#8: Time Travel in Games

(Spoiler Warning: I discuss Final Fantasy XIII-2's plot.)

Time travel is one of many in a list of often utilized science-fiction tropes. It is easy to understand why that would be. Most people are fascinated by the concept of going back and forth through time for a variety of reasons. Some people would love to travel to the distant past to observe how folks from olden times really led their lives with their own eyes. Others have the distant future in mind for their destination. These members of society are interested in the growth of humanity and desire to see how our actions in the present affect the what happens afterward. Still more people see time travel as a means of escapism. They look at the lives they are currently leading with disgust and repulsion. They dream of going back to the past and fixing their lives so that they no longer feel miserable. The concept of venturing across time and space permeates books, movies, and other media and video games no different. This week's article will analyze the mechanic of time travel and video games using Final Fantasy XIII-2 as the basis for discussion.

The first, I have to fill you in on the premise of XIII-2. As you have probably already figured out Final Fantasy XIII-2 takes places after the events of Final Fantasy XIII. In the game, the protagonist of the previous game, Lightning, has mysteriously disappeared from the timeline after saving the world. Everybody, except her sister Serah, remembers her fighting a bunch of monsters and getting killed in action. Serah remembers the Lightning was at her side one minute and gone the next. After three years of self-doubt, she meets a young man named Noel who claims to be from the future, a world where he is the only human left. He says that was pulled out of that timeline by Lightning and instructed to bring Serah to her. Together, they go on an adventure through time to search for a way to find Lightning and (inevitably) fix the timeline so that Noel's future does not happen.

 

Final Fantasy XIII-2 uses time travel both effectively and ineffectively. For one, its system of time travel does allow it to explain away a few of the plot holes that are typical of a time travel story. The protagonists of the game are not allowed to just go to any time period they desire. First, they have to find a gate in whatever era they are in or have been to previously. Then, the have to find an “artifact” that opens up the gate. This explains why it is impossible for the heroes to just go to the time period when and where all the shenanigans involving mucking up the timeline were originally thought up and kill the villain of the game or convince him that his plan is incredibly stupid (which it is, but that will not be touched on in this article). There is no gate that allows them to travel to that period before everything started. It also explains why the events of the first game remain intact. No time gate appears before three years after the events of the first game. The time travel mechanic also helps bring the player into the world and makes the player begin to care about the people in it. It is interesting and fun to go to different time periods of the same place to see how the world advances. Every area has at least a few interesting characters or developments that bring the player closer to the story and make him/her want to save this world. Lastly, do something that alleviates a problem that I have seen many time travel stories. In many stories, all the time travel weirdness occurs without anyone giving so much as a backwards glance, except for the protagonists. In XIII-2, the people in this world of paradoxes and time manipulation do what would be expected: They send teams on scientists and researchers to go out and investigate them to try to figure out why these paradoxes occur and fix them. Later on in the future, it is implied through an optional quiz game that time travel and paradoxes become part of a standard education. In a unique take on time/space manipulation, citizens of this world become used to paradoxes and other oddities as a such are not surprised by it. All these little details are done well and help to add a bit of logic to the world.

However, while XIII-2 does many things right with its time travel narrative, it also does many things wrong. One of the main problems with the narrative of the game is that the writers are all to eager to use the word “paradox” to explain away every and all problems that occur. While this makes sense in a time travel narrative, it is often the case where the effect of a paradox does not make any sense at all. For example, in one optional area in the game, the effect of a paradox cause a whole team of researchers to disappear, presumably to a different time period. This somehow causes red spheres filled with all of the regrets of those affected by the paradox to materialize in their place. Wait, what? How did that happen? What possible explanation could explain that? While that is only a side-story and can be easily ignored, the main quest is also filled with plotholes. When Lightning disappeared, she was sent to place outside of space/time called Valhalla, ruled by the goddess Etro. In Valhalla, it is possible to see all places and periods of time at once. Furthermore, Etro is the one who can control space/time and open up time gates. The problem with an area like this is that it basically breaks the plot. If it is possible to see every era at once and create gates to places in time, then there really should be no narrative tension. The conclusion of the game should be obvious well in advance and all of the events would be simultaneously playing out while at the same time have already been played out. It does not end there. The story constantly reminds the player of something that does not make sense: “Change the future, and you change the past.” At first, I thought this was referring to the paradoxes. I thought that meant that if a paradox began in the future and sent something into the past was resolved, then the past would change because it was no longer be affected. This made sense to me. However, a datalog, the in-game database, entry says that if the future gets changed for whatever reason, then the past will auto-correct itself so that the future will have the best possible chance of happening. Think about it for a second. How would that make any sense? I am legitimately wondering that. Anyone who can explain that to me, please post a comment. I would be eager to learn.

 

Final Fantasy XIII-2 is an interesting takes on the usual time traveling tale. It has both its good points and it bad points. Be warned, while I personally enjoyed Final Fantasy XIII-2, it is not a game for everybody. Old fans of the Final Fantasy series or JRPGs in general will find themselves right at home here. Others should borrow or rent the game first before considering a purchase. I complained a lot about the story as it heavily relies on “A goddess did it.”, but the gameplay of XIII-2 really works.

#7: The Quicktime Event: Pros, Cons, and Untapped Potential?

Most gamers are already aware of what a quicktime event is. A quicktime event is a cutscene in a game where the player is required to correctly input a series of button prompts. From that base, quicktime events can vary in how they are executed. Some require different sets and types of inputs. Some restrict themselves to certain parts of the controller. Some restart the entire event if a player fails an input. Some place the player at the point they lost, possibly with some penalty like health damage. Some even continue on despite failure, going with the flow of the event. This weeks article is a discussion of the quicktime event: where they work, where they can fail, and an example from a recent game that might reveal untapped potential for the mechanic.

I understand why game developers use quicktime events. One of the positives of using a quicktime event is that it allows the developer to forge a carefully choreographed and “cinematic” sequence without completely removing the player from the game, even in the middle of a combat scenario. Games like God of War have become well-known for this. The takedowns that Kratos performs during a quicktime event immerse the player into the world and give them a sense of the brutality of Kratos's character. In this case, the quicktime event functions in service to the game and the world that the game takes place in. A quicktime event can also act as a good way to give the player a brief reprieve from standard gameplay and breakup sections of combat. A brief, easy to pass quicktime event can allow the player to catch his/her breath and relax for a second to prepare themselves for the next gameplay sequence.

On the other hand, from the perspective of the player, the quicktime event can be one of the most irritating forms of artificial gameplay. Picture the following in your head: The player has just gone through a level of gameplay and finally arrived at a cutscene, giving him/her a time to relax. The cutscene depicts the player character talking with the villain while the villain has the hero in precarious position (Because they do that instead of just killing him outright, but I digress). After this conversation goes on for a minute or two, then the villain takes a knife and throws it at the player character and the game goes “Press X to not die!”. The player, controller set on the table, scrambles to grab it before he fails the randomly inserted quicktime event. Too late: The knife hits the protagonist in the head and the player has to sit through the entire conversation from the very beginning! While this type of game play is certainly on its way out, it has been done in far too many games. I am sure that most gamers reading this can think of a game that has done something like that to the player. There is no excuse for that kind of poor design. This is not the only bad things about quicktime events. That same reprieve that I mentioned in the above paragraph could easily have a regular, non-playable cutscene take place instead of a quicktime event and the player would not be any worse for wear. Another failing of the quicktime event is that it often takes the reins away from the player in order to highlight an action that the player cannot perform in standard gameplay. Instead of making characters perform super-cool in a quicktime events, why not just give that move to the player in standard gameplay. While there are admittedly times where this could be difficult, it is by no means impossible. Going back to God of War, no one complains that they do not get to perform amazing and visceral actions in gameplay because the entire game is visceral and exiting action. Furthermore, any action done in a quicktime event is often ignored because the player has to keep looking for button prompts. In that case, a regular cutscene would be a better choice.

But despite my criticisms, I think there is an untapped potential in quicktime events that a game released very recently made me realize. As some of you who read this might be aware, one of new “features” included in Final Fantasy XIII-2 was “Cinematic Action”, aka quicktime events. While they are mostly just used as coup de graces for all the boss fights (Which I hate. I already defeated the boss. I do not need a quicktime event to show how they canonically defeated the boss. I know how it died because I killed it! But again, I digress.), the first quicktime event did something interesting that I did not expect. While it was a small thing, it had a profound impact on me and made me alter (if only slightly) my negative opinion of quicktime events. At the beginning of the game, the player fights the obvious big bad of the game (anyone who wields a weapon that looks like Soul Edge is evil) as Lightning, the hero from Final Fantasy XIII. Towards the end, a “Cinematic Action” sequence begins. Instead of saying “Press X to not die!”, the games gives the player the choice of two prompts: One button initiates a physical attack and another cause Lightning to cast Ruin. The event gives the player two more choices of attacks before it ends in a styleish and admittedly cool looking sequence. This is an interesting mechanic. I would love to see a game where the quicktime events is not the player going through a scripted sequence, but rather them going through an actual battle, making split second decisions and actually affecting the outcome of the event by what they are pressing as opposed to having a reflex test. The scene would change to show who is winning and who is losing. It could help to bring the player into the frame of mind of the protagonist and help immerse the player into the experience. I am extremely disappointed that, twenty hours in and after several more “Cinematic Action” sequences, they do not do anything similar to that again. This could have potentially revolutionized the quicktime event and made it fresh and interesting.

Quicktime events do not have to be stupid and annoying. They are like any other tool in a game designers arsenal. Used well, they can be a splendid addition to the experience and add to the immersion of the game. It is a shame that very few games ever use them well.