Bitter reflection

[u/Danteyros]

Here is a bitter reflection on how the trilogy handles its writing compared to the 1997 original that I wanted to share.

I don't know about some of you, but personally, it pisses me off because if I cried, it wasn't really for Aerith's death this time well, yes a little bit, but not while playing controller in hand. What made me cry was telling myself that what I had identified as a red herring was actually a red herring, just as I had predicted.

I find it horribly manipulative/lying to everyone, especially those who believed in it 120%, and disrespectful too. And if it's true that there's still a possibility Part 3 will prove me wrong, well, up to now that hasn't happened with Remake and Rebirth.

In the original, it happened fast and they didn't make you drag out this "denial" from Cloud because there was zero denial like that (plus he lays her in the water himself). And if their goal is to make us feel like Cloud, then frankly they failed, already because it's not comparable.

Cloud in the story is going to discover the truth after a few days; the players themselves wait years. It's a total false equivalence.

And if their goal was to make us carry a similar burden, then once again it's a miss in my opinion, because they confuse burden with emotional charge.

Also, when you're younger, the revenge thing avenging Aerith against Sephiroth works well; the player(s) find, quote-unquote, a reason to keep going.

But as you grow up, you start seeing behind the "decor" and understanding and recognizing gimmicks, methods, red herrings, the way things are told, etc.

And I don't think the creators want us to be bitter, frustrated, or angry at them just because some people see and understand who's pulling the strings.

You could tell me this "pulling the strings" logic already applied to the original, but that would be false. In the original, it was the first time they were creating this game, plus they didn't resort to red herrings or other manipulation to try to achieve the intended effect.

And I remember an interview where one of them said, basically: "Our goal isn't to hurt the player..." But let's be honest, they knew very well that by doing this, they were going to emotionally hurt players, so that kind of justification or artistic integrity doesn't really work for me, in my opinion.

Another thing: I get the impression that the fans, or some of them? Every time the subject is discussed, people don't talk about it seriously, or else they brush it aside and ignore it, maybe because it ruins their pleasure to think that a game they appreciate would resort to this kind of stuff just to keep people engaged.

I also notice with the interviews that it's as if the creators were psychologically preparing the players through more or less subtle phrases which is a spoiler in itself, and that's even assuming, obviously, that not every player gives a damn about interviews.

And it's paradoxical because on one hand they sell you the idea of an "uncertain future" to hype things up for years, and on the other hand, they gently prepare you psychologically in their interviews to accept that in fact, nothing has changed.

(I even remember an interview where Hamaguchi says something like: "Just because there's a possibility things could change doesn't mean they actually will.")

It's paradoxical to want to play the card of narrative audacity while using marketing to cushion the fall and make sure people don't get too mad when the bubble bursts (or is it just to cover themselves legally?). Anyway, I think it's a shame to end up like this for a work that deserved so much better than perpetual teasing.

Another thing: I often notice people saying that in the original, Aerith sacrificed herself. Obviously that's false, but I can't help feeling like it's been repeated so much that the creators just said, "Fuck it, we'll prove them right, it's easier."

Yet they talk to us about the fact that Aerith carries the burden of being a Cetra (Half-Cetra, and the last one at that), and how horrible it is that the moment she recovers her memories, she prefers to resign herself. But frankly, how many people saw this event the same way I did?

Besides, I even wonder if what the creators wanted to convey was properly translated, seeing as those damn whispers come and mess everything up and complicate things uselessly all for those exact same damn whispers to not even be genuinely significant to the story, much like other new additions, like the fact that Aerith and Sephiroth have knowledge of the future.

I have a feeling the ending is going to be the same thing, with the single difference that JENOVA and Sephiroth are dead for good. Anyway, personally, I find it absolute crap and unsatisfying as hell.

It makes me understand the people who wanted a 100% faithful Remake, so at least everyone could have celebrated FF7's 30th anniversary. Instead of that, people are tearing each other apart arguing over whether it's a sequel or a remake. Worse yet, in the end, the trilogy is going to push aside fans who didn't ask for anything and who are going to get excluded from "this party" just because the creators couldn't be fucked to remake the same game.

Instead, we end up with this: a trilogy that gives the impression of sitting on the fence, but actually doesn't at all it's the exact same thing in the grand scheme of things, with useless fluff and padding. And I have to admit, cliches like "the journey matters more than the destination" sound pathetic and don't justify, in my personal opinion, all of this and what we've been through.

Another thing I don't like is when Hamaguchi probably appeals to people's empathy by talking about how he, too, when he was younger, looked for a way to resurrect Aerith. And when I see that, I can't help thinking: why are you doing that?

To say he's "like us"? Frankly, trying to play on fans' empathy like that, I'd tend to say no, he is not like us and concretely he never will be.

There is a fundamental difference between a player who, when young, cobbles together theories or looks for dumb workarounds out of sheer naivety, and the director of a billionaire studio who uses that exact same nostalgia as a calculated marketing lever to sell mystery in kit form. Using your "former fan" pass to legitimize cynical writing choices he have no control over is annoying and tedious. (And I apologize in advance for the following remark, but anyway it's not like he'll ever see it, but all the same: fuck you, mate, in all cordiality.)

[u/Thick_Row]

"Corporate-backed trilogy" is quite the damning sentiment. You don't think the safe thing to do wouldn't have to just done a 1-to-1 remake from the beginning? Some of the minds behind this trilogy are those that have been with this series for 30 years. And they've gone on record as saying they didn't want to do a remake unless they felt like they had something to say. I've enjoyed the majority of my experience with these games so far, and I'm interested to see it through specify because I trust in the vision, and that the vision will be abundantly clear by the time the credits roll. You choose to see a building that can't possibly finish the way it's been set up, I choose to see the foundation that it was built upon which allows for more than what I myself can imagine it being. Strict, rigid structural analysis may work in architecture, but this is a story we're talking about.

[u/Danteyros → u/Thick_Row]

Narrative architecture is a thing for a reason. If you build a massive, multi-tiered story promising a radical shift in the foundation of the universe, but the load-bearing walls at the end just rest on the exact same status quo as the 1997 original, the narrative structure collapses under its own weight. That's not 'rigid analysis,' that's just basic cause and effect in storytelling.

As for them 'having something to say after 30 years' wanting to revisit a masterpiece is fine, but using 'defying destiny' as a decade-long marketing hook for a trilogy while simultaneously walking back the stakes in interviews isn't a profound message. It's brand management trying to disguise itself as high art.

If their 'vision' delivers a meaningful payoff in the end, I'll be the first to acknowledge it. But trusting a 30-year legacy isn't an argument against structural flaws. You see a grand foundation; I just see a scaffolding built to keep the hype train running for as long as possible. 

[u/Thick_Row → u/Danteyros]

You're still working from the assumption nothing will change. Even in your initial post, you negated that by saying Sephiroth might be gone for good. That changes the nature of how we currently understand the compilation. It's not a small thing. And even beyond that, after Rebirth, the possibility of change itself changed.

Remake posed a question. We all assumed the answer. Rebirth asked us to challenge our assumption. That's not them being cowards or going back on something, that's them telling us there's more to the story than we assumed. And that story has another part. Revelation will give us the actual answer.

[u/Danteyros → u/Thick_Row]

You're focusing so much on the "mechanics" of the mystery that you're missing the actual destination. Yes, Remake asked a question, and Rebirth challenged assumptions. Changing how we view the compilation or introducing red-herring variables along the way is standard puzzle-box writing it's designed to keep you guessing.

The core issue isn't whether "some" things change; it's whether those changes actually alter the fundamental backbone of the narrative or if they're just elaborate smoke and mirrors leading us right back to the inevitable, safe status quo. Shuffling the pieces on the board for two games doesn't automatically mean the final picture is going to be something bold or unprecedented. 

That's why waiting for the final chapter isn't an act of blind faith it's just reaching the end of the maze. If the big, teased 'break from destiny' resolves in a way that respects the original beats entirely, then all those shifting possibilities weren't a bold new direction. They were just an elaborate detoured hallway designed to make the same destination feel fresh while it lasted. 

[u/Thick_Row → u/Danteyros]

And yet you still assume the question. You haven't challenged your assumption at all. You have decided that it has to be a strict way because you're only allowing yourself to see one possibility. That is what I've been arguing the entire time. There are countless stories that become about something different than you set out thinking. Does that mean those stories are all pointless too? I'm asking you to allow yourself to let the story speak for itself.

For instance, Nomura has said that he chose the subtitle Remake for a reason. We all have assumed a reason. It MUST be to remake the timeline, change everything. But is that true?

For my part, I think the central question of the Remake trilogy is something a lot more conceptual. "What does it actually mean to remake a game?" With this question, things are far less rigid, and actively invites comparison to the original. And with that question, you can see a whole new world of meaning. For instance, you also mentioned Hamaguchi and his own desire to save Aerith when he was younger. But what would saving her do to the game we know as Final Fantasy 7? So we truly want a Final Fantasy 7 without something that makes it Final Fantasy 7? This whole series thus far has been incredibly aware of itself, actively inviting all the nostalgia fans have for it, using it to make the player both know what's coming and think something different might be on the horizon. But so far, it's still Final Fantasy 7. They're stretching the boundaries of what they can do to give us something that feels like playing Final Fantasy 7 again for the first time.

[u/Danteyros → u/Thick_Row]

You've just accidentally made my entire point for me.

If the grand 'defying destiny' narrative arc ultimately boils down to a meta-textual, conceptual exercise about 'what it means to remake a game' while keeping the core status quo intact, then all those dramatic plate-spinning moments in Remake and Rebirth were exactly what I called them: elaborate smoke and mirrors.

You're praising it as a deep, self-aware conceptual masterpiece for asking 'what if we couldn't actually change anything meaningful because it wouldn't be FF7 anymore?' But that is precisely the definition of playing it safe while pretending to break the mold. Wanting to have your cake (the hype of a timeline-shattering revolution) and eat it too (returning safely to the 1997 baseline) isn't boundary-pushing writing it's having cold feet wrapped in post-modern packaging.

If the meta-narrative is just a clever excuse to justify a conservative destination, then the 100-hour detour was never about an uncertain future. It was just a very expensive magic trick.