So, as it happens, I managed to reexperience some of Final Fantasy 6 through a Let's Play of its Pixel Remaster. On the whole, the game remains enjoyable and entertaining as an experience, despite some aspects that haven't aged very well.
But that made me ponder what I liked about it, and I think I have found a rather simple, if seemingly contrarian answer:
Final Fantasy 6 is a story about losers.
Think about it. Terra, the very first protagonist we're introduced to, is a vacuous woman who constantly struggles with doubts about herself and her decisions.
Locke, well, he constantly has complexes over a girlfriend who died ages ago and whose corpse he constantly preserves in a basement attended to by a creepy guy.
Edgar? Sabin? Well, they're definitely a touch more adjusted than most of the protagonists, but are by no means flawless beings, and definitely no selfless paladins in shining armor. Edgar is, as is often noted, a smart and capable ruler who also happens to be extremely flirtatious (though at least, he doesn't force himself on any ladies, so it's mostly just him being weird in a relatively harmless way...ish). Sabin is, for the most part, the exact opposite - a well adjusted martial artist who fled from his royal responsibilities out of grief and anger. They definitely compliment each other well, and are, in many ways, the "center" of the party as a whole.
Cyan? Well, his entire character arc can be summed up as, "old fashioned knight who's stuck in the past". He doesn't get much story, but what story he gets is mostly him grieving about his dead wife and child, and wanting revenge against the empire/Kefka for their deaths. Yeah.
Shadow? He has no morals, he only turns against the empire/Kefka because they betray him. Before that, he's literally a guy who only works for money. And his work? Killing people. And his backstory? Being a train robber who abandoned his daughter to become an assassin. Real swell guy, that.
Celes? She's basically Terra without the amnesia and existential struggles, and works for the empire until it betrays her because she disagrees on some war crimes. She feels no remorse for the crimes she herself committed, with everyone pretending that she's a fine and upstanding member of the resistance.
Actually, in a strange way, she's even more of a non character than Terra, being defined almost entirely by Locke's strange and fucked up attachment to her, and her caring for him for some reason. And before you bring up her opera scene or her attempted suicide scene, they don't really add much in the way of unique traits - the opera is just her wanting to play an attractive princess, the suicide scene is her grieving over losing the last human she knew. Both are fairly common human traits, and don't actually define her as a character, imo.
Setzer? He's probably the biggest loser of them all. His entire character is to dress like an edgelord, kidnap actresses he finds attractive, and be a gambling addict. Also his backstory is that his girlfriend died because she was too reckless and crashed her airship. Wow. Such great characterization.
Gau? Well, he's just a feral boy who likes playing with the monsters on the Veldt, but he's technically the last "real" character, as the story attempts to give him a sad backstory instead of just having him around as a gimmick, ala Mog or Umaro. That being said, there's not much to it, his dad threw him into the Veldt because he thought he was "cursed", and Gau, despite this, feels the need to protect his dad out of familial love. Hmm. Maybe he's actually the best adjusted member of the group?
Relm and Strago are basically gimmick characters who are barely a step above Mog and Umaro, in terms of narrative relevance or impact. They don't really get any kind of profound story or characterization, beyond being a loveable grandpa-granddaughter couple, and as such, I don't feel the need to really describe them.
So yeah, that's...not a great bunch of characters. But weirdly, in a way, I think that's the main appeal of the game.
How is that? Well, these people end up teaming against an evil empire, and later an all powerful megalomaniac, and end up winning. The implication there is that even losers can achieve great things if guided by a common grand purpose, and I feel like this is what actually drives most of its appeal; after all, this is a very inspiring message, one many people can relate to.
Seen this way, Kefka also becomes far more sensible as a grand villain. He's essentially the biggest loser of them all; a clown who revels in the suffering of others, who gains power just to inflict more suffering, and who, upon becoming omni powerful, ends up inflicting so much suffering he gets bored of it! Every loser character has some kind of redemption arc come the end of the world, but not him. On the contrary, he becomes even more of a loser.
There's an interesting implication here; before they redeemed themselves, they weren't worthy to save the world, that's why they lost on their first try. It was the redemption that made them worthwhile heroes, capable of taking down the one loser who didn't redeem himself, despite acquiring godlike powers. While the game itself doesn't explore this concept too deeply, it's certainly one I find quite compelling, and think deserves more use.
Anyhow, that's a bunch of my raw thoughts on this classic, and why I think it's still appealing. I hope that it was enjoyable and helpful to you, and that it perhaps shed some new light on the game. See ya later!
Comments
Post a Comment