So yes, you heard me. 358/2 Days, which some members laud it to be a great example of character development in a Kingdom Hearts game, is badly executed and badly placed in the construction of the game. It's not the story's fault or the character's fault. Because when you read it in detail when not playing a game, it does have the potential to be unique and furthers the mystery.
Cool.
The fact that it has a novelist writer on board (Tomoko Kanemaki ) should mean a well-written and effective story. So why didn't it work?
False premise, but I'll bite. Why?
Aside from a poor introduction with fifteen or so days of mediocre plot development, it become increasingly more apparent that the structure of the game did not suit the story. The mission-based structure has damaged the narrative greatly, with plot development having to be plotted after a certain amount of days. You can go for missions without any plot development. That I don't find too much of a problem.
So, it's not a problem with the story, the characters, or the mission system. Just checking.
What I find the problem is that it DROWNS you in it once we hit the plot development.
Please qualify this statement for everyone. How does it do this? When does it do this?
It feels like it's trying to cram so much information and development, that it can be overwhelming to the player.
Again, needs to be qualified.
When you haven't paced your game, to ponder and care about the characters, then it's so jarring when the cutscenes call us to care about them.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. You still haven't convinced me that the pacing of the game is damaged in any real way. And aren't cutscenes supposed to be where most character development and forward story motion takes place?
Fact check time:
Kingdom Hearts gameplay in nutshell: run through worlds, fight Heartless and level up, important things happen via cutscenes.
Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories: run through castle, fight Organization members and level up, important things happen via cutscenes.
Kingdom Hearts 2: run through worlds, fight Nobodies and level up, important things happen via cutscenes.
I believe the precedent has already been set. Gameplay is reserved primarily for gameplay. Cutscenes contain the bulk of the storyline. Most video games work this way.
For example, Xion. She stepped on the wrong foot with me (and by that, made it bleed) because she really rubbed me the wrong way. It's the typical reason why many people didn't like her. She's a mary-sue. She's the female companion that Roxas needs to care about. You get the gist.
I don't get the gist. She's a mary-sue because a lot of people agree she is? She's the female companion Roxas needs to care about and that isn't important? She has no other role in the story other than to stand around as Roxas's trophy girlfriend? The gist has been consummately lost on me.
But I kinda DID care about her once I went on missions with her. It's the missions and companion I got from her that made me cared about her. Not most of the cutscenes where the spotlight has to be on her. The missions. Heck, when I saw her in one of the missions running away, it actually GOT me to chase her.
Contradiction in point. The game developed her when she was on missions with you in-game and made you care about her, but somehow all of her development was resigned to cutscenes. What do you mean, "the spotlight has to be on her?" Did none of the cutscenes in the game ever focus on another character? Were Roxas and Axel not also present in nearly all of the cutscenes in the game?
But once you wrestle her away, keep her hidden and expect us to garner sympathy for her because the narrative demands it (after so many useless missions of 'destroy dark blob' and 'defeat x heartless'), then you effectively destroyed the development that I liked about her.
What are you referencing? The point in the game where she leaves with Riku? If I recall correctly, there are a number of cutscenes which take place in that time period which she is, obviously, not a part of. This would seem to contradict your statement that she "has to be in the spotlight" during cutscenes. Also, what sympathy were you intended to garner for her? When did the game explicitly tell you to sympathize with her? Is there no other interpretation of the game that should possibly be taken into account? Perhaps Xion is a more tragic character than a sympathetic one. Perhaps her role in the story is as a motivational force for Roxas and a footnote to his experiences and the story he has to tell. Perhaps.
There are others, much better ways to garner sympathy for her, but instead they boiled it down to a narrative structure which is in direct conflict with the game's structure.
Again, presuming a sympathetic character where there is little evidence to point to this. Still need to qualify your perspective on narrative structure vs game structure.
And this is because you aren't working towards an overall goal. Instead, you're doing missions to further the story.
I don't see how the missions in Days do not contribute to an overarching storyline; does Roxas not interact with characters and gain experiences with each mission? Do these experiences, no matter how seemingly immaterial, not actually contribute to the build of his character on the whole, his critical perspective on life, people and the nature of existence? In our lives, does every day that goes by in which we do not accomplish something of epic proportions such as saving the world or finding a long-lost friend have no meaning? Furthermore, the fact that many of the missions in Days specifically cater to a gameplay scenario and are not necessary to the story is entirely in line with the series' precedent, as I've already indicated.
Why did Birth by Sleep's story worked? Simple, because the game's structure suited the storyline. The game allows us to progress, to visit other worlds and the cutscenes shows us of that progress, because of the progress we made by travelling to other worlds.
How is that any different from what occurs within the Mission formula of Days?
When we get down to it, yes the story is rather weak and the character development could've been better. But the game's structure allowed the story to be enjoyable.
The story was weak, how? The character development could've been better, how? What do either of those factors have to do with Days? How do they differ? How are they the same?
358/2 Days tried to follow a standard narrative that Kingdom Hearts always entailed... and failed because the structure of the game is not suited.
This is becoming repetitious. To begin with, you have not exposed what makes the game structure unsuited to the narrative structure.
Harper all you want about character development and character study, but when those little instances where I got more development from being partnered with Xion than the cutscenes that tried to make me feel sorry for her (which is the game's default of development), then you have an effectively broken narrative.
Harper all you want about narrative development and gameplay study, but when you refuse to identify what those factors are and how they relate to your perspective on the game, then you have an effectively broken argument.
Also, Novels aren't Games. This is quite a popular opinion that got mention in my Games Culture Lesson at my University. Why was Gears of War 3 panned for its storyline when it has a Novelist Writer on board? Simple, Novels aren't Games.
Are you stating the obvious in order to make a point or are you just stating the obvious for the sake of it?
Novels are extremely heavily in expressing detail, character development, story development and many other things.
No. Novels are books of narrative prose. They can be written in any number of styles and subscribe to any level of indulgence of the superficial, the transcendental, the incidental, the introspective, etc. etc. Read Anais Nin. Then read J.R.R. Tolkein. Then get back to me on what novels are.
When Novels take their time to explain that, Games just show it.
No. Visual novels are games. Visual novels take the time to explain it and show it. You are arguing black and white between totally different mediums, and then you are ignoring the many commonalities they share and how they actually can function cooperatively.
Silent Hill 2 has a heavy story, but it didn't bother you with every cutscene. Instead, it shown in the gameplay's structure. Now I'm not expecting Kingdom Hearts to be that, because after all it has done well with its current narrative structure as it is. But it would've gone a long way to help with 358/2 Days because of the Game's vastly-different structure.
What's your point? What could Days have taken from Silent Hill 2 in order to present its story in a stronger fashion? If you aren't expecting Kingdom Hearts to do that, why mention it?
tl;dr: 358/2 Days did poor because the structure of the game did not suit the narrative.
tl;dr Your argument is based upon a false premise, riddled with assumptive language and totally lacking in basic citations for your principle stances.
Allow me to present a counter-perspective (this is not a comprehensive evaluation of Days, only a direct appeal to a number of thoughts regarding it).
Days was effective as a game because it offered an in-depth perspective on Roxas's time in the Organization by formulating a character-oriented story. It was Roxas's game, not Xion's; it was self-contained in nature, not chronological; it was character driven. Days examined the fundamental psyche of its characters in a far more effective manner than any other game in the series; beginning with the birth of Roxas and culminating in the obliteration of Xion, elucidated by Roxas's rebirth without any memories of his time, it ran a full spectrum of the life experience which was its thematic basis: as the days go on and the sun sets and rises, so life begins and ends and begins anew.
On Xion As a Mary-Sue:
Xion is a character of understated and often miscomprehended significance. As an imperfect clone of Roxas within the story, Xion was an element of Roxas's experiences; she was influential, but she was not central. She has no identity, and therefore she has no personality: to relate to her as Mary-Sue is missing the point. All of the elements of her character are composed of pre-existing qualities she comes into contact with: she has Sora's kindness and selflessness, Roxas's weariness and confused sense of caring, Kairi's humanity and devotion to friends, Riku's fierce sense of self-loathing and Axel's ambiguous notion of allegiance. She is none of these things and all of them, a piece of every heart she touches-- she is an imperfect character and a perfect archetype. However, people mistake her role in that capacity; she is not the story's mystery, but its exposition. She is the fundamental study of all of the characters that takes place throughout their journey in Days. Are you meant to sympathize with Xion? Only in so much as you are meant to sympathize with Axel or Roxas: then, by extent, her. Her death is an innate tragedy and a necessary sacrifice. You understand it, but whether or not you identify with it emotionally correlates with your emotional identification with the game on the whole. Literally, she embodies the characters of Days and, thus, the story. But she is not its protagonist or its focus; Roxas is.
On Roxas as the Protagonist:
You play as Roxas. You fight as Roxas. Every major event in the story produces conflict and motive for Roxas as a character. Days is Roxas's story, and he is the one telling it. All of the characters are significant by way of their relation to him. So what is Xion to Roxas? I believe we are meant to discern that Xion is a blank slate, a starting point and a seed. Xion encapsulates non-judgment: for much of the game, she does not speak and she never commands him. She doesn't infiltrate his space in the way Axel does; she resides there, safely. At the same time, Xion, being a part of him, is familiar. In many ways, she is home, and she is validation of Roxas's existence. He interacts with her not out of an overwhelming interest in who she is, but in who
he is. This is not say he doesn't care about her as a person, however, it is through her that his identity becomes clear. As the game goes on, Xion's relation to Roxas begins to shift; she begins to absorb him; to invalidate his existence; to own him; to replace him. At the same time, her continuity within the story is reversed; her role as an aspect of everyone around her is contradicted as she begins to reshape everything around her. Roxas rebels and ultimately succeeds in reclaiming his identity, and as Xion fades from existence she gives rebirth (a concept that is becoming increasingly prevalent within the series) to the elements she took into herself, including Roxas. The characters forget her because she never existed to begin with. Although Xemnas did not consider her a Nobody properly, in actuality, Xion is the most pure Nobody the game has introduced. She has no origin, no grounding, no individuality-- she does not exist except for others, and Roxas, in particular. Because of this, Roxas is only whole once she returns his wholeness to him.
On the Subjectivity of Story and Character Development:
I believe the story was portrayed very well in Days. The Mission system provides a subtle coaxing of characters rather than a roaring establishment as in other titles. Characters offer vignettes and instances of enlightenment rather than hefty monologues and endless philosophizing. Xion is utilized to great effect as an unwitting antagonist and thematic foundation; Axel is played perfectly as a torn friend struggling to juggle loyalties; Roxas is a lonely and overly conscious child-figure who is being manipulated from all sides. Xemnas's evil is most apparent in this title as he callously cheats every character to his own ends and the truly heartless nature of the Nobodies becomes more apparent than ever not in how cruel they are, but in how they don't fully comprehend that themselves.
Some consider the pacing jarring and uneven, yet I consider it efficient and abstract. The profundity of the moments and conversations and confrontations Axel, Roxas and Xion share is unmatched by any other game so far. When Axel fights Xion to bring her back from Twilight Town, you can see that he is marred by both the desire to restore her as a friend of Roxas's and the necessity of using her to meet his personal goals and the greater good; when Roxas realizes how he has been completely betrayed by everyone (and how this informs his character in KH2, even if he doesn't know it), and how he is ultimately tasked with betraying Xion in every way, even memory, you can't help but feel for him; and when Xion ultimately realizes what her purpose is and what that means for her, she does what we would expect her to do-- as she is told, with all of the feeling and determination she had learned to master in her association with the world around her. We can expect that any possible future appearances from Xion will allow her the same freedom to be what she must be for the people that need her and, perhaps, to finally cultivate her own identity somewhere within that.
Whether you agree with these assessments are not is going to depend on how literally you observe the series and this installment especially. I've chosen to observe it not as a play-by-play, scene-by-scene construction of an obvious narrative, but a deeper and looser conceptual design of characters and themes. It's why I think the game is so fantastic and why it still holds as one of my absolute favorites next to
Chain of Memories, which is similarly composed. In the end,
Kingdom Hearts to me is about people; it is about their folly as they strive for wisdom and power, their willingness to give to others and share with others, how they contrive means of hurting others, how they establish healthy connections with others.
358/2 Days uses all of these elements to construct a powerful cast and storyline which emphasizes the nature of the Heart as an instrument of expression of our most human faults and accomplishments.
