SPOILERS FFVII Remake Frustration Expression Thread (*Open Spoilers*)
- Thread starter Obsidian Fire
- Start date
Theozilla
Kaiju Member
Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree in that regard. I definitely have much different standards of what's considered "dark and moody" in regards to lighting and aesthetic.
Odysseus
Ninja Potato
- AKA
- Ody
That's just a matter of taste, but I see where you're coming from. I've actually been pretty happy with how vibrant the remake has been, especially compared to the dull grey of the compilation. I'm just a sucker for "dark but vibrant." Blame Blade Runner, I love that movie and it's aesthetic.
Wol
None Shall Remember Those Who Do Not Fight
- AKA
- Rosarian Shield
Hamuzu is an excellent composer, his work on XIII saga never felt over-orchestraded like it does here; he applied the electronic and vocal input that created a sound world to XIII.
But here its lacking something, something that characterizes Midgar, I truly miss the industrial sounds of the original and I think together with the great orchestral arrangements it would nail the perfect balance.
But here its lacking something, something that characterizes Midgar, I truly miss the industrial sounds of the original and I think together with the great orchestral arrangements it would nail the perfect balance.
oty
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- ex-soldier boy
As much as I dont like this change they made, it's understandable. Specially if they know what they are doing.
There's no saying that this change wasn't impulsed by a higher up, executive power, or something like that. Now if it was their own creational decision, I'd have more problems with it.
In the case of this specific detail, the overral arc has always been the focus. Even in the original, in my recent playthrough, I only felt being criticised of their actions when Cait Sith talked about it (and that was fairly late in the game, maybe too late actually), and it served as tool for developing the characters, specially Tifa and Barret. It's an important detail because they focused on it, but it served for a "°higher cause", always.
And it seems that higher cause still stands. At least I hope. In Tifa's own "bio", it's written she's not sure of Avalanche's actions, so it seems they are not changing that overral arc, which for this case, is the most important thing.
That doesnt mean they can change every little thing for the sake of a higher narrative, so I hope this isn't a "trend" of sorts.
There's no saying that this change wasn't impulsed by a higher up, executive power, or something like that. Now if it was their own creational decision, I'd have more problems with it.
In the case of this specific detail, the overral arc has always been the focus. Even in the original, in my recent playthrough, I only felt being criticised of their actions when Cait Sith talked about it (and that was fairly late in the game, maybe too late actually), and it served as tool for developing the characters, specially Tifa and Barret. It's an important detail because they focused on it, but it served for a "°higher cause", always.
And it seems that higher cause still stands. At least I hope. In Tifa's own "bio", it's written she's not sure of Avalanche's actions, so it seems they are not changing that overral arc, which for this case, is the most important thing.
That doesnt mean they can change every little thing for the sake of a higher narrative, so I hope this isn't a "trend" of sorts.
Makoeyes987
Listen closely, there is meaning in my words.
- AKA
- Smooth Criminal
Except that's only a single moment from an arc that lasts for at most 2 hours before the President is unceremoniously stabbed in the back and removed from the narrative. After not even having a handful of lines in the script.
You say it's "abundantly clear" but this is not the same scope or story. More emphasis and time is going to be spent with President Shinra playing the role of an evil and cruel villain in opposition to Cloud and the others. Which requires more than just 1 scene to flesh out the limits of his immorality and justifications for it. You're simply prejudging the narrative's use of him in the story by filling in a perceived intended effect. If the perception of AVALANCHE being responsible for the loss of life is the issue, that still doesn't make sense. Because Shinra still allowed for the second Mako Reactor to blow up despite ample time for intervention and disclosed they were fine with the damage, as well as the fact that the entire situation occurs thanks to the fact the fight happens in the first place.
Thoroughly communicated within the OG's smaller scope and time with him as the villain on disc 1. Because President Shinra only needed to do One Big Thing to communicate what kind of person he was as said villain. But if the story's to support his expanded emphasis as a perceived relevant threat and cruel antagonist, there's got to be more than what's already apparent. Especially if an expanded role to AVALANCHE is to be given with the inclusion of other Anti-Shinra groups working with them. So no, it certainly could be for more than that purpose.
Because for a criticism that claims the Remake is somehow removing nuance from the narrative that's an extremely non-nuanced label to put on the heads of them all and to fixate over. Sure, Shinra certainly perceived them as terrorists as they did their attacks on Shinra and their infrastructure. What's the reason for delineation on terror-cred, when the actual themes of the value of life, hypocrisy and revenge are not at stake or even being questioned by this change?
@Mr. Ite you're criticizing it over a possible future hypothetical that's not related with their argument there. That contention wouldn't be the source of friction between Reeve or Barret in the first place. They argued over Barret's hypocrisy of claiming to have fought Shinra to protect the planet and innocent lives, yet he spared no thought for the innocent lives at risk from Diamond Weapon or the other possible risks that arose now that crap-hit-the-fan.
It was first and foremost a character building turning point in the OG narrative. The applicable guilt and responsibility Cloud, Tifa and Barret harbor over their actions is from the fact that many lives were lost in their conflict with Shinra and they really didn't stop to think about it before. It wasn't regret over fighting Shinra and trying to stop them, it was the fact they trivialized the cost of going head-to-head against Shinra without properly accounting for the possible ramifications.
And that guilt, regret and heaviness is unequivocally still present in the Remake and moving them towards that same character build. They don't lose sight of that here. Fixating on terror-cred is a complete diversion from the point of that argument and the subsequent growth they had in the first place. How much they're terrorists is only a concern for Shinra and their attempts at trying to hide their responsibility for jeopardizing the lives of everyone from the start. AVALANCHE are about realizing the weight of their actions and the value of protecting life beyond just destructively obstructing Shinra. An internal struggle and realization of their own internal moral character.
That... Is what mattered and gave weight to what happened in the OG. Not a bomb and who really set it off and when.
Last edited:
The Twilight Mexican
Ex-SeeD-ingly good
- AKA
- TresDias
@Makoeyes987
The natural progression of your reasoning that an escalation-of-narrative-scale-requires-escalation-of-actions is that Sephiroth now needs to kill not just Aerith but Tifa as well to properly convey the level of his villainy and make it memorable across an expanded narrative. Do you see why that's not reasonable reasoning?
For that matter, even if such escalation genuinely was required, a new evil action from President Shinra could have been inserted into the expanded narrative that will already be full of many, many new things -- just as Hojo gets the altogether new horrifying act of
.
In any case, I personally don't feel the basis of your argument holds any water at all. The dude was already shown to be evil through and through. He ordered Sector 7's destruction (one of the most memorable events of even the original game); used it being gone as an excuse to, of all things, raise taxes on people; had Aerith taken; and is the head of the organization knowingly and indifferently killing the planet.
To say that isn't enough without taking culpability for something from the protagonists does not ring true.
The second reactor blowing up didn't result in any collateral damage we're ever made aware of. The furnace itself wasn't even nearly as damaged, as we see the thing back online later, whereas the first reactor stays gone.
As for Avalanche still being somewhat responsible just by having chosen to enter conflict with the organization killing the planet -- no. That doesn't ring true any more than President Shinra not looking evil enough does.
When watching the bank heist and subsequent shootout in "Heat," is there a perception by the audience that no civilians would have been endangered had the police not shown up to try stopping the robbers?
... But you're the one fixating on it. And why now all of a sudden? I've never heard you complain about this word in relation to Avalanche over the past 15 years.
And no, it certainly can be a nuanced "label." V in for "V for Vendetta" is a terrorist.
Shin-Ra's perception has nothing to do with the definition of the word.
Yes, we all know it doesn't change that theme or their arcs. That's been acknowledged repeatedly.
However, that doesn't address what I brought up before, which you've been unwilling to likewise acknowledge:
The natural progression of your reasoning that an escalation-of-narrative-scale-requires-escalation-of-actions is that Sephiroth now needs to kill not just Aerith but Tifa as well to properly convey the level of his villainy and make it memorable across an expanded narrative. Do you see why that's not reasonable reasoning?
For that matter, even if such escalation genuinely was required, a new evil action from President Shinra could have been inserted into the expanded narrative that will already be full of many, many new things -- just as Hojo gets the altogether new horrifying act of
showing Aerith the dissected and dismembered remains of her birth mother
In any case, I personally don't feel the basis of your argument holds any water at all. The dude was already shown to be evil through and through. He ordered Sector 7's destruction (one of the most memorable events of even the original game); used it being gone as an excuse to, of all things, raise taxes on people; had Aerith taken; and is the head of the organization knowingly and indifferently killing the planet.
To say that isn't enough without taking culpability for something from the protagonists does not ring true.
Mako said:
The second reactor blowing up didn't result in any collateral damage we're ever made aware of. The furnace itself wasn't even nearly as damaged, as we see the thing back online later, whereas the first reactor stays gone.
As for Avalanche still being somewhat responsible just by having chosen to enter conflict with the organization killing the planet -- no. That doesn't ring true any more than President Shinra not looking evil enough does.
When watching the bank heist and subsequent shootout in "Heat," is there a perception by the audience that no civilians would have been endangered had the police not shown up to try stopping the robbers?
Mako said:
... But you're the one fixating on it. And why now all of a sudden? I've never heard you complain about this word in relation to Avalanche over the past 15 years.
And no, it certainly can be a nuanced "label." V in for "V for Vendetta" is a terrorist.
Mako said:
Shin-Ra's perception has nothing to do with the definition of the word.
Mako said:
Yes, we all know it doesn't change that theme or their arcs. That's been acknowledged repeatedly.
However, that doesn't address what I brought up before, which you've been unwilling to likewise acknowledge:
Odysseus
Ninja Potato
- AKA
- Ody
At least unlike "Han Shot First™" nothing fundamentally changes about the characters in this case, which is why I don't think its a big deal. It's all in how the player perceives them, and I think, whether they were directly responsible or not, the reckless nature and consequences of their actions are more than enough cause to hate themselves over, regardless of if they actually "pulled the trigger" so to speak.
The Twilight Mexican
Ex-SeeD-ingly good
- AKA
- TresDias
And that's absolutely a fair and reasonable position to take! The locking of horns you guys are observing and remarking on is really just stemming (on mine and Ite's part anyway) from frustration over the unwillingness to acknowledge a spade for a spade. This began when leadmyskeptic brought up an undeniable change in the information presented to audiences with which to perceive the culpability of this particular story event.
If one doesn't feel that it's a relevant change (because it doesn't change anything about how the characters perceive it) -- that's fine! Great even! Observations like that help drive conversations deeper towards discussions of character arcs and themes.
So if one wants to say "A realization of their own internal moral character is what mattered and gave weight to what happened in the OG. Not a bomb and who really set it off and when," they have every right to feel that way and should say that. And again, that's the sort of observation that drives the collective conversation to deeper meanings and understandings.
Insisting, though, that it doesn't change the underlying reality (as much as that word applies in a discussion of a work of fiction anyway) of the matter, nor how many players will perceive and internalize it? And insisting on talking about the character arcs ad nauseum when that has explicitly, clearly, and repeatedly been expressed to not be what the other party is talking about? That's just insulting, and borderline infuriating.
Makoeyes987
Listen closely, there is meaning in my words.
- AKA
- Smooth Criminal
I think the quoting went sideways in your reply to me, so I'm gonna try to condense it a bit in replying.
Close, but not exactly. The moment of Aerith's death doesn't need to be escalated or expanded, but the actions and role of Sephiroth as villain/antagonist needs to be given proper expansion to scale with the expanded narrative he now finds himself in. Meaning, he needs to do more to fit the new pacing and nature of the story/game. Such retooling of the character's role in a newly written narrative doesn't seem unreasonable at all.
At this point, we seem at odds about what new evil actions would be warranted or allowed for President Shinra to do to fit. And I guess that shows it's a matter of subjective taste which of course can't be really argued. But I will say my point was that the choice the writers did choose for President Shinra to perform, does absolutely nothing to take away from the relevant character development and thematic presentation that the OG gave them. Which seems to be what those who dislike this change are worried about losing. The guilt that Barret, Tifa and Cloud feel for their actions is not diminished at all, indicating the alignment with the OG is still in tact. If anything it's being emphasized and showcased early in the Remake. If that's not the main concern regarding the details of the bombing, what is it then?
Even if you believe President Shinra was already properly shown to be evil through and through, that still doesn't change the fact that there is an entirely new dimension to his character in the Remake that needs to be examined, expanded and emphasized now that he's to perform at a higher level since he has more time on the screen here. Something needs to be done to have him function in his character role and warrant his placement.
As for the measure of culpability, that standard was never the emphasis of the character growth the OG showcased for Cloud and the others. Again, It's focusing on a point that is mostly irrelevant to the substance of the character growth Barret, Tifa and Cloud underwent in coming to terms with their actions in fighting Shinra.
For Barret it was realizing he was a hypocrite and holding the same callous regard for innocent lives that he criticized and hated Shinra for.
For Cloud and Tifa, it was for not realizing the weight of their actions, the understanding the guilt they carried over them and realizing that innocent lives were lost with every fight they willingly threw themselves in. It also made them seriously ponder what their reason for fighting really was .
Boiling it down to the bomb is a simplification of the personalized growth the heroes achieved in examining their actions, how they felt about them, and why they did them. It was never about who set the bomb or why it detonated. In the end, the responsibility for the innocent lives loss is shared by all parties and far more nuanced because of a truth they even spoke to in the OG. Violence creates violence. Shinra embraced and engaged in a history of violence on the innocent people they felt were in the way of their profits and consolidation of power. This in turn spawned retaliation and opposition from the oppressed and incensed groups who had lost everything at the hands of Shinra, and understood the truth that Shinra was a direct threat to the planet. Thanks to Shinra's absolute rule of the planet and all aspects of society, Shinra put their own innocent employees and innocent bystanders at the front of their conflicts with those that opposed them. And those who felt compelled to fight Shinra by whatever means necessary, pursued their war against Shinra through the only means they knew how. Direct action. Which in turn swallowed up the innocent lives of those in the way as consequence.
Nothing about that is changed in the Remake given the emphasis shown in Tifa feeling guilt over her choice of actions, along with Biggs, Wedge and Jessie questioning their actions upon seeing the devastation their actions have wrought. The most important aspect from the OG, seems in tact in the Remake here. Isn't the minutiae of how the bomb was detonated and by whom insignificant when compared to the actual personal growth and internal examination the characters reflect on?
I have to say you brought to my attention something I actually neglected. You're right, Mako Reactor 5 does appear again to be functional later on in FFVII when it's hooked up to the Sister Ray.
However. That doesn't necessarily imply that there was no collateral damage at the time of the bombing or the furnace infrastructure was unharmed. It could have easily been repaired and brought back online afterwards. So you can't automatically rule out there being no collateral damage at that point. Furthermore, the homes situated near the reactor and Shinra's own troops were purposefully placed in harms way and potentially even killed in Shinra's staging of the reactor being blown up.
Why doesn't it ring true? Conflict inspires conflict. Violence attracts violence. And escalation is a natural consequence of any open opposition. Given the fact that their character development hinged on their realization of the part they played in the loss of innocent life, I feel this is especially pertinent and true.
I get your analogy in terms of your comparison to the movie "Heat" (really good film btw) however I don't think that's applicable to AVALANCHE fighting Shinra. AVALANCHE weren't committing crimes of robbery for personal profit. Neither were they career criminals. Furthermore, the Mako Reactor, Shinra, and the Shinra Electric Power Company operate from a more immoral place than the innocent armored car guards, the bank, and then the bank tellers and police officers.
To be fair, the only reason the I am bringing this up now, is because people are saying the Remake is somehow nerfing the perceived terrorism AVALANCHE performs and washing them of responsibility thereby robbing Barret and the others of character growth. Which as I've said, misses the point of what happened in the OG's examination of their actions. I'm challenging that perception because I feel it is a simplification of the roles they played.
And yeah, V is a terrorist according to the British Norsefire government.
I guess the point I'm trying to make here, is that perspective is everything. And in terms of FFVII, it goes beyond fixating on the acts themselves or culpability. Because one side's terrorist is another side's revolutionary hero. But I think the real magic that the OG had was in terms of the personal acknowledgment Cloud and the others had over their actions, which drove them to evolve personally and challenge themselves. That's where the real growth occurred. Anything that is fundamentally attacking an entrenched status quo power system, is inherently going to be seen as a "terrorist" due to the fact they're fighting the system itself. And that type of opposition will inevitably drawn in innocents because at that point, the status quo has enveloped all.
So no, I'm not trying to ignore how players will digest future scenes in which Cloud, Barret and Tifa mention their guilt over the collateral damage and harm their actions did. I'm merely pointing out there's more to it than that. And I don't think the Remake's positioning itself to take that away at all.
Close, but not exactly. The moment of Aerith's death doesn't need to be escalated or expanded, but the actions and role of Sephiroth as villain/antagonist needs to be given proper expansion to scale with the expanded narrative he now finds himself in. Meaning, he needs to do more to fit the new pacing and nature of the story/game. Such retooling of the character's role in a newly written narrative doesn't seem unreasonable at all.
At this point, we seem at odds about what new evil actions would be warranted or allowed for President Shinra to do to fit. And I guess that shows it's a matter of subjective taste which of course can't be really argued. But I will say my point was that the choice the writers did choose for President Shinra to perform, does absolutely nothing to take away from the relevant character development and thematic presentation that the OG gave them. Which seems to be what those who dislike this change are worried about losing. The guilt that Barret, Tifa and Cloud feel for their actions is not diminished at all, indicating the alignment with the OG is still in tact. If anything it's being emphasized and showcased early in the Remake. If that's not the main concern regarding the details of the bombing, what is it then?
Even if you believe President Shinra was already properly shown to be evil through and through, that still doesn't change the fact that there is an entirely new dimension to his character in the Remake that needs to be examined, expanded and emphasized now that he's to perform at a higher level since he has more time on the screen here. Something needs to be done to have him function in his character role and warrant his placement.
As for the measure of culpability, that standard was never the emphasis of the character growth the OG showcased for Cloud and the others. Again, It's focusing on a point that is mostly irrelevant to the substance of the character growth Barret, Tifa and Cloud underwent in coming to terms with their actions in fighting Shinra.
For Barret it was realizing he was a hypocrite and holding the same callous regard for innocent lives that he criticized and hated Shinra for.
For Cloud and Tifa, it was for not realizing the weight of their actions, the understanding the guilt they carried over them and realizing that innocent lives were lost with every fight they willingly threw themselves in. It also made them seriously ponder what their reason for fighting really was .
Boiling it down to the bomb is a simplification of the personalized growth the heroes achieved in examining their actions, how they felt about them, and why they did them. It was never about who set the bomb or why it detonated. In the end, the responsibility for the innocent lives loss is shared by all parties and far more nuanced because of a truth they even spoke to in the OG. Violence creates violence. Shinra embraced and engaged in a history of violence on the innocent people they felt were in the way of their profits and consolidation of power. This in turn spawned retaliation and opposition from the oppressed and incensed groups who had lost everything at the hands of Shinra, and understood the truth that Shinra was a direct threat to the planet. Thanks to Shinra's absolute rule of the planet and all aspects of society, Shinra put their own innocent employees and innocent bystanders at the front of their conflicts with those that opposed them. And those who felt compelled to fight Shinra by whatever means necessary, pursued their war against Shinra through the only means they knew how. Direct action. Which in turn swallowed up the innocent lives of those in the way as consequence.
Nothing about that is changed in the Remake given the emphasis shown in Tifa feeling guilt over her choice of actions, along with Biggs, Wedge and Jessie questioning their actions upon seeing the devastation their actions have wrought. The most important aspect from the OG, seems in tact in the Remake here. Isn't the minutiae of how the bomb was detonated and by whom insignificant when compared to the actual personal growth and internal examination the characters reflect on?
I have to say you brought to my attention something I actually neglected. You're right, Mako Reactor 5 does appear again to be functional later on in FFVII when it's hooked up to the Sister Ray.
However. That doesn't necessarily imply that there was no collateral damage at the time of the bombing or the furnace infrastructure was unharmed. It could have easily been repaired and brought back online afterwards. So you can't automatically rule out there being no collateral damage at that point. Furthermore, the homes situated near the reactor and Shinra's own troops were purposefully placed in harms way and potentially even killed in Shinra's staging of the reactor being blown up.
Why doesn't it ring true? Conflict inspires conflict. Violence attracts violence. And escalation is a natural consequence of any open opposition. Given the fact that their character development hinged on their realization of the part they played in the loss of innocent life, I feel this is especially pertinent and true.
I get your analogy in terms of your comparison to the movie "Heat" (really good film btw) however I don't think that's applicable to AVALANCHE fighting Shinra. AVALANCHE weren't committing crimes of robbery for personal profit. Neither were they career criminals. Furthermore, the Mako Reactor, Shinra, and the Shinra Electric Power Company operate from a more immoral place than the innocent armored car guards, the bank, and then the bank tellers and police officers.
To be fair, the only reason the I am bringing this up now, is because people are saying the Remake is somehow nerfing the perceived terrorism AVALANCHE performs and washing them of responsibility thereby robbing Barret and the others of character growth. Which as I've said, misses the point of what happened in the OG's examination of their actions. I'm challenging that perception because I feel it is a simplification of the roles they played.
And yeah, V is a terrorist according to the British Norsefire government.
I guess the point I'm trying to make here, is that perspective is everything. And in terms of FFVII, it goes beyond fixating on the acts themselves or culpability. Because one side's terrorist is another side's revolutionary hero. But I think the real magic that the OG had was in terms of the personal acknowledgment Cloud and the others had over their actions, which drove them to evolve personally and challenge themselves. That's where the real growth occurred. Anything that is fundamentally attacking an entrenched status quo power system, is inherently going to be seen as a "terrorist" due to the fact they're fighting the system itself. And that type of opposition will inevitably drawn in innocents because at that point, the status quo has enveloped all.
So no, I'm not trying to ignore how players will digest future scenes in which Cloud, Barret and Tifa mention their guilt over the collateral damage and harm their actions did. I'm merely pointing out there's more to it than that. And I don't think the Remake's positioning itself to take that away at all.
Last edited:
Smoothie King
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- Pat
One argument that I’ve seen a bunch that I originally agreed with was that having Sephiroth appear earlier/more often than he did in the original is a bad idea. On the surface that’s true. The aura and mystique around an antagonist who you only see referenced in legendary terms (and Resonant Arc did a great video on this) is powerful. That being said, by the time you get to Kalm and relive the flashback, you’re probably, what, seven hours into the game? There’s a very good chance that the first installment of the Remake will have a longer play time than the entire original game. What are they supposed to do, not have the most iconic villain of the entire series (maybe of all time) be seen for a thirty hour run time? It’s impossible. If they pace the game correctly then they can still elicit that same feeling of ominous foreboding while still having Sephiroth in the game. Based on the amount of care and attention to detail we’ve seen thus far, I think they can definitely pull it off.
In terms of trepidation’s, I would say one thing I am worried about is them lessening the impact of Avalanche’s actions.
I guess what I’m saying is that I don’t want the moral compass to be so firmly drawn down the middle. There’s a lot of opportunity for shades of gray to color the palette. We’re not talking about FFVIII and a bunch of teenagers still in high school. All of the protagonists in FFVII are hardened, street-wise adults. Don’t paint them with the brush of naive do-gooders.
In terms of trepidation’s, I would say one thing I am worried about is them lessening the impact of Avalanche’s actions.
I don’t like the angle they decided to take with the first bombing run. The cost of innocent lives is a necessary evil when the odds are stacked against you so severely. Shinra can still be the evil mega corporation while Avalanche is killing innocent people as well.
I guess what I’m saying is that I don’t want the moral compass to be so firmly drawn down the middle. There’s a lot of opportunity for shades of gray to color the palette. We’re not talking about FFVIII and a bunch of teenagers still in high school. All of the protagonists in FFVII are hardened, street-wise adults. Don’t paint them with the brush of naive do-gooders.
oty
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- ex-soldier boy
I mean, if the complaint is that details were changed that for the overral arc are irrelevant then oh boy we looking at a doozy of a game. But I dont think that's the problem.
Don't believe it's insulting either. Any person would "jump" (not sure if it's even that) to that conclusion. Many people on the criticising side also continued that conversation, even if that was not their focus.
On another note, I actually think Sephiroth showing up earlier it's really good, and the interactions so far have impressed me. Really feels like they are gonna put Cloud through hell, which is interesting in many points. I have this own theory of mine, that they are building up this notion (specially for newcomers) that Aerith is the "hero" or the "savior" and Cloud is the troubled mystery that you may think it's the "hero", but seems there's something underneath. It's going to make the moments where Cloud is being controlled even more dramatic, and that well known moment even more excruciating and surprising.
Don't believe it's insulting either. Any person would "jump" (not sure if it's even that) to that conclusion. Many people on the criticising side also continued that conversation, even if that was not their focus.
On another note, I actually think Sephiroth showing up earlier it's really good, and the interactions so far have impressed me. Really feels like they are gonna put Cloud through hell, which is interesting in many points. I have this own theory of mine, that they are building up this notion (specially for newcomers) that Aerith is the "hero" or the "savior" and Cloud is the troubled mystery that you may think it's the "hero", but seems there's something underneath. It's going to make the moments where Cloud is being controlled even more dramatic, and that well known moment even more excruciating and surprising.
Smoothie King
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- Pat
LNK
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- Nate
I think it's good that they did that as well. It seems like for a lot of people, Aerith's death didn't have that big of an impact on their first play through. Having her "take the reigns" more, will show her value more.
MelodicEnigma
Pro Adventurer
I always find the conversations of "gray area" to be fascinating. The concept itself naturally begets differences in personal perception and/or contextual logic for the rationalization of actions and thinking. Honestly though, I can't really say too much because I haven't completely absorbed a lot of the context that we do have available from the Remake—I'd really have to wait until the game releases to go so fully into it in how I feel. If we're simply talking about the literal responsibility aspect that is a change impacting not only the characters and the audience—this is most certainly true. But, I definitely wouldn't say it is so in the sense of a nullification of the impact from the OG, either. I've seen different fluctuations in the conversation, so I'm not saying that is what is being said by either side, but I'll throw it out there for the sake of it.
I believe it most likely will just change what I'll refer to as the "conclusion of conflict" for both the players and the characters in regards to the bombing and that moral compass of AVALANCHE. The conviction and supposed follow-through of an action still carries its own emotional weight for a person, regardless if they later learn the end result wasn't completely their fault. It may be an alternate fact to the world and to others—but not to them. It definitely changes for us as the viewers, but even as we can (hopefully) observe alongside the character's growth in carrying that conviction and guilt, we still understand that we're playing as a group of people who are still willing to do dirty things for the sake of the world, to make hard choices and whatnot. At the end of the day, whatever changes occur, I don't believe it's meant to completely obscure the type of morally-compromising weight the characters have—it's too important to deviate from. But just as others have said, it definitely is altering it for a varied colorization of the "gray area" that we observe and the characters acknowledge as they move forward.
At least, that's the hope. It all still comes down to the way it plays out in the final cut for me. It's hard for me to have an ardent conclusion on something that isn't completely observable yet in all it's glory, even if there is some pre-knowledge, so I can only talk about it with a certain amount of confidence.
I believe it most likely will just change what I'll refer to as the "conclusion of conflict" for both the players and the characters in regards to the bombing and that moral compass of AVALANCHE. The conviction and supposed follow-through of an action still carries its own emotional weight for a person, regardless if they later learn the end result wasn't completely their fault. It may be an alternate fact to the world and to others—but not to them. It definitely changes for us as the viewers, but even as we can (hopefully) observe alongside the character's growth in carrying that conviction and guilt, we still understand that we're playing as a group of people who are still willing to do dirty things for the sake of the world, to make hard choices and whatnot. At the end of the day, whatever changes occur, I don't believe it's meant to completely obscure the type of morally-compromising weight the characters have—it's too important to deviate from. But just as others have said, it definitely is altering it for a varied colorization of the "gray area" that we observe and the characters acknowledge as they move forward.
At least, that's the hope. It all still comes down to the way it plays out in the final cut for me. It's hard for me to have an ardent conclusion on something that isn't completely observable yet in all it's glory, even if there is some pre-knowledge, so I can only talk about it with a certain amount of confidence.
Odysseus
Ninja Potato
- AKA
- Ody
So I got on a brain wave right before falling asleep,
EDIT: I finally had an oppritunity to make good on my username
By having Shinra be responsible for the reactor explosion, this effectively means that at NO point are our main character's ever in a position where they have the upper hand over the company. They think they're making a difference, but they are actually just dancing in the palm of Shinra; they are completely powerless. This culminates in them all being captured and put in prison at Shinra HQ. There's nothing they can do but await whatever fate Shinra decides for them, they lost. Then Sephiroth shows up and completely demolishes Shinra from the inside out, accomplishing in a few hours what Avalanche couldn't manage in an entire full length game. This is the new "Sephiroth is just that much stronger than you" moment to compensate for the change in narrative.
EDIT: I finally had an oppritunity to make good on my username
Last edited:
LicoriceAllsorts
Donator
You are a genius, Odysseus.
Kratos
Pro Adventurer
Hey all, new member, long-time lurker.
I'll start with the obligatory "I don't really belong in this thread." There are a lot of things that could potentially play out in ways that lessen what i like about the original, but it's hard to know how I feel about them in a vacuum, and so much of the game looks like it has an incredible amount of real care put into it.
Except.
I'm not super hot on what they did with getting makeup from the Honeybee Inn. There was something kinda nice about how mundane Cloud getting his makeup done in the dressing room in the spare time of one of the girls was, and replacing it with something far flashier kinda kills the seedy-love-hotel vibe that the original place had. THAT, in turn, makes me worried that the other memorable moments - the weird Satanic corporate LARP session, the kinda-sweet bit where an older couple whose son has gotten them a room just sort of sit awkwardly - will be lost too, and I dunno. I think that would be sort of a shame.
I'll start with the obligatory "I don't really belong in this thread." There are a lot of things that could potentially play out in ways that lessen what i like about the original, but it's hard to know how I feel about them in a vacuum, and so much of the game looks like it has an incredible amount of real care put into it.
Except.
I'm not super hot on what they did with getting makeup from the Honeybee Inn. There was something kinda nice about how mundane Cloud getting his makeup done in the dressing room in the spare time of one of the girls was, and replacing it with something far flashier kinda kills the seedy-love-hotel vibe that the original place had. THAT, in turn, makes me worried that the other memorable moments - the weird Satanic corporate LARP session, the kinda-sweet bit where an older couple whose son has gotten them a room just sort of sit awkwardly - will be lost too, and I dunno. I think that would be sort of a shame.
oty
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- ex-soldier boy
I think it was the way they found to make the scene. Given how polemic just the discussion of "will they put it or not?" became, I kinda give them a pass. Hope it's not for other things tho.
This whole last sentence kind of embodies a lot of what I'm feeling. A lot of moments are being changed, but either because of a fortunate coincidence or a strange placebo effect, a lot of them , atleast for me, has a justification. And I always say: "well it depends if Square does X, then it will be too far".
I do agree that I have a strong opinion about change. Specially after the release of the "Raising Kratos" documentary by Sony, and you see how much care changing something dear needs. It's most of the time the harder path, and they do it to make something special. Cory even says the reactions he expected, and it was so strange seeing how they are extremely similar, if not the same, to the reactions the Remake provokes. In both games you had a team comprised of old and new. People who were involved in the original and people who lived with the original. It kind of gives me hope that maybe this will all work out.
Then I remember Genesis.
just a joke guys
This whole last sentence kind of embodies a lot of what I'm feeling. A lot of moments are being changed, but either because of a fortunate coincidence or a strange placebo effect, a lot of them , atleast for me, has a justification. And I always say: "well it depends if Square does X, then it will be too far".
I do agree that I have a strong opinion about change. Specially after the release of the "Raising Kratos" documentary by Sony, and you see how much care changing something dear needs. It's most of the time the harder path, and they do it to make something special. Cory even says the reactions he expected, and it was so strange seeing how they are extremely similar, if not the same, to the reactions the Remake provokes. In both games you had a team comprised of old and new. People who were involved in the original and people who lived with the original. It kind of gives me hope that maybe this will all work out.
Then I remember Genesis.
just a joke guys
LNK
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- Nate
If SE would've said they were going to keep everything the same except for the graphics, I would've been disappointed with what we've seen. But, since they told us things would be changed/expanded on, I've just kept an open mind about things. As long as they keep the major things in the story and lore, I'm sure I'll like it.
And I actually hope Genesis will be included somehow in the Remake lol.
Obsidian Fire
Ahk Morn!
- AKA
- The Engineer
Genesis is... a huge case of "decent concept, bad implementation". On paper, his characterization is all right. In the game, he comes across as grating and stealing the spot-light from the characters from the OG.
He's also a character that I don't think really has a Western Character Archetype to fall back on either. Soldiers interested in artsy stuff isn't something normally seen in Western Literature. At least, not modern Western Literature.
And then there's the problem that he's about as destructive as Sephrioth when he finds out about being experimented on, but Crisis Core decides to redeem him anyway. Why and if that redemption should even happen can be a very hard pill to swallow for some people.
Personally, I like Genesis overall. He fixes one of my personal pet peeves with Sephrioth's backstory which is that Sephrioth was the only human-based Jenova experiment that was done (and that ended up having consequences for people). He brings some variety to the top-tier Soldier members and gives them so much needed flair. While I find his reaction to finding out that Shin-Ra screwed him over unfortunate, I think it's not something that isn't understandable either (his brain literally breaking down while that was going on did not help). And I like that even with all that going on, Genesis still didn't take himself so far out of the equation that Zack couldn't help him in the end. He's a great foil to Sephrioth's reaction to finding out all the same things and how Sephiroth ultimately cut himself off from anyone who wanted to help him.
All that said, I had to pay a lot of attention to timeline, world-building and characterization details to finally come to that conclusion about Genesis. He's very much a character that was designed to come across in a certain way to people, and for a lot of people, how he comes across is very off putting.
He's also a character that I don't think really has a Western Character Archetype to fall back on either. Soldiers interested in artsy stuff isn't something normally seen in Western Literature. At least, not modern Western Literature.
And then there's the problem that he's about as destructive as Sephrioth when he finds out about being experimented on, but Crisis Core decides to redeem him anyway. Why and if that redemption should even happen can be a very hard pill to swallow for some people.
Personally, I like Genesis overall. He fixes one of my personal pet peeves with Sephrioth's backstory which is that Sephrioth was the only human-based Jenova experiment that was done (and that ended up having consequences for people). He brings some variety to the top-tier Soldier members and gives them so much needed flair. While I find his reaction to finding out that Shin-Ra screwed him over unfortunate, I think it's not something that isn't understandable either (his brain literally breaking down while that was going on did not help). And I like that even with all that going on, Genesis still didn't take himself so far out of the equation that Zack couldn't help him in the end. He's a great foil to Sephrioth's reaction to finding out all the same things and how Sephiroth ultimately cut himself off from anyone who wanted to help him.
All that said, I had to pay a lot of attention to timeline, world-building and characterization details to finally come to that conclusion about Genesis. He's very much a character that was designed to come across in a certain way to people, and for a lot of people, how he comes across is very off putting.