Xeno 2's climax is made 100x more meaningful knowing who "that person" is.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Xenoblade Chronicles: Definitive Edition launches May 29, includes new epilogue "Future Connected"
- Thread starter Taka
- Start date
Xeno 2's climax is made 100x more meaningful knowing who "that person" is.
Exactly. Finding out that Pyra/Mythra is a mirror universe Seven makes sense if you know that Seven has an artificial body, glowing power source on her chest, split personality, one of two god-like beings, controls a big flying mech, etc, but means exactly fuck all if you don't know who Seven is.
The whole game builds up the architect as this mysterious figure and then when you get there it's just some weird old guy. But if you've played the original game you're like "Oh shit it's Klaus."
The whole game builds up the architect as this mysterious figure and then when you get there it's just some weird old guy. But if you've played the original game you're like "Oh shit it's Klaus."
That's literally the first time I've seen someone make that claim. I don't think it adds anything to the experience.
What? Xenoblade 2 being a mirror universe retelling of Xenoblade 1 is literally the whole point of the ending.
Of course, I'm not saying you can't explain the differences between battle systems, exploration, gameplay, scope, focus on story and other objective things.
I'm talking about predisposing new users saying things like "that game is a disappointment", "that game is bad" and other personal judgements that may or may not coincide with that new player.
If someone starts a game thinking the infamous "ERA consensus" (often vocal minority consensus) is "this game is awful" like some people loves to remember us every time a MSI thread is opened, it'd affect his/her experience and enjoyment. Some people won't even give it a chance.
So yeah, if someone that's new to the franchise asks, it's fine pointing out the objective differences between all three main XB games and even recommend one or several of them if you know his/her personal preferences ("if you prefer more lineal story / more open world..."), but it's unfair to them trying to influence with personal bias like "that game is disappointing".
more meaningful, sure. but I wouldn't go so far to say new folks would be missing anything
can't recall anything in particular
Totally agreed.
Xeno's 2 plot positions the Architect as the all knowing creator, who willingly created all life, including Blades, the way they are - that he designed them as servants for humanity, withthe praetor pushing that narrative. As the same time, he's painted as the mythical savior who could fix Alrest problems by opening Elysium's doors.
If you played Xeno 1, when you learn the Architect is Klaus you realize that all the problems in Xeno's 2 world are because he wasn't an all knowing god, he was just a jaded (ambitious once upon a time) old man that when he had to act to avoid Amalthus's rise to power by stealing the cores, just said "fuck it". The new humanity, alongside with Blades, didn't advance because of him, they advanced despite him. Just like the world of XC1, XC2 doesn't need a god to move forward
I agree that from a lore perspective, a big part of 2's ending is the reveal that 1 and 2 are occuring simultaneously in different dimensions. However, another major part of the lore is reintroducing more elements from Xenogears and Xenosaga into the Xenoblade series (bringing back the actual Zohar and loosely implying Xenogears and Xenosaga could be occurring in different dimensions that are all connected through the Zohar). I don't agree with the interpretation on Xenoblade 2 being a retelling of Xenoblade 1. If anything, a lot of elements in Xenoblade 2 remind me more of Xenogears (haven't played Xenosaga).
With the Definitive Edition "THIS" close, I feel it's almost bizarre to suggest people won't miss much from the first game, especially since now it's deliberately connecting itself to the sequel with brand new content.
...Which reminds me, Square Enix has been relatively hush about Xenogears again havent they. :/
I'd love to see them bend to give Gears some (even if only) cameo spotlight in a new -Blade game, but I'm not sure what the relationship is with them at this point and about this series.
For all we know this might go full circle and the epilogue for Xenoblade DE might not make any sense unless you've played XB2.
I would love that, even just hearing his voice during a cutscene near the end like Shulk had in 2 would make me very happy.
Really? You just thought it was a coincidence that both Rex and Shulk died, were brought back to life after becoming hosts of a god-like being's life force, acquired a red sword with an energy blade that allowed them to predict the future, started the game by stumbling into a crab monster while scavenging and ending the game by traveling to space, unlocking a third sword, and killing a god-like being at the exact same time as each other?
It's not even subtle when they get to the snow area and the love interest gets carried off into the sky while the protagonist is on the ground screaming her name. They use the same camera shot of them flying off into the sky even.
It's not even subtle when they get to the snow area and the love interest gets carried off into the sky while the protagonist is on the ground screaming her name. They use the same camera shot of them flying off into the sky even.
until we see what the new game changes, I still don't feel the connections are as big a deal as people here make it out to be
I noticed most of of them. I just don't think most of them matter that much beyond the parallel universe connection.
How many of them would you have noticed if you hadn't played the original? Yeah, it doesn't matter to the story as a standalone, but the game has a deeper meaning in the context of the series. There's a layer here for people who have played the original, and certain revelations have more impact as a result. That's why it's usually better to play games in release order. Having context allows you to better pick up on and appreciate the connections when they appear.
Like yeah, I can enjoy Infinity War if it's the first Marvel film I've ever seen, but it's more impactful with the context of the previous films leading up to it.
Like yeah, I can enjoy Infinity War if it's the first Marvel film I've ever seen, but it's more impactful with the context of the previous films leading up to it.
I've played 1 to death, never made that connection, and even with you saying it I think you're reading into things that aren't there. Basically, all of that still means exactly fuck all to me.
As for Klaus, it's just as much (if not more) of an 'oh shit' when Klaus is name dropped if you play 2 then 1. I don't think the order particularly matters. And, frankly, that goes for every 'connection' you're making. If everything just mirrors the other, can you not just play 2 then 1 and see the things in 1 as a callback to 2? It's not like people who played 2 and are now waiting to play DE forgot 2's ending, either. DE is going to re-contextualize 2's ending for them, just as 2 did to 1 for us.
Again, Monolith Soft wasn't just trying to discourage people from holding off when they said there's no connection to 1. The order legitimately only has very slight consequence. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter if you're making the connections while playing 2 or while playing 1. It's not like Torna, which flat out doesn't explain some shit it expects you to know.
As for Klaus, it's just as much (if not more) of an 'oh shit' when Klaus is name dropped if you play 2 then 1. I don't think the order particularly matters. And, frankly, that goes for every 'connection' you're making. If everything just mirrors the other, can you not just play 2 then 1 and see the things in 1 as a callback to 2? It's not like people who played 2 and are now waiting to play DE forgot 2's ending, either. DE is going to re-contextualize 2's ending for them, just as 2 did to 1 for us.
Again, Monolith Soft wasn't just trying to discourage people from holding off when they said there's no connection to 1. The order legitimately only has very slight consequence. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter if you're making the connections while playing 2 or while playing 1. It's not like Torna, which flat out doesn't explain some shit it expects you to know.
Fine. Speaking for myself, I was THRILLED + SHOCKED when I saw the him. I imagine others might too
I guess it's less that your comparisons make Xenoblade 2 sound like a conventional sequel and more that your comparisons make Xenoblade 2 sound like a Force Awakens situation, which wasn't the sort of vibe I got from playing Xenoblade 2.
I mean, if you know in advance that Nia is a mirror of Melia, you can predict the response to her "I love you" declaration before it happens. And yeah, you can still get something extra out of the original even if you play 2 first, but I think Xenoblade 2 is more effective at it because it was built around that idea from the beginning. It gives you more context to the origins of Xenoblade 1's world, while Xenoblade 1 doesn't really add anything to what 2 has already said regarding the bigger picture.
And Monolith Soft said there was no connection because they didn't want to spoil the big end of game twist. Kind of like why a certain other recent JRPG was marketed the way it was.
And Monolith Soft said there was no connection because they didn't want to spoil the big end of game twist. Kind of like why a certain other recent JRPG was marketed the way it was.
Like I said before, it's more akin to Star Trek: Into Darkness. Re-imagining a familiar story while also not rewriting the events of the original. The only difference is that you already know from the beginning that you're in a parallel universe, rather than saving that as a reveal at the end.
Xenoblade 2 is not a retelling of Xenoblade 1 in any way. That take is bonkers and incorrect. They are completely different stories. Yes they are happening in parallel, but the tale they are each telling is very different until they intersect at the end. On that note though, they absolutely do intersect at the end, and at several places before the end.
Xenoblade 2's story is absolutely made better by having played Xenoblade 1 first. The game is enhanced if you have that knowledge, and there are further twists, and twists that hit you at different points, if you know Xenoblade 1's story. Of course, it is absolutely okay to play Xenoblade 2 first, but I actually think it will cause you to view many things in Xenoblade 1 much differently if you do.
Essentially, if you play XB2 first you more or less can figure out what is happening in XB1 fairly early on. If you play XB1 first, you can't predict the same about XB2 in any way. These games were planned and designed primarily on assuming people are playing these in release order.
Oh yeah?
Which game has a silver haired girl with animal features on her head that came from royalty, loses a sibling, and has a non-existent love life.
Which game has a goofy sidekick with a larger than life attitude and a chest scar?
Which game has a female soldier that looks after her little brother?
Which game has an ancient civilization that imprisons the main cast because of the threat of impending doom halfway through?
Oh yeah, both games. Sure, it's not exactly the same narative, some plot points are moved around, some characters have slightly different roles, but there are similarities that go way beyond just the couple of points where it's spelled out for you.
Which game has a silver haired girl with animal features on her head that came from royalty, loses a sibling, and has a non-existent love life.
Which game has a goofy sidekick with a larger than life attitude and a chest scar?
Which game has a female soldier that looks after her little brother?
Which game has an ancient civilization that imprisons the main cast because of the threat of impending doom halfway through?
Oh yeah, both games. Sure, it's not exactly the same narative, some plot points are moved around, some characters have slightly different roles, but there are similarities that go way beyond just the couple of points where it's spelled out for you.
don't get me wrong, I was shocked too. but in a way, I was kinda disappointed in a "that's it?" sorta way. after that kind of revelation, I was hoping for something that was bit more substantial
But it's widely known that Takahashi loves to use similar arquetipes, plot elements and even names for some characters... Not only in Xenoblade, but Xenogears and Xenosaga too.
Do you think we'll get new information about XCDE and/or details about FC in the next few weeks?
A Xenoblade Direct explaining the gameplay for newcomers? A new story or exploration trailer shadow dropped? Some Tweets with new pictures and tidbits?
Or they'll go radio silence until the reviews starts coming out? (Also, when should we wait for previews?)
Last edited:
All this talk about "which game do I play first?" reminds me of the Baten Kaitos-Baten Kaitos Origins situation.
But really, a lot of the similarities between the Xeno-games comes down to the fact that Tetsuya Takahashi has spent the last 25 years basically retelling the same story over and over and over.
But really, a lot of the similarities between the Xeno-games comes down to the fact that Tetsuya Takahashi has spent the last 25 years basically retelling the same story over and over and over.
It's kinda hard to do that if people specifically ask which of the games would be best suited to their tastes.
Saying that XC2 is a retelling of XC1 just because of similar concepts, design, etc is silly. If you played every Takahashi game going back to even Xenogears you will also pick up similarities as well, but that doesn't mean it's a retelling (except Xenosaga, which they explicitly said was a retelling of Xenogears).
XC1 and XC2 are different stories. Similar tropes, ideas, yeah, but they are not the same stories.
XC1 and XC2 are different stories. Similar tropes, ideas, yeah, but they are not the same stories.
I have to assume they'll have something.
Then again, NoA's refusal to acknowledge this game's existence is legendary. Maybe they'll ignore this release just for old times' sake.
Xenoblade Chronicles 2 is explicitly in a parallel universe of the original game. The similarities are reused from previous games, yes, but this time they're implemented intentionally and given an in-universe explanation. I don't see how that's a controversial statement at all. It's a different story in the same way that MGS2 is a different story from MGS1.
Right, only now he's giving a lore-based explanation as to why it's that way.
Half of this is just trope re-use. Nia's driver was just from nobility, not royalty (which wouldn't even be unique in the first place - Morag and Zeke are literally royalty, while Rex is heavily implied to descend from it). Morag and Sharla only look similar when you boil down some of their traits to the most generic words possible, as you did - and if you're really trying to say Zeke mirrors Riki of all characters because they both serve the common purpose of comedic relief and happen to have chest scars, I don't even know what to say. He mirrors him only in the meta sense of being comedic relief; Riki's scar isn't even of any relevance, or ever mentioned.
You could make a lot of similar statements about games from different developers if you're willing to abstract things as much as you did.
You could make a lot of similar statements about games from different developers if you're willing to abstract things as much as you did.
Yeah I'd suspect so. I think they'll give us something, could be a Direct, could be a final trailer, whatever. Following what they did with Xenoblade Chronicles 2, a Direct really isn't that far fetched, and personally I think it could give them a chance to sell the game to those unfamiliar with it while everything is going on in the world right now. Exciting stuff though, really excited to play this when it drops. Truthfully this was my most wanted Switch "port" or remaster of sorts, and MonolithSoft delivered in a huge way remaking it with a brand new epilogue.
I'm in the boat that if you haven't played XC2 yet, just wait for XC in May and play that first. The knowledge gained there will enhance XC2 more than, I presume, playing XC2 first will.
The presumption is they aren't adding a bunch of tie-ins to XC2 with the remake though they absolutely might.
The presumption is they aren't adding a bunch of tie-ins to XC2 with the remake though they absolutely might.
I think it's not that hard; you can say "XCX would fit you better if you love open world exploration, but XC1 and XC2 are more linear but with fairly big areas to explore" better than "just play XCX because XC1&2 are trash and disappointed me". The first sentence describes some of the game's features without personal bias so you know what you can expect if you try them, and the second one influences negatively towards two of the games.
I can't explain myself better since English is not my mother tongue, sorry :P
This 100%.
Yes both games have characters that fall into the same archetypes, but that is painting things in a very large generalization. They aren't the same character. Morag is in no way a similar character to Sharla apart from being "a female soldier that looks after her little brother", just to take one of your examples. But ALL of them could be picked apart in a similar way.
Like, you are reducing these things down to a very ridiculous degree in an attempt to draw this connection that is straight up not there. These are just standard storytelling archetypes or tropes that Takahashi likes to employ. They can be found in many stories. They aren't literally supposed to be alternate versions of the other. And it's true for all of these examples in your quote. I'm not even spoiler tagging this anymore, because it straight up isn't a spoiler for either game. This is not something anyone involved with the titles has spoken about, to my knowledge. You are drawing your own conclusion, which is fine -- art is up for interpretation, but it is not an interpretation I've ever seen elsewhere and frankly I don't think any similarities are intentional... or even if they are, meaningful.
EDIT:
You said it even better than I could have.
Again, it still doesn't mean it's a retelling of a story. Character relationships are all different, premise of the story is different, character motivations are different, etc.
Spoiler tag this. It's OMEGA level spoilers for a game that a lot of people in this topic haven't played yet. Bad manner to just post like this considering.
Daily reminder of spoilers???
Take that here please: https://www.resetera.com/threads/xenoblade-chronicles-2-spoiler-thread.8489/page-50 o_O
Oh lordy. Okay, maybe "retelling" isn't the right word, but
There are clear, intentional similarities that go beyond just trope reuse. The game goes out of its way to make Rex and Pyra/Mythra into Shulk and Seven analogs. If you can't at least see those obvious references, to what is, I remind you, explicitly stated to be an alternate universe, I don't know what to tell you.
I didn't hit on this, but it's perhaps the most compelling argument. If those similarities are intentional and supposed to be real connections, it adds nothing to either game. XC2 does what it spells out, and... that's it. Any connection beyond that is at most a curiosity.
The references are there to build up to and support the revelations at the end. You still miss them and the main impact of the meeting if you don't have context.
Again, you can go all the way back to Takahashi's first game and say the same thing
about Fei and Elly
Parallels exist. Those who played all or most of Takahashi's works can pinpoint them. But just because those elements exist doesn't mean it's a retelling. Each game is a contained story of their own.
Does Fei also die, get brought back to life after becoming a host of a god-like being's life force, acquire a red sword with an energy blade that allows him to predict the future, start the game by stumbling into a crab monster while scavenging and end the game by traveling to space, unlocking a third sword, and killing a god-like being while his definitely-not-a-mirror-universe-counterpart does the same thing at the same time?
It really doesn't.
And the "references" don't do that, at all. The game specifically avoids the phrase "parallel universe" IIRC, and I don't think that's by mistake.
If you say so. I'll just say my own perspective on the importance of the connections between Xeno 1 and Xeno 2 is probably colored by how much I hated absolutely every single thing about Xeno 2.
It really does.
The "Foresight" ability does basically nothing except that.
And they really do. I was able to predict a connection to the original game as early as the Tantal scene, and that's a whole chapter before shit gets obvious.
Actually, yeah, he does do most of that stuff.
Seriously, people. Every game Tetsuya Takahashi has ever made has been some version of the story he's been trying to tell for 25 years. He's never gotten over whatever fever dream he had back in the 90's that led to the existence of Xenogears.