Political Ideology and Storytelling Within FFXIV

[aveyond-dreams]

I don't usually find political or wartime stories interesting. My first FF title was FFX, which I loved. Then I played FFXII, which I didn't care for at all.



Individuals have different sets of values and what's important to one person isn't to another. It's why I don't believe these conflicts work and you'd think they'd have learned that between ShB & EW (or real life for that matter). Especially given the way FFXIV tends to treat antagonists, it's condemning of the 'wrong' set of values regardless of what Yoshi-P says about accepting different ways of thinking. I wish more of the DRK questline mentality carried over to the main MSQ where the WoL struggles with whether or not they're doing the right thing.

I will concede that there are a lot of parts in FFXII that drag on a lot longer than needed-which isn't helped by the decision to make Vaan the starring character as opposed to Ashe or Basch.

However, a decent chunk of FFIX is technically a war story as well with tragic and impactful events such as the sacking of Burmecia, the annihilation of Clerya, Atomos laying waste to Lindblum, and the shocking destruction of Alexandria. I will argue that FFIX is a war story done right, balanced with excellent characterization and being able to play through such intense events as opposed to having them happen in the periphery like in FFXII.

[Lauront]

I don't usually find political or wartime stories interesting. My first FF title was FFX, which I loved. Then I played FFXII, which I didn't care for at all.



Individuals have different sets of values and what's important to one person isn't to another. It's why I don't believe these conflicts work and you'd think they'd have learned that between ShB & EW (or real life for that matter). Especially given the way FFXIV tends to treat antagonists, it's condemning of the 'wrong' set of values regardless of what Yoshi-P says about accepting different ways of thinking. I wish more of the DRK questline mentality carried over to the main MSQ where the WoL struggles with whether or not they're doing the right thing.

If it amounts to the game attempting to lecture me on this sort of thing, it will in all probability fail. So I'm rather curious to see what they mean by it in practice to gauge whether I even have an interest in it.

I will concede that there are a lot of parts in FFXII that drag on a lot longer than needed-which isn't helped by the decision to make Vaan the starring character as opposed to Ashe or Basch.

However, a decent chunk of FFIX is technically a war story as well with tragic and impactful events such as the sacking of Burmecia, the annihilation of Clerya, Atomos laying waste to Lindblum, and the shocking destruction of Alexandria. I will argue that FFIX is a war story done right, balanced with excellent characterization and being able to play through such intense events as opposed to having them happen in the periphery like in FFXII.

Of all the single players, XII (Ivalice more generally) and IX are probably the ones I'd most like to see turned into an MMO - with 7 not too far behind.

[KariTheFox]

FFVII is a game that does not need a huge focus on classic fantasy elements because that is explicitly not the kind of story they are trying to tell-a story of corporations and environmentalism is better suited to settings like the city of Midgar and the modern settlements of that world. FFVII takes place in a time period roughly equivalent to the 1980s-1990s, depending on the given birthdates of the cast. FFXIV's battle of Cartenau takes place in the year: 1572.

FFXIV is a game pretty heavily inspired by the early modern era. Indeed, the year you just cited for the Battle of Cartenau, 1572 - puts it squarely in that time period according to most historians. The 16th century was home to things like the establishment of colonial powers, the beginning of the slave trade, the erosion of the power of the catholic church, the rise of several Islamic Empires that expanded through the use of gunpowder.

Feudalism and the kind of society established in the late middle ages were very much in decline at this point. Constantinople had fallen to the Ottoman Empire nearly 100 years ago, the Crusades were a distant memory, and the place for knights and lords was becoming more and more ceremonial. When you say 1572, I don't think "knights in armor and castles", I think "the beginning of the age of sail and expansion of colonial powers".

Not that I take too much stock in the calender year in a fictional setting, the events of the LotR novels takes place in 3019, so what's that supposed to mean?

[aveyond-dreams]

FFXIV is a game pretty heavily inspired by the early modern era. Indeed, the year you just cited for the Battle of Cartenau, 1572 - puts it squarely in that time period according to most historians. The 16th century was home to things like the establishment of colonial powers, the beginning of the slave trade, the erosion of the power of the catholic church, the rise of several Islamic Empires that expanded through the use of gunpowder.

Feudalism and the kind of society established in the late middle ages were very much in decline at this point. Constantinople had fallen to the Ottoman Empire nearly 100 years ago, the Crusades were a distant memory, and the place for knights and lords was becoming more and more ceremonial. When you say 1572, I don't think "knights in armor and castles", I think "the beginning of the age of sail and expansion of colonial powers".

Not that I take too much stock in the calender year in a fictional setting, the events of the LotR novels takes place in 3019, so what's that supposed to mean?

The 1500s wasn't when most of the world's countries began toppling kings left and right. That was a gradual process that saw many of these countries temporarily revert back to monarchy such as France before eventually being completely displaced in favor of republics-in FFXIV we've been "liberating" what feels like country after country and now that Garlemald is concerned its a valid concern to wonder what will become of what remains of the world. As for LotR given the thematic consistency of its setting, whatever year it takes place in is irrelevant-its the middle ages plain and simple as opposed to the mishmash we see going on in FFXIV.

I have no interest in continued stories about colonialism vs tribes-it just does not appeal to me on a fundamental level. I am more interested in kingdoms warring between each other and the interactions between the heads of state and the people in their armies. This is why Heavensward appeals a lot to people, Estinien is a revenge-driven soldier, Aymeric is knight in shining armor #1, Ysayle is a heretic on the run, and the religious background of Ishgard helps flesh out the character of the nation. This is a story whose premise appeals to many, with us being thrust right into the center of the action. For the most part it also didn't wear people out with abstract themes or callbacks to tiring issues that people already lecture us enough about on social media on a daily basis. I will not stick around for 2 years of an expansion droning on and on about how colonialism/kings=bad, I'm sick of it.

Also keep in mind that the real world then continued to have many prominent monarchies in Europe up until World War 1 imploded everything. Those that remain have since adapted to modern times and continue to serve as positive symbols of their respective nations, as opposed to republics whose heads of state come and go like the wind and despite going on about freedom and liberty, life doesn't seem to get any better for ordinary people.

I'd much rather in game for nations to be pitted against each other once again or have to grapple with out-of-control forces of nature, as is often the case in Final Fantasy games instead of another round of "look at how amazing our morals are compared to the bad guys" with the same cast of unimpactful characters while the only interesting ones are sent off to who knows where, as more kingdom falls and more states are added to the United States of FF.

[Seiori]

Gods I wish there was a Fire Emblem themed quality MMORPG, but the more I think about it more it would be akin towards World of Warcraft faction type scenario between nations or kingdoms. Might be hard to do since ffxiv is considered a hero fantasy and does not want us to deviate from winning side that much also the main story is structured that way, told like a single player experience.

[Lauront]

I have no interest in continued stories about colonialism vs tribes-it just does not appeal to me on a fundamental level. I am more interested in kingdoms warring between each other and the interactions between the heads of state and the people in their armies. This is why Heavensward appeals a lot to people, Estinien is a revenge-driven soldier, Aymeric is knight in shining armor #1, Ysayle is a heretic on the run, and the religious background of Ishgard helps flesh out the character of the nation. This is a story whose premise appeals to many, with us being thrust right into the center of the action. For the most part it also didn't wear people out with abstract themes or callbacks to tiring issues that people already lecture us enough about on social media on a daily basis. I will not stick around for 2 years of an expansion droning on and on about how colonialism/kings=bad, I'm sick of it.

Likewise. Those "themes" are completely sterile to me. I don't play fantasy or even sci fi games for them.

[MikkoAkure]

I outright reject the trend of liberating these nations and sucking the magic straight out of them by turning them into another part of the United States of Final Fantasy. Enough is enough.

I refuse to follow down this game down that pathway, I'm sick of these tropes and now that this world does not even have any gods there is less allure to it than the mechanized settings of FFXIII's games and modern setting of FFXV. I refuse to be Sharlayan's new peacekeeping mercenary, wielded by none other than Alphinaud and the great leader G'raha Tia himself! I'd rather fight on the Garleans side in the name of a new emperor, or hop over to another shard and leave the source behind entirely. Failing that? Consider me gone, nebulous "themes" of freedom didn't sell me on Heavensward: the castle on the mountain and Aymeric did.

Yeesh. I think there's a point where after you've stated your distaste with enough of the elements of the game that you need to realize that maybe the game isn't for you. I already stated before in a previous post in this thread that not all FFs are based around monarchies. An even greater number don't even have a "traditional" fantasy setting. And not many of them have gods in the traditional sense so I'm not sure where that's coming from. I'm also not sure how a game having a ruler who is inbred and raised in a separate world from their subjects who they are expected to rule just because they were born to directly corresponds to "good fantasy game" but to each their own.

And I don't know which Heavensward you played, but a lot of the knights and nobility of Ishgard were portrayed as being bad guys. They killed a dragon to eat her eyes to gain power and then helped perpetuate a forever war at the cost of the majority of its own citizens. We don't really do anything to "free" Ishgard beyond dragon slaying, that's all on Aymeric, Hilda, and the people of Ishgard. After their war was over and it was revealed that all Ishgardian Elezen have the capacity to turn into dragons after drinking their blood and thus are descended from the original knights and not just the nobility, along with the lies that the church told everyone, there's no need to keep the original theocracy going and to continue to do so would have been ridiculous.

In regards to Ala Mhigo, their own king slaughtered his own people before civil war destroyed the country and then they were taken over by the Empire. Now, there's only 1 member of the royal family left alive and he has no intention at all to continue the monarchy. Did you expect the monk NPC of all people to suddenly decide "screw this, I'm going to be king?" or for the people to decide "monarchy totally worked for us before, let's just assign a new king"? If we went by your standard of "heroic person who went on a journey becomes new king", that would've been Lyse by the way. Should we have let Ala Mhigo continue to be an Imperial Province just because their new ruler was born into his chair instead of elected to it and that's "better fantasy"?

The 1500s wasn't when most of the world's countries began toppling kings left and right.

The Garleans themselves used to be a republic. Their Senate House is ironically the only structure still standing unscathed in the entire city. They only became a hereditary empire due to an Ascian deciding to hijack and weaponize 800 years of Garlean resentment. In our own world, Rome overthrew their own monarchy and established a republic 2500 years ago, a full 1500 years before the medieval-ish setting most fantasy uses. So republics aren't anything new in either our world or the game's world.

[aveyond-dreams]

...

I maintain my position that it would have been better for all that Aymeric took the throne as king, you don't just hand over political power to a peasant class that cannot even read or write nor was the nobility completely tilted in favor of evil. Count Fortemps and the various members of the other high houses were absolutely not bad guys. As for the knights of the Heavens' Ward I sympathize more with their plights and backstories, being equally painful and tragic as those of Aymeric and Estinien who had difficult upbringings themselves but did not go the way of evil. One of the messages I took away from Heavensward is that sons don't necessarily inherit the sins of their fathers and are free to choose better paths-clearly that didn't sink in for you.

Again, if Cecil took the throne of Baron and Garnet-who was not the trueborn princess of Alexandria-took over as queen then I fail to see why a leader as respected and beloved as Aymeric could not have assumed the position and done a fine job. These are characters who show growth as people and that enables them to be competent heads of state. They certainly make for a more interesting nation than one ruled by "99 speakers who refuse to lift their fingers when another country is clearly in great peril."

In terms of Ala Mhigo-I would rather the random monk npc go be king instead of having Lyse near anything to do with government. Throughout Stormblood she was little more than a "naïve lens to see the world through" that got boring so fast compared to the party we had in Heavensward. This "kingdom" was 3 zones devoid of color where very little attempt was made to make us feel welcome, in stark contrast to how we were treated in Coerthas and Dravania, and then later on as we made connections in Doma and to the people of the First.

In terms of the supernatural element in FFXIV-you have predominantly medieval setting now with the exception of not-Soviet-Russia void of a dominant religious presence or gods to oversee the world any longer. The pillars holding up this world are gone-fine when its the end of the story, not fine when there's another 10 years planned. Most FF games maintain some kind of religious or divine underlying presence:

FF1-Chaos as a God of destruction
FF2-Christianity seeing as how the Emperor is said to have defeated Satan and took his powers
FF3/4/5-Crystalism, and in FF4's case the creator deity is defeated at the end of the story
FF6-Kefka and the Warring Triad
FF9-the eidolons having powers on the scale of gods and later on the underlying lore regarding crystals, etc
FF10-the dominant big bad here is Sin, and while no gods are present in this story the strong unification of the world under Yevon contributed to the game's consitency and palatability
FF11-Atalanta, Promathia
FF12/Ivalice - needs no explanation
FF7/8-did not require them in favor of FF7's lifestream themes and FF8's sorceresses

I've largely enjoyed my time in FFXIV but I definitely enjoyed myself most in Heavensward, Shadowbringers, and Endwalker as opposed to the horrendous writing of Stormblood's nation building arcs, which is what a significant amount of people fear is coming next. But don't worry, I'm more than happy to bow out and leave FFXIV as G'raha Tia fanclub: the video game and Alphinaud's political reddit. There are stories that resonate strongly with people and stories that are only tolerated by overly attached fans-this nationbuilding "free the people and fight the evil king to spread democracy!" is one of them. I'll leave the crowd who is willing to tolerate that to their own devices, and go off on my own merry way.

Go ahead and let Garlemald revert to a republic and become the United States, and lets go ahead and displace the alleged king of Corvos too while we're at it. Then we can go overthrow Hien too just for funsies because "it's the right thing to do!" because according to your logic he's just another undeserving noble from the looks of it, and a faceless conglomerate would be better to rule Doma I suppose. Then when every nation is a copy of Sharlayan's political system, we declare world peace and FFXIV shuts its servers off with a whimper-because they'll have driven away the players that came here in search of high fantasy or even interesting sci-fi plots instead of endlessly being preached to about morals from a 16 year-old and red-headed catboy.

Maybe just maybe its time to let the current writing team take a break-and bring back the Heavensward writers who I'm sure have done an excellent job with FFXVI's script. A young nobleman who loses everything and goes on a quest to lay low his brother, trapped in the form of a Phoenix-a God in all but name within the context of that world, throwing his lot in with a colorful cast of sellswords as revenge burns in his heart. Sounds a whole lot better than "lets go reform the bad empire into a democracy" as we are assisted by the know-it-all scions whose growth has stagnated and ground to a halt.

[KariTheFox]

Eh, to each their own. I find FFXIV treatment of colonialism and exploitation to be a rather unique one, with the way if grants an even-handed approach and gives us perspectives from both sides of the conflict, in a time period where colonialism is going strong. If that approach ultimately comes down on the side of colonialism being bad, that might be because... colonialism is in fact, pretty bad.

That being said, I don't really see how FFXIV is a game that says "monarchy=bad". Monarchs we meet spend and sizeable time with - Hien, Nanamo, Vrtra, and Feo Ul are all quite friendly and helpful characters. "Bad" monarchs are... the Emperor of Garlemald, which, given they're a belligerent invading force in the setting, makes sense - King Theodric, who we never actually see, and King Thordan, who isn't really a legitimate monarch at all, and is just the archbishop declaring himself as one. ( i know there's some stuff going on in Bozja but I haven't done that plotline, so.)

[aveyond-dreams]

Eh, to each their own. I find FFXIV treatment of colonialism and exploitation to be a rather unique one, with the way if grants an even-handed approach and gives us perspectives from both sides of the conflict, in a time period where colonialism is going strong. If that approach ultimately comes down on the side of colonialism being bad, that might be because... colonialism is in fact, pretty bad.

That being said, I don't really see how FFXIV is a game that says "monarchy=bad". Monarchs we meet spend and sizeable time with - Hien, Nanamo, Vrtra, and Feo Ul are all quite friendly and helpful characters. "Bad" monarchs are... the Emperor of Garlemald, which, given they're a belligerent invading force in the setting, makes sense - King Theodric, who we never actually see, and King Thordan, who isn't really a legitimate monarch at all, and is just the archbishop declaring himself as one. ( i know there's some stuff going on in Bozja but I haven't done that plotline, so.)

The issue with the benevolent monarchs present in the game is that they are written out of focus not long after they take their thrones. It felt like we were actively being pushed away from characters like Feo Ul and Hien, while the spotline shone on insufferable characters like Lyse and the resistance members and coming up the would-be reformers of Garlemald.

Garlemald as a monarchy put itself first. This is the case for nearly every such country in existence, and in cases like Alexandria where the tyrant finally gets to exit the picture another, more benevolent monarch took the throne as opposed to throwing out the system entirely and then lecturing us for hours on end about how evil they were. Enough is enough.

As for the colonialsm always bad I do believe it depends on the context-there have historically been civilizations that resort to ritualistic human sacrifice or other atrocities and when pitted against literally any other would be colonists that do not engage in such behavior, I would rule in favor of the more benevolent society, and that is where I choose to leave any and all discussions regarding the subject. It is not a black and white issue at all, but this is not the place for an extended conversation about that.

Time will tell what ends up happening and Friday's live letter can't come soon enough. I'd like to know whether this ship is headed in the right direction or not so I can get my lifeboat ready, because after 8 years I think it's time to move on from these tired old themes being repeated to us without cease. A return to a golden Heavensward-like era, or spiralling into an extension of Stormblood's Ala Mhigo arc transposed onto other countries. One of these will retain players, another will drive all but the most patient fans away gradually over time.