Final Fantasy XVI (spoiler review, end of blind play-through)

Final Fantasy XVI attempts something simple: a classic FF story- like one of the first five games -with cinematic realism.

With the creative direction Square Enix has been going in for the last few years, a turn-based game was never likely. FFXV and VIIR mainstreamed the action-RPG for Final Fantasy.

Meanwhile, in the gaming landscape in general, turn-based RPGs are thriving in niche communities. My favorite recent examples of this are the newer Persona games and a curveball from UbiSoft that I want to review here sooner or later called Child of Light.

Classic turn-based RPGs still have their place, but Square hasn’t relied on them in awhile.

We knew that FFXVI was going to be an action-RPG. Which is not the Final Fantasy a lot of us grew up with. Final Fantasy has always been a blend of gaming and storytelling, though. This is where it gets classic.

The centrality of the storytelling makes FFXVI feel like a hyper-cinematic game like Life Is Strange.

Not the same genre at all but the focus on story is equivalent. The hyper-realistic cut scenes and the limiting of the scope to immediate relevance and plausibility has a cinematic effect. I would recommend this game more to a fan of Life Is Strange or Heavy Rain, so long as they also like action-RPGs.

So if you’ve heard there’s a ton of cut scenes and it’s linear, you heard right. This involves something else that the fan base appears split on: the lack of a party. The player controls Clive directly for most of the game, which limits the audience perspective to one character.

Square Enix obviously wanted to embrace the button-mashing freedom of solitary melee. This was likely the influence of Devil May Cry developer Ryota Suzuki who worked on FFXVI. The closest basis for comparison, for me, would be the Salt games from Ska Studios and Vigil: The Longest Night.

Lots of freedom with one character and no player-identification with any other can make a narrative-focused game feel isolated. At the same time, the other characters appear more autonomous and therefore more real. The boundary between Clive’s agency and everyone else is firm, which builds immersion.

This is especially evident when a looming catastrophy hasn’t happened yet and appears preventable. The clash with Garuda felt very reminiscent of the Eikons at Phoenix Gate.

Both Benedikta and Ifrit creep into danger. When Ifrit brutally pulverized Phoenix, I kept wondering if I did something wrong to make that happen. Benedikta is both in and out of control. She is the head of Waloed espionage and is capable of far-sighted manipulation. At the same time, she is caught in a crossfire. Her duty to keep the second fire Dominant captive is the only reason things escalate at Caer Norvent. She has a duty; but after her first battle with Clive, he instinctively saps her dominance over Garuda. The agony of this loss is visceral. At that point I wondered ‘Was any of this ever necessary?’

Of course it was. Benedikta was operating under a clandestine plan between herself and Barnabas to unite the Eikons and their Dominants, by force if need be. She is duty-bound and she is uncomfortably aware of it.

Before her first clash with Clive, Benedikta attempts to recruit him. She makes the same offer to her old flame, Cid. The player has already seen her emotionally and sexually manipulate both Hugo Kupka and Barnabas Tharmr. We know she’s a puppet mistress. After her dominance over Garuda is stolen, though, these repeated offers have the same effect as Clive’s ultimatum.

Benedikta never would have handed over the second fire Dominant and Clive never would have joined Waloed. After she noticed the absence inside of her, I wished one of those things had happened anyway. Her repeated offers tell us that she was aware of her lack of autonomy in all of this. She cannot do otherwise; her only hope is that someone else can.

In an earlier post during my blind play-through, I mentioned the dissonance between Clive’s conviction that he must have killed Joshua, as the Dominant of Ifrit, and the circumstantial evidence indicating that it’s not that simple. This tension is exacerbated by Clive’s prior thirteen years as a warrior-slave. For thirteen years, he had nothing but brutality and grief. As Clive’s only connection to the past, his grief became all-important. Living for one thing, and one thing only, is precarious. The highest hope is that the one all-important thing never changes.

Clive’s realization that he’s the Dominant of Ifrit changes the one all-important thing.

Without his place in his world, the full weight of all that trauma and grief comes crashing down and Clive starts to wrestle with suicidal ideation. When this happens, Cid does his best to reason with him but that only goes so far. To Clive, Cid is a reliable and good man, but still a stranger. Clive only attempts to think logically once he is able to talk to Jill. When Clive and Jill return to Rosalia, the suicidal ideation sits uncomfortably beside his growing emotional awareness. I wondered if he was really going to walk into his own death just as he’s beginning to understand his feelings.

That sense of teetering risk was magnified by Clive’s exclusive connection to the player. On one hand, it can’t happen; that would be an awkwardly short game with an awkward ending. But Square has conducted bizarre experiments before. At the same time, Clive’s feelings weigh strongly in that direction and he has only lately, tentatively, begun to think of alternatives.

This tension, for me, was more interesting than the quest for revenge was. After we learn that Clive will not imminently commit suicide-by-monster/other-Dominant/Echo, his commitment to the Hideaway is a breath of fresh air.

Maybe this is nothing more than my interpretation. What makes me think it might not be (or, at least, not just my interpretation) is that it sets important reference points for some of the most powerful scenes afterward.

The storytelling is absolutely central to this game. It’s not an even split that relies on visual and circumstantial storytelling, like Metroid or Bloodborne. Like I said, think Life Is Strange. Or, better yet, Vampyr with more action-RPG emphasis. The division with Final Fantasy XVI is closer to sixty-percent story and forty-percent game. That’s something that will either make or break it for a lot of people.

Plot isn’t everything but- if you want a story that carries its own weight -then plot has work to do. Like other Final Fantasy games, there are plot points that depend on the player’s inferences. The more important the plot point, the more important it is to express it. If an important plot point is communicated by implication, then the circumstances that imply it must succeed.

There are genre conventions that address this. A well-written detective story depends on the reader observing things while they happen and connecting dots before the mystery is solved. A number of Final Fantasy games have attempted this. Their biggest success was with the original FFVII. There are certain details in XVI, though, that are built up by understatement that can be easily missed. Many of them set up the story’s final act.

And the storytelling, like I said a million years ago, is where we find the deconstruction of classic Final Fantasy.

As far as I can tell, most of the lore precedents for XVI were established before VII. We got crystals, summon monsters, ancient founder civilizations, elemental magic, corrupt institutions and moral reversals. All of which were Final Fantasy touchstones before the jump to 3D. This short list of old standards are the main ingredients.

In the west, many gamers associate games with alternating mechanics with JRPGs. Many westerners likely encountered combat screens and birds-eye exploration screens for the first time with JRPGs.

Like I said at some length in an FFVII post, these divisions had a basic appeal to the imagination back then. The combat screen is not a literal depiction of a battle. Things like active time bars and experience points don’t have any diagetic existence within the fictional worlds. When I first got hooked by VII, I used to wonder if the Dorky Faces and Hellhouses are literally real or are representations for things like hauntings. At that point, we also know that summoning Bahamut in VII doesn’t literally lift the ground beneath your foes and vaporize the floating island in midair. Summoning Ifrit in X won’t leave regular craters in the ground behind you.

As the most cinematic Final Fantasy, XVI does not have this separation between representation and reality. Shifts in proportion are implimented as cinematic themes.

One of the most memorable cut-away cinematics focuses on the ongoing war between Sanbreque and Waloed and their respective Eikons: Bahamut and Odin. Sanbreque has just lost ground in a border war and Waloed is marching inward. Odin steps in and is met by Bahamut in a battle that probably would have been depicted a million different ways in older FF games, especially from the player’s perspective. With as much abandon as summoning Knights of The Round in VII or Ark in IX for sheer amusement. There were comparable moments like Phoenix Gate and Caer Norvent but our first look at Bahamut and Odin goes further. That was the first time I felt like I was watching a cinematic version of what battles between summon monsters would look like from an earlier game.

Other details of the event draw your attention to other differences of scale. These two Eikons are the totems of nations, with armies behind them. The entrance of a single Eikon into a military battle is a stretegic decision. As we saw earlier with Shiva and Titan, two Eikons is a gamble for both sides. After winning the strait of Aurtha, it was worth it for Odin to press the advantage on behalf of Waloed. Sanbreque can continue to fight with an army and get wiped out by the giant flying kaiju on a giant flying horse…or they could try to hold their ground the only way they can: with their own Eikon. So Bahamut manages to keep Odin at bay and shortly afterward receives word of civil unrest at home. Prince Dion won’t leave the field because- once he does -Barnabas can turn into Odin and destroy the Sanbrequoi army. Barnabas would never leave the field for the same reason. Meanwhile, riots at home have struck close to the Sanbrequoi capital.

Sir Terrence adds, with worry, that they will not be receiving any previously-requested reinforcements. Those forces are needed at home. Meanwhile, Sanbreque is playing defense with a dwindling army and an Eikon.

The haplessness of Prince Dion adds to the dramatic scale. So does the worldbuilding forces at work in this scene. Clive’s own battles reach greater proportions later with Titan and Bahamut. But the confrontation between Clive and Barnabas in Waloed is different. It made me feel that, for the first time in the story, Clive was approaching the level of Eikon mastery that Dion needed to hold his own against Odin. This is built up by a moment of dialogue that implies that there has never been a question of royal succession in Waloed: Barnabas is corporeally ageless and has ruled his country for eons. When Barnabas and his mother first landed on Waloed’s shores, there were cities and territory to conquer, so I hesitate to say that Waloed has only had one king…but it definitely looks like it.

In any case, Clive only rises to the level of a divine combatant once he is pitted against an ageless human who has lived with his Eikon for mutliple human lifetimes.

If it makes sense to talk about a Dominant, with an Eikon, literally becoming a god of their nation, then Barnabas has done it. In a ‘might is right’ paradigm, Barnabas is the most ‘right’ and epitomizes what Clive and Cid’s Hideaway are fighting against.

If the narrative use of graphics and proportion is a strange thing to dwell on, consider how rare it actually is in Final Fantasy. Even XV couldn’t have every explosive spell or Astral summon leave a permanent mark on the continuous map. Which is not a problem: it’s rational game design. We don’t need to see a literal, in-world consequence of every mechanic because we understand we’re playing a video game. All of which is why XVI is so different for not allowing the player to do anything that’s not directly explicable in-world. When exceptions materialize, they have exceptional consequences, such as Clive being the only Dominant to control more than one element.

In my own writing, I try to remain aware of something I think of as plot economy. Everything a storyteller introduces is something that an audience will notice. Every innovation has consequences that can either help or hinder the body of work. The uniqueness of Clive is a good example of this. The crux of its economic value is introduced almost immediately. Just before Lord Murdoch is killed by Ifrit, he says that there is only one Eikon for each element. Cid confirms this. Another Dominant, Benedikta, can create lesser emanations of her Eikon Garuda. The Eikons Shiva and Odin both are accompanied by semi-divine companions: Torgal and Sleipnir. Conversely, Ifrit and Phoenix can combine into a single Eikon.

The doubling, splitting and combining is introduced by Clive and it’s never far from him. This is introduced beside the pivotal use of visual storytelling: the uniting of the Eikons.

Bahamut is usually portrayed with multiple floating blades, but in FFXVI it’s reminiscent of Garuda’s doubling with the Chirada monsters

As the absence of open world exploration accommodates a set narrative, it’s worth talking about the gameplay that is present. This is, obviously, the most combat-oriented Final Fantasy ever made.

Other than the Dissidia games, of course. Among Square Enix RPGs, though, XVI is the most combat-oriented. Yet not without precedent: both Crisis Core and Type-o were heavily combat-focused with limited narrative freedom. What distinguishes XVI is the possibility for new combat builds with each Eikon absorbed by Clive.

Things hit a sweet spot once every Eikon is unlocked. Eventually, you can even ‘master’ the circle button moves which leaves the range of move-sets pretty wide open. My usual is a fast/aerial combat set based on Garuda with preference given to airborne Eikon abilities in the other two builds (up to three can be socketed). I made a range-fighting build using Ramuh and Bahamut abilities. I nicknamed it the Mega Man build but the combat is still more action-RPG than run-&-gun. Ramuh’s circle ability, Blind Justice, is a good slow-burn strategy against foes with high defense.

Blind Justice consists of launching electric projectiles that cling to the target and explode the next time you use an R2 Eikon ability with square or triangle. This delay means that you have a chance to launch as many as your patience will allow for maximum impact. This also brings the skill requirements back to my usual speed/rogue preference.

Shiva’s Cold Snap ability with its temporary paralysis might feel like a good fit but don’t do it. The amount of time needed to launch a few Blind Justices is better served by enemy cool down time and distance. And Cold Snap requires melee distance.

Cold Snap is a better neighbor for melee abilities that need a hot minute to charge. It’s a dash/leap variant that allows you to pass through enemies while briefly freezing them, which works great in conjunction with a “rogue”-styled move set. With Cold Snap mapped to the circle button, my two favorites for the square and triangle slots are Rook’s Gambit and Upheaval.

The best of the mixing and matching only opens up late in the main scenario, though, with most of the experimentation happening in ‘Final Fantasy mode’. Combat is the central game play mechanic and the tougher post-game battles with late-game enemies showing up earlier give the biggest incentive for experimentation. That being said…the trial and error experiments don’t usually take long to wrinkle out in the first half, before Clive takes over the Hideaway.

While combat may be the central mechanic, it’s not the only one. Even if a game play-centered review might not consider the cinematic cut scenes, story beats or lore text…it should be obvious that just as much effort was spent on these details as the game play. Even if not directly relevant to game play, those details were clearly intended as an equally significant part of the overall experience.

Case and point: side quests. Many of which are pretty common tropes in RPGs. In FFXVI, the game play in side quests will consist of interacting with NPCs, fetching, fighting and light exploration. A roster of bounties for boss-tier monsters ocassionally intersect with some of these jobs. With these familiar side quests, everything else has to do more work, such as gameplay, graphics and the exceptions to the rule.

The plot gets in on the action: after the death of Cidolphus at Drake’s Head, Clive becomes the leader of the Hideaway and the current bearer of the Cid moniker. He is at the heart of the community’s leadership, which makes him responsible for the people who depend on the Hideaway for protection. This gives the side quests something that they should have more often in other games: a point. It makes sense for him to be intervening in the matters of others and it makes sense for the people of the Hideaway to expect this.

There are also chapters of the mainline story that resemble side quest-like activity, such as travelling the world map and looking after material needs and political relationships of the Hideaway. These demands of infrastructure and problem-solving restore part of Clive’s birthright. He may not have the title but he definitely lives the life of a Duke with subjects.

There are side quests that flesh out the world of Valisthea. Most frequently: the lives of Bearers under the increasingly brutal crack downs. At the same time…there are far more random fetch quests, running stuff back and forth and hunting monsters. Many side quests just aren’t very rewarding, in terms of gameplay or worldbuilding. This seems like the kind of problem that could have been easily solved if Square Enix just spent a little more time developing Final Fantasy XVI. Many gamers complain about Square’s long development cycles but this is one instance where they should have taken longer.

This is the problem with XVI’s side quests: Clive, once he inherits the name Cid and assumes leadership of the Hideaway, has more of a reason to do “side quest stuff” than most RPG protagonists. Clive has an authortitative title and it comes with the messier responsibilities of leadership. In this way, the “side quest stuff” has direct relevance and it makes sense for Clive to address them whenever he can…and whenever you can is how side quests work. But the side quests needed more actual game design, which lets down the perfectly good ficitonal set-up.

Another concept that depends on the harmony of graphics, writing and gameplay is the dungeon experience. You’ll be moving the story a lot just from walking around between different regions. There are also smaller, more limited infiltration gigs that involve destoring the Mothercrystal in this or that country or rescue missions. The only time I really felt like I was entering a “dungeon” in a typical RPG sense was when the Ash continent and its ruling country of Waloed were finally unlocked.

Two continents with one being mostly dead reminded me of Final Fanasy XV. As the “open world” FF, XV missed an opportunity by putting Niflheim on rails. XVI is far more linear but it’s desolate “final dungeon” actually felt liberating. In XV, Noctis is connected to a wider world of context (at least as a young adult, before the flash-forward). When Noctis and his retinue show up in Niflheim, they have context from reliable, institutional sources. When they see how suspiciously empty Niflheim is, there are a few reasons the player could imagine based on the geopolitics experienced by the main characters.

In XVI, Clive embodies something of an institution himself: he leads the Hideaway. XVI is also set in a world without the (twentieth century) media infrastructure of XV. Waloed is also more comfortable with naked aggression than Niflheim. Niflheim, of course, had a long history of warring with Lucis. But in the continuity of XV, Niflheim is at a crossroads. There is a militaristic ploy hidden in their final act of diplomacy which sits uncomfortably beside knowledge that Niflheim is gambling with it’s very last diplomatic opportunity.

Waloed waved bye bye to all that a long time ago and are secure in the knowledge that they are no one’s friend. Monarchies in Valisthea are typically held by the bloodlines of the Dominants. Many Dominant-monarchs hesitate to take to the field of battle because, on one hand, the ability to transform into the giant, kaiju-like Eikons is a major military assett. On the other, the Dominants are hereditary rulers and it’s not easy to bet your monarch. The Dominant bloodlines and their control over the Eikons appears to serve a function similar to nukes in our world: a deterrent rather than a serious option. Barnabas Tharmr, the King of Waloed, regularly fights alongside his army as Odin. Dion, the prince of Sanbreque, is seen as uniquely brave for transforming into Bahamut and meeting Odin on his own terms every time. Waloed is clearly willing to cross lines of traditional conduct that other Valisthean nations are not.

Waloed openly buys up resources in other countries after exhausting their own and their espionage apparatus is relentless. In the present of the story, any connections Waloed has to other nations are secret, such as the collaborations with Dhalmekia and the Crystalline Orthodox. In polite society, Waloed is a pariah state. Benedikta, Cidolphus, Sleipnir and Barnabas gather a lot of intrigue simply by being from Waloed as well as the fact that none of them say anything about it. Benedikta or Barnabas wouldn’t talk because one’s a spy and the other is the head of state. Sleipnir is a supernatural being; a kind of familiar for the Dominant of Odin (Barnabas). Cidolphus is a defector, though, and presumably has no love for the homeland that made his life and his duty impossible. The only reason Cidolphus would keep quiet would be personal plans of his own and/or a visceral avoidance of the memories. Waloed therefore has more of a mystery to explore than Niflheim.

It may not have been the total exploration feast I wanted it to be but the Waloed segment also had the most satisfyingly complete ‘party formation.’ I know I know: that’s not what this game does. If it did, though, the most complete party would be when Clive, Joshua, Jill and Torgal all go together as a party toward the enemy’s home turf. This is also, like I said, when Clive’s mastery over all the Eikons is at its most satisfying during the vanilla play-through.

However familiar we become to Clive’s unique powers, though…it remains a mystery in the world he lives in. A mystery with consequences for the other more familiar worldbuilding details.

Like ancient technology and their metaphysics. Mothercrystals (at least some of them) are close to porous dimensional veils. Clive has a handy dandy game mechanic enabling fast-travel through the obelisks which, in-world, would have to be teleportation using old technology. The shortest distance between two points stops being a straight line with space-time warping.

This makes more sense when we see Dominants lose control near the Mothercrystals. It is also common for Dominants to lose control when the astral presence of Ultima is nearby. This happens with Clive, at sixteen years old, during the asualt on Phoenix Gate. His deranged rampage as Ifrit happens immediately after glimpsing Ultima. The astral presence of Ultima also appeared to be a factor during the Sanbrequoi frenzies of both Ifrit and Garuda. Ultima was physically present when Dion rampaged. There are none of the typical signs of Ultima when Hugo snaps but Hugo’s progressive madness is triggered by Clive and his growing power in the world. When Hugo truly loses it, he physically devours the Dhalmekian Mothercrystal to absorb its power and defeat Clive. Cid, the Dominant of Ramuh, dies when he attempts to shatter the Drake’s Head Mothercrystal while channeling his Eikon. Afterward, we get our first glimpse of Ultima’s true shape, like a sacrifice was offered to open a gateway.

The autonomy of NPCs become more believable when they are made to act before thinking. Slowly but surely, we learn that the madness of the Dominants is the sanity of Ultima: our antagonist. I hesititate to say ‘villain’ since that word is usually thought of as a more human force motivated by human reasons. Maybe that’s nothing more than an antagonist with a personality. Ultima, though, is closer to the monster in a monster movie.

Square Enix has done both kinds of antagonist before. Villains like Kefka and Sephiroth are some of the most beloved Final Fantasy characters. On the other end of the spectrum, there is Orphan and Barthandelus in XIII, who are non-human puppet masters. Ultima may be closer to Orphan than Kefka but he still has a few character beats.

Near the end, Ultima delivers a lot of explication about things that only he was around to see firsthand. Lots of things, such as the insanity of the Dominants around either Ultima or Clive, are explained in his words. Because there are so few other sources that contradict him, we are tempted to take Ultima’s words as authoritative.

Fair warning: the following includes my personal inferences and interpretations.

The meaning of Ultima’s words is so important to the plot that it can overshadow more subtle, adjacent details. Por exemplo- he only tells his side of it. He mentions events where he acted unilaterally but makes no comment on whether or not he was alone. And we’ve seen the Fallen ruins so many times throughout Valisthea that they might fade into the background. He says he was once part of a non-human, non-corporeal society that only found itself in Valisthea after the fall of their homeworld. He also says that the (apparently few) other immigrants he arrived with became the Mothercrystals, offering their magical bounty to the world of Valisthea to shape it into the place that will produce a being called Mythos. Known to us as Clive Rosfield.

Ultima sees Clive as his eventual physical vessel. Clive, meanwhile, destroys the Mothercrystals and absorbs the powers of the Dominant bloodlines. In the end, this is confirmed as a means of “releasing” Ultima’s peers. Only into one body, though, to be subsumed by one personality.

Either Ultima betrayed his own people…or his people were always a colony organism to begin with. What clarified this, for me, was the revelation that Ultima crafted the Eikons based on a common model: Ifrit. There were, apparently, eight original Ifrits which were chanelled, through the Mothercrystals, into the eight Eikons. This makes for a total of sixteen (ta-da!) different Ifrits.

If there’s something from Clive’s childhood that he never forgot, it was his mother’s rejection. Why did she reject him? Because he wasn’t the Dominant of Phoenix and his mother Anabella comes from a bloodline known to be able to create Dominants. Clive was her first child with the Rosalian Duke but, without the Eikon Phoenix, Clive could not inherit the throne. Joshua, instead, became the Dominant of Phoenix. Before the disaster at Phoenix Gate, no one had heard of Ifrit. Just like, in the normal course of things, no one ever sees a prototype. Humans might start out as fetuses but no one you know is a fetus.

The Ifrit mold, it seems, is derived from what Ultima originally was before the “fall” to Valisthea.

I’m tempted to stop here and just do a mythic dive into that but instead I’ll just remind you of a few things: Barnabas believes all human effort is doomed to failure and only through the grace of a higher power do we have any hope. Hugo Kupka is a manic alpha male who constantly bristles but won’t change his behavior to nurture the loneliness that makes him worship the ground Benedikta walks on. As far as Hugo is concerned, no one loved him but Benedikta and once she’s gone there is no one else. Benedikta herself is trapped between knowledge that her future depends on authorities that will never change and she believes that if she could just say the right thing at the right time someone might see reason. Cidolphus helped build a monster, lived to regret it and dedicated himself to a life of good works in a desperate attempt to make amends. Dion is trapped between holding the Sanqrequoi frontier against Barnabas and a father that could undermine his life’s work with bad judgment. Clive barely survives thirteen years of trauma.

The only Dominant that is absolutely, rigidly sane, almost every time we see her, is Jill, the channeller of Shiva. And Jill spent just as much time off camera as Clive did, during the thirteen year flash-forward at the beginning, doing much of the same thing. Clive knows this and even prolongs the raid on the Crystalline Orthodox’s Mothercrystal for Jill to reap her revenge against her former slavers. Clive’s self-image went through several black and white shifts before Jill’s empathy helped him even out. Clive knows this and is dedicated to supporting Jill better than he was supported.

If cracks in your worldview and self-image are how Ultima “wakes up” in the mind of a conflicted Dominant…Clive is committed to not letting that happen to Jill. Unfortunately this also gets into one of the few moments in the story when I truly did feel like calling bullshit: leaving Jill out of the final battle.

The more I think about it the more I think there are in-world occassions for this. Providence, the “space ship” that Ultima is bound to, is suspended in the air. A winged Eikon of some kind, like Phoenix, is necessary. Dion, capable of channeling the dragon Bahamut, also tags along. If Clive can ride on one of their backs, so could Jill. But it’s posible that no one survived the final battle.

Personally, I hope that the attack on Providence wasn’t necessarily a suicide run. Joshua and Dion appear to die while Clive clearly dies. You know what? This is the second part where I call bullshit.

The ambiguity of the ending made me cling to other possible interpretations (ending spoilers incoming). We spent a whole game getting to know someone who is learning to make peace with being alive. But he dies anyway. Clive’s whole arc is about the discovery that the world isn’t just a giant cesspool of evil after all and that it’s worth it to keep going. Ending the story with a noble self-sacrifice feels dead wrong.

The lore precedents are not kind about this, though. If Ultima and his people were a psychic colony organism then they were, in a way, one being. It’s why Ultima planned for Clive to destroy the Mothercrystals and absorb the Eikons. This implies that, in order for Ultima himself to die, any body that could channel him must die to (kinda like Jenova in VII).

This interpretation at least leaves room for a more mysterious fate for Jill. She consensually allowed Clive to sap her Dominance over Shiva because it was the only clear way to avoid the destructive fate of a Dominant. Is Jill a loose end for Ultima to reappear through or did Clive close that door when he absorbed Shiva?

Either way I don’t like it. Maybe lore consistency requires Clive’s death but it felt backwards to the overall thrust of the story.

There is some genuine ambiguity here, though. Before the ending, certain characters express the fear that Valisthea may be doomed no matter what. If the Mothercrystals were introduced by the ‘Ultima race’ specifically to cultivate Valisthea…then it’s possible that the Mothercrystals have become existentially necessary. A few characters even speculate whether or not killing Ultima alone would destroy the world.

Post-credits, we get our biggest flash-forward yet. A household of children are enamored with a book called Final Fantasy by someone named Joshua Rosfield.

Joshua’s death in the final battle appears certain. If Joshua survived it could not have been because of anything on-camera. Yet he was somehow able to write the story of his adventures. If the world ends and people you know are still doing things anyway then maybe the new world succeeded the old. If Joshua reincarnated, other characters may have as well.

I know everyone’s saying Dion and Terrence are the first LGBT Final Fantasy characters…but I remain convinced that the honor belongs to Fang and Vanille in XIII. Even in V, Faris refers to himself in a ways that imply that his male presentation is not /just/ a means of escaping life as a princess and becoming a pirate.

Dion falling in the final battle is also repugnant. LGBT characters are sacrificed for cheap pathos way too often. Like Clive, the lore appears to put Dion on the losing side of this equation. Out of all the Dominants to break down upon contact with Ultima, Dion’s encounter is the worst: he lives to see the consequences of his rampage. His aspiration toward redemption compells him to join Clive and Joshua. Dion wants forgiveness but he also understands that turning into a dragon and going on a killing spree in the middle of your own kingdom is not easily forgiven. The prospect isn’t good. After we’ve seen Clive turn away from suicide-by-duty, it stings to see it happen again so late in the story.

Every other Dominant driven mad by Ultima dies because they think they’re hopeless and then make themselves hopeless after a massacre. Dion stops just short of that. He experiences something none of the victims of Ultima do other than Clive: the struggle to go on, afterward. Dion may not expect much for himself but he does believe in the struggle. He sends his lover and his most trusted knight, Sir Terrence, to look after a mysterious child that nursed him back to health after his deadly rampage. From that moment afterward, he considers nothing but reparation and redemption.

Dion’s post-rampage arc is built by moments like his meeting with the “medicine girl” and his last meeting with Terrence. The hard truth and the duty it leaves him with are established. We know the depth of what Dion is experiencing because we’ve seen Clive go through it.

It’s not as reprehensible as the double-standard of Cecil and Golbez in IV. Cecil had a long and miserable journey toward expiation and all Golbez had to do was admit he was possessed. Maybe Cecil’s journey is supposed to soften us to Golbez but if so that needed to be better established. But the double-standard between Clive and Dion is still pretty bad. Obviously, the “succeeding world” interpreation with different incarnations for the same inhabitants is more attractive, if only because Joshua and (conceivably) Dion and Clive might still make it.

If the successive world is a world without Ultima, in which the whole epic is known only as a fictional novel, then it makes sense that Joshua (and whoever else) would be ordinary people. When the book and its author are revealed, it evokes the very beginning of the game with it’s mysterious narrator. My intuition tells me that narration was reading from the book and the voice was Joshua’s. The opening narration refers to in-world sources like Mors the Chronicler. To the people reading Final Fantasy by Joshua Rosfield, are these references just world-building or are they historical sources? It isn’t clear.

The problem with the succssive world theory is how to deal with the characters who do survive. If the post-credit scene takes place in another world then it follows that everyone in Valisthea died after the final battle and everyone reincarnated in the next world. Which would wash everyone’s hands anyway.

This successive world could furnish a lot of DLC possibilities, since Square Enix is considering DLC for XVI at this point. My preference for DLC would be something centered on Dion in which he gets his happy ending with Terrence. A story in the successive world about Clive would also be a good idea, if only to complete his “don’t kill yourself” arc.

XVI’s developers have also said that Clive and Dion were designed as thematic and aesthetic opposites. Dion spends much of the game keeping Waloed and Barnabas at bay. If Clive is Dion’s opposite equal and Barnabas is Dion’s enemy, it could be fun to imagine alternative timelines where the three serve different roles. Maybe in one of them Dion is Mythos, Rosaria is the seat of Ultima and Barnabas is the tragic Dominant living under an oppressive pall of remorse.

If the DLC is going to be a character-centered piece, like the first season of DLC for XV, I want that character to be Dion. If that one standard is met, I’ll probably be pretty happy with it. Beyond that…the fandom has ben uanimous on their desire to hear more about a mysterious Eikon called Leviathan the Lost. If they address that mystery from the ancient lore of Valisthea, it may be convenient to include other historical events…such as what exactly happened with Waloed to get it where it is.

Mid, with her combined Cid/Celes vibes
Not a parallel situation at all but this shot of Benedikta reminded me of Celes, in the opera, in VI
Look at that FFVI-style Ultima spell

A perfectly good abstraction

My parents were politcal opposites for the entire time they were married. My mother leaned left and my father leaned right. Their beliefs had something deeper in common, though: fear of tyranny. Both of them believed (as they do now) that a person is smart but people are stupid. From this it follows that institutions are zombies animated by the collective subconscious. A zombie is dependant on the magician who raises them. If such a creature is composed of more than one being, then control gets difficult for the magician (who is only one person). If the magician is subsumed by their creation, then the leviathan is bound only by the currents and eddies in the minds of its sleeping vessels.

Another way to put it:

Institutions are not evil. They are only tools. Yet there is a conflict between the ends and the means. It makes sense to want a stronger tool to do a better job. Often, institutions become more complicated as they grow stronger. The strongest institution is therefore the best tool and the hardest to grasp.

My parents had this in common because my mother was a member of the Green Party and my father was a Libertarian. Both perspectives fear the excesses of unchecked institutions. I tried to point this out to them more than once and they never agreed with me.

According to my dad, my mom made the mistake of thinking that one rogue institution can be checked by another. According to my mom, my dad made the mistake of thinking that the dream of a better world (or, let’s say, the social imagination) itself was the path to zombie institutions.

Skip a few decades and grown-up Ailix is still puzzling over this. If there is any love in America for zombie institutions…it can’t be said out loud. To say that an institution can take care of society’s every need, like the parent of a perpetual child, is to invite the accusation of authoritarianism. I agree. A modern American self-identified socialist would not (if asked) agree that social safety net institutions should be run on a non-democratic, top-down basis, as in the former Soviet Union.

My dad, in his characterisation of the left, often quoted Hilary Clinton’s “it takes a village to raise a child” statement. No matter what Hilary Clinton believes herself, she would never win another election for as long she lived if she said, out loud, that “individual autonomy is bullshit and we need institutions to run everything.” Maybe she believes that, maybe she doesn’t, but no one would vote for her again if she said so.

For another oddity, self-proclaimed Libertarians who enter American politics typically end up as doctrinaire Republicans in all but name. For all of their rugged individualism and Ayn Rand quotes, they almost always bend the knee to the right wing corporate and religious prerogative and almost always welch on matters of individual liberty that align with the left.

Libertarianism is the closest thing that exists to a national American ethic; and a societal ethic is more subtle than a political philosophy. Americans in general believe in individual autonomy. No American who wants a political career would openly deny that the thriving individual is the ground on which democracy is built. At the same time, those who espouse individualism the most treat it like a downer of a grown-up who doesn’t understand just how cool capitalist feudalism and theocracy are.

Asking a conservative about this often produces the answer that libertarianism is a perfectly good political philosophy but it can only be the letter of the law. Social conservatives believe in a separate but equally necessary spirit of the law.

Asking a liberal about this often makes them look at you like you’re crazy…while standing on the bedrock of libertarianism to resist conservative overreach. Social liberal values, like social justice, depend on a libertarian ethic. In a world where everyone is entitled to all the happiness that they can claim for themselves without disenfranchising or abusing others, there is no reason to marginalize differences simply for existing.

Like art and architypes, the gap between the American ethic of libertarianism and the realities of American politics is huge.

As someone raised by a liberal and a conservative who both internalized the libertarian ethic, I’m frustrated by the popular wisdom that the American duopoly is permanent. Many conservatives hate the RNC and many liberals hate the DNC. Many of those same conservatives and liberals also think that the Republican and Democratic parties are unstoppable and that the lesser of two evils must always be tolerated.

To paraphrase Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables: Machievelli was not an evil genius- he was only the voice of fact divorced from truth. Hugo wrote that wisdom is the reconciliation of fact with truth. That reconciliation can only come from exposure and dialogue and the conflicts that may arise from it. It depends on contact which depends on patience, compassion and intellectual curiosity.

You probably don’t need one more person telling you that social media is dividing everyone by keeping us in our echo-chambers. But withdrawal from contact ironically makes you dependant on others. An isolated group that acts on a single unquestioned perspective will function exactly like a zombie institution. The hard edges of fact are banished completely and truth is reduced to consensus. Meanwhile: “Doesn’t it just suck that we’re stranded with this duopoloy that no one wants?”

Final Fantasy XVI (first play-through, spoilers, etc.)

After Clive commits himself to the cause of the Hideaway, things move fast. The creeping, environmental menace of the Blight has been present since the beginning. Both the rising power of Sanbreque and her victims have been affected by it. Once Clive and Jill return from Rosaria, Cid offers the first actual speculation on the Blight.

As with Final Fantasy IV, V, and IX, the Mothercrystals seem to function a lot like weather control / energy devices left behind by an ancient, technologically sophisticated civilization. Since the crystals are like machines under human ownership, misuse is always just around the corner. The crystals in XVI interact with an ambient force called aether. In the long run, aether is naturally replenishing but in the short run it can be exhausted. When aether is running thin, the environment starts a downward spiral. This, in Cid’s estimation, is what the Blight is, and it is why the Mothercrystals must be destroyed.

The attack on the Drake’s Head Mothercrystal brings us back to the remnants of the Fallen, Final Fantasy XVI’s founder race. Along with adding the historically familiar (within FF) link between the crystals and ancient technology, we see more Bombs, Iron Giants and Liches. As established in Clive’s return to Phoenix Gate, these kinds of ruins follow a pattern like the Cloister of Trials and and the Aeons in Final Fantasy X.

Sure enough, the Drake’s Head Mothercrystal is protected by the Eikon Typhon. We then encounter a being that looks like they may be an Eikon themselves. They have fluid telepathy and interaction with both humans and Eikons. Joshua seems to have bound himself to this creature as a means of surveillance. This, of course, is Ultima.

This leads to a number of lore-matches. It’s not uncommon for Final Fantasy summon monsters to play a role similar to gods, bodhisttva-like spirits or magical totems. Summon monsters in one game may be summon-adjacent in another, like Omega, Chaos or Doom Train. Ultima is a frequent member of this gray area. Summon monsters are linked with the in-world mechanics more than almost any other game play mechanic, except (arguably) crystals. IV included diagetic functions for other game play mechanics, like combat spells. VII basically turned Holy and Meteor into titanic, cosmic forces. Like I was droning about in a prior post, the link between summon monsters and an ancient founder race goes back to Final Fantasy Adventure on the Game Boy, if not further (the first FF has similar insinuations).

That last one is closer to what is going on in Final Fantasy XVI, but I’ve not yet unraveled Ultima’s role. I’ve only just reached the point where Clive and Bernard are looking for Hugo Kupka (channeler of the summon monster Titan) after the Waloeders rescued him.

Speaking Kupka and related topics, I could not have been more wrong about Benedikta. I think. Since I’m doing a loosey-goosey play through to get a read on what’s on offer, some details may have escaped my attention. I could probably edit prior posts in accordance with discoveries but I just like doing these little multi-post play through thingies. The mistakes add to the cumulative discovery, including false predictions.

Said all that to say: I may have missed some stuff. I remember the hooded figure appeared immediately before the fight with the Garuda emanations containing parts of Benedikta’s soul. I don’t know if he had any sort of…last minute intervention like he did with Kupka. If it was understated, it may have slipped under my radar. I kinda wonder if the hooded figure rescued Benedikta like he did Kupka.

Which brings us to the hooded figure. At first glance, it looks as if the hooded figure is Joshua but he’s clearly not just Joshua. This subtle difference was insinuated in the beginning with the cuts between the more shadowy, non-corporeal hooded figure and the corporeal hooded Joshua. Then, at the end of the Drake’s Head raid, we see Ultima for the first time through Joshua.

This clash ends with Joshua saying that he knows better than to try to kill him. The implication is that Ultima is incorporeal. Joshua has another idea, though. Much later, a Joshua says in a cut-scene that he knows what Ultima is thinking, which gives the impression that Joshua somehow contained Ultima with his own soul. Joshua also makes it clear that this containment does not stop him altogether.

Joshua has no clear reason to rescue Hugo Kupka from Clive. We also know that Joshua is not the only one who constantly wears a hooded robe and that Joshua is bound to at least two non-corporeal beings (Phoenix and Ultima).

In a cut-scene in Sanbreque, Anabella’s young son Olivier is given credit for winning Hugo Kupka over. Let us not forget that Anabella is also the mother of Joshua and Clive. If Ultima is haunting Clive, is partially bound by Joshua and can be channeled by Olivier, it looks like there is a connection with the Rosfield bloodline.

If such a connection exists, it adds weight to the possibility that Ultima is scooping up Dominants that get rekt by Clive. And here we’ve returned to my suspicion that Benedikta may still be waiting in the wings, somehow. I’ve been extremely wrong about her before, though.

Concerning game play: the statements from Square regarding a job system seems to have been referring to the move sets that Clive gains whenever he saps the Eikon of another Dominant. The Phoenix and Ifrit move sets are comparable to something like a warrior or berserker play style. The fire Eikons are good for going in swinging. Garuda’s move set is speed-based melee with an emphasis in aerial combat and is my favorite so far. Ramuh has a range-fighter move set and Titan has a high-defense / high-damage move set, similar to a corsair from Final Fantasy XIV or Barret from VII.

Many of the Phoenix abilities are part of your ambient combat options, regardless of whichever Eikon Clive is attuned to. Many of those include classic adventure game melee, which- combined with Garuda -appeals to my preference for dex builds in Bloodborne.

The dev team were, for sure, not lying when they said that FFXVI had one playable character. One could make an argument for Torgal being the only genuine “party member”, but I have a lot of fun coordinating Torgal’s attack patterns with my own. It even adds something to the side quests, since Torgal is the only party member that always comes with you when you deviate from the mainline story. Maybe this is just a cheap shot for the animal lovers, but I appreciate it. Clive’s deep alienation at the beginning makes me…I guess…weirdly grateful for a fine hound that never leaves your side. If this makes me a sap, I can be okay with that.

Speaking of side quests, that’s another strong point. Not that this game is free from some typical, silly side quests. I’ve recently discovered the Viva La Dirt League YouTube channel with their Epic NPC Man skits. Greg, the garlic farmer of Honeywood, captures a lot of the silliness that have become normal in JRPGs. Greg is constantly offering a quest to round up his sheep, who have “run amok.”

Just like many JRPGs…FFXVI is not immune to “my sheep have run amok” NPCs. Not nearly as many as XV, though (XV had the worst case of “sheep run amok” NPCs in the history of Final Fantasy).

Other than that, though, this game adds something to side quests that I don’t see as often as I would like: a point.

After the destruction of the Drake’s Head Mothercrystal, Clive adopts the mantle of Cid and continues his mentor’s life’s work (our Cid wasn’t even the first one to use the name).

As the new Cid, Clive is now responsible for the Hideaway, a shelter for formerly enslaved magic users. As the de facto leader, it makes sense for Clive to be involved in the different levels of administration and providing. These aren’t a bunch of randos whose sheep ran amok; they’re desperate and Clive has accepted the responsibility of a provider. Clive himself was once enslaved and branded, with other Bearers.

Even before then, Clive’s branding is tied into side quests. Early in the game, while you’re away from the Hideaway, randos outside the Hideaway will recognize Clive’s facial brand and will make obnoxious, condescending demands, offering rewards which you are instructed to “pass on to your master.”

This stops happening after the attack on Drake’s Head, but it sets up the character significance for Clive adopting the role of Cid. He’s not just a provider; he’s a provider for his own people.

More to come. If you’re reading this on the main page, keep scrolling for my older FFXVI posts. If you’re reading this in a link, click the arrow at the lower left of the screen.

End of blind play-through w/ final review

Final Fantasy XVI (first play-through continued, partial spoilers)

Let’s get the rough stuff out of the way first:

The facial rendering and body language is only top notch during the cut-scenes. During typical game play, they range from FFXV quality to just above VIIR. Just above VIIR is, admittedly, pretty good though.

Concerning the narrative-

Clive’s level of responsibility in the fatal clash between Joshua as the Phoenix Eikon and the Ifrit Eikon.

I’m still not finished with the game so there is still room for this to be solved. I’ve only just reached The Veil, during Clive’s attempt to locate Jill and Cid behind the Sanbreque border.

As things stand now, though, I am not altogether clear on why the apparition of Ifrit at the Phoenix Gate necessarily means that Clive killed Joshua. The implication seems to be that an Eikon can only manifest through their current, corporeal Dominant. If Ifrit manifests during the lifetime of Clive, it may follow that Ifrit must necessarily manifest through Clive. That’s my best effort at trying to deduce why Clive would feel that his guilt is unavoidable.

The battle between Phoenix and Ifrit is watched by Clive, as a teenager, immediately before he was enslaved by the Imperial military. If Clive simultaneously watched the fight while participating, that would be some pretty hardcore dissociation.

However…I don’t specifically remember Clive on the sidelines during the fight. During the fight, the player is rooted in Joshua’s perspective. It just sort of feels intuitive that Clive is watching. We also hear Clive’s screaming as Ifrit pounds Phoenix into a bloody pulp.

Then again, the two giant Eikons do a serious amount of dodging and flying. They probably moved a fair distance away, which would call the screams of Clive into question. If his screams can’t be heard from where he was originally standing, then we must be hearing them for another reason- such as Clive being rooted in Ifrit the way Joshua was rooted in Phoenix.

Yet the apparition of Ifrit is only triggered by the mysterious hooded figure. If Clive went apeshit because he was suddenly forced into an unfamiliar, primal, non-human perspective…it was clearly triggered by a third party. That’s why I don’t buy Clive’s guilt.

It’s also possible that the player is meant to feel this dissonance, and that Clive’s guilt is important only in his individual character arc. In that case, the dissonance would serve as a motivating instinct leading the player to the correct conclusion.

There’s a lot that can go wrong with that setup but there is also a lot that can go right. Worst case scenario, the player/viewer/reader feels alienated from the viewpoint characters. When a story’s point of empathy is abruptly shut down, it’s hard to bounce back. Best case scenario, you feel intimately connected with the viewpoint character.

In the context of the rest of Final Fantasy, a split or reversal in the arc of the main character is often associated with the two layers of crisis in my earlier post.

Put simply: the archetypal Final Fantasy story rests on two layers of crisis. The first one is often social or institutional. The second, deeper layer is more mysterious but often intertwined with the first one.

It is also normal for this shift between two layers of crises to occasion a shift in the main character, which usually changes their motives. Cloud’s altered memories in Final Fantasy VII is probably what most people think of first, in this regard. IV introduced a dramatic moral reversal in Cecil that goes further in the opposite direction when the second layer of crisis starts to emerge. Every single playable character in VI (other than Umaru and Gogo) has their motives changed or influenced in the World of Ruin.

This, I imagine, is what is happening with Clive in XVI when he begins to think that he killed his own brother in a magical altered state.

When he starts to believe this, Clive begins seeing visions of a hooded man in a cloak, like the figure he originally believed was the Dominant of Ifrit before realizing it was him.

The hooded man never appears to be truly, physically close, which implies that Clive might be the only one who can see him. Then Cid makes it clear that he sees the figure as well. In that moment, Cid is probably saying what the player is thinking. I, at least, felt like it was firmly established that the appearance of Ifrit is conjured by a third party, even if he does manifest through Clive.

Not everyone will carry this baggage going in, but the hooded figure has a vague resemblance to the updated version of the Sephiroth clones in FFVIIR. While this might be my own subjective problem, it still felt like the game was taking some risks, between resembling Cloud’s psychic torment a bit too much on one hand and the dissonance between Clive’s beliefs and the perspective of the player on the other. A dissonance that could either alienate the player from the viewpoint character or create an immersive sense of isolation beside the viewpoint character.

When the alternative possibility is not immediately accepted by the protagonist, or appears fake at first (if it turns out to be real), I find that it works better.

A protagonist who accepts the alternative possibility as soon as it’s presented to him is a greater risk. As a writer, I would almost always choose to have the protagonist wrestle with the possibility before judging it one way or another. It does not take long for Clive to decide, however, that he is responsible for the death of his brother Joshua.

This begs the question: are there any apparent reasons why Clive may make this judgment easily?

One of them is simple and quiet enough to be overlooked: Clive was a slave-soldier for thirteen years in the Imperial army. The conditioning of that experience is hinted at immediately after the thirteen-year flash forward. When he realizes that his unit is fighting with a company of Bearers that includes Jill, Clive’s immediate course of action is not at all obvious until he starts to act. His choices are absolutely binary: watch another loved one die and keep his future, or lose his future to save her life. In that moment, Clive seems to realize that a life with that guilt is not worth clinging to and tries his luck with a rescue.

His most decisive act, after thirteen years of slavery, probably happened through a self-destructive impulse. In conversation with Cid, he says that the hope of vengeance was the only thing that kept him going as an enslaved soldier.

This is where things start to get interesting. Jill recovers from her injuries and swaps stories with Clive of their suffering in the last thirteen years. When Clive mentions his discovery that he is himself the Dominant of Ifrit, he frankly states his belief that he killed Joshua in a frenzy. The concept of suicidal guilt is always just one little step away from being mentioned but is rarely addressed directly. Only one line from Cid appears to do that.

It’s possible that Clive’s suicidal ideation is a subconscious pressure behind his eagerness to classify himself as damned and deserving of punishment. One reason why I loved the scene where Cid accepts the help of Clive and Jill in Sanbreque is because it’s only then that Clive appears relatively free of the wish to die.

The walk between Cid’s Hideaway and The Veil actually feels cathartic- for the first time, the story is tinged with hope. At that point, I realized my feelings were involved. Not a bad place to be, in a story.

I also think I’m vibing with the combat system. It’s an adjustment after FFVIIR, but it’s just so fun after awhile. I’m actually enjoying the tougher enemies and the trial and error with the different Eikon abilities and strategies. I find myself thinking things like “I might not get out of this alive but let’s do it anyway.” That’s a good sign in my book.

I’ve never been particularly averse to the action RPG direction the series has been headed in since XV. It’s normal for each numbered Final Fantasy to add their own unique game play. Personally, I’ve always felt like story archetypes and world-building was what made Final Fantasy itself, anyway.

Which is something the fan base has been debating, lately, with regard to XVI. The only time I started to ask that question was with XV, since the ending in the base game goes for both tragic love and teenage wish fulfillment. Rather than developing outward, the main character curled inward. The canonical ending was originally planned to appear at the end of a second season of DLC. It got cancelled, so that canonical ending now exists only in the Jun Eishima novel The Dawn of the Future. It’s a decent little story collection, but the only ending that was ever offered in video game format was the one seen in the original FFXV, excluding possible insinuations in Episode Ignis or Episode Ardyn.

As FFXV exists now, it still has it’s first ending, which is the biggest deviation from the archetypal Final Fantasy story in a mainline title.

Another recurring idea in the Final Fantasy series: ancient magical founder races or ancient aliens. It’s interesting to me that Zelda is also getting into stories that involve advanced aliens interacting with a swords-and-sorcery world.

Rather like XV, many of the classic Final Fantasy monsters (Iron Giants, Bombs, etc.) appear exclusively in cave-adjacent ruins of an ancient, technologically sophisticated society. I therefore couldn’t help noticing that one of the mini-bosses in the ruins below Rosaria is called Lich, like the Four Fiends in the 8 bit games or IX. Even the ancient tower of the Vandole founder race in Final Fantasy Adventure on the Gameboy feels like an adjacent concept. Final Fantasy Adventure (later rebranded as Sword of Mana) even associated the summon monsters with the Vandole founders. The sword that permits Sumo to enter the tower is guarded by a firey being called Iflyte in the Gameboy original and Ifrit in subsequent remakes.

Finding our way back to the Four Fiends, a gateway to another plane of existence called Memoria in FFIX happens directly above the Iifa Tree, which is itself an ancient piece of technology. Creatures resembling the Four Fiends guard the means to activate some of this technology. Deep in Memoria, the party fights the Four Fiends repeatedly, as if the monsters in the outside world were physical “versions” of them. After those versions are no more, their backup data still remains in Memoria. Finding Lich inside of the Fallen ruin below Rosaria makes sense.

This association between the Fallen and the classic Final Fantasy monsters also makes me excited to get to FFXVI’s new game plus. It is, apparently, called ‘Final Fantasy mode’ and, along with a higher difficulty scaling, also includes monsters like Bombs and Iron Giants in different places and behaving differently.

Further posts to come. Hit the left arrow at the bottom of the screen navigate back to my first post on this play-through. Or keep scrolling, if you’re reading this on the main page.

Final Fantasy XVI (first impressions- light spoilers)

The facial rendering is the best I’ve seen since Vampyr on the PS4. Not even Final Fantasy VII Remake or FFXV matched Vampyr’s facial rendering and body language. Similarly, this game has also got me to do something that no other recent game has- persuade me to go easy on the analogue stick because I felt like it.

I’ve played several games that require different kinds pressure on the analogue stick at different moments. Some of them convince you to do it strategically, usually survival horror (most recent one for me is The Callisto Protocol). But FFXVI was the first game for which it just feels right, sometimes.

A part of it is just how beautiful and lifelike everything is. If you’re in the middle of a crowd or have someone following you, it actually feels more natural and courteous for the same reason it would in real life.

I wouldn’t say FFXV or VIIR failed at that, exactly, but it’s easy to forget sometimes. Which can lead to some interesting situations. Like when I got bored in XV and decide to wander off the beaten path. After I chose a random direction and started wandering, I would notice the body language of the main characters. At a normal clip of with moderate pressure on the analogue stick, Noctis has this self-assured jog. You could imagine him saying something like “Just a little longer, guys!”

While you’re just randomly exploring. In the middle of the woods, at night. I used to giggle at that.

This level of immersion says something about how carefully the graphics are being used. As new as the action RPG format may feel for an old school Final Fantasy lover, Final Fantasy XVI is attempting something very simple and familiar.

The overall premise is not very different from the classic 8-16 bit Final Fantasy games. The main departure is hyper-realistic/cinematic proportions. In particular, the gap between the world-building and the non-diagetic game play has never been so close. Early on, we see magic-wielders use their powers for the kind of mundane, practical uses you would expect in a society with magic. People do things like conjure fireballs to light dark spaces and use conductive crystals to generate water for goblets.

This is emphasized by the early segment when the game places you in the perspective of Joshua, the Dominant of the first fire Eikon.

I’m aware that the developers have stated that you only control one character for most of the game. But the early Joshua segment felt a lot like the beginning of FFIV, in which the party was joined by overpowered class specialists who would usually die quickly or otherwise drop from the foreground. The point of this was to allow a comfortable range of exploration with the different class functions, to learn strategic footing by the time one of the permanent party members reaches the higher levels of specialization.

I’m still early in the game so there’s a lot I don’t know. I’ll probably do another post when I finish. But for now, it looks like the point of the Joshua segment was to give the player a frame of reference when abilities like his become more accessable later.

Then there’s the perspective shifts to Benedikta, acting against the player character Clive. It’s common for Final Fantasy games to confine the scope of the perspective to “party members.” Both VIII and XIII had continuity shifts to other characters who appeared to be outside of the direct plot, only to bring them in at the last minute. VIII did this with Edea and Laguna and XIII did it with Fang, which also illuminated the motivations of Vanille. There’s plenty of game left to prove me wrong on this, but if this were any other Final Fantasy…the presentation of Benedikta would signify that she’s going to be a party member.

Other than world-building and apparent story structure, Final Fantasy XVI has a few themes that are so specific that they’re almost references. When Clive, Torgal and Cid are en route to Lostwing, Clive’s overall motivation is made explicit. Clive witnessed the death of his younger brother, who was a child, while he himself was a teenager. After the murder, Clive was conscripted into an invading army of enslaved Bearers. Years passed which only compounded his grief and trauma with rage.

The unpacking of this loss in the forest surrounding Lostwing felt a lot like the introduction of Cyan in Final Fantasy VI, whose arc begins with a devastating loss and shortly transitions to the Phantom Forest. Granted the resemblance to the scene in XVI is thin, but the rays of light shining through the canopies over the streams felt a lot like the Phantom Forest.

Then there’s the X-factor character: the Dominant of the second fire Eikon. Final Fantasy games often begin with one layer of societal or institutional crisis. The pressure might come from a government, a religion, a corporation or anything else, so long as it’s institutional. The first layer is often subverted by a second crisis. To name a few examples of this, VII has Shinra for the first and Sephiroth for the second, VI has Gestahl and Kefka, X has Yevon and Jecht, XIII has Barthandelus and Orphan, XV has Niflheim and Ardyn, etc.

In XVI, the institution is Waloed combined with the influence of Benedikta. If Benedikta is the source of the first layer of crisis, then the second layer (at this early point in the story) looks like it’s going to come from the Dominant of the second Fire Eikon.

Click the right arrow at the bottom of the post for part 2.

Analyzing Final Fantasy VII: intro

In an August 2021 Washington Post article, Hironobu Sakaguchi and Nobuo Uematsu discussed their work on Fantasian, which was about to receive its final update. Although Fantasian was an online IOS game, the collaboration allowed Sakaguchi and Uematsu to reconnect with their original approach to making RPGs.

Sakaguchi and Uematsu are two of the oldest and most important influences behind the Final Fantasy series. Both were involved in the first three entries on the NES (‘87-‘90) and both were present and active all the way through Final Fantasy X (2001).

Gamers who were hooked in those early years probably noticed a few common elements. No early Final Fantasy story was sequential with any other but there were many recurring story elements. Storytelling shared the foreground with gameplay. Since Final Fantasy was the most visible face of the Japanese RPG in America, many Americans associate Final Fantasy with separate battle and navigation screens. There was something else, though, that’s not so easy to summarize.

When FFIV came out on the SNES, the chibi art style probably excited little comment. It made sense that Square would rely on its last reference point from the NES. FFV still had chibis, but now the chibis had facial expressions and body language. Mega Man and Mario pulled off huge visual rehauls with the jump to 16 bits. Final Fantasy played it safe, with the increased graphical capabilities used to build on what came before. The simple sprites became more doll-like, with facial features reminiscent of anime. IV, V and VI used the 16 bit graphics for enemy sprites and backgrounds during the combat screen, which looked either painted or drawn. All of your player characters were still chibi dolls. These specialized uses of complimenting art styles even lasted until the move to the PlayStation. Between VII and IX, the battle screens were filled with polygons, along with the “overworld” section. The exploration screen now had polygon characters against a more detailed pre-rendered background.

Many of those qualities disappeared after X, when Nobuo Uematsu and Hironobu Sakaguchi began to step back.

From the Washington Post article

In the Washington Post article, Sakaguchi and Uematsu discuss Fantasian as a return to their JRPG roots. This game was developed in 2014 and the contemporary software was once again used to build on their traditional approach to JRPG storytelling.

Hand-made diaramas were photographed for environments containing the doll-like, polygonal characters. When talking about his recent play through of FFVI, he compared the art style of early FF to a puppet show.

Think about the tone of some of those early to mid FFs. Particularly IV and VI. Themes of wartime atrocity, mental illness, suicide and the end of the world stand side by side with moon rabbits looking for their calling and a pun-loving octopus. Whimsy and tragedy co-exist easily in non-literal storytelling. The same flexibility that enables erratic tone shifts also enables some unexpected emotional blindsides. Final Fantasy VI was the first to deviate from the traditional swords-and-sorcery subject matter but Final Fantasy VII brought the puppet show into 3D.

Final Fantasy VIII had a futuristic story with a heavy anime influence. IX played it safe with a Jim Hensen/Henry Selick-like fantasy world. X was a meeting between the old and new guard. Final Fantasy VII was a fifty-fifty split between the traditional puppet show aesthetic and the later variations.

The world-building of VII is only slightly more daring than VI. The main variation is in its complexity. VII is also less interested in a traditional fantasy origin story: human society, in VII, is divided on how to interpret history. Which made it feel a little more modern than VI. FFVII had whimsy but nothing on the level of Namingway in IV or Ultros in VI.

The use of the chibi-doll polygons against the pre-rendered backgrounds brought a level of surrealism. When I first played FFVII on the PC around 2000, there was a glitch in the opening FMV and one of the chibi train attendants was briefly superimposed over the crowded streets of Midgar. As the camera rose over the cityscape, the train attendant who looked like a doll ran offscreen.

The glitch put one of these guys over the birds-eye view Midgar panorama

At first, I thought this was intentional. I had played Super Smash Bros. recently which revolved around a magical glove that brings toy Nintendo characters to life. Toy-based metafiction was precedented in game design, even before Smash. The glitch never repeated, but it did suggest to me that there were actual human characters here represented with symbolic toys. Other things, like the combat system (which is obviously not a literal representation of what is going on) backed this up.

From the Washington Post article

The varying art styles in the FMVs are a major reason why the Washington Post article rang true to me. Fully animated cut scenes have no function other than supporting a narrative. Their purpose is identical to flavor text. In a high-stakes move to a new platform with an unprecedented Western ad campaign, Square was limited only by their imaginations and hardware. The decision they made was to have some cut scenes with chibi dolls and other cut scenes with more realistically-proportioned characters.

I’ve always remembered the scene with Barret comforting Tifa after Cloud falls through the suspended structure over Sector 6. It has an almost Rankin/Bass stop-motion quality. Tifa’s escape from Junon to the Highwind also had chibi dolls.

There were also interesting moments when the dialogue boxes fleshed out details of more intimate moments. Things that couldn’t be depicted with the chibi dolls, like Jessie rubbing the soot off of Cloud’s face or Barret’s whiskers scratching his daughter when he cuddles her. The normalization of these smaller, non-literal emotional beats establishes believability for more serious moments later on, such as the Nibelheim flashback. Even the more comically awkward scenes like Cloud’s cross-dressing infiltration benefited from this.

This also strengthened the immersive quality of the dialogue boxes: it’s easy to hear the character’s voices in your imagination when you’ve already accepted that there are more intimate, human events that exist whether or not you see them. The pathos of the non-literal character interactions also brought dramatic weight to the story’s larger-than-life scale.

Critics of remaking FFVII across multiple games overlook this. The puppet show’s distance from reality opens a wider scope for storytelling. By using graphics to establish symbols rather than direct representations, there is less of a need to let the ordinary unfolding of life and physics bog down the narrative. If Final Fantasy VII was ever going to be remade as a modern video game with realistic or cinematic graphics, it would have to be a very different story…or find another way to convey its scope. To tell a story with a realistic sense of scope, breaking the story into multiple games is the best way to cover every point of faithfulness and give it all room to breathe.

But none of those cinematic, hyper-realistic games will have the same tone. Motion-capture and granular texturing directly effect how the tone informs the scope of the story. Everything would rely on a sense of human physical proportion.

The way in which the puppet show aesthetic exploited the intersection between tone and scale even has a relationship with the literary genre referenced in the name.

Let’s get some basics out of the way:

Final Fantasy is set in a fictional world subject to fictional conditions. Magic is abundant. This, by most standards, makes it fantasy. A looser standard (but no less prevalent) is that a fantasy story has magic.

The influence between tabletop RPGs and the modern JRPG video game is apparent. Dungeons & Dragons is a widely invoked similarity. D&D is obviously the most prevalent tabletop RPG. It wouldn’t surprise me if Hironobu Sakaguchi, Yoshinori Kitase or Kazushige Nojima were regular DMs among their friends when they were young. It’s also easy to be reminded of D&D during combat in the 16 bit Final Fantasy’s, what with the artistically-rendered enemies and the chibi doll player characters (are they chibis or are they miniatures?).

The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings enjoyed American popularity during the sixties. Obviously Tolkien was a foundational fantasy writer. The ubiquitous medieval settings, orcs, elves, halflings and wizards of modern fantasy were also shaped by the popularity of Dungeons & Dragons, though. Tabletop RPGs have been a popular hobby since even before Gary Gygax got in on the action. Like LotR, it was big in the sixties (let us not forget that the first three FFs used a magic system resembling spell slots).

I know there are innumerable different opinions on what constitutes any genre. But I believe that fantasy is defined by a relationship with mythology. More than swords and sorcery, more than treasures of the elements and magic swords, more than races of supernatural creatures. The power of fantasy is channeled through mythology.

J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Lord Dunsany, J.M. Barrie and every other foundational fantasy writer were all aware of this. H.P. Lovecraft was aware of it and tried to incorporate this mythic influence into his own work. Tolkien, Dunsany and Lovecraft were so smitten with the desire to capture the language and tone of ancient texts that they became famous for being dry. In high school, I had a classmate who said that The Fellowship of the Ring was accessible as historical fiction, The Two Towers felt like historical fiction with heavy ancient world atmosphere and The Return of the King was “the Old Testament.”

While Tolkien emulated the tone of ancient poetry and epics, C.S. Lewis coordinated his relationship with mythology less directly. He insisted that The Chronicles of Narnia was not a Christian allegory: it was a depiction of a world that ran parallel to his Christian world view. Aslan was not a symbolic representation of Christ; Aslan was literally Christ in the world of Narnia. To use a concept from a separate religious tradition, Aslan could be described as an “emanation” of Christ. Lewis’ Space Trilogy dealt with other worlds that exist before and after their respective Falls from grace in their respective Edens.

Lovecraft wanted to capture a sense of classical authenticity denying us cosmic validation. A voice from the past informing the present that the search for meaning is doomed to fail. While Hans Christian Andersen wrote fairy stories from his imagination, his work reflected the influence of both European folklore and Christianity.

Even Dungeons & Dragons includes (both then and now) a ton of mythic creatures and phenomena. If imagination is the playground of the role playing game, then there is no excluding folklore.

I’ve always suspected that fantasy storytellers are motivated by a personal relationship with mythology. And mythology is our oldest storytelling tradition of dealing with the unknown and what matters most. At the same time, they are not reducible to an allegory or a metaphorical treatise. The first humans to hear the first creation stories did not think that they were listening to imagination or metaphor. Many modern fantasy readers and writers (like myself) don’t think the value of fantasy can be reduced to anything pragmatic. A good artist works with the outside world, so it makes sense to incorporate things like social commentary and matters of personal belief and observation. Those are things that people relate to and they are some of the building blocks of good storytelling. But no single one of those dimensions captures the essential value.

On some level, we still hear literal truth within mythology.

Or, perhaps more accurately, we hear experienced truth, and no experience is reducible to a single specific meaning. Meaning is an effect of experience, not a cause.

Many ancient myths, to modern readers, are simple stories. Things can be deep and powerful while being simple. A good pop-rock musician can make three to four minutes do a lot of work. Simplicity is probably one of the oldest qualitative benchmarks in the history of creativity.

High artistic benchmarks usually have a high failure rate, though. And fantasy is simultaneously one of the most beloved and most derided literary genres. Opinions tend to cluster into child’s play, garbage or the highest of the high.

Final Fantasy itself is a good example of what can go wrong. One of the most common criticisms of the series is that things get complicated. I have nice things to say about the story of XIII, which might put me on thin ice to begin with, but not even I can reconcile the world-building between XIII-2 and Lightening Returns. The story and the cosmology of the first XIII game worked well together. The world-building of the next two games completely ignored each other’s continuity.

World-building minutia can create a sense of authenticity and immersion. But it can just as easily derail the tone of the main story.

FFIV also has cluttered world-building. But it didn’t excite the same western exasperation that XIII did. The graphical difference between the first SNES Final Fantasy (IV) and the first PS3 Final Fantasy (XIII) necessarily effects the tone. The tonal impact of the graphics is one reason why the science-fiction aesthetic of XIII grated on me the way it did. While scrolling between the stats of your party members, a picture of the relevant character will appear with brief facial movements. The intent was to create the effect of a face seen on a security camera recording immediately before someone “pauses” it. Whenever something happens that resembles magic, there are usually musical cues signaling a tone shift from the futuristic atmosphere. XIII also had a relentlessly serious tone. A dark or dour tone won’t break a story on it’s own but when it’s stacked on top of extremely detailed world-building, the risks add up. In addition to the tone and the world-building, the graphics of the PS3 entangles its sense of physical and emotional scale with human bodies, faces and voices.

It could be argued that a technology-heavy, futuristic setting does not have to draft detailed renders of human characters into a less fluid tone. Wall-E was a computer-animated movie about a sentient AI cleaning robot which kept the tone as whimsical as anything else Pixar did, like Toy Story. Wall-E also waited until the second half of the movie to introduce human characters, though. The robots, with their wildly varying shapes, were allowed to set the tone by being the only characters in the first act.

FFIV may have had a long and complicated story but it also took itself less seriously. Or maybe it’s overall aesthetic made it more approachable.

The game starts with Cecil, a military commander in the fictional nation of Baron, having just raided a village under orders from his king. When he questions the morality of these orders back home, he is punished with a menial delivery task. Upon arrival, the object he was told to carry turns into a magical weapon of mass destruction and levels the surrounding city. Cecil realizes that he has been trapped in a “blood in blood out” arrangement. His opinion no longer matters because he has already shared the guilt of his comrades. In spite of this, the plight of a young girl who was orphaned by his unwitting attack causes him to defect.

He leaves the scene of the carnage with her because he knows his fellow soldiers will likely sweep the area looking for survivors. She fights him and hates him every step of the way. Soldiers of Baron soon try to take both Cecil and the girl, Rydia, into custody, and he fights them off. This is the moment that changes Rydia’s mind about him.

There are a few different ways to take this. Rydia’s mother was not killed in the same wave of destruction that destroyed her home. Rydia belongs to a people called summoners who have symbiotic relationships with magical beings. Before entering the village, Cecil was attacked by a dragon which he succeeded in killing. This dragon was in an entangled symbiosis with Rydia’s mother. Because of Cecil, her mother was dead before he even set foot in her village.

Most people would not easily forgive the person who kills their mother. It also must be said that Cecil did these things unwittingly. He had no way of knowing that the dragon was anything but a dragon or that the package he was delivering would basically explode. On the level of conscious intention, Cecil is innocent, but intentions do not ameliorate trauma. Trauma can also narrow perspective with panic. While fleeing Nazis in WWII, it’s safer to travel with a defecting Nazi than a Nazi true believer. Or maybe the example of his violent insubordination actually convinced Rydia of his commitment to protect her.

Since this is all happening with chibi dolls, it’s easy not to react the same way as you would with a live-action portrayal. The tone doesn’t try to force your empathy. This is not the same as saying it doesn’t matter anyway: there definitely would have been a wrong way to do it. Rydia’s initial hatred and resistance to Cecil makes her eventual acceptance more convincing. More so than it would have been if, for example, she never blamed him for anything. It would have rang equally false if Rydia leapt from her bed and ran to hug Cecil as soon as he fought off the soldiers who were sent to capture them.

The doll-like appearance of the character sprites do not invite visceral empathy or identification. It would have been easy to make it cartoonish. The simple presentation goes over better with more concise dialogue anyway. If your conversations need to be brief, it would be intuitive to lean into melodrama to extract the most value from the shortest amount of space. Instead, after fighting off the soldiers, Cecil tells Rydia that he wouldn’t dare to ask for her forgiveness or affection but he will still do everything he can to protect her. Her reply: “Promise?” This is the first non-combative statement she offers him.

I’m not saying Final Fantasy IV isn’t melodramtic or escapist. A lot of characters appear to die with maximum pathos who turn out to be alive again later. You travel to an underworld filled with dwarves and fairies and even end up on the moon. It’s as escapist as it gets. But FFIV is a better game than it would have been if it leaned into a cartoonish tone to compliment the cartoonish appearance. FFXIII made thorough use of the PS3’s graphics for both spectacle and grittiness. IV balanced it’s appearance with writing, whereas XIII’s writing accommodated the appearance. The result was that XIII appeared more melodramatic to westerners (at least) than the 8-16 bit games.

Balancing cartoonish graphics with text and scenarios that are not cartoonish is a win but it is not the sole strength of the puppet show. There’s something about a lack of physical realism that enables easier mental access to certain things. Anne Rice said that her supernatural novels enabled her to talk more directly about spirituality and philosophy than her realistic ones. The appearance of something like a puppet may be cute, quaint or artsy. They look like simple representations that allow for artistic freedom but not literal truth, so it’s easier for aesthetics to dominate the first impression. If you start with aesthetics, it is a short leap to imagination. With a little bit of emotional realism (rather than visual), non-literal representation can access vast potential.

This is why I find it so easy to be reminded of non-textual allusions throughout the first Final Fantasy VII for the PS1. The game starts in a city called Midgar with two horizontal tiers: the ground and the upper plate. At the beginning, it’s easy to overlook the fact that you are in a mako reactor immediately beneath the upper plate. After y’all blow it up, everyone escapes onto the upper plate and from there they catch a train to their hideout on the ground level.

This is one of only two glimpses of the upper plate in the whole game. And the story basically starts there. The opening cutscene starts with Aerith emerging from an alley in a crowded sidewalk beside an intersection where we briefly run into her after the bombing mission. The opening cutscene makes it visually clear that both Aerith and the route to the train station are on the upper plate but it’s easy to forget; especially since our starting player characters are so ideologically aligned with the people living under the plate.

I remember at least a few fans talking about a scene near the end when the player characters parachute onto Midgar from above as if it were the only time we ever see the upper plate. Apparently, more than one western gamer did not recognize the upper plate in the early bombing mission. Especially since your main task in the beginning is blowing up a mako reactor, which are tower-like structures between the two plates anyway.

While you’re there, though, consider the visual cues. Immediately after your escape, you crawl through a tunnel into an open indoor space with black and white floor tiles and destroyed statues. From there, you emerge into a street beside skyscrapers and strips. It’s still early in the game so it might not be obvious that you would only see things like this on the upper plate. The shadow play is directed by fluorescent streetlamps in the pre-rendered backgrounds. The general, pervading darkness is suggestive of a night sky. There are giant banners advertising a play called Loveless, a few of the footpaths are cobblestones and the cars look like they came from the forties or fifties. It has a New York-flavored, classic film atmosphere. After this brief passage across the upper plate, the party returns to the slums below by train.

Although the ground-level slums are very different from the upper plate, the disembarking on the train station below still maintains the atmosphere of nighttime urban romance. A young couple happily reunites beside you. You overhear them talking about a separate, abandoned train depot that’s rumored to be haunted. The girl is wearing a leather jacket and punk swag that could have come from the eighties. Cloud arrives at the Seventh Heaven with everyone else and reunites with his childhood friend, Tifa, who apparently got him involved in the bombing to begin with. Cloud and Tifa then share an extremely non-literal flashback.

We’re in the Sector 7 slums, under a plate, but a brief cut appears to take us near a water tower under a night sky. The adult chibi-dolls are soon replaced by child chibi-dolls. Another cut brings us back to the bar beneath the plate. The player learns, later on, that the flashback depicted something that happened on a separate continent.

During the moment where the setting of the flashback is inhabited by the adult characters, we’re not quite in the memory yet. We’re just seeing adult Cloud and adult Tifa talk about it. Basically, we’re being introduced to a psychological use of environments at the start of the game. Considering the role that belief and delusion play in the rest of the story, this has got to be intentional.

Before this early stage of the game, there are other indications of non-literal storytelling that could be easily overlooked. The game begins with a long credits roll, like a film. The starting screen does not have a logo. The only text are your two options: ‘New Game’ and ‘Continue.’ The only image is Cloud’s buster sword, angled with it’s point downward, surrounded by a spotlight. If you manage to get KO’d, you’ll see a game over screen with a broken strip of film and a film reel canister off to the side. If you see that screen before escaping from the reactor, the old-fashioned cars and cobblestones imply an even more direct classic film aesthetic. The only thing that stops me from making comparisons with noir is that there are too many colors (however subdued).

On this note- when development started on Final Fantasy VII, it was originally planned to take place in twentieth-century New York and would have told the story of a detective. The detective eventually made it into the final game, after many revisions, as the character Vincent Valentine. Square’s New York-based detective concept would later be used for Parasite Eve, which was released very closely to Final Fantasy VII. Parasite Eve was something of a survival-horror game and therefore had a darker tone than Final Fantasy. The police-procedural plot structure and the darker atmosphere landed much closer to noir than FFVII.

Maybe classic film (noir or otherwise) was an early influence in FFVII. Maybe not. I lean toward affirmative. Especially since discovering Vincent, the original detective character, will connect several plot threads. His entrance to the story functions as an arch-clue solving a number of mysteries. To say nothing of the WEAPON monsters later on, which are evocative of the Japanese kaiju movies of the sixties like Godzilla. That last part clinches it for me but I’ll have more to say about that later.

So. The torn film in the game over screen and the buster sword, spotlit as if onstage, are tucked into forgettable moments like losing battles and starting the game up. As out-of-the-way as they are, though, they point directly toward a kind of metafiction. When I first played the game on PC, the glitchy train attendant all but convinced me that FFVII was “acted out” with dolls, like Super Smash Bros. There are less direct indications, though, that also point to toy metaphors.

On the train returning everyone to Sector 7, Jessie shows Cloud a digital wire-frame model of Midgar, 1/10,000 scale. Later in the game, we pass by a physical diorama of Midgar in the Shinra Building. There is an odd set of collectible items called 1/35 SOLDIER that look like miniature train-attendant polygons. The Temple Of The Ancients is revealed to be the Black Materia and must be reduced to a size small enough to fit in one’s hand. Cait-Sith repeatedly refers to his body as a toy and that he can shift his consciousness from one toy to another. The instruction booklet for the PS1 FFVII says, in Cait-Sith’s character profile, that he primarily resides inside of the cat and the body the cat rides on is a toy moogle that he “magically brought to life.”

That last one feels directly analogous to Sephiroth’s consciousness shifting between carriers of Jenova’s DNA while his original body is sealed in the center of Gaia. It’s also hard to shake an association with Cait-Sith when Sephiroth, “possessing” one of his clones, refers to the “end of this body’s usefulness.” Then there’s Jenova’s only line of dialogue, telepathically addressed to Cloud, calling him a “puppet.”

One of the strengths of Sakaguchi’s puppet-inspired design is that it doesn’t immediately draft your visual mind into a literal emotional language. The emotional and psychological dynamics are furnished entirely by dialogue and situations. Depending on preference, this can either completely stop immersion or it could completely immerse you. I found it immersive but then again I’ve never thought it was necessary for video games to emulate film (not that they shouldn’t- modern video games can and do succeed at that; I only mean that it is not universally necessary).

In a lot of my gaming posts, I’ve talked about how the entire gaming industry jumped on board with voice acting, whether or not it was a good idea for all games. Rather like reading, I’ve always appreciated dialogue-boxes because it puts the voices of the characters directly in your head. For me, the puppet show succeeds in a similar way. Especially in moments like Rydia’s acceptance of Cecil in FFIV, when a few careful writing choices can get you across the distance of abstraction.

From the Washington Post article

I think a lot of the aesthetic references and allusions feel more direct because of the abstraction between the puppet show and the story it tells. It’s a reason why so many thematic bells and whistles in Final Fantasy VII are so close to the surface. It’s why I can’t play through that beginning part without being reminded of old detective movies from the forties and fifties.

BTW- if it seemed like I’m on a noir kick…it’s ’cause I am ^^

One particular trait of noir is relevant here: moral ambiguity.

To simplify the history of film a bit- German expressionism was a close cinematic cousin to noir. Expressionism freely incorporated abstractions on a few different levels- characters that embody and control things like gods and wildly creative painted backgrounds. Expressionist film establishes it’s own internal consistency rather than depending on real-world reference points. If expressionism is set in it’s own psychological world, noir is set in it’s own moral world.

This moral abstraction is most typically established by bleakness. Many detective movies, both then and now, are as gritty as the conventions of the day permit.

Both expressionism and noir depend on an internally-consistent world that attempts to support itself rather than bringing in literal outside reference points. Just like the fantasy genre. Early in A Song of Ice and Fire, George R.R. Martin made sure to include things like “to the Others with X” and “Others take X”. By replacing ‘Hell’ with ‘Others’, he using the structure of common English euphemisms to establish the internal frame of reference of the novels. It’s also evident in one common criticism of The Matrix trilogy: too much in-world jargon. One review said that the scene where the Oracle says that the Keymaker is with the Merovingian is like hearing someone say “the thing said you need the thing which is held by the thing.”

Building your own internal consistency which is separate from the outside world and relatable only by analogy is hard. And like any other art form, brevity and efficiency often have to co-exist with that. Removing the possibility of direct, external reference makes things really simple and, as in so many things, simple benchmarks are often the highest and most difficult.

While fantasy may share the abstraction of expressionism, Final Fantasy includes a noir-like flourish that raises the stakes. And it’s nothing new. It’s the thing that usually gives you something to pay attention to within stories, without which people will say “nothing happened”: conflict.

More specifically, a conflict of meaning. In the most memorable Final Fantasy stories, some conflict of meaning is explored. In IV, Cecil goes from a loyal soldier to a righteous deserter. In VI, Terra starts as an unwilling pawn and goes through a variety of paradigm shifts, including (but not ending with) abandoning the quest for a simple life of good works. Zidane starts his quest as a self-interested thief and Tidus begins as a hormonal teenager trapped between puberty and emotional abandonment. Neither of them end in those places. In all of those games, the moral stakes at the beginning are revealed to be the surface of deeper machinations.

The conflict is made specifically moral by a mistaken or misguided source of power. It could be a feudal monarchy, a religious movement, a political movement or a corporation. Final Fantasy begins with an underdog in a corrupt world and then moves on to the reality that the “corruption” is bending under. At that moment, the main character usually has to re-evaluate their motivations.

On to the next part

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2021/08/13/final-fantasy-creator-sakaguchi-fantasian/

https://www.thegamer.com/cloud-strife-new-york-final-fantasy-vii-development-concepts/

Ambrosia Parsley’s recent material

From the Amb. Parsley Bandcamp

Like a lot of people, I first became aware of Ambrosia Parsley and her band Shivaree from movie soundtracks. Goodnight Moon, from Shivaree’s first album in 1999 (I Oughtta Give You A Shot In The Head For Making Me Live In This Dump– one of my favorite album titles ever) has been in a number of movies over the years. The one I saw first was Kill Bill Vol. 2, but it’s also on Silver Linings Playbook and at least a few other films. Someone I saw Kill Bill Vol. 2 with said it was a cover of a Leonard Cohen song.

It isn’t. Speaking as a writer, though, I would be pretty stoked if someone had mistaken my lyrics for Leonard Cohen. And lyricism is a real strength of Ambrosia Parsley. Her lyrics are both very visual and very conversational. Leonard Cohen has gone there before but it’s never really been his central strength. Cohen’s lyrics were extremely conceptual and economic like Allen Ginsberg. Ambrosia Parsley is closer to Jack Kerouac.

I don’t want to imply that Ambrosia Parsley doesn’t have concept-driven material either, and she definitely knows how to let a small collection of words do the work of many. But her writing for her Shivaree body of work definitely emphasized her ability to be explosive and colorful. There are some really cool surreal touches on the first two Shivaree albums, I Oughtta Give You A Shot In The Head For Making Me Live In This Dump and Rough Dreams. The lyrics to Goodnight Moon are suggestive and abstract and Daring Lousy Guy closely pairs the mental image of a flat-in-front (potentially plastic) Ken doll boyfriend getting spanked without pants on. That combination of mental images snuck up on me- her voice is just so rich and her music hugs the complicated edge of simple, straight-laced songwriting. For an example of her more conceptual lyrics, see her recent singles Atlantis and Let a Wolf.

Maybe that’s why her lyrics run such a wide range. She’s actually quite the disciplined musician. Maybe the effusive lyrics counterbalance the economy of the songwriting. David Bowie and Warren Zevon took advantage of that balance often. This actually makes my heart go out to Ambrosia. She exemplifies an aspiration of mine.

I’m a messy writer. And I love other messy writers. I love that Salman Rushdie included a number of vignettes in The Satanic Verses that fleshed out the world of the story but didn’t explicitly move the plot. I love it when Anne Rice (R.I.P), Neil Gaiman and Alan Moore do the same thing. Ambrosia also appears to be a messy writer but she’s a messy writer who understands simplicity. I’ve always aspired to that.

If you’ve never heard of her, Ambrosia Parsley’s music has always been somewhat close to what people think of with the words ‘singer-songwriter.’ The first two Shivaree albums included elements of country, folk and alternative rock. Daring Lousy Guy (Shot In The Head) and After The Prince And The Show Girl (Rough Dreams) are clearly influenced by R&B. Thundercats, John, 2/14 and Reseda Casino could probably do rotations on modern rock forums. All of those are from Rough Dreams, though, which was never released in America. John, 2/14 had a music video that aired on European MTV though, and the album charted in France. Shivaree recorded a rather beautiful concert that can be found on YouTube under the name ‘Rough Dreams in Paris.’ Ambrosia’s more complicated and experimental work make it fun to imagine her touring with bands like The Bridge City Sinners or Hillbilly Moon Explosion.

Her more recent material, though, errs on the side of simplicity. And maybe my radar isn’t the best, but Ambrosia Parsley’s recent offerings under the name Amb. Parsley kinda…flew under the radar. I only became aware of them when I saw her Instagram story almost a year ago advertising the single Over the Overlook. She has released eight singles in the last few years, and some years before then did a solo album called Weeping Cherry.

Over The Overlook and Heavy Metal Stacy both put Ambrosia’s conversational voice front and center. Heavy Metal Stacy could fit in alongside some of Ambrosia’s more whimsical and energetic songs like Reseda Casino, Someday or Thundercats. Mexican Boyfriend from Shivaree is less energetic and whimsical but it has a retrospective attitude that could work well alongside Heavy Metal Stacy, in a concert or something. Skin & Bone from Weeping Cherry would also work well on that setlist. Another quieter Shivaree song it could compliment well would be Five Minutes. Heavy Metal Stacy relates stories of a bygone best friend. It reminds me of a few of the totally unexpected friendships from my childhood. Growing up in a smaller, rural place, you make your own fun and you get used to a lot. The necessities of isolation cause some very unexpected (and sometimes very powerful) connections to form. This was echoed in the next single, The Kindness of Strangers.

On the other end of the spectrum are songs like Beneath the Bird Feeder and It Won’t Be Me. It Won’t Be Me is synthy, melancholy and remote with vampiric metaphors reminiscent of the costume Ambrosia is wearing on the cover. The song would be at home on the soundtrack of a David Lynch movie alongside scoring by Angelo Badalamenti. Beneath the Bird Feeder is simple and atmospheric with poetic lyrics about bird seed and falling snow.

Maybe this is an accident of my retrospective listening, but Beneath the Bird Feeder makes for a neat segue to Weeping Cherry which starts with the same solitary, mental point of view with the first two songs, Empire and Rubble.

There are some superficial connections between Weeping Cherry and other Amb. Parsley and Shivaree material, but not a lot. Weeping Cherry doesn’t really sound like anything else that she’s ever done. Maybe this is because of the material that she wrote for Shivaree, which was the band she broke through with, but when I think of Parsley’s writing I think of an outward-facing point of view. She’s just so good at using conversational delivery which always feels a little outward-facing, even if it doesn’t have to be. Weeping Cherry feels more personal and somehow transient. Empire has a soft rhythm that’s both anxious and resigned, as if some leave-taking is in process. Rubble follows with a less pressured voice but just as isolated with it’s speculations on the thoughts of a loved one and one’s own immediate fate. My Hindenberg takes a similar perspective to a more accepting and empathic place.

In case I haven’t emphasized this enough: she writes just as well in a solitary voice as she does in a conversational one. Good Shivaree examples of this are New Casablanca, Five Minutes, Mexican Boyfriend, Stealing Home and Arlington Girl.

Speaking of Ambrosia’s more stripped-down moments, with her voice taking the entire foreground, the title track of Weeping Cherry is a good one. She uses the dominance of her voice to focus on multiple characters. It even starts with a loose third-person point of view: “That was no way for a queen to end / what’s under her bed /never used to be a dark thing.” I’d be happy with an opening line like that for a story. More lines I have to mention: “Well, history / unwashed and unsaid / I left my best dress and my shoes on the bed.” That’s from Skin & Bone but it builds expectation in a way that’s similar to Weeping Cherry. Weeping Cherry looks backward at a story, giving the feelings up front but only fleshing it out bit by bit, so the contextualizing emotion goes through a number of changes. Skin & Bone is more rooted in the present but it uses expectation in a similar way.

Among the eight recent singles, Let a Wolf and Atlantis have the most concise and direct language. No Good In The Daytime is a close third and the more personal associations add depth to the philosophical lyrics. Those three songs would go beautifully with the five others on an album.

https://www.eyekneerecords.com/ambparsley

Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion first impressions (sorta, also heavy spoilers)

Upon this, my second total play-through since playing the original back in 2020, the WEAPON motifs in Genesis’s design during the final boss fight stood out more. It lends potential relevance to the theory that the summon monsters are a kind of emanation that expresses itself throughout all of the FF worlds.

That’s close to the definition of the word used for summon monsters in FFIX & XIII: eidolons (also my favorite name for them since it’s possibly the most descriptive). In FFX, summon monsters are called aeons, a word with ties to Gnosticism which describes an emanation of a spiritual being in a separate, physical plane. Like an eidolon, an aeon is one thing with multiple representations in different places.

In particular, there were two design choices deriving from a WEAPON and an eidolon: Ultima and Bahamut. The bladed halos positioned above the wings is a reoccurring trait of Bahamut in Final Fantasy. The Flare attacks and beam sword attacks are another similarity…to say nothing of Genesis summoning Bahamut repeatedly through the game.

Still less overwhelming than Golbez in the Dwarven castle in the FFIV remake for the DS

Ultima Weapon, in FFVIII and FFXIV has a mouth (or even a face) on their belly, where their human torso emerges from a quadroped body type, like a centaur. FFVII has a little of both. FFVII’s version of Ultima has a round aperture in their chest where beam attacks come from. Similar to Omega in FFX. In the original FFVII, Sephiroth’s first form in his boss fight (Bizarro Sephiroth) has the centaur “transition mouth” between the torso and the equine trunk. Bizarro Sephiroth’s resemblance to Ultima implies something about Genesis’s own Ultima/Bahamut transformation.

Might be a bit of a reach, but the materia in the hilt of the sword reminds me of Ultima’s beam aperture in the original FFVII. Also note how the lower body merges into the rocks

The definition of eidolon is a separate simultaneous presence of something elsewhere, or something that represents something else. If you keep having bad dreams about something (let’s say dreams that scare you) over and over again, that something meets the definition of a scary eidolon. Or if you want to be pretentious about it, an eidolon of fear, or whatever it’s subjective relevance is for you, separate from the literal truth of the thing itself.

Each Final Fantasy game is set in it’s own world but with repeating patterns in each of them. The eidolon summon monsters are some of the few things that remain mostly constant. Since the semi-Greek Weapon names (Omega, Ultima…) and the monsters with the gemstone names (Sapphire, Ruby, Diamond, Emerald, etc) also re-occur…those also appear to exist in the same category as the summon monster eidolons.

So. Remember how the main change to the plot in FFVIIRemake was introducing divergent timelines influencing each other?

In the Final Fantasy universe, the difference between one world and another may be comparable to the difference to one timeline and another. Fan theories fly thick and heavy over that possibility. Since both FFVIIR and FFXV include diverging timelines, those theories now appear to be on to something.

Especially considering the appearance of the three clone avatars that Genesis summons during the final boss fight:

The correspondence isn’t one-to-one, but I think there is a distinct resemblance between these clone avatars and the three Whispers summoned by the Whisper Harbinger in FFVIIR. A developer interview in FFVIIR’s Ultimania guide briefly touches on the possibility that the three minions of the Whisper Harbinger are Kadaj, Loz and Yazoo from Advent Children. I wrote another big long post about the possible consequences of that (link below).

But even without getting into all of my thoughts on that…the Advent Children connection also complicates the possible reasons behind Genesis’ boss transformation.

Does this seem like a weird thing to hyperfocus on? Sorry, can’t help it. Square’s been saying things to the press about Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion now serving a complimentary function within the developing “remake trilogy.” As a prequel, the original Crisis Core had numerous references to the original FFVII. If Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion now represents the prequel to the first remake game, those original reference points take on new meaning.

Is it bad that I wonder what these plays and musicals are actually like?

When the release of this game was first announced, Square used the words ‘more than just a remaster’ in a few different advertisements. At the same time, there is virtually no change in the overall content. Obviously, there’s the graphical upgrade and the streamlined combat system. The DMW slot-machine display no longer takes up the whole screen and pauses combat but rather is constantly going in a smaller section of your HUD. Personally, this made the role of the DMW less apparent this time around. In the original, the full-screen DMW made it easier to notice when, say, there was a number combination that levels up your materia.

At the same time, the quieter DMW in Reunion could reinforce it’s function by fading closer to the background.

A clever dimension to the DMW is how it deconstructs a lot of typical RPG mechanics. It even clarifies a basic effort-to-reward metric at work in most video games. In RPGs, it’s most recognizable in grinding.

To clarify: grinding is repetitively wandering around trying to accumulate the rewards of combat. In Pokemon, you’re doing it when you’re searching one section of tall grass for a particular Pokemon. In most RPGs, grinding is getting in random battle after random battle to hoard experience points. Usually when you’ve hit a difficult place where you just want to brute force your way through because no strategy seems to be working. The whole principle is based on an effort-to-reward system. If you spend twelve hours grinding, you will necessarily do at least some character-building.

The DMW mechanic streamlines this by making the rewards for combat almost perfectly proportionate to the amount of time you spent fighting. The DMW slot combinations happen at regular intervals and the slot combinations are how you level up or grow your materia. An easy battle ends quickly, which means little to no opportunity for the DMW to level up Zack or his materia. A longer (and presumably harder) battle means more time for the DMW to churn out a reward other than a limit break.

As cool as the upgrades to the combat system and the graphics are, though…everything else is the same. Every story beat is the same. Does that mean there are no story changes?

Arguably. It is definitely true that there are no story threads in Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion that are not present in the PSP original. I am still slow to believe that means there is literally nothing to see.

(Except when Cloud and Sephiroth stab each other in the Nibelheim reactor: at the entrance and exit wounds, there is dark gray vapor, like when Sephiroth skewered Barret in FFVIIR and the Whispers brought him back to life. Obviously we never see a Whisper in this game. Maybe it’s a random detail nobody thought about. But it definitely looks like the dark gray vapor in FFVIIR)

Especially since the first PSP version was released closely to the Advent Children film. Advent Children was released in 2005 and Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII originally came out in 2007. After finishing this last play-though, though…I wonder about the connections from back then that I failed to notice because I saw that movie and played that game at very different times.

Big’ol spoilers incoming

I wonder if the helicopter landing outside of Banora happened the same way in both the original and in Reunion. I only played through the PSP version once but I don’t recall any differences from what I just saw in Reunion. I wonder, though. Because what I just saw was kind of shocking.

If there was a difference…the fandom would probably be discussing it right now. If they are, I haven’t noticed yet.

Soo…if the helicopter landing outside of Banora is the same in both versions…then this now ties directly into Kadaj, Loz and Yazoo.

What happens, exactly?

Helicopter lands. Two figures emerge, scoop up Genesis’ unconscious body and leave. One of them says that he will “(b)ecome our brother” and muses about whether or not Genesis will accept this fate willingly.

If that happened in the original…I feel like I would have remembered. But maybe I didn’t. Maybe I ignored it because I chalked it up to a future story wrinkle which might not have manifested. I still haven’t played Dirge of Cerberus, and various online sources agree that this scene relates directly to that game.

Excluding things like an abandoned story line (like the cancelled FFXV DLC) or a connection to a game I haven’t played…it seriously looks like they’re insinuating that Genesis becomes one of the three Advent Children villains. Meaning that Genesis might be Kadaj, Loz or Yazoo. And all that entails. In that event, they probably wiped Genesis’ prior identity and replaced it with one-third of Sephrioth’s mind.

We never see the faces of the two figures from the helicopter. We see that they are wearing SOLDIER uniforms and that they have slightly longer white hair. Kadaj, Loz and Yazoo all have white hair, which I had long assumed was because they were Sephiroth clones summoned for the Reunion at the Northern Crater. Sephiroth killed as many as he could to lend the power of their souls to Jenova’s manifestation. But if he sent out a generalized psychic beacon, summoning every carrier of Jenova cells to the Northern Crater…he would have to make damn sure that he killed them all. Cloud and co. had better hope so, since- if even one was left alive -then that’s a body that Sephiroth or Jenova could transmigrate into. So if Sephiroth “cast a wide net” with his psychic broadcast, there’s always the possibility that one or two cell carriers fell through the cracks.

I always assumed that Kadaj, Loz and Yazoo were three of those unaccounted-for Sephiroth clones. Each one embodies a different quality of Sephiroth and all of them have small, superficial resemblances to him. All three have white hair. At the end of Advent Children, Sephiroth appears to “emerge” from Kadaj the same way that the will of Sephiroth or Jenova could manifest within any cell carrier. Kadaj only transforms into Sephiroth once Yazoo and Loz appear to be killed by the Turks, which even adds a bit of the Reunion metaphysics. When Loz and Yazoo show up again later, they could just as easily be channeling their souls into some other Sephiroth clones that never made it to the Northern Crater.

If there were that many clones, there’s no reason why Yazoo, Loz, Kadaj, Sephiroth and Jenova couldn’t just keep popping up like a whack-a-mole game.

That I took such a scenario for granted leads to one reason why I avoided the original Crisis Core for so long. If each culture of Jenova cells binds to a specific carrier who received them while they were in the womb (like Genesis, Angeal or Sephiroth) then…the plot for the original FFVII would depend on every Angeal clone and every Genesis clone being dead. Other wise, the psychic dominance over the cell carriers wouldn’t be limited to just Jenova and Sephiroth.

Perhaps Sephiroth’s soul could be uniquely empowered since his original body is held by Jenova within the Northern Crater, which is exposed to a Lifestream vein that runs to the center of the planet. Basically, Jenova and Sephiroth are empowered by being immersed in the transmigration nexus for all souls on that planet. That could explain why that pair is so exceptionally represented. For that reason, the clone problem is not world-breaking. But it is still a loose thread.

To return to the relevance of the helicopter scene to the “remake” continuity, though: If Genesis was somehow “absorbed” into the body of a Sephiroth clone, later to become one of the three Advent Children villains…how does that impact the timeline dynamics?

If we trust the Ultimania text, then one of the three Whispers summoned by the Harbinger, Rubrum, represents Kadaj. If, hypothetically, Genesis was later “turned into” Kadaj, that means that the Rubrum Whisper also represents Genesis. It would mean that Genesis is present in the timeline manipulation at work in Final Fantasy VII Remake.

Maybe I’m only freaking out over the helicopter scene because I forgot about it and was blindsided. Maybe it’s only a tie-in with Dirge of Cerberus and nothing more. Only included in Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion because it was in the original and the devs wanted to be faithful. As I type this, I realize this is almost certainly true.

But this new version is, somehow, supposed to a prequel to Final Fantasy VII Remake. The big deviation in FFVIIR are the Whispers pushing over from the timeline next door. The invasion from the neighboring timeline doesn’t rise to the foreground until the very end, with the Whisper Harbinger, the three lesser Whispers (Kadaj, Loz and Yazoo) and Sephiroth.

If Kadaj, Loz and Yazoo were embodied in the three Whisper minions, then little details that resemble that moment in Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion become more interesting. Like the clone avatars that Genesis uses during the final boss fight and their resemblance to the Whisper minions. A small, visual reference to the FFVIIR Whispers becomes harder to miss in conjunction with the helicopter scene.

I’m not saying that this is what it means, but to me it looked like the Genesis clones in the boss fight were a visual reference to the fate of the three clone brothers (Yazoo, Loz, Kadaj) immediately before the clone brothers come together by transforming Genesis. It has an ending-to-beginning symmetry to it.

If Genesis goes on to become a clone brother, then that means that Genesis was always present in Advent Children, was involved in the FFVIIR final boss fight and might even be in Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, the next game in the remake continuity. This would be a hell of a way to create a unique prequel-to-main-story relationship with the remake continuity.

Then again, the story of Crisis Core is fundamentally intertwined with the story of the original FFVII anyway. They don’t have to add extra lore to the PS5 edition for that. It’s possible that Square is saying that Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion takes place in the remake continuity just to drum up hype for Final Fantasy VII Rebirth.

But if Reunion has a specific relationship with the remake games…then it makes sense to re-evaluate the references to FFVII in light of the new continuity. Like how Sephiroth’s function in the original FFVII plot was reflected in both Angeal and Genesis.

All three of them were infused with Jenova cells in the womb. This began with placing them in the body of a woman named Gillian. Angeal receives his dose from Gillian’s body after she was impregnated with him. Separately, Professor Gast took a DNA sample from Gillian and surgically mapped it onto Genesis while he was a fetus. Angeal can use his Jenova cells as a two-way conduit. He can send and receive both information and genetic traits.

Angeal carriers include different species of animals along with different humans. Lazard and Hollander are latter-day Angeal carriers. Before Angeal attacks, he summons several monsters with his cells to combine into. This resembles the Jenova Reunion from the original FFVII without death being necessary to distribute lifeforce between the collective (even if being physically absorbed is as good as death). Genesis can send and not receive.

Sephiroth, who was gestating in his mother’s womb already when she was infused with Jenova cells, can do neither. But Sephiroth’s cells can heal the eventual degradation in both Angeal and Genesis carriers.

After the Nibelheim event, Hojo circumvented Sephiroth’s mind-cell limitation by surgically adding them to both Zack and Cloud. Sephiroth himself is missing, so Zack and Cloud become targeted by the Genesis clones since their bodies are housing the only cultures of Jenova cells in accessible, living bodies. After the fight with Genesis at the end of the game, Zack, Lazard and Cloud all eat Banoran apples together. Ones that look like the apple that Genesis is always carrying around and gesturing with like frigging Hamlet with Yorik’s skull.

I mean I know the reference is probably meant to be Biblical but he’s just so hammy with it

The apples have other meanings in the lore. Genesis’ family used to farm them. But the cell decay of Lazard and the mako poisoning in Cloud seem to get better after they all eat the apples. We also know that Genesis carriers can send but can’t receive and Sephiroth carriers can heal but can’t telepathically interact outside of their bodies at all.

Angeal carriers, meanwhile, can send and receive. Lazard is present with the cells of Angeal. Presumably, he has a two-way conduit with all other Angeal carriers. If the apples carried by Genesis are basically a cell culture prepared for consumption, which would open a presumably one-way conduit with Genesis…the apples shared by the three could enable the two-way exchange to happen with Genesis carriers. All three eat them, including one with the two-way conduit. This unlocks the two-way conduit between Zack, Cloud and Lazard.

Cloud and Zack, meanwhile, are Sephiroth carriers. Meaning they can heal, and they have just received the two-way conduit from Lazard through the apples. So the healing trait circulates between the three of them. This would also explain how Sephiroth carriers can both send and receive in the original FFVII. In the original FFVII, carriers of Sephiroth’s cell culture can even telepathically induce hallucinations in each other’s minds.

Can you believe, just a few paragrpahs ago…I said that I avoided the original Crisis Core because I was afraid it would needlessly complicate the plot of the overall story? Obviously I had no clue what the future held X_X

I know it’s a lot of circular-sounding jargin. But I wouldn’t have cared enough to pay attention if I wasn’t actually hooked by it.

Also, if the cell-exchange between the Genesis, Angeal and Sephiroth carriers enabled the totally uninhibited psychic and biological colony organism that exists in FFVII…that would be kind of cool. Maybe that explanation was intended in the original Crisis Core. But if we’re getting some completely insane curve-ball with Genesis being the former identity of one of the clone brothers…then the subplot about the Sephiroth, Genesis and Angeal cell carriers united through the cell doses in the apples becomes much more important.

(I also don’t see how we wouldn’t end up exploring the potential link between Cloud’s memory issues and the suppression of Genesis’ identity to make him a Sephiroth carrier. If Cloud’s mental problems enabled Jenova to subvert his sense of self then it makes sense to wonder if something similar happened with the destruction and recreation of Genesis’ personality)

In the original FFVII, the Weapons (Diamond, Ultima, Ruby, Emerald, Sapphire) are guardian totems that the planet summons when threatened. If the vitality of a planet in this cosmology is manifested in the Lifestream, then that means the life of a planet comes from its transmigration nexus. If the planet has a will, it’s an emergent will from every soul on its way to its next life.

When characters like Aerith use phrases like “the cries of the planet” or the “the voice of the planet”, they are talking about a kind of collective subconscious shared by all sentient life on a given planet.

This would make the Weapons magically incarnate archetypes. Another word for an archetype is an eidolon.

Sometimes, when Jenova cell carriers are forced to change shape by Sephiroth or Jenova or whatever dominant personality, they might express traits of eidolons. Mythic beings that exist in a collective subconscious. This pattern had already been established in the original FFVII, what with Bizarro Sephiroth’s Ultima-ish shape with two faces (the upper, dominant head representing Jenova and the face closer to the four-legged body representing Sephiroth).

The Ultima association in particular seems meaningful since Cloud’s best weapon in the original game is made from part of Ultima’s dead body. There was a guide published back in the nineties that riffed on that: “Cloud’s ultimate weapon, the Ultima Weapon, is obtained after defeating the Ultima Weapon.”

As goofy as the naming scheme is, even that is echoed in Crisis Core, with the Buster sword playing a role in the arcs of Angeal, Zack and Cloud.

I was wondering what this one would look like on a modern console
Also: all the locations we’ll probably get to see again in Final Fantasy VII Rebirth!

My post on the FFVIIR lore theory:

https://ailixchaerea.blog/2020/07/04/final-fantasy-vii-remake-lore-theory/

My first ever Crisis Core play-through:

Just finished Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII for the first time (spoilers as usual)

Peers to Celebrants

Obviously, conspiracy theories have been pushed in recent years to irresponsible and deadly extremes.

But I can’t help but wonder if some of the pushback comes from the way equivocation has been used in power. Particularly in recent years.

I was legally able to vote for the first time in 2008. For my generation, ending the Middle Eastern wars and the national security state were essential priorities. Obama ran on a promise to close Guantanamo Bay and I believed him. Others did to. We also believed him when he said he’d make Roe v Wade the law of the land.

Then he started hemming and hawing with “maybe we shouldn’t leave the Middle East until we set up a Western-style democracy.” And then he sicc’d the Feds on Snowden, Assange and Manning when they blew the whistle on American air strikes targeting civilians and emergency first responders in Iraq. Eight years later, Trump is elected and Guantanamo Bay is still open.

Trump won populist sympathy with claims of bringing jobs back to America and courted the religious right with a promise to overturn Roe v Wade. He did neither of those things. His Supreme Court appointees overturned Roe v Wade after a few years but Trump, as President, did not enact the direct dismissal that he alluded to. What he did do was host Saudi nobility at his DC hotel chain where they dropped hundreds of thousands of dollars. Jared Kushner received two billion dollars from the Saudi crown prince for a documentary that was never made. When an American journalist was murdered by the Saudi court, he ignored it. While outsourcing even more American labor needs overseas.

Most Americans fell for one of those celebrity politicians or the other. And those who voted for either Trump or Obama were not rewarded for their trust. Both Obama and Trump stopped short of their campaign promises while claiming that their hearts were always (and remain) in the right place.

Saying one thing and doing another is hypocrisy. Saying one thing, doing another and claiming that you were serving the same ends in both instances is equivocation. Many younger people came of age under Obama or Trump. Even before then, American voters were long familiar with their values being dangled just out of reach.

If “woke” activists appear to fly off the handle over mere words and ideological nit-picks, I think it is easy to see why. It follows that a history of equivocation would engender a suspicion of vague, interpretive language. For a people who are tired of the abuse of language and good will, conspiracy theories are a ripe target. Any body of ideas in which appearance is taken for confirmation will not be treated charitably. Especially when one side of the political spectrum is more willing to weaponize conspiracy theories.

On the subjects of broken faith, double standards and recent politics, there is something else we must necessarily mention.

In 2018, on Sam Harris’s Waking Up podcast, he interviewed a guest with a compelling theory on the origins of the MeToo movement and the 2016 election.

For the sake of clarification: I’m aware that #MeToo was started by Tarana Burke as a means for victims of sexual violence to legitimize their overlooked experiences. Burke has also said that outing individual predators is a quick fix compared to the work of systematic reform. Burke writes that healing the wounded must matter more than punishing the guilty.

With that out of the way, back to the Waking Up episode: Harris’ guest theorized that the election of Trump, who has been accused of sexual assault innumerable times, was a galvanizing event. Weinstein and R.Kelly were exposed, but how much could that actually mean if someone like Donald Trump could become President?

A common rebuttal at that time was that lasting change is incremental and must take time. For recent generations of American voters, who grew up hearing “incrementalism is the only way”, this smacks of equivocation. While dissidents are being told that change must be incremental, the powerful and the privileged are free from self-restraint.

The dynamic reminds me of the ancient Peerages of France and Britain. A Peer (like nobility in general) received fortune-sized salaries. For occupying their office. For simply being a Peer of the nobility. Peers were protected from certain laws. Victor Hugo had an affair with a married woman who was convicted and imprisoned for adultery. Hugo was a Peer, and therefore could not be charged. The attention paid to the marginalization of women in his work suggests that the incident stayed with him. To say nothing of his novel l’homme qui rit, which villainized the Peerage.

These legal and social protections were afforded, presumably, for the same reason as their salaries: simply existing as Peers.

Similar privileges were common among ancient nobility in general. But the Peerage represented a particular relationship with feudal power. A Peer was a social equal of the monarchy. It was a relative distinction.

The modern day concept of a ‘celebrity’ is also a relative distinction. A Peer was a peer of a royal family and a celebrity “celebrates” something. To celebrate is to bestow legitimacy with your witness. An officiant for a ceremony is a kind of celebrant. The term has made a comeback in modern paganism for clergy who perform marriages, cleansings and other rituals. Andy Warhol’s concept of the superstar was a personality who simply embodies something. The films Warhol made with his own cohort of self-proclaimed superstars consisted of the actors doing ordinary, day-to-day activities. The project was inspired by Warhol’s obsession with the early years of Hollywood where the face of an actor, alone, was an almost archetypical embodiment. Marilyn Monroe simply existed as feminine beauty and John Wayne simply existed as rugged masculinity.

This method of embodiment is where I see the connection between the ancient European Peerages and the modern celebrity. John Wayne and Marilyn Monroe, as celebrities, are celebrants of aesthetic ideals. A less specific function is apparent in modern pop culture, though: the famous are seen by others. They are celebrated by others, whose witness gives them power, while at the same time they represent the power of being seen. Modern celebrities are celebrants of visibility. The only trait required for visibility is to be visible. Beyond this, that which is visible need only exist.

Like the European Peerage, a modern celebrity’s existence is treated with reverence. If an outsider demanding change has to carry the burden of high-minded stoicism and restraint while the powerful can get away with anything, they will feel like they are being told to stay out of the way. This can explain why privilege has drawn so much anger in recent years.

Just lately, this double standard is even harder to miss with the followers of Donald Trump making accusations of government overreach with their criminal investigations. Immediately after the 2020 election, Andrew Yang was asked in an interview whether or not Trump should face criminal prosecution for insurrection, assassination of Soleimani, emoluments or anything else. Yang said that to do so would be to join the ranks of third world dictatorships where heads roll between administrations. After the illegal, offensive wars of George Junior and Obama’s double taps and whistle-blower prosecutions, giving Trump a pass would send a clear message that an ex-President is free from prosecution simply for being an ex-President.

A gap between the restraint of outsiders and the freedom of insiders invites suspicion of vague language. When the vagueness is weaponized through conspiracy theories, it becomes even more suspect. Ironically, it becomes harder to think of that gap as anything but conspiratorial.

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/10/07/new-book-highlights-how-campaign-money-influences-us-foreign-policy/

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/09/22/saudi-lobbyist-oversees-millions-in-dark-money-gop-campaign-donations/

https://amp.smh.com.au/national/outing-perpetrators-doesn-t-get-to-root-of-the-problem-metoo-founder-20191108-p538x0.html

https://isreview.org/issue/89/enduring-relevance-victor-hugo/

https://www.warhol.org/exhibition/andy-warhol-stars-of-the-silver-screen/

https://fashionmagazine.com/flare/celebrity/andy-warhol-superstars-guide/

Summer of 2022 and “team sports” politics

Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe Vs. Wade and Biden made his recent effort at student loan forgiveness, a few right wing arguments have caught my attention.

If you’re wondering, I’m pro-choice and I think student loan forgiveness is the right thing to do. I’m a leftist but I think that the proliferation of political echo chambers is one of the major forces of destruction at work in America and in the world. I think that all of us- my political fellow travelers included -need to be more comfortable with conversation, confrontation and the exchange of ideas. It requires relentless honesty but it also requires compassion and intellectual curiosity.

I wear my positions on my sleeve but I want to emphasize that I do not think those who disagree are necessarily bad people. But I do think that, in the wake of what has recently happened with Roe v. Wade and Biden’s proposed debt relief, some bad ideas have been aired.

One of my common touchstones among the political talking heads of YouTube is Rising which featured an opinion piece(“radar”) by Briahna Joy Gray. She made a comparison which, in my assessment, is fair: the SCOTUS ruling on abortion resembles a Christian equivalent of Sharia law. The overwhelming volume of pro-life activists who loudly express Christian religious motivations make a comparison tempting, at least.

Robby Soave, Briahna’s frequent co-host on Rising, had notes afterward: Briahna used the phrasing “Catholic Sharia law.” Soave claimed that pro-life legislation is not, by definition, inseparable from Catholicism. Assuming he wasn’t making a denominational distinction about Catholicism, he likely also takes issue with the more general comparison. Fundamentally: that the pro-life position is not endemically religious and that this SCOTUS ruling should not be seen as an incursion of the church into the state.

In the interest of covering our bases, let’s own that there is at least one non-religious movement whose cause is represented in the overturning of Roe v. Wade. A number of social media profiles posted statements that the SCOTUS decision can only effect those who have made mistakes. In the words of one detractor, this argument can be characterized as “sluts need consequences.”

What’s interesting is that I can recall adult men having similar conversations around me when I was a child. When there was news coverage of a potential vaccine against HPV, someone said “everyone should have VD once in their lives.”

If I had to speculate why this person thought that, I suspect they may have meant that getting a sexually transmitted infection is a learning experience and a rite of passage. That’s the best I can do with that. The same people might think abortion should be outlawed for the same reason. My opinion is that arguing the social benefit of unplanned pregnancies and STIs is like arguing for the social benefit of rape or poverty. It smacks of social Darwinism or accelerationism. Social Darwinism and accelerationism are often used as rhetorical proxies by fascists. Many people connect those dots. If someone openly claims “sluts need consequences”, their only ideological home would be something like inceldom.

I think there are more Evangelical Christians in the American conservative mainstream then there are social Darwinists and incels. The people who are super stoked about the overturning of Roe v. Wade are mostly Christian. Robbie Soave’s point, that the pro-life movement is not necessarily Christian, just doesn’t map onto reality. But I’ve also encountered that point outside of YouTube.

The other way this is argued is that Evangelical Christianity is an outward symptom of deeper sociological influences like patriarchy. This introduces the problem of the accuser believing that they know the hearts of their opponents better than they themselves do. In theory, this is gas-lighting. In practice, accusing Evangelical Christians of existing only to empower men over women just confuses Evangelicals- while making them look cool to incels.

This also leads to the belief in one group being intellectually or morally inferior to the other. This is ordinary chauvinism and it closes the avenues of connection that allow democracy to work. Ideas cannot prove themselves in civil discourse if they’re excluded or not taken seriously. To say nothing of how those on the receiving end of chauvinism are aggravated and possibly radicalized by their dismissal.

The search for pro-life ideologues outside of American Christianity stops at incels and social Darwinists, both of which are statistical minorities. The only other way to take religion out of the equation is to reject what the Christian majority says about itself.

So is the notion of a non-religious pro-life position a complete fraud? A number of people seem to believe that one exists, even though it contradicts the driving force of the pro-life movement itself. If the stated points of an argument are not true, it makes sense to wonder about other factors.

I think a belief lies behind it; a belief that manifested itself again when Biden stated his intention to forgive up to 10,000$ of student debt. Tucker Carlson epitomized it with a rant headed with the line “this move will not help ordinary Americans.” Do I even need to spell out how asinine those words are?

More importantly though: the best conservative arguments against student loan debt forgiveness are based on the profit motive for colleges. Massive sums spent on gyms and stuff to attract students from wealthy families. A fundamental consequence of modern tuition prices is that college freshmen must, necessarily, resign themselves to anywhere between six-thousand dollars and ten-thousand dollars of debt, up front. I suspect I’m being conservative in my assessment of the “price of admission” but last I heard that was a predictable baseline. If there is any way they can make you pay more, they will find it.

If the problem with an institution (like higher education) is that it is too privatized and too driven by profit…then it needs more outside intervention, not less. Perhaps reverence for capitalism heads off that line of reasoning. Inaction is not supportable. Loan forgiveness, on its own, frees the innocent while paying no attention to the guilty. To do right by the innocent while stopping the guilty would include the admission that American universities are dangerously unregulated. But if you can’t get to that last stage, you’re stuck moralizing about how bailing out student debt subsidizes the lenders.

The pro-life movement in America is a religious one and Biden’s student loan relief effort was a minimal reaction to a problem requiring a bigger solution. And I do not think the political right wing would necessarily suffer by conceding these things. It would forfeit some traditional conservative rallying cries but the gains would be considerable.

On August 20th, YouGov released some interesting data on shifting political attitudes. Those who have changed their positions on political issues were polled. The data was collected from August 3rd to the 5th. Out of the respondents who shifted their stance on abortion, a 50% movement toward pro-choice away from pro-life was recorded. A 68% conservative-to-liberal swing was found on gay marriage and a 38% shift to the left happened with climate change.

For context, the rightward movements on those respective issues were 34%, 13% and 31%. I’ll also add that these percentages only represented the people who responded, not America as a whole. Even with that caveat, though, these numbers strike me as significant. It has been a politically rocky summer and- evidently -the people who changed their minds favored the left. 50% of those who reported changing their minds have become closer to pro-choice than pro-life. By at least one metric, overturning Roe v. Wade has created more liberals than conservatives.

The gay marriage figure strikes me as significant because of the recent spurning of the Log Cabin Republicans. For those who don’t know: the Log Cabin Republicans are a Texas-based LGBT-inclusive Republican group. At the Texas Republican Convention this summer, they were denied the space to have a booth for the second time in a row. Numerous blogs and news outlets covered this, and dropping their anti-LGBT platforms has been discussed in confidence among members of the RNC. Obviously, it has not happened, but there are clearly some who sympathize as insiders (like the Log Cabin Republicans) who want them to. Even Caitlin Jenner has said that including the queer community would change the Republican party less than the changes she would make to the Democratic party.

If the pro-life position is necessarily religious and therefore, as a political aim, theocratic…then imagine the opportunity the RNC has, right now. They have a vocal (if small) LGBT following waiting in the wings. Imagine if the RNC said that it was time to get real about abortion bans: it is Christian theocracy, full stop. Not only does it allow the church to overreach the state- it allows the church to go straight to the physical body of the individual. The absence of this criticism within conservative thought has always baffled me. Anywhere that welcomes libertarians should have at least a few people insisting that the individual’s right to self-determination is sacrosanct. Yet this affiliation between libertarians and Republicans is the only reason I can think of as to why feminism seems so deeply alienated from libertarianism.

The values that once made me a libertarian eventually made me a feminist. I’m surprised I haven’t heard more voices saying that both feminists and libertarians share an investment in protecting the individual from tyranny. There have got to be at least some “big L” Libertarians who are female, queer, feminist or all of the above who are tired of the DNC being the only game in town.

If the RNC had some kind of “crush theocracy wherever we find it” movement, the influx of support would be considerable. Combined with some “we learned our lesson” messaging, the Republican party could reinvent and reinvigorate itself. A bold and energetic new direction with enthusiastic supporters would also enable them to take their power back from Trump’s influence. Speaking of YouGov, a more recent poll they took suggested that the majority of Americans think Trump should face criminal prosecution.

Right now, Trump’s best hope is that the “it’s all political persecution” line lands with his base and the public. The polling data indicates that it hasn’t landed with the public. If that’s true, then the RNC could gain much by simply saying it out loud: the investigation is just and we want to nominate someone else. It would go well for them if they did it in conjunction with an influx of new blood.

None of this is likely to happen, though. And I’m interested in why.

I’m convinced that the only thing stopping mainstream American conservatives from flipping on abortion and loan forgiveness is partisanship. Recently, it’s been referred to as “team sports” mentality. According to APNews, the Michigan elections board vetoed a direct ballot initiative effort that gathered its required number of signatures. The initiative was an effort to safeguard the reproductive protections afforded by Roe v. Wade.

That’s when “team sports” becomes more than just an ugly oversight. If the Republican party can’t change for the good of ordinary people or even their own political advantage, hopefully the duty of the elected to the electors can still be counted on. Just more reliably than in Michigan.

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/08/16/how-often-and-why-do-americans-change-their-minds?utm_medium=organic_social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=SM-2022-08-US-B2C-Politics

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/08/24/trump-fbi-economist-yougov-poll-august-20-2022

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-2022-midterm-elections-us-supreme-court-health-michigan-4888105cd9fe270786420c150e18c8b3

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/13/1111285143/abortion-10-year-old-raped-ohio

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/louisiana-woman-headless-fetus-abortion-florida-b2146452.html