I admit, not having a PS5 I haven’t played FFXVI yet, but sometimes these things are world building around a more personal story which is what I understand the game to be from other people talking about it, just because something features in a world, doesn’t mean it needs to be further explored if that’s not the story that’s been written. Just because thats am element that interests Kotaku writers more due to there nationality and politics, doesn’t mean it was the story the writers set out to tell.
Thing is, and I haven’t played it either, but I know this from conversations I’ve seen about it, your character is a slave. Or, rather, is from the caste of people that is enslaved because they have magic. That means it’s something that can’t just be background, because it quite literally influences how everyone in the world interacts with Clive.
There was a really good Jimquisition on how being a “bearer” is treated in the world, and how SE just kind of overdid it with a lack of subtlety (jump to about the 4 minute mark to start, because there’s a lot of faff at the beginning before the video starts talking about the game). https://youtu.be/sgjqXTvHaLk?si=9EQqqsA4x2HEOmqc
Your character is not a slave. (Spoilers limited to promotional materials) Player character is the oldest son of the ruler of one of the major countries in the game world, so a prince. Ability to wield (very specific) magic is quickly explained that some of the nobles of that family can do. He somewhat is a slave at some point, but this is a very brief story moment (tbf at the very beginning, you meet your character as a slave before he goes into childhood memory where he is a prince). When relevant, NPCs do interact with character as with slave, but its rarely relevant. So it is very much a background theme, even if a major one.
That’s why the phrasing was “from the caste of people” in the clarification. It was just a cultural difference: his home treated him as honorable and other cultures don’t.
When he is briefly enslaved, it wasn’t because they mistook him for being the kind of person you get to do that to, it’s because he was that kind of person and simply hadn’t been treated that way before.
his home treated him as honorable and other cultures don’t
Not the point of the story, when NPCs get to know who the character is theirs opinion changes
it wasn’t because they mistook him for being the kind of person you get to do that to
That is actually almost what happened. If he was not a mage, that story point would change little.
The “mages are slaves” thing is more akin to FF6’s “there is no magic in this world”, like it is a somewhat big deal that Terra is mage, but game doesn’t spend much time there since it is not a point.
Yeah, I did see Steph Stirling’s video and I do get the arguments, but personally I don’t agree that just because it’s an element in the world building and the backstory of the main character it has to be a driving element of the plot.
Look at it like X-Men, being feared and hunted by humanity is sort of X-Men lore, but it isn’t the driving force of every story. Sometimes they’re just off having adventures in space or whatever.
See, this is why I wish this game wasn’t currently PS5 exclusive and had come out on PC like they originally planned. I can’t say what story it seems like they wanted to tell just because unless I want to watch someone else play it, I can’t know. I couldn’t even read much of the article because I didn’t want to get too far into spoiler territory. It’s very frustrating because this seems like an interesting discussion to be had.
Then maybe we who haven’t played the game shouldn’t be having opinions on some aspects of it, because context matters and we lack context on the whole plot.
While I personally have no opinions on FFXVI, I find that such a consumeristic stance, that the only valid way to form an opinion is by (buying and) playing/watching/using it themselves. Because if so, how can anyone be meaningfully opposed to a product or a piece of media? Seems a little strange if even people who are critical of something are supposed to buy it.
Sure they may have no firsthand impressions, but they might make their minds from a variety of reviews, critiques and discussions around it.
I didn’t say you had a strong opinion either. In any case, having any sort of slavery present in a “medieval-esque” game doesn’t sound too weird to me. From the promotional material it seems like the game is about fights between countries and some eikons/primals/titans and the characters channel the fight of those primals though them?
The whole concept of primals is linked to slavery by the very simple notion that once the character is touched by their mana, it becomes a slave to them. This is how it has worked in all the FF games I have played.
IDK, complaining about the game having aspects of slavery but not addressing them seems a weak complaint to me when probably the game was never about the thing, the thing just being a setting. And I’m not against the thing being just a minor setting, not every game must either make t their focus or make it not exist.
Again, I have not played through it so I’m not gonna say if their implementation is correct or not. All I’m gonna say is that Americans really focus so god damn much in the slavery topic, it’s like unless it’s properly addressed it’s some kind of taboo in media.
You sat there and said I shouldn’t have an opinion because I haven’t played, when you haven’t played either but get to have a strong opinion on it plus eye roll at Americans. My only opinion is, “eh, seems like they whiffed it instead of going into what they introduced,” and that’s based on a review I saw by a Brit. 🤨
I admit, not having a PS5 I haven’t played FFXVI yet, but sometimes these things are world building around a more personal story which is what I understand the game to be from other people talking about it, just because something features in a world, doesn’t mean it needs to be further explored if that’s not the story that’s been written. Just because thats am element that interests Kotaku writers more due to there nationality and politics, doesn’t mean it was the story the writers set out to tell.
Thing is, and I haven’t played it either, but I know this from conversations I’ve seen about it, your character is a slave. Or, rather, is from the caste of people that is enslaved because they have magic. That means it’s something that can’t just be background, because it quite literally influences how everyone in the world interacts with Clive.
There was a really good Jimquisition on how being a “bearer” is treated in the world, and how SE just kind of overdid it with a lack of subtlety (jump to about the 4 minute mark to start, because there’s a lot of faff at the beginning before the video starts talking about the game). https://youtu.be/sgjqXTvHaLk?si=9EQqqsA4x2HEOmqc
Your character is not a slave. (Spoilers limited to promotional materials) Player character is the oldest son of the ruler of one of the major countries in the game world, so a prince. Ability to wield (very specific) magic is quickly explained that some of the nobles of that family can do. He somewhat is a slave at some point, but this is a very brief story moment (tbf at the very beginning, you meet your character as a slave before he goes into childhood memory where he is a prince). When relevant, NPCs do interact with character as with slave, but its rarely relevant. So it is very much a background theme, even if a major one.
That’s why the phrasing was “from the caste of people” in the clarification. It was just a cultural difference: his home treated him as honorable and other cultures don’t.
When he is briefly enslaved, it wasn’t because they mistook him for being the kind of person you get to do that to, it’s because he was that kind of person and simply hadn’t been treated that way before.
Not the point of the story, when NPCs get to know who the character is theirs opinion changes
That is actually almost what happened. If he was not a mage, that story point would change little.
The “mages are slaves” thing is more akin to FF6’s “there is no magic in this world”, like it is a somewhat big deal that Terra is mage, but game doesn’t spend much time there since it is not a point.
Yeah, I did see Steph Stirling’s video and I do get the arguments, but personally I don’t agree that just because it’s an element in the world building and the backstory of the main character it has to be a driving element of the plot.
Look at it like X-Men, being feared and hunted by humanity is sort of X-Men lore, but it isn’t the driving force of every story. Sometimes they’re just off having adventures in space or whatever.
See, this is why I wish this game wasn’t currently PS5 exclusive and had come out on PC like they originally planned. I can’t say what story it seems like they wanted to tell just because unless I want to watch someone else play it, I can’t know. I couldn’t even read much of the article because I didn’t want to get too far into spoiler territory. It’s very frustrating because this seems like an interesting discussion to be had.
Then maybe we who haven’t played the game shouldn’t be having opinions on some aspects of it, because context matters and we lack context on the whole plot.
While I personally have no opinions on FFXVI, I find that such a consumeristic stance, that the only valid way to form an opinion is by (buying and) playing/watching/using it themselves. Because if so, how can anyone be meaningfully opposed to a product or a piece of media? Seems a little strange if even people who are critical of something are supposed to buy it.
Sure they may have no firsthand impressions, but they might make their minds from a variety of reviews, critiques and discussions around it.
Where have I said a strong opinion on it other than pointing out art is political?! I’ve done a “yeah, but” and that’s it. 🤨
I didn’t say you had a strong opinion either. In any case, having any sort of slavery present in a “medieval-esque” game doesn’t sound too weird to me. From the promotional material it seems like the game is about fights between countries and some eikons/primals/titans and the characters channel the fight of those primals though them?
The whole concept of primals is linked to slavery by the very simple notion that once the character is touched by their mana, it becomes a slave to them. This is how it has worked in all the FF games I have played.
IDK, complaining about the game having aspects of slavery but not addressing them seems a weak complaint to me when probably the game was never about the thing, the thing just being a setting. And I’m not against the thing being just a minor setting, not every game must either make t their focus or make it not exist.
Again, I have not played through it so I’m not gonna say if their implementation is correct or not. All I’m gonna say is that Americans really focus so god damn much in the slavery topic, it’s like unless it’s properly addressed it’s some kind of taboo in media.
You sat there and said I shouldn’t have an opinion because I haven’t played, when you haven’t played either but get to have a strong opinion on it plus eye roll at Americans. My only opinion is, “eh, seems like they whiffed it instead of going into what they introduced,” and that’s based on a review I saw by a Brit. 🤨
???