I just think the way they took a theme (Plato's Loves, Aristotle's concept of a perfect society -> More's Utopia), broke it down into ways that theme can be manifested and explored each in specific sections and people. Then they brought them all back up at the end so that it'd all connect. I like how it draws on philosophy. ARR was mostly worldbuilding, HW was exploring faith and how far a lie can go, SB explored how war is a constant back and forth/the values of freedom/how all it takes is one person to be mistreated to make them agree with opressive regimes... But SHB was mostly just blatant philosophy on the structure of society and the virtues of man. I liked that. And I liked that it wasn't especially preachy with it unlike Endwalker's vague aesop of "Suffering is what makes you appreciate life". Endwalker rubbed me the wrong way. SHB let you explore the concept, see how they do it and draw your own conclusions. And each character grows a little based on those aspects.
But that's just bc I'm a massive nerd and my favourite FF is 12, so I have really bad tastes as far as the FF community sees it.
idk
of course, it does still have flaws, particularly the way they use some characters (Ran'jit) and the weird insistance on some elements. But it was still my cup of tea, and that's why I generally defend it as a good story. If it's not your cup of tea tho, it's fine, it doesn't have to be. Hopefully something else about this game is.


Reply With Quote





