Roderick

Final Fantasy XIII'th story sucks

Recommended Posts

Toblix, also, is pretty gay, I heard.

What?! WHAT HAVE YOU HEARD!? WHO HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which FFs have you played?

I played through half of Final Fantasy 7, after which I quit because it was too uncaptivating. I saw people play through large chunks of FF9 and FF12. Not playing it myself helped, though, and I didn't mind watching along at all. There's pretty graphics and beautiful music, so at least it's not a bore to watch ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having never played through a Final Fantasy game and having only witnessed three of the 12, I think you could be considered a bit of a troll for posting:

I continue in my absolute bafflement why the entire world is so enchanted with cookie-cutter drivel like Final Fantasy. Once perhaps inventive, now a dusty caricature of itself.

As I've already pointed out, the first five games featured the same MacGuffin: Four mystic crystals and a pseudo-medieval setting. The series has never really been "inventive" in the way you seem to imagine fans think of it. The things that actually change between the games are the mechanics (always different, always interesting) and the characters, their stories and the way the story is told.

If it was the same characters with different names and the same events, (with the same battle mechanic) then yes, I'd agree with you. But they're not, they're always different.

For me, it's like Zelda or Mario: There are certain things that must be present for it to be a Zelda or Mario game. The only difference with FF is that it changes the main characters, storyline and look (but not feel) of the main world with each incarnation, whereas Zelda changes... what exactly? (Honestly don't know.)

Edited by ThunderPeel2001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may have been a bit trollish, but it doesn't change my initial comment that the storytrailer of XIII is pretty weak. Your point stands though; if you don't mind the story being reiterated and like different things returning every time, good for you. My perspective, however, IS that of the outsider. I see a gameseries that's tauted as being the most enchanting and rich, and then a trailer full of clichés. I think that's fair criticism.

Zelda, by the way, mixes up things pretty well. The characters and story stay roughly the same, and the real changes lie in the world and dungeons, which (though thematically familiar) are all freshly designed, with new gameplay twists. A key difference is that Zelda specifically uses the iconic (or repetitive, however you want) nature of its features by presenting them as legends. It's a legend, a primal story that's being retold over the generations.

Generations of consoles :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until they decided to give in to the whiners who decided that they were too "growed up" to play Wind Waker, Zelda was great about taking chances.

Zelda 1: If it didn't invent open world, it at least popularized it.

Adventure of Link: intricate (for NES) combat system, added RPG elements

Link to the Past: Dual dimensions impacting one another

Ocarina of Time: In many ways, just a rehash of LttP in terms of dimensions and story, but actually made it work in 3D, which was pretty damned impressive considering how well other series made the jump. 3D dungeons meant ingenious puzzles, creepy as hell vibe at times, and clever, multi-level boss fights.

Majora's Mask: Actually made the world feel alive. Transformation mechanics, darker tone, and story completely different from any other Zelda game (princess doesn't even make a cameo) made it a huge leap in storytelling for the franchise. The fact that the story was great and really emotionally affecting just made it even better.

Wind Waker: Sunken kingdom, beautiful art style, as close to post-apocalyptic as the series could really get. Less of a leap than MM, but the seafaring really made the world feel massive and daunting, and gave the exploration a real sense of adventure.

Twilight Princess: OMGZ YOU GUYZ LETZ REMAKE OCARINA!!!!!1111one (also, throw in a bit of that transformation stuff from Majora. That was cool.)

I left out the portables, as they mostly exist as companion pieces and don't change as much as their big brothers. (This is not necessarily to their detriment, Link's Awakening is one of my favorite games of all time) Four Swords was left out as well, as it's essentially a Zelda party game. For the hell of it, here's a quick look at them too.

Link's Awakening: First game in the series to not have Zelda or Ganon in it. Gameplay essentially a refinement of consoles, but did add the ability to jump and some really clever dungeons came out of that.

Oracle series: Great games, but taken individually just polished retellings of LA's best bits. Linking the two together to make one giant experience is kind of cool though.

Minish Cap: Takes Vaati (from the Four Swords games) and makes him the main villain. The growing/shrinking mechanic allowed the designers to craft some incredible puzzles.

Phantom Hourglass: Getting into the modern Zelda experience here. No risks taken, nothing new really brought to the table. Still a great game, but not a significant departure. Made an action game work great with a touchscreen though, which is pretty cool.

Really, Thunderpeel, your criticism is apt, but only when looking at Twilight Princess and Phantom Hourglass. Both of these came after Nintendo's recent "Holy crap I'm on a MOUNTAIN OF MONEY" success, and they seem more averse to risky changes nowadays. The new ones are pretty good, but shadows of the excellence that the N64 entries attained.

I don't really get why there needs to be a rift between Zelda and FF though. One is an action game with some RPG elements, one is a JRPG. I've enjoyed what FF I've played, and after I get through with the Dragon Quest remakes, have been thinking about playing the DS remake of FFIV to get my RPG fix. Sorry about the rambling post. Just felt I should stand up for Zelda a bit against the charge of being the same from one version to another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't really making a charge against it, I just meant to point out that there's things that stay the same in that series, too.

On a personal level (and this is wholey OT) I just can't seem to get into Zelda. I can't bring myself to get further than ten minutes into Ocarina... and I've tried many times! I forced myself to play through Link's Awakening on my GameBoy Color and despised every single second of it. Don't know what I'm missing, but it just doesn't seem like it's for me :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I don't see elements staying the same between games to be a fair criticism against either series, honestly. Surely that's a big part of what makes them a series in the first place? Particularly in the case of Final Fantasy, where as I understand it there is little to no continuity. Without those plot elements we'd just have a bunch of completely unrelated games under a common banner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair enough. I don't see elements staying the same between games to be a fair criticism against either series, honestly. Surely that's a big part of what makes them a series in the first place? Particularly in the case of Final Fantasy, where as I understand it there is little to no continuity. Without those plot elements we'd just have a bunch of completely unrelated games under a common banner.

Yes. That was my point... Rodi was the one who was complaining the similarities made the FF series a "cookie-cutter caricature" of itself. I was pointing out that those similarities are what make it part of a series and there's other aspects that change.

Did you lose the thread of the discussion? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much. As I understood it though, Rodi's complaint wasn't so much that the stories were similar but that they just weren't very good. As a game that bills its story as one of its greatest features, this is a disappointment. A game like Zelda or Mario, though also with generally weak stories (I happen to like the Zelda mythology, but it's presentation from game to game is admittedly not that strong) they don't generally sell themselves on them. Finding a Zelda game with a great story (Majora's Mask) is more of a pleasant surprise than an expected event. Epic stories are how Final Fantasy sells itself to those who don't care too much about the depth of their combat systems. In fact, as impressive as their combat systems may be, they're very rarely mentioned by Squeenix themselves in the lead-up to a game, with the press having to decipher things from the trailers and (eventually) demo.

Personally, I barely noticed the combat system in the FF RPGs that I played, which again are VI and VII. VI's never got in the way, but I played it for the story. VII irritated me somewhat with the seemingly random nature of Limit Break attacks, but I pushed on anyway. I find the active time system leads less to interesting battles and more to making forced quick decisions so that the enemy gets as few hits in as possible. Don't like it much, honestly. Much prefer the slower, more strategic pace of a Dragon Quest-ish traditional JRPG system. Still, though the system annoyed me, I played through both to see the plot. If the recent entries have had inferior or just plain boring plots, I can empathize with the frustration. If they've overhauled the system since the last I played or not, it doesn't really matter to me if the story is no good. As I said earlier, from what I've heard of XII I may need to give it a shot, but if and when I play my next FF game, it sure as hell won't be for the battle system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Failing to see point...

As Rodi has already mentioned, he has never played through a FF game. As for assuming he meant the quality of the stories were sub-par... I can only direct you to his first post where his only complaint was that the story is "exactly the same", "cookie-cutter" and not "inventive" :erm:

Any particular reason you're fighting windmills, Miffy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously Final Fantasy is never going to live up to the best JRPG (made in Korea I think) out there, Enchanted Arms!

Right?... Oh :getmecoat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That may have been a bit trollish, but it doesn't change my initial comment that the storytrailer of XIII is pretty weak. Your point stands though; if you don't mind the story being reiterated and like different things returning every time, good for you. My perspective, however, IS that of the outsider. I see a gameseries that's tauted as being the most enchanting and rich, and then a trailer full of clichés. I think that's fair criticism.

By whom? Don't let members of fanfiction.net set your expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any particular reason you're fighting windmills, Miffy?

Seems a bit harsh there. I was only trying to explain what I took Rodi's point to be. This also happens to be one of the reasons for my non-interest in the series, so I had a bit to say about it. I hardly think that this is a windmill. The problem of Final Fantasy's main strength being completely removed from its main selling point (and its selling point being weaker than it should be) is very real. Doesn't make its strength any less valid of course, which I hope came across, but it seems to me a completely legitimate problem to have with the franchise. Maybe the marketers'/press' fault, not the game's, but a problem nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't mean to sound harsh, you just kept replying to my posts with arguments... and I couldn't understand why.

I think we'll have to disagree with regards to its "problems", though. I DO think that the stories in the FF series ARE particularly strong. It doesn't matter to me that their themes and settings remain the same *shrugs*

Originality != great storytelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. As I said, I played through the two that I did despite the combat irritating me because the stories were good. I tried X for a few hours and just felt completely let down. I've heard good things about other games in the series though (one of the reasons I'm thinking about picking up the remake of IV). Honestly, I just don't know. I've heard that they become pretty same-y, but that's all second-hand. If the characterization is good though, it would be enough for me as well. There are only so many archetypes for a story anyway, so why shouldn't the plot follow similar progression across games? If that's all it truly is, then I wouldn't have a problem with the series either.

Still though, the whole reason I got into this was to defend Zelda. I don't really feel qualified to speak on FF, having played only two games (plus a few hours) of however many they're at now. I haven't cared enough to check out the XIII trailer yet myself, so I just assumed that Rodi's problem with it was the cliched, cookie-cutter, etc characterizations. If it's new and interesting characters in a similar situation, that's cool by me. If it is the characters that are the problem, I'm even less interested than I was before. Still, I won't tell you that you can't enjoy it.

...peace? :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tell that to Super Mario fucking Galaxy.

Toblix, thank you SO much for the greatest post ever. Here's a sign of my appreciation:

picture.php?albumid=4&pictureid=10

You WILL be satisfied - IGN.com

You'll need a smoke when you're done - IGN.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now