Back To Special Features
In my opinion, the best video game you can play is a great RPG. RPGs generally last longer than any other kind of game, they usually have the best music found in any kind of game, and most importantly of all, they make you care about individual characters more than any other kind of game. I think it's safe to say that video games as a whole would be a lot worse off if there were no RPGs. But as great as they are, almost every RPG has a major flaw that no other kind of game does: Story lines and characters that never continue from one game in a series to the next. Can you imagine how different Resident Evil would be if no two games in the series had anything in common other than being scary? What if the characters were completely different in every single Oddworld game? What if a game like Tomba 2 shared nothing in common with its predecessor other than the word "Tomba" in the title? In each of these cases, you would probably be much less attached to the characters in the series, and the games would probably take a beating from the press for their lack of continuity. And they would deserve it. But for some reason, RPGs are exempted from this criticism. For years, we have been overlooking the fact that true RPG sequels are almost completely non-existent. Nowhere is this more evident than in Square's Final Fantasy series, where each game has a completely different story line that is not related in any way to any of the previous games' story lines. The only thing that the stories of the various Final Fantasy games have in common is their high quality. Unfortunately, this trend is not limited to the Final Fantasy series. The story line of Wild Arms 2 has nothing to do with the original game, the classic characters in Lunar are nowhere to be found in Lunar 2, and so on. Sure, some of these games have similar battle systems and other design elements, but these things are comparatively un-important in RPGs. The story is what really matters. Perhaps most disturbing of all is the complete lack of continuity between Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross. It wasn't until over four years had passed that Square finally announced a sequel to Chrono Trigger, which is widely regarded as one of the greatest games of all time. During those four years, I did a lot of thinking about what I wanted a sequel to Chrono Trigger to be. What I envisioned was a game that takes the lovable cast of characters from the original game and moves them into the third dimension, with ground-breaking graphics, plenty of cut scenes, and a story line that's just as good as the original game's. I was very disappointed to find that Chrono Cross doesn't resemble the original game at all. Even if some of the combat mechanics are the same, the characters and story are completely different. In this way, Chrono Cross isn't really a sequel to Chrono Trigger at all. It's a game with the word "Chrono" in the title and Square says it's the sequel to Chrono Trigger, but that's as far as it goes. Likewise, Final Fantasy 8 is a game with the words "Final Fantasy" in the title and Square says it's a part of the Final Fantasy series, but that's as far as it goes. They could just as easily have called Vagrant Story "Final Fantasy 8" and it wouldn't have made a difference from a story line standpoint. The lack of continuity in story lines is made all the more frustrating by the non-endings in some RPGs. To give an example without spoiling anything, the endings in FF7 and FF8 have much more style than substance. Sure, they're graphically amazing, but they don't really tell you what happens to the characters. As I said in RPGs: The Best of the Best, I don't think it's unreasonable to want to clearly find out what happens at the end of a 50-hour game (or a 20-hour game, for that matter). I also don't want to make assumptions about what happened in the endings just so I feel like I know, even though I'll never really be sure. These non-endings discourage you from getting too attached to any characters, because you know that the game could end at any time and you could never see the characters again or find out what happens to them. True sequels would be especially welcome with games like Final Fantasy 7 that don't really explore the personalities of many of their characters. Even in the case of games like Lunar where the personality of each character is thoroughly explored, story line continuity would still be welcome because you would already be attached to the game the moment you start it up. Some developers spend entire games trying to get you to know their characters and grow attached to them, only to end up failing miserably. With true RPG sequels, this hurdle would already be overcome before development even begins because many gamers would already be familiar with the characters. True sequels would give you a chance to get to know popular characters more, get to know characters that you really never got to know before, and also meet new characters who are added into the mix with the old characters. I realize that there are also plenty of reasons that things are the way they are. If more RPG developers wrote story lines that continued from one game to the next, there could be plenty of developers who give half-assed efforts on one game so that they have enough material for the sequel. There could even be some developers who suffer from Soul Reaver Syndrome and conclude a game with "To Be Continued" and nothing more. Square is big enough and powerful enough to take a stand on this issue. All they would have to do is release a couple of high-profile "true sequels," and other developers would inevitably follow suit. As long as RPG developers make a conscious effort to avoid the pitfalls described above, this concept could make RPGs even deeper and more rewarding than they already are. Send your thoughts on this feature to ivan@mastergamer.com
© 2001 ivan@mastergamer.com