Revisionist History at E3

by Nich Maragos 

Final Fantasy VII had a magic system like no other RPG, possibly the best graphics of any RPG to date, heart-stopping cut-scenes, and one downright spooky main plotline.

So why do I keep hearing it's such a bad game?

Though not in the E3 coverage, Grandia is listed on this page as "a better game" than FFVII, though the previewer goes on to explain that its game engine, method of delivery, and plot were nothing new. Star Wars is mentioned in the review, and it strikes me that Star Wars succeeded for one of the same reasons FFVII did: It brought old themes into a new, futuristic setting. So why is Grandia a better game than FFVII? From reading the review, one would think that the reporter's explanation would be, "It just is."

Now we move into the actual E3 coverage, where the best games can't be complimented without explaining why they're better than FFVII. "While Square claims that FFVII's theme was 'life,'" the reporter states in his review of Lunar: Silver Star Story Complete, "some would argue that it was really 'angst.'" When Squaresoft makes it clear months before the game is released that it's going to have a more mature tone than previous RPGs, that's a sign to me that not everything will be well in the lives of its characters. Games can be good without being serious -- I mean, look at Lunar, which is in its own right an excellent game -- but my point is giving them a little bit of an edge does not equate to a game full of angst. The comparison is especially unfair against a game like Lunar, which is an anime RPG and necessarily light in tone. FFVII is naturally going to look overwrought against such a background. Unlike most heroes, Cloud is constantly wondering whether he should go on in the fight. FFVII is the first game to my mind that actually achieves (if only for a while) a blurring between the "good" side and the "evil" side, and that's an achievement no traditional anime game can even try for, no matter how good an example of its genre.

Victor Ireland then gets into the act with, incredibly, praise for Final Fantasy VIII. "Final Fantasy VIII is the first Final Fantasy to interest me," he claimed, and this is the statement with which I have the most serious problem. Now we're going past Final Fantasy VII bashing, which has become commonplace and accepted, into the throwing out of the entire series. Does nobody else have a problem with this? Am I to understand that now, Final Fantasy VII is not only a bad game but so are Final Fantasies I-VI, some of the best RPGs ever made? Even more chilling is the initial offhand comment of the reporter before that, that Ireland's statement "summed up the feelings of many at the show."

Final Fantasy VII had its problems. I'll argue about the game with anybody, and even I'll admit that. But Final Fantasy IV, V, and VI were the best RPGs on the SNES, bar none. Is everyone willing to let revisionists pave over them, too, and ignore the contributions things like the Active Time Battle or the Job System brought to the genre? Final Fantasy VIII very probably will be a much better game than FFVII, and that's to be expected of the second effort on a gaming platform. The danger lies in dismissing earlier efforts as nothing, something RPG fans must never let happen.