Suikoden and Wild Arms: Expectations and Reality

by Mike Benedetto

Original Editorial: Suikoden II and Wild Arms 2: A Double Standard in RPGs

Though compelling and well-written, Howard Kleinman's recent critique of Suikoden II leaves a couple of things to be desired.

For the sake of accuracy, it must first be pointed out that the game received more than a few negative reviews. Figuring significantly among the complaints was Mr. Kleinman's own, that very little was changed from the original. Other major complaints were that the translation was subpar and that the characters, if more carefully written than in the original, were shallow, caricatured if given any personality at all.

More to the point, though: while Suikoden II deserved much of the criticism it received, it also earned its greater amount of praise. I don't know whether Mr. Kleinman finished the game or not, but the opposition of the hero and Jowy was by no means forced -- Jowy, at least, clearly believed that the only way for the two countries to live at peace was for one of them to thoroughly defeat the other. And when Luca Blight made it clear that an unchecked Highland would kill many innocent people for no good reason, it was necessary for a sane, kind, and intelligent person to lead that nation. (A side note: Blight did not need to be as memorably evil as, say, Kefka. He was not the locus of evil in the game -- you might say that fate was.)

It also makes rather a lot of sense for the hero not to say anything in particular. It actually isn't the convention I prefer (I was weaned on the complex, prewritten heroes of the SNES Final Fantasy games), but I think it works in this case. There has to be something special about the leader of a massive army, and while this could be conveyed by giving him some kind of Cloud-ish turmoil, it is better in a way to give him *unpredictability*, to allow the player to make choices that don't serve the immediate purposes of the storyline if they will ultimately make the game better. Anyway, everyone is impressed by the heroes of these games because they're unusually strong and brave for ones so young, and it's understood that the shots are really being called by the advisors. Would Gore's and Bush's consultants run for president on the theory that they'd be the ones doing all the work anyway? It's a non-issue.

Moreover, the game is as intricately written as any I've ever seen. Many towns and characters were referenced in the original game, and others are referenced which we can perhaps expect to see in the next in the series. We learn the motivations of some characters (Clive in particular) who behaved mysteriously in the original, giving the series a sense of unity. The quest to recruit the hero of the original game (which Mr. Kleinman missed, not having played that one) opens up a chain of delightful references to the original game, down to the opportunity to tickle Gremio as he cooks dinner. And some of the subquests and minigames pay off in the endings -- part of the fun of playing repeatedly is trying to complete as many character arcs as possible.

Granted, these arcs aren't very much to speak of individually. There's nothing approaching the emotional involvement of, say, Xenogears. But the thrill of Suikoden II (and its predescesor, for that matter) is to assemble the many threads of a large tapestry, to observe the places of scores of people in a huge world. The depth is there in the central relationships (Hero/Jowy/Nanami, Viktor/Flik, Clive/Elza, Apple/Shu, McDohl/Gremio, Hix/Tengaar, etc.), even if it isn't consistent through the minor players.

Ultimately, it doesn't make much sense to compare the sequels of Suikoden and Wild Arms. There cannot be a double standard at work if there isn't a consistent and irrelevant factor involved in our preferences. I honestly don't see an irrelevant one (old-school graphics? Come on, that hasn't hurt Squaresoft much), but I can take a stab at the consistent one. Wild Arms was fun chiefly because of the gameplay -- that's where action RPGs are supposed to shine. The gameplay of Suikoden was effective, but almost beside the point of the game (which was to present the storyline as efficiently as possible).

When each game became a franchise, different things were required of the teams behind the sequels. The Wild Arms II team had to create a new *gaming* experience, while the Suikoden II team had to create a new *story* experience. While the latter generally succeeds among people who liked the original Suikoden and enjoy the minor improvements and new story, the former doesn't seem to be enough of a contrast to the original Wild Arms gaming experience.

You know what I'd like to see in the third sequel? A story that's of a piece with the first two... and a game that doesn't get in its way. Konami has already delivered that once, and I'm pretty darn grateful.