A few thoughts on linearity in RPGs before we begin. Over the past few days, we've seen some debate over what's really important in RPGs, why they're important, and how they can be improved. One of the most common calls was for greater freedom of play within the game, with a less linear, railroad-type plot. Instead, many feel that having the option to just ignore the quest du jour and do something just for the hell of it is a freedom they'd like to have. Preferably a freedom that is well-supported by the gameplay. One letter-writer, last night, commented that he found it ironic that everyone wanted non-linearity, but also hated the non-linear SaGa Frontier. Which is, broadly, true. I hated the game, myself, but appreciate nonlinearity, and also enjoy tight plotting in my games. How does this work together? Well, in my ideal world, RPGs would work sort of like writing a daily letters column, like this one. You're set out with a given task (write a column, save the world, same difference), a given number of skills and talents, and a "world" to explore them in (the Internet, in my case). Beyond that, you do what you must to accomplish your goals. But your actions do have reprecussions. That's one of the areas where I felt SaGa Frontier fell down: it was an intentionally divided world, which really never changed. It was too static, too unchangeable, and that annoyed the hell out of me, because my accomplishments in this "non-linear" game were strikingly limited. It was a question of who I fought and when, not what I wanted to do. You were freed to do as you please, but nothing you did really mattered - it rarely impacted on plot of characterization or world dynamics, so what's the point? Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. | Musical notes, first movement | Hey Allan; Long time lurking admirer here; I've been inspired by Thursday's column tostep in with a correction. You said "I don't believe Square releasedsheet music for any other games..." Think again, my friend. I have heresitting beside me sheet music for FF I-III, FF V, FF VI, and ChronoTrigger. I happen to know there also exists music for FF IV, FF VII,Seiken Densetsu 1 2 and 3, Front Mission, Romancing SaGa 3, Gun Hazard,Mario RPG, and that's just the big ones, I could go on. So how did I get these marvels of piano excitement? Well, I found themat a bookstore in Japan. I realise this isn't very helpful for mostAmerican RPG/piano fanatics, but if you find a really goodJapanese book/music import store, you *might* be able to specialorder them. As near as I can translate my kana, they are all publishedby a company called "Doremi" (heh.. do, re, mi, get it? Japanese publishingcompanies are a barrel of laughs, apparently), as part of the"Doremi Game Music Series". Good luck! (And now I'm leaving on vacation, so I won't see if this getspublished.. ah well, such is life. ^_^; Happy Holidays.) -Ben Elgin |
Oh, those wacky Japanese. Thanks for the pointer, Ben, and have yourself some happy holidays, too. Belatedly. :) | Musical notes, second movement | Rabiteman has created a book of video game sheet music. It's not allSquare, but the Fierce Battle from FF6 is in there! http://www.rain.org/~rabite -Morbid Walker (Colin Bartolome) |
And again, thanks for the pointer. | Desmond Gaban returns | There were some interesting replies to the initial e-mail that I sent to Allan Milligan as a follow up to his call for opinions on the balancing act in RPGs today, and I'd like to give my own replies to these comments. Anonymous gave the Brucknian reply to my post. He basically stated that RPGs are like stories that you read through linearly, an experience that's from beginning to end with no freedom in between. That's fine, in fact, that is the attitude that most people have today, that RPGs are not games, are not about role-playing, but are simply stories with pointless turn-based battle gameplay. Optional sub-quests, secrets, and rewards for advancement and experience building are hereby declared 'Pointless' by Mr. Anonymous and the millions of RPG fans that exist in the US and Japan. Anonymous is telling us that nothing should ever be optional, everything should be experienced the first time through. Replay value is meaningless, as long as the experience is of Final Fantasy VII proportion. I will not say what I think on this matter, but I will leave everyone reading this to formulate his or her own opinion. The next reader, Bosco, makes what I suggested sound primitive at best. His idea that RPGs should have highly sofisticated AI is very interesting, although I'm pretty sure it will be decades before such a game is invented. And finally, Secret Asian Man has made some points in that as technology gets better, so will the game's content, however he makes it seem like the only reason why technology gets better is so that graphics, music, and cinematic storylines can advance. Where does this leave the quest-based role playing gameplay of the RPG? Not all companies focus on making better FMV for their RPGs, Enix is an example of a company that spends months perfecting the design of their dungeons or making the perfect balance for weapons, armour, and items. Other companies, such as Chun Soft (whom makes a few games perfect for those who only want a story: they're called Sound Novels), Quest, Intelligent Systems, Origin, and other companies have always been strenous in these such little detail balancing, and they've almost made it an art. Overall, I would have to say this, that one game idea I suggested isin't what I think is the 'RPG to end all RPGs', it's just merely one game idea. As the original post stated, balance is the real key to having an RPG that is optimally enjoyed by many, but with balance comes areas that could be expounded upon. Things such as a plethora of optional stuff (ranging from easy to very hard to find/accomplish), item and story balance, and many more could do a lot to further enhance the RPG experience, but the only new games that come even slightly close to this sort of ideal are the ones that are heavily criticized (Like Final Fantasy Tactics and Tales of Destiny). But as the industry goes, it will be up to the developers, and the people who buy their games, that determines what directions that games will go -Desmond Gaban |
I generally don't like to have the same letter writer be posted too often, but I felt Desmond deserved a chance to defend and continue his points in this debate. Likewise, I feel the sudden urge to ramble in a big way. Chips ahoy! At this point in time, console RPGs tend to be of the linear, story-centric variety. The best of them excel both in this, in the operatic, dramatic sense of the storytelling, and the nitty-gritty fun stuff of gameplay. But, of course, that's idealism, so let's deal with reality. It's increasingly apparent to me that the role-playing community is become highly divided over basic philosophies of game design. There are those who are, and in many cases always were, the ones who always loved the character bits above all. They're the ones who wrote fanfic about FF2 US, where Kain came back and married Rosa. They drew the fan art. They wrote the RPGs. Most of these people are consequently pleased with the current trend of RPGs, especially from Square, who've mastered the storytelling style of games. They may not like the individual game (FF7 polarizes RPG fans like no game before or since), but they're in this for the story and the experience. On the other hand are those that are more concerned with the game aspects of RPGs. Every bleeding one of 'em loves Tactics Ogre, because it's non-linear but not directionless, it's tough as all hell, and it's got detail up the wazoo. I've met people who have beat TO three or four times and still proudly admit that they don't know half the stuff in there. Density of gameplay is the watchword for these people, and as a consequence, the style and story-heavy current RPGs are seriously disappointing them. Most of them don't want story to be tossed aside, quite the contrary, but want it recognized that they're playing a *game*, and the first priority in game development is making it a good gaming experience. More detail, more options, more fun. In an ideal world, every game could satisfy both groups. Of course, in an ideal world, I'd also be a millionaire playboy who dresses up in red and gold power armor and fights crime. :D So in real life, we end up with a splintered gaming market, just as we come into an era where the RPG industry is big enough to support such a rift. As Desmond mentions above, there are companies that still sweat the gameplay details. He ignores the fact that Square's sweating the details, too, but detailed, miles-deep gameplay isn't what's being asked for from them. Their greatest successes have come from creating interactive opera, fairly simple mechanics to shape rich and fascinating virtual worlds. The key thing is, people *do* want this experience. This fundamental rift between the two groups is evident more and more, and finding middle ground is tough. Games that bridge the experience vs. gameplay gap tend to be harshly judged by both sides. The solution? Well, that's tough, perhaps impossible. Square in particular has really tapped into something with the cinematic RPG style, like it or not, and to say that it's wrong to enjoy it is futile. On the other hand, to toss gameplay development out the window leads to stagnation. If I had a panacea for this situation, I'd say so, but for now, I can only reiterate to buy what you like, play what you like, and let the developers know so. | Fanfic and Bad Dudes | I second the motion for a fanfic section! After all, you have a fan artsection,so it would only be fair to have fanfics... ok, I may be a bit biased (er,more thana little ^_^), but it still seems like a good idea. It's hard to find goodfanfics,and I'm sure you guys could separate out the good stuff from the garbage. Oh, and what do you mean that Bad Dudes didn't have a good plot? Thegood Professor Daravon spent many hours slaving away at that masterpiece.I dare to you find any recent game plot that combines the shocking plottwists,high drama, and deep metaphorical meaning of "The President has been kidnappedby ninjas. Are you a bad enough dude to save the President?" ^_^ Er... this letter is kinda pointless so I'd better end it here. Keep up thegreat work with your column, - Fritz Fraundorf |
Six votes for fanfics now... hmmm.... As for Bad Dudes, well, um, you said it. I guess. I had a good feeling when I opened this letter in faith. | FF8 Trailer SPOILER! | I just downloaded the new Final Fantasy eight MPEG, and it appears to me thatthere is a HUGE spoiler at the end of it. Is it just me, or when Rinoa isrunning toward squall she just doesnt make it? It looks to me like she isdead, or at the very least dying. Maybe shot in the back as she ran, orsomething along those lines? Now at first I didnt believe it. I thought "No, square would never give awaysomething like that!". Then I thought back to the commercials for FinalFantasy seven, where square gave away the death of aeris to the world. So what do you think? I dont think im crazy, but who knows eh? Anyhow, am Ithe only person to notice this? |
I'm hoping she's just swooned, overcome with love for Squall. Or maybe she just found out that yes, Squall is his real name, and has fainted from exposure to that intensity of stupidity. I'd question whether she's dead and/or dying in that parting shot, however, since we get a fairly good look at her, and I didn't see any indication of injury, and with character models that detailed, we'd probably be able to notice *some* sign of a wound. If that does end up being a spoiler for a major plot point, I will be very, very perturbed. | Is Europe Square? | when xenogears and brave fencer were released in the states, useuropeans were left more than a little disapointed, as we would not beable to play those games, there weren't any plans to release in europe.but now, a short while ago i ran into a preview in the uk playstationpro magazine, of said games, xenogears, and brave fencer, stating thatthey would both be released in europe in first quarter '99. obviuslythis would be good news for us european rpg fanatics (square rulesall!), but somehow i'm still a little skeptic. maybe you could see if itis true that square and sony computer entertainment europe are planningon releasing the games in europe for us? any info very much appreciated. -Leonhart and Valdros |
Okay, I don't claim to be an expert on the European market, but Sony of Europe's website doesn't list Brave Fencer or Xenogears. I fear this does not bode well, as the remainder of their upcoming game coverage is pretty good. But, because I'm such a nice guy, I've emailed Sony of E, just to double-check. It doesn't look good, but check back tomorrow for the verdict. | The danger of spoilers | Okay - this might sound like a strange question, but I have been being provoked to ask it for a year now. More. I sent this letter to RPGamer originally, but they never replied... I‰m sending it to you because you‰re much cooler and you actually post long letters, and give intelligent replies... Well, now that I‰m done complimenting you, let me ask my question. Why do people say that Square concentrated on graphics at the expense of plot in FF7? Obviously, FF7 is not perfect, and I would definitely be willing to say that Square concentrated on graphics and plot at the expense of challenge. But I don't understand why people complain about its plot. Plot is why I play RPG‰s. I started playing them when I was 10, when my younger brother and I bought FF4. The plot drew me in so much that I could not do anything else but think about it. Since then, often I haven't even bothered to finish RPG‰s if they don‰t have appealing plots. I wasn't able to play any of the Breath of Fire games, because their plots simply didn't draw me in. The only reason I played Lufia I was because I happened to see the ending before I even started - otherwise I don't think I would have gotten past the slow, dull beginning. Most recently, my brother and I (we still play RPG‰s together by taking turns with the controller) stopped playing Wild Arms, because its beginning, at least, was just too cliched for me to bear any more of it. I frankly care about graphics only to the extent that they enhance my enjoyment of a game. Having said all this, let me point out that FF7 drew me in as no game before or after ever has (although I haven't played Xenogears...yet...). FF6 was great, sure, but I really had no motivation to keep on playing after the Floating Continent. We only finished it after a long hiatus, because there wasn't anything drawing me back to play it (and if there were any other RPG‰s available at the time, we might never have finished it). This doesn't mean that I'm denigrating the game - it just didn't, in my opinion, have the greatest plot (that is, the second half), which is what I care about. FF7, on the other hand, is the first video game I have ever played which has a plot which even begins to rival that of my favorite fantasy novels. Is it far less complex? Yes, and that's what I'd expect. However, it is the first game where the motivation drawing me on wasn't just, "What's going to happen next" but also, "What new truths will be unveiled?" It's the first game that I thought was worth replaying after beating it, not just to reminisce, but also to get a completely new experience. After having learned the truth, I just wanted to play the entire first disk again with my new knowledge. For me, this is such an important feature of a plot. My favorite books are those for which it is a completely new experience to read them the second time. FF4, FF6, Chrono Trigger; no other game was really like this. Even the revelation/plot twist in Lufia I only colored the game forwards, not backwards. FF7 is the first game where I actually saw tiny hints and clues that led me to accept an atmosphere where only the content, not the existence of shocking revelations came as a given. I can understand that RPG players who really care about challenge or about game play have some pretty good reasons to think that FF7 was a mistake. But I just don't understand why they feel that the plot was neglected. Yes, it was confusing, but I think that almost all of the confusion was explained by the end (and those that weren‰t, in my opinion, were purposefully left vague and unexplained). I've met people who didn't understand it because they didn't examine all of its beautiful, subtle, nuances - but these are the people who don't care about plot. How could people who consider plot a virtue think that FF7's wasn't a good one? Please, please, please, post this and answer me. Even if you have to cut some stuff out - I know this was long. But I really have been wondering about this for a very, very long time... --Vierran of House Guaranty |
From my perspective, the primary gripes about FF7's plot is the focus problems. Ninety percent of the game's plot is dedicated to deciphering the past of Cloud. He's the main character, okay, we can deal with that. But for all the time spent, and all the atmosphere and cool scenes put across, it's never clearly explained what the hell actually happened, which is frustrating. Case in point: many people hated the ending, because it provided only thematic resolution, not a denouement of the action or drama. A plot you need to think about is all well and good, but some of the aspects were just plain confusing to many people, and a story that nobody gets is a story that's no good. The other focus problem is how thinly developed many of the other characters were. There was precious little interaction between the "minor" characters like Cid, Red XIII, Barrett, et al. They existed as support for the Cloud Plot Machine, and apart from the designated Personal Quest (one apiece, no more), they never really stood on their own as characters. They were all followers, not characters. Whew. That's all I can say after writing all that. Whew. - Allan Milligan, exhausted | | | |
