The Lack of Role Playing Elements in Recent Squaresoft Games

by Don Wang 

Recently, I've gotten hold of Arcana, a fairly old SNES RPG. When I finally beat it, I was quite thrilled with the success. I didn't feel so when I beat Final Fantasy VII. And yet Arcana is in no way comparable to Final Fantasy VII. Arcana's plot is almost nonexistent, and gameplay, graphics, and music is mediocre at best. There shouldn't be any aspect Arcana is better than Final Fantasy VII, is there? I believe so. Arcana has the element of role-playing, something decisively lacking not only in Final Fantasy VII, but in general Squaresoft games (Final Fantasy 2 and up). By no means am I able to identify all the role-playing elements, but I'll try to pinpoint a few key elements.

First, by definition, a Role-Playing Game derives its name because the player is role-playing the role of one of the characters, presumably the hero character. This is missing in at least two successful Squaresoft games: Final Fantasy 3 and Chrono Trigger. Final Fantasy 3 has no real role-playing. The character shift makes it nearly impossible to keep a consistent role-playing identity. In the beginning, the story centers around Terra, and later Celes. In the end, the player really doesn't have anyone to identify with. Chrono Trigger has a similar problem. Crono, the character the player is supposed to role-player, NEVER talks! It's one thing to try to fill in the blanks with one's imagination, but when nothing is spoken, there is very little a player can identify with the character he role-plays, and thus role-playing is practically nonexistent.

Second, the lack of consequences to death. Typically, RPG have defined the condition of zero HP varying from swoon, death, unconsciousness, cannot fight anymore, and so on. Squaresoft games (and many others, too) leave no sympathy for the dead. In fact, throw a spell on them, and they'll return instantly. If you don't need them, you can conveniently leave their unconscious/dead bodies on the ground and fight as if they never exist until the battle is over. Heck, you can even run away, all the while the unconscious bodies of your comrades are still on the ground! How is the player suppose to be attached to his characters when there is no significance to them dying? In my opinion, there must be some consequences to the HP zero condition. An extreme example would be Arcana, when it is game over when ANYONE dies. I found myself, while playing Arcana, growing quite attached to Teefa and everyone else as I try to do whatever possible to keep her alive in a major battle. It's this kind of serious consequences to dying that will make role-playing possible. A character one role-plays is supposedly one the player cares for, which is why he role-plays that character, and that should start by valuing their well-being and also do something about protecting them when they've hit the zero HP. Perhaps a game over is too drastic of a consequence, but there ought to be some consequences for dying. At least the fallen should be protected rather than treated as part of the background.

Third, lack of focus. In fact, this is probably what all the ending debates on Final Fantasy VII boils down to. Where is the focus? When we're done with the game, does it really feel like it's Cloud's story, or anyone's story? Not at all. The story side-tracks all too often that Cloud's story is missing. Sure we know he is this hotshot SOLDIER, and later we learn about his past and why he turned out the way he did, but it never feels like FFVII is Cloud's story. And it is not. Role-play if very difficult, if not impossible, if even the hero figure seems to be an insignificant part of the story, considering how often the story sidetracks to other characters. For the other characters, it is infinitely worse as they receive even less development than Cloud, and too are subject to the frequent sidetracks. Basically, the complexity and number of characters involved in a Squaresoft game is its own undoing to the element of role-playing. By trying to incorporate so many characters and develop each character a little, the game loses focus on the main character, whom is the role-playing figure. In this respect, Final Fantasy 2 is a notable exception. Cecil moves the story, and the story is HIS story. While occasionally we found out interesting facts about Edge, Rydia, Rosa, Kain, and the other characters, the story focuses more or less on him all the way through. While there really isn't more character development on Cecil when compared to, say Cloud of FFVII, he retains the attention because he is the focus of the story, while in FFVII Cloud's story is constantly thrown into tangents. There is simply too many minor character development that after a while there is no central story left to role-play. That's fine if we're reading a book or something, but in a role-playing game, the player ought to be able to identify with one of the character, hence role-playing the role of that character, and follow his story, not everyone's story.

Finally, the problem of the hero himself/herself. What has Crono, for example, done that is significant? Or Cloud? Or any other hero figure to a Squaresoft game? Not much. There is no sense of needing that particular person. You can beat Sephiroth just as easily with or without Cloud. Same with Lavos and Kefka. With the way Square are setting up in the game, sometimes the difference between the hero and the rest itself is disappearing. What qualities of Cloud makes him stand out in combat? Practically nothing. His spell might be a little bit stronger, but that's probably because he gets the best materias, and he might have slightly stronger attack, but throughout the game there is no real sense of needing Cloud. Just about anyone else is almost a perfect substitute for the hero so far in terms of abilities, and the only real separation between the character is their limits. Sure, maybe no one is quite as good as Cloud in fighting, but it's close enough that you probably won't miss Cloud. This is WRONG! The hero is supposed to be the strongest person on the team (overall), and it ought to be quite a significant difference between him and the rest of the team, which is why he is the hero. But no, you never feel this in a Squaresoft game. It's true that Cloud, in the end, hits harder than anyone else, but that is never critical to the game. Same with Crono. The hero is also too dependent on his party. When is the last time a Squaresoft hero fought a major battle without the entire support of his party? Not many I can think of, if any. I'll quote from one of my favorite RPG-esque manga, Dragon Quest, that "The objective in any fight is to keep the hero in the best condition no matter what the cost. The enemy is many times stronger than we can imagine, so we must keep our strongest person in his best shape possible, because he is the only hope to defeat the enemy." However, Squaresoft heroes simply do not possess the uniqueness and ability that makes them essential. This, in term, diminishes the hero's significance, and thus players identity even less with the heroes.

Does all this means Square doesn't know how to make a good game? Of course not. But I just can't help but to wonder whatever happened to the role-playing elements. Who am I supposed to identity with? Whose story do I follow? To me, since the genre is named after role-playing, this element ought to be tangible, and I sincerely hope Square would do something to remedy this problem in the future.