What happened to this series?

[Wolf Kanno]

Largely the issue is that Matsuno left. Even though the original TA wasn't directed by him, he was still a part of the project as a producer and so forth. Hell the writer of FFTA itself seemed to be relegated to a more minor role by TA2's development.

Honestly its just a franchise that really was the vision of one guy and when he left the team just didn't really know what to do with it. Bolivar brings up Tactics Ogre but that right there proves the point that this team's skill really is about dancing to Matsuno's tune as I would be curious to feel if he would feel the remake would be the same without him.

FFTactics pretty much set a precedent about the series, and most of Matsuno's early works with Square (FFTactics, Vagrant Story, FFTactics Advance) at their heart deal with complex issues that tear at the heart of the players own world views. The man has a knack for writing moral quagmires filled with emotional landmines and then he expects you to walk through it as you play the games. I mean at its heart, Tactics strength is the tale of Ramza and Delita, the Lucavi and Lion War are simply backdrops to the twisted tale of these two men being forced though the flame of war and hardship and testing their ideals and resolves, its a character play about the reality of good men either being forgotten and cursed for their good deeds or becoming the very evil they seeked to get rid. The last sequence with Delita at the game's end perfectly brings home what FFTactics was really all about.

In Vagrant Story, once again its not so much the issue of political maneuvering and family secrets that is important to the story as much as it is Ashley struggling to find himself (in truth, I would argue Ashley's story is ultimately a better written and less idealistic version of Cloud's story from FFVII) , to watch Sydney rip from under him the very foundation of who he thought he was, and slowly facing the demons of his past. Despite fighting dragons, demons, and evil spirits the game and the cast make it a point to highlight that Ashley himself is the scariest monster of them all and so the story is an issue of mking the player ask the question if its possible for bad people to find redemption. Ashely himself never even gets a real sense of closure, simply choosing to hold onto an idea of who he wants to believe he really is but by game's end, neither Ashley or the player really get to meet the "real Ashley Riot".

FFTactics Advance has been gone over already but really I feel the kiddy nature of the game was perfect for telling a story that for most gamers hit a little too close to home. The idea of escapism into fantasy worlds to escape hardship. The tale just wouldn't have worked as well if the cast was older, it has so much more bite because Marche and the cast are kids and adults often see that time as a point where kids can indulge in selfish desires and escapism; so to watch it taken to an unhealthy extreme was really chilling.

FFXII has Ashe's story but part of me feels it lacks the real bite of the three games I mentioned. It may have been different had Matsuno saw the development through but that is largely baseless expectation at this point. Revenant Wings feels completely out of place because it wasn't made by the same team, just borrowing a few members but major players like Jun Akiyama were absent for that project and it shows because the game largely just steals ideas from the directors last project of FFX and X-2. TA2 is just a game without someone to focus it and it shows, the main plot is weak, and largely borrows ideas from the Never Ending Story, in a way I sometimes feel it was written this way as a means to compensate angry fans who thought the first TA game was going to be a simple FF style version of the Never-ending Story nd got slapped in the face by the stories heavy subtext. Even the few high points in the game just lack the gut-wrenching qualities of the early works. Its a fun world but it lacks the soul that Matsuno puts into his games and it shows. The man is a master of sleight of hand in his writing and design, always presenting you with something that seems simply only to discover too late the deeper subtext of his work.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to rub some "brown" off my nose...

[Skyblade]

Ashely himself never even gets a real sense of closure, simply choosing to hold onto an idea of who he wants to believe he really is but by game's end, neither Ashley or the player really get to meet the "real Ashley Riot".

Or, seen another way, it's simply a view on the struggle of redemption. At the end, the "real" Ashley is the one he chooses to be, not the one he was. The image he holds, that he works for, that is the reality. Is the measure of a man how he shaped the world, or how he shapes himself?

TA2 is just a game without someone to focus it and it shows, the main plot is weak, and largely borrows ideas from the Never Ending Story, in a way I sometimes feel it was written this way as a means to compensate angry fans who thought the first TA game was going to be a simple FF style version of the Never-ending Story and got slapped in the face by the stories heavy subtext. Even the few high points in the game just lack the gut-wrenching qualities of the early works. Its a fun world but it lacks the soul that Matsuno puts into his games and it shows. The man is a master of sleight of hand in his writing and design, always presenting you with something that seems simply only to discover too late the deeper subtext of his work.

I still feel differently about this one. I don't think FFTA2 is weak on themes or ideas, but rather on structure, pacing, and execution.

To me the story always feels rushed and unfinished. The Neukhia is basically completely unexplained, Khamja gets far more development in the side plots than in the main plots, and the main story is filled with huge exposition dumps that don't show up anywhere else in the series.

If the game had taken its time with the story elements, not spent half the main questline with pointless tutorials, and really fleshed out its concepts and themes, I think there would have been a very interesting story there. It certainly has some incredibly strong elements with great potential. But they're almost all discarded at the last minute in some rush to a final boss fight, instead of being explained and getting to come to fruition.

The Neukhia, Khamja, the Whitesilver Magicite, Ilua & Cid's relationship, the relationship between the grimoires, Ilua's relationship to the Chosen... So many things this game brings up, only to cast aside in a last minute scene before the final boss without having a chance to develop them.

And the high points of this game are bloody brilliant. I'll rate Frimelda's storyline above any of the writing in FFT.

[Bolivar]

Since we're at it, lemme ask you guys, since the story is subpar in TA2, what about the gameplay? Do you think it's a game that could satisfy a Tactics fan with just some battles and characters to grind away with?

[Fynn]

I think it would certainly satisfy a TA fan. The job system is relativelly the same, just with some new jobs, two new races, etc. But the missions themselves are much more varied, with escort missions, misssions based around talking to people, finding stuff, it's much more varied.

[Wolf Kanno]

[QUOTE=Skyblade;3241543]

TA2 is just a game without someone to focus it and it shows, the main plot is weak, and largely borrows ideas from the Never Ending Story, in a way I sometimes feel it was written this way as a means to compensate angry fans who thought the first TA game was going to be a simple FF style version of the Never-ending Story and got slapped in the face by the stories heavy subtext. Even the few high points in the game just lack the gut-wrenching qualities of the early works. Its a fun world but it lacks the soul that Matsuno puts into his games and it shows. The man is a master of sleight of hand in his writing and design, always presenting you with something that seems simply only to discover too late the deeper subtext of his work.

I still feel differently about this one. I don't think FFTA2 is weak on themes or ideas, but rather on structure, pacing, and execution.

To me the story always feels rushed and unfinished. The Neukhia is basically completely unexplained, Khamja gets far more development in the side plots than in the main plots, and the main story is filled with huge exposition dumps that don't show up anywhere else in the series.

If the game had taken its time with the story elements, not spent half the main questline with pointless tutorials, and really fleshed out its concepts and themes, I think there would have been a very interesting story there. It certainly has some incredibly strong elements with great potential. But they're almost all discarded at the last minute in some rush to a final boss fight, instead of being explained and getting to come to fruition.

The Neukhia, Khamja, the Whitesilver Magicite, Ilua & Cid's relationship, the relationship between the grimoires, Ilua's relationship to the Chosen... So many things this game brings up, only to cast aside in a last minute scene before the final boss without having a chance to develop them.

And the high points of this game are bloody brilliant. I'll rate Frimelda's storyline above any of the writing in FFT.

We'll have to agree to disagree, while I like Frimelda, I felt her story was mostly unique largely because FFTA2's plot was more on the light hearted side, but I felt Frimelda's story lacked the elements that keep you thinking and wondering which is why I still rate FFT and VS higher than FFTA2. It was a strong story and certainly a high point for the game but it just couldn't redeem the title for me. I still feel Delita was a far more interesting character whose actions and story left you wondering and analyzing whereas Frimelda's story is pretty cut and dry once the smoke clears and there isn't as much to really debate or wonder about. Its the quality that brings forth debate that makes the Ivalice titles interesting for me and I just don't feel anything in FFTA2 really gives me that. Course, I don't feel FFXII has it either sadly.

Since we're at it, lemme ask you guys, since the story is subpar in TA2, what about the gameplay? Do you think it's a game that could satisfy a Tactics fan with just some battles and characters to grind away with?

Its a vast improvement over FFTA and while it still lacks the overly complicated mechanics of the original FFT, the game is superior to its predecessors in terms of mission variety. There are far more missions that are not simply "Kill everyone" which combined with some of the side content allows the gameplay to have stronger legs to carry the game. For me, it was the stories that ultimately carry me through FFT and FFTA, it was the gameplay that kept me going in FFTA2. Of course this all depends if variety is a strong point for you, if you could care less about not having to do the same thing over again, and the customization is all the gameplay you really need, then you may want to go back to the original FFT.

[Greatermaximus]

There's DnD instead/too. Same platform yet different aesthetics, tone, characters, ect.,.

I wonder where FFT's got the idea?

[escobert]

I agree with Roogle that the later games didn't have the darkness Tactics had. Vagrant Story is set in the same world correct? If so it'd be the only one that came close to matching Tactics story wise imo.

[Roogle]

Yeah, I agree with that assessment. I feel like Vagrant Story and Final Fantasy Tactics were on the same level in terms of storyline and setting.

[DarkBahamut]

The modern gaming mindset is much different. Lots of people in the gaming communities of today can't comprehend deep stories like Tactics. I'm not calling people stupid, but they don't expect that stuff in games anymore.

And Tactics and Xenogears are both very deep and have compelling stories, maybe the best stories of all time, but in ways are socially unacceptable due to "going against God" and some religious tension.

But come on, there's enough of people like me and lots of others who love deep stories that make a man/woman think. And your facial expressions stay dull, but it's because inside your mind is blown by so many things.

[Skyblade]

The modern gaming mindset is much different. Lots of people in the gaming communities of today can't comprehend deep stories like Tactics. I'm not calling people stupid, but they don't expect that stuff in games anymore.

And Tactics and Xenogears are both very deep and have compelling stories, maybe the best stories of all time, but in ways are socially unacceptable due to "going against God" and some religious tension.

But come on, there's enough of people like me and lots of others who love deep stories that make a man/woman think. And your facial expressions stay dull, but it's because inside your mind is blown by so many things.

Depth has never been the problem for me. I haven't had trouble understanding the plot of Tactics. I just don't like it.

It's like A Song of Ice and Fire versus The Lord of the Rings (from a thematic standpoint, not a quality standpoint). Both epic fantasy worlds, but tone, themes, and morals are handled completely differently. I prefer the more uplifting nature of LotR to the morose depression of SoIaF. It doesn't mean that one is better than the other (although LotR is totally way, way better than SoIaF, and anyone who says otherwise is a fool), or that there isn't merit in either's positions. LotR is generally a positive, uplifting story. It can be dark (and when it is, it does it very well), but that isn't the overall point of it. SoIaF is quite the opposite, an overall dark and dreary tone punctuated by lighter moments.

I prefer my world to be an uplifting and positive one. I prefer heroes who are heroic. I don't like watching my favorite characters get killed off every quarter of the story. And I don't like the villains getting away with everything in the end.

So, I prefer the story of FFTA and FFTA2 (even though FFTA2's is executed far worse than FFT's). It's not a question of depth, it's a question of perspective, themes, tone, and world view.


FFTA has a very deep plot. There's a reason I've written essays on it. It simply has a lighthearted tone. A dark tone and more in depth political maneuvering doesn't make a plot "deeper". Analyzing character traits and relationships can be just as deep as analyzing political actions and power plays between countries.

[Raistlin]

The modern gaming mindset is much different. Lots of people in the gaming communities of today can't comprehend deep stories like Tactics. I'm not calling people stupid, but they don't expect that stuff in games anymore.

Priorities have shifted. Back when FFT was made, gameplay was the focus, because gameplay was all their was. Now it seems like plots are almost an afterthought for some games (see: the last 5 chapters of FFXIII). Even FFXII, which has the most mature, political plot of the modern FF games, has its plot strung together in such a poor fashion at times that it's sometimes difficult to find very engaging.

FFT was a great game, and I wish we would see more like it. But I kind of doubt it at this point. Maybe a small project eventually on a handheld, in a style more like FFTA2.

[Skyblade]

We'll have to agree to disagree, while I like Frimelda, I felt her story was mostly unique largely because FFTA2's plot was more on the light hearted side, but I felt Frimelda's story lacked the elements that keep you thinking and wondering which is why I still rate FFT and VS higher than FFTA2. It was a strong story and certainly a high point for the game but it just couldn't redeem the title for me. I still feel Delita was a far more interesting character whose actions and story left you wondering and analyzing whereas Frimelda's story is pretty cut and dry once the smoke clears and there isn't as much to really debate or wonder about. Its the quality that brings forth debate that makes the Ivalice titles interesting for me and I just don't feel anything in FFTA2 really gives me that. Course, I don't feel FFXII has it either sadly.

I never wondered about Delita. I thought he was an extremely straightforward character, with motivations that I understood from the very beginning. I just hated him. A lot.

Frimelda's story is one of my favorite character moments in Final Fantasy. Not because it's complicated or keeps you thinking, but rather the opposite. I love it for how simply it defines the character.

Does everything always have to be "complex"? I love the sheer simplicity and power of a strong character moment, something that can portray the heart of a character in a few moments, in a single well-chosen line. And Frimelda's is one of my favorite in Final Fantasy (not necessarily my absolute favorite, I think Tifa still owns that one, but Frimelda is up there).

[Pumpkin]

I loved Tactics, and I would love to see more of it. I actually do prefer darker plots, because, I dunno. Sometimes to me having everything turn out A-OK, hunky dory in the end just ruins it for me. It's realistically not always going to happen. I like dthe complexities of Tactics.

I would like to see that kind of game and execution and maybe have the story where you think you're the protagonist, but you're actually the antagonist, and you lose. Just to get a perspective from the other side. I think with writing like Tactics had, it could be pulled off well.

[Skyblade]

I loved Tactics, and I would love to see more of it. I actually do prefer darker plots, because, I dunno. Sometimes to me having everything turn out A-OK, hunky dory in the end just ruins it for me. It's realistically not always going to happen. I like dthe complexities of Tactics.

I don't mind dark stories. Heck, Persona 3 is one of my all-time favorite games, and it has a far darker plot than Persona 4, which I don't like nearly as much because of it's lighter plot (even though I admit it is far better in every technical regard).

While a story about a soldier who goes to war and just gets killed may be realistic, it doesn't exactly make for an interesting story, does it?

Do you know why we have tales of heroes and legends? Because they're interesting. Seeing the effects that one king and his knights can have on history, the way they can shape and change things is fascinating. The hardships they face and overcome are great. And there are plenty of historical examples.

True, there are far more examples of people who don't have an impact, who struggle and fail, but there's a reason they're almost never remembered, unless they did something awesome, unless they had and impact, even if they failed.


Also, I dislike plots based on heavy political maneuvering and manipulations, they tend to be too impersonal.

I would like to see that kind of game and execution and maybe have the story where you think you're the protagonist, but you're actually the antagonist, and you lose. Just to get a perspective from the other side. I think with writing like Tactics had, it could be pulled off well.

A couple games have tried this. Spec Ops: The Line did something like that.

Heck, FFVII did it. Cait Sith's whole "what the frell are you doing blowing up innocent people" rant comes to mind. It then took it in a different direction, and changed the perspective and nature of the fight, but it still went there to a degree.

[Roogle]

Also, I dislike plots based on heavy political maneuvering and manipulations, they tend to be too impersonal.

Yes, I agree. Games like that typically have weak characters or the characters lack enough time or interaction to grow or provide an interesting story.

There are exceptions to the rule, at least. The A Song of Ice and Fire series balances character development and political scheming very well, but it is a different media. Final Fantasy Tactics itself had development for characters for a time, but due to the nature of the story, character arcs end prematurely when the character joins your party, such as Meliadoul.