[PS2] Final Fantasy 12 - Unappreciated or underwear

Originally Posted by Kikoha Hater

I mean there’s a wonderful execution of subtlety to the way the character reveals themselves to players and have a better level of maturity to these characters then those like Squall or Tidus who either Nojima or Kitase feel the need to have them go on this Inuyasha like dramatics.

This is something else I've noticed: Why is it the more "Medieval" Final Fantasy are, the more idealistic the main character becomes? Squall, Cloud and Tidus lived in worlds with technology comparable or better than modern times, but they were significantly more introverted than, say, Zidane or Vaan, or might as well have been living in the Victorian era. It might have something to do with them being the "charming thief/sky pirate" archetype (see: Locke), but it's still interesting.

Originally Posted by Kikoha Hater

So I was hoping that the RPG fans here who feels that the story was underwhelming could do a better a job explaining on why they that felt that 12 story is lacking compared to the previous entries, and for those who liked it what or your feelings on the reviews that I posted?

There are a couple reasons I keep hearing on why many people didn't like the story. For one, there's no sub-plot. Inherently, this isn't a bad thing, there are plenty of stories that rely on just one theme and stick with it, but in this case I think people couldn't find anything in the plot to latch onto when they played it. It was a rebels versus empire scenario pretty much from start to finish, with some lore about the Aeons thrown in to pad out the world and make it more organic. FFXII carried on the whole Ivalice mythos from FF Tactics/Tactics Advance, so it didn't need to devote itself to a lot of expository scenes explaining where the player was or their place in the world. The monster guides kinda gave anyone who was willing all the background they needed anyway, but often at the cost of hunting certain creatures for hours to get info that may or may not be beneficial. The main quest was very point A to point B pretty much throughout (with a lot of backtracking required for nearly any quest), with virtually nothing revealed about many of the characters in the process aside from basic personalities and habits. People like a certain amount of intimacy with the characters they play in RPGs, and it's like the more you *wanted* to get involved in this story, the less it actually gave you.

The translation was excellent, though. I won't argue against that because honestly I can't see a bad side to it. I wish Alexander Smith did more games.

Most amazing jew boots

I understand, Rotor. I'm of the opinion that a game doesn't have to have a story to be successful - after all, we don't need a reason for Pac-man, some kind of food-deprived hockey puck, to be running from multicolored ghosts in a maze located in some dark and infinite limbo. The game stood the test of time because it had simple yet solid gameplay and widespread appeal. A game should be just that: a game. One with rules and programming that make it a solid, understandable, and enjoyable experience to anyone who picks it up. RPGs, though normally outside this boundary, are not necessarily excluded.

*However*, I also stand behind games that have good stories, and are able to give us an interesting plot in addition to gameplay. I'm sure you do too, 'cause everyone loves a good story (and why not have the whole package) but I think we can agree that it's not the end-all, be-all factor for a game, RPGs included. If a game were all about story, it would be a novel, right? In FFXII's case, I think Square was purposely trying to inject some brevity into the series' scripts, if only because they'd gotten so many mixed reviews for projects like FFX. It could have also had something to do with its many delays, like Dark Nation pointed out. While the lack of a strong narrative wasn't inherently bad, the biggest issue I had with it personally was the lack of comradere between the main characters. There has to be a sort of chemistry between the main protagonists for me to really get into it, with each one's strengths playing off another's weaknesses. I know there were reasons to care for the characters individually, like Vaan being an overall lost and uncertain young guy caught up in this flow he has no power against, and I appreciate that Square and Matsuno gave us a main character who wasn't just overly apathetic. It's actually been a year since I've played it, so sorry if I'm totally off-base with the characters here, I just can't remember too many instances where they functioned well as a true team dynamic, and I think that's a reason some people dislike the story as a whole (fair or unfair as it may be).

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Rotorblade

You didn't like Balthier's mentoring Vaan? Or Vaan's sort of initial unease around the royalty and Basch? The party was generally together due to actual convenience of common interest, and their relationships generally all stuck that way. Which I found quite refreshing. Again, it's not a contemporary character driven story, though I understand where you're coming from. As do I understand where others are coming from. I wish I didn't feel like some guy defending, oh say, Chrono Cross, in this regard.

Heh, If you could defend Chrono Cross from a character standpoint, I'd be pretty impressed. It's a mystery to me why so many party members were included.

Don't feel like you're being outnumbered here, there are lots of people who share your opinion on the game (the entire nation of Japan, for starters). I like it too, I really do, and I played the heck out of it back when it came out, but my biggest hang-up was the characters and, in particular, there roles in the story. Penelo was confusing to me because I could never quite understand her role in the group, or her place in the story. Vaan's friend, sure, but why her specifically? Ashe was a fantastic design, a young lady who was strong and determined but not your stereotypical tough girl - but I could never quite figure out why she kept taking center stage with the story. If Vaan were the true protagonist, why was he in the background of so many important scenes? If he was the proverbial "you" in this game, why was his contribution so little? I hope you understand what I'm getting at - I don't *hate* the characters, I just don't fully understand some of them.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.