gaia's revolution around the star. The moon would consistently occult the sunlight over the same geographic region during the day, everyday (read: solar eclipse). This might block out enough of the sunlight for major parts of the day, such as the afternoon, and cause the area to experience further darkness than the mountains alone provide.
If you remember the depiction of Gaia and its moons, note that the moons are awfully close to Gaia. Also, the moons are shown as "crowning" Gaia, never anywhere else in their revolution except over the norther hemisphere. Above, I only used one moon as an example. If the second moon held a similar orbit, it would probably occult the sun for the same regions at alternating times.
One caveat about Treno would taint the idea of eternal night: There is a forest just outside Treno. Under constant darkness, plants do not grow well.
It's been said variously already, I think said by LZ the most, that these locations of supposed "permanent" and "eternal" conditions are probably exaggerated when the reality is that more than half of the time the natural events occur. I would want milder conditions of these fantastic places to make them more plausible.
By saying the equator of Gaia is not shown on the maps, that the equator lies far down and to the right of Treno, it makes Gaia have a much higher proportion of water surface to land surface. Earth is 70% water surface, but Gaia's surface could easily be 80% or even 90% water. This leads to much wetter conditions, shorter stream movements between climates, and overall more severe weather per climate. In Burmecia's case, there wouldn't be an ocean current to alter the stormy propogation at the coast near the country, everything will always accumulate at the spot.
Yes, there are temperate rainforests, but that's not my focus. My point is that you do not see the biome on Gaia analagous to an area like Borneo, Thailand, or Sumatra.
|
|
|
Post by Robshi on Apr 26, 2007 8:52:05 GMT
Why do you guys have to be so cynical about the eternal rain/night prospects. It is a fantasy world in a video game. And Gaia is magical in a sense.
So what if there's a forest outside Treno? Maybe they're a special breed of tree that thrives off moonlight. Or it has some similar properties to the evil forest, which I bet wouldn't have too much trouble if there was a lack of sunlight. Or it's outside the region of eternal night by being outside Treno.
|
|
|
Post by ajcrescent on Apr 26, 2007 19:14:50 GMT
We'll answer that when you explain why you're so adamantly against the very likely possibility that some things on Gaia can be explained logically.
Gaia may be "magical in a sense", but it doesn't run 100% on fantastic magic. I'm sure science and physics exist on Gaia.
If our explanations for Burmecia's rain and Treno's darkness upset you that much, don't pay any attention to them, think whatever you like, but don't make it seem like we're a bunch of stubborn fools for not agreeing with you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2007 7:35:28 GMT
-_-' This is why we don't discuss things like this everyday.
|
|
|
Post by Declan Tribal on Apr 27, 2007 12:59:40 GMT
Seriously folks, keep it civil. We're not trying to compete to see who's the biggest brainiac here.
AJ, though you do make some good points, you were told by Lancer not to express them in such a hostile and aggressive manner. If you are incapable of debating an issue without resorting to the schoolyard attitude, then I suggest that you and Robshi take it to PMs and discuss it there.
Now, if the next few posts after this contain a hint of hostility towards anyone, then this thread is getting locked. Do I make myself clear?
|
|
|
Post by LancerZero on Apr 27, 2007 13:11:13 GMT
Personally, I'm still of the opinion "to each his own". I agree most with Oni's views on this, but I also can't deny the potential validity of Rob's and AJ's opinions on the subject. Especially given that Square doesn't exactly say much on it. =P This discussion is starting to remind me of the old "muscle car vs. tuner car" debate: neither side is willing to give, even though the car customization scene is so widely variable that BOTH sides are actually correct in saying theirs is best. Sorta. Both make good points, and are best in slightly different ways, but neither is generally willing to admit it.
Basically, what Declan said, adding: rather than trying to convince the "other side" that you're right - because you almost certainly won't - why not just list out and explain the merits and reasons behind your opinion for the undecided out there, and so the "other side" can examine your arguments without rancor?
|
|
|
Post by ajcrescent on Apr 27, 2007 22:19:18 GMT
I wasn't being hostile or aggressive at all. I was slightly annoyed. There's a big difference.
Maybe it's time to change my aggressive avatar... >_>
I'm just trying to get Rob to realize he could very well be wrong, and that not everyone will agree with him. So he should stop acting like he knows everything about Gaia, Burmecia, etc. His tone is far worse than mine, and his posts suggest "Quit being so stubborn and start believing what I believe", even if it was unintentional.
I'm glad, however, to hear people agree that I raised good points. I'd raise other ones, but everything else I'd want to point out has already been brought up by Lancer and Oni.
|
|
|
Post by daimaoumyutsuu on Apr 28, 2007 7:04:43 GMT
I want this thread to keep going, it's the only one I care enough to post in.
The Evil Forest was brought up. I haven't checked the game in a while, nor do I wish to load it up, but has the game stated why the Evil Forest is... evil? If it's just because of the Mist, that's a really poor reason considering there's over a dozen normal forests in the Mist as well.
Was the Ice Cave only the way it was because of Black Waltz #1? I can only remember vague in-game references to how long it's been there (as in, implied it's been the "ice" cave for a long time).
Nobody quite noticed my earlier comment on Burmecians living in the Mist and not being affected. I mean, it's one thing to say the Mist isn't as strong there as in Alexandrian lowlands, or that the city and its rain water the effects down. However, things that feel right at home in an environment tend to, well, come from that environment. We are told people that remain in the Mist get hostile, and animals turn into monsters. What happens to said people and animals? They stay that way, they don't get more mutated, and they're at their new natural state. If Burmecians are cozy down there at the Mist level, maybe they are what the Mist does to people? Only with them, they're not hostile?
If I got that last point across, know that I don't like that specific theory.
I told Eudemic once how most RPG's have the cliche "giant tree," and FFIX is at fault for having it. However, there's TWO giant trees, which is not only overdoing it, but divides the cliche into two extremes. Cleyra looks like your old, good-natured world tree, with it's happy string music. Iifa is creepy, murky, dark, dank, part mechanical, and more accustomed to an H R Geiger dungeon, what with its opening into a neon abyss and all. Somehow, each tree meant much to the storyline. It wasn't a fight inside and then forget it affair with either.
I think I hinted before that Square, like in most of its products, is half-assed in the lore and world-immersion department. Things usually are just there spontaneously, with no background. I guarantee that somewhere in the near future, I'll think of something else in the game that has no ground whatsoever, and I'll report to you my accusation of "bullshit" about it.
Speak of the devil, I just thought of Desert Palace. How did it get there? Kuja obviously didn't build it, and he only had about 10 years even if he would build it. No, his uber Terra hax skillz has no hint of magical castle building. Obviously, he owns it and uses it as his base, just like he owns and uses the Treno auction house as his information frontend. I cannot remember anything in the game that said of the palace's origins.
|
|
|
Post by Robshi on Apr 28, 2007 12:36:05 GMT
Well, there is one point backing my theory that the rain is eternal in Burmecia, and that is everytime you go there in the game on the world map, it's always raining. The weird thing is if you bob an airship up and down over Burmecia you can make the rain stop and start. I think that was something missed by Square.
I think Kuja must have built Desert palace. Either that or there was a powerful sorcerer there before who died and was forgotten. Although judging by the prison cells Kuja traps the party with and nearly kills them with I guess it was Kuja's design. A decade is enough to build something like that easily.
|
|
|
Post by ajcrescent on Apr 28, 2007 12:43:29 GMT
Interesting thing actually--when you go to Burmecia on Disc 3, it's not raining on the World Map.
|
|