I agree in some senses, but disagree because of one main thing: FFVI was noteworthy for not having a real main character, whereas FFVII was pretty much fixated on Cloud. If you had a character you didn't like in FFVI, you could pretty much phase them out by not using them. In FFVII, if you get sick of Cloud, you're kind of stuck with him.

I found VII and VIII to be the most similar. Consistent main character (aka, you're screwed if you hate the main character), 3 man parties, extremely cinematic, a supporting cast that ends up getting lost in the shuffle towards the end, summons that take too long, experimental yet flexible battle systems, lack of items overall to equip, a mix of futuristic and medievil (okay, FFVI had that too). In general, I just found VIII to be largely VII except with a forced "love" theme and lots of little experiments with game mechanics thrown in (like the leveling system and not having monsters drop Gil).

This is actually one of my favorite things about VI. To a certain extent you can make a decent argument that Terra is the main character of VI... at first. A few hours into the game the elements that support that theory completely disappear. That's quite an interesting and one hell of a magic trick.

Edit:

However, I think I like what the original Wild Arms does more. Technically, from what I've read, Rudy was the main character and the (mostly) silent protagonist theme backs it up. But to me there is no main character in Wild Arms since all three characters receive a fair and pretty equal amount of development. It's because of this that the game only has three playable doesn't bug the hell out of me.

I see your point, but I think the most similar FFs would be X and XIII.
I guess Nomura's design is partially to blame, but X and XIII had very similar leveling systems (the Crystarium is pretty much the sphere board without spheres) and very similar level design (narrow paths all the way, with the exception of one big-ass open area in the latter half of the game) as well, though combat in XIII feels more similar to X-2 (same director, I believe).

Also, no world map, no air travel; summons function as actual characters in combat instead of unskippable cutscenes, your party is basically a bunch of fugitives for a large part of the game (this is a recurring theme in the series though), and you use item drops to upgrade your weapons/accessories.

I always put the argument that the story still revolves around her for the most part. When she leaves your party the first thing that happens is the others chase after her. And then they do stuff because of what she represents. Then she's back at the forefront. Really it's only a small part of the WoB, mainly Locke & Sabin's scenarios and the very last bit that's not in some way about her. She even plays an integral part of the ending even if you don't actually recruit her.

I can definitely see and even make that argument (although you can play through the entire WoR and only end up seeing her at the end, although that scenario feels REALLY forced...you're obviously supposed to recruit her and witness her development). But she doesn't DOMINATE as the main character like Cloud/Squall/Tidus do, which is something I greatly appreciate about VI. You can even argue Celes becomes the main character in the WoR, since her, Edgar and Setzer are the only 3 mandatory characters.

No comment on XIII. Never played it. Never had any desire to touch it or XII. XI and XIV are way too...um, alike for my tastes as well.

While I don't really have any issue with the online games why did they have to make them part of the numbered continuity? I kind of hate having those holes in my console game collection....

However, I guess I should admit that Diablo II: LoD was the only online game I've ever put any amount of effort into playing. Unfortunately, no one who played D2 online ever wanted to do quests compared to just grinding the hell out of key spots.

As a side note: Diablo II LoD has some of my favorite game music of all time.