It's amazing how much you can get done with just a little bit of unconventionality, isn't it? Killer7 dares to take the mere act of walking from one place to another and render it unrecognizable. What's usually a two-stick process is now mapped almost entirely to the "A" button, denying the player control over both the camera and the path your character takes. This game's tutorial mission scrambled my brain- not because walking is at all complicated, but because it's such a radically different approach from everything else I've played that I couldn't comprehend it at first. Hardly ever being responsible for the direction that your Smith goes in makes it that much more difficult to create a mental map of the area, even when frequently consulting the actual in-game map. Trying to decipher spacial layouts in Killer7 is as tricky as trying to decipher the game's overarching plot, and I often found myself stopping to take aim when there weren't any enemies around just for a more orthodox camera perspective. And, clearly, this was a deliberate trap. In the collective mind of the Smith syndicate, the world only makes sense when viewed through the scope of a rifle, a detail that's communicated entirely through gameplay and embellished through audiovisuals. The simple geometry and basic color gradients of every environment seem to mock you, claiming that they're not as complicated as you think they are, and the haunting laugh of every Heaven's Smile adds that extra bit of disorientation. Given how effective this one facet of the game is, then, it's such a shame that the rest of it is just so conventional. I shoot enemies in their glowing weak spots. I solve puzzles that I'm given the answers to. I'm never tasked with managing the mutual vitality of the Killer7, nor do I even choose my Smith based on the situation that I find myself in. Conforming to the standard structure of ending most levels with a boss battle is the most poorly considered of these decisions, as the lack of any mobility whatsoever means they're all simultaneously painful yet far too easy. The one exception is Andrei Ulmeyda, who represents an exciting chase through an arena that was actually built to take advantage of how moving around works. Ulmeyda Intercity, in general, seems to have been lifted from a much more cleverly designed game, mainly due to how it reevaluates how horror should operate in the context of Killer7. It's pretty unconventional for a game's scariest level to be its least confined, isn't it? Unfortunately, this game isn't all that weird, despite how desperately it wants to convince you otherwise. Samantha, for instance, abstractly transitions between various erotic fantasies and/or stages of adolescence whenever you see her, and only allows you to save your game when she's an adult-slash-French-maid. Leaving such a vital part of the game to an unreliable character is a stroke of genius, especially when you consider how much of a relief finally reaching a safe zone in a stressful game can end up being, but it's all rendered pointless by the fact that the map tells you where you can and can't save, allowing you to ignore Samantha's whims entirely while planning your path. But, I suspect, fans of this game will consider any non-thematic analysis of Killer7 to be equally pointless. I won't pretend to be smart enough to fully get what Suda is ultimately grasping at, though I will say that fate and control are far and away some of the least interesting themes for video games to cover, even back in 2005. Nor will I pretend to care all that much- thematically rich or not, the game's still boring, and in my eyes, anything that demands a deeper look is obligated to contain more replay value, not less. I've almost certainly only been made dumber by the amount of times I've heard Leon S. Kennedy's corny one-liners, but I'm not sure if I'll ever return to this (according to Suda acolytes) incredibly intellectually rewarding work. For better or worse, I no longer get that DS feeling...

When I think of a 3/5 game, I think of either a game that is “totally fine”, or a game with equal amounts of interesting and odd choices counteracting each other. FF16 is the latter. A game I wish was better, because it showed so much potential.

tl;dr: You have already decided if you will play FF16. If you are somehow on the fence I would say:
Are you looking for an interesting story with multiple developed characters? Look elsewhere.
Are you looking for a fun action game with deep mechanics? Look elsewhere.
If you are looking for a fun romp that at times comes annoyingly close to achieving both? Check it out!

I don’t regret playing FF16, but I also don’t think I would tell anyone they need to play it? I came away from it not knowing who it was for, or if it was trying to achieve anything. Before I dive deeper into my


Extended Thoughts

I think I should

Establish my biases going into FF16:
A review is only useful if you understand the viewpoint of the reviewer. I think it’s only fair to explain my headspace going into FF16, since my view going in might differ greatly to yours. Aspects I'm critical of (or uninterested by) might not be true for you, so you might enjoy the game far more (which is a good thing!).

Final Fantasy
is a series I don’t know if I enjoy anymore? Or to be more accurate, because I’m not a MMO-guy, I haven’t enjoyed a mainline Final Fantasy game since 10. I couldn’t get through the first disc of FF13. I was excited for FF15 since it was Versus 13 (I even watched Kingsglave in a limited screening), to then 100% the 1.0 version of the game in its launch week, to then realise “hey, I don't think I liked that game”. More recently I finally played 12 (Zodiac Age port) and if not for the emulator-like ability to set the game to x4 speed, I don’t think I would have finished it.
The only things keeping me interesting in playing a Squenix dev’d RPG are:
1. Close friends that I trust regularly say FF14 is their favourite Final Fantasy (I trust them, I just don’t enjoy MMOs. I tried, it ain't for me).
2. FF7 “Remake” is a game I did enjoy a lot, and I'm (as of July 2023) excited for its follow ups.
3. The last new Squenix RPG I played was ‘NEO: The World Ends With You’, a game I deeply adore.

Traditional Fantasy
is also something I will bounce off of without a significant twist. Before the game came out I heard that “it took inspiration from stories like Game of Thrones” (which I don’t enjoy, so that is a big bias you might not share). Also a bigger red flag that I wouldn’t find the story interesting is despite being a fantasy setting, it was going to be devoid of people who weren’t white. I think this is ludicrous. It is one thing to say, have a story set in Tokyo, so your main cast are Japanese, and you might see 1 or 2 extremely minor side characters or NPC’s who aren’t ethnically Japanese. But this is because you are crafting a reflection or representation of a real location, in our real larger world. Crafting an entire fantasy setting, completely devoid of diversity will just result in the world feeling small.

So why did I even play FF16?
To directly quote a headline from a PC Gamer article I saw in June 2022, “Oh hell yeah, Final Fantasy 16's combat director worked on Devil May Cry 5 and Dragon's Dogma”. This instantly interested me enough that when I first saw a 6 second twitter clip of doing an enemy step I ordered the game. I kept the order after playing the FF16 demo, which interested me with both the combat and its prologue narrative to hook me in.

So I basically got hooked in early with the promise of cool combat, an intriguing fantasy mystery, plus a pretty compelling revenge plot (the prologue effectively sets up an extremely hateable villain). How did I get from having a good time, to just kind of going through the motions until credits?

Combat
is frustratingly both fantastic and not enough. This might just be a case of expectations too high, but with the credits on the game, the pedigree on display, the budget of a mainline Final Fantasy, plus a direct quote from Suzuki Ryota (the combat designer) saying his work on the game is “my own personal masterpiece”, I feel like I get to have those high expectations.
Bottom line, the combat feels satisfying, if we were judging it solely in comparison to other Action RPGs, FF16 is in the highest tier. However, compared to other action games, including those worked on by Ryota, nowhere near. I would understand if he meant “masterpiece” in that it feels as good as it does, but is still accessible by players who never touch action games, because FF16 excels greatly in that aspect. By default the game has both “story focused” and “action focused” difficulties that are tuned extremely well for both audiences. I think any player who has a far more casual (or has no) taste for action-oriented games, will be able to go through FF16 like a breeze with “story focused”. Plus most of the flashier moves they would want to do, aren’t inputs at the end of a combo string, but are just abilities on a cooldown. The game even has widely accessible optional “Assist Rings”, equipment unlocked from the start that dramatically changes how the game plays. Like having the game slowdown before every hit you would take so you can more easily dodge (like a cutscene QTE), or even just having the game auto dodge when able (as in anytime except during long Eikon moves that would require a manual cancel to stop) and making advanced attack strings happen automatically with one button press like in Bayonetta.

This is all great for someone who likes Final Fantasy, but has never touched something like Devil May Cry. But as someone who was here primarily for that combat? I wish there was as much care at the high end of the skill ceiling, as there was for the low. For each feature for someone with no patience for finely tuned action mechanics (or players who physically cannot engage with them), I wish there was something for people craving mechanical depth. There is one sword combo in the game. Actually let's establish this, the core kit you will fully unlock within the first 3 hours is:
- Triangle for ranged attacks
- Square for a four hit melee combo (you can press Triangle once after each swing for a mini combo extender. The final one acts as an ender. You can do this one only, so s > s > s > s > t.)
- Square also can be used for a three hit air combo
- Both Square and/or Triangle can be held to charge either a big swing with the sword, or a charged ranged attack. The square charge move in air is the closest thing to a traditional action game launcher
- If you use Square to swing your sword the moment the enemy would land an attack, you Parry (take no damage, the enemy is often knocked back a little, time slows down for a couple of seconds)
- R1 for a dodge, a last minute dodge can be followed up with a counter attack (either melee or ranged). After getting knocked down by an enemy, you can press dodge to immediately get back up (you still take the damage, so like a Kingdom Hearts ‘Recovery’)
- Cross for a jump, you can jump off enemies (enemy step) twice before landing on the ground to reset
- Cross + Square on land is a body projectile to close distance (like a DMC ‘Stinger’)
- Cross + Square in air is a falling attack to reach ground faster (like a DMC ‘Helm Breaker’)
- R2 + Touchpad is a taunt, useful to bait enemies into an easier to parry/dodge attack

This is everything part of the “core moveset”. While this is all tuned well, and each one of these actions feel satisfying to do. It is also extremely limited by action game standards. One sword combo is wild, I understand not wanting to have long complicated strings for the non-action game players. But that is why pause combos exist, being able to have a variety of different moves with different utilities, all accessible from the same button, fully dependent on timing is incredible design. For example s > s > s > s, would be a standard combo that knocks smaller enemies back, but s > s > s > pause > mash s, could be a combo unleashes rapid hits on one target, but not knocking back or hit stunning them, meaning it's risky to do if surrounded, or if the target isn't already knocked down. Not even having this level of variety and depth, especially with all the accessibility options, feels like all the time spent polishing the combat design went into the accessibility, and none into making it interesting. Worth noting while not the default kit (because there are times when you cannot use it) the dog Torgal has moves assigned to the d-pad. One of which is an aerial launcher that can launch smaller enemies into the air. Why this wasn't something closer to DMC like back on the left stick + square (while locked-on) to have Clive launch the enemy, hold square while doing this to also launch Clive with the enemy to follow in the air, is beyond me. Especially since that move almost exists in the game in the “spells”.

Everything unlocked outside of the core kit is either:
A/ Moves tied to an Eikon (activated with Circle), so you can have maximum 3 equipped at once. These mostly function similar to style abilities from DMC 3 onwards. For example, one is a dash to close in on the enemy targeted, one is a grapple that pulls in smaller enemies.
B/ Eikon abilities, which are effectively “spells” that go on cooldown after use (cooldown time depends on the ability itself), activated with R2 + either Square or Triangle.
One of my major issues with the game is how these function. Half of which I wish were far weaker and instead added onto the core kit as directional moves (like the Rising Flame move as a launcher, or Wicked Wheel as an additional aerial combo). But the main issue is that instead of cooldowns, these abilities could solve the most glaring issue with the combat.

While the combat has a tight game-feel, and can look flashy, there is absolutely zero incentive in normal play to do anything other than the most optimal damage. This is usually a combination of a set series of abilities in a row, then just filling time waiting for all the cooldowns to execute again. The only thing the game tries to do to encourage playing with variety are ‘Battle Techniques’. When you do something “neat” like a parry or perfect dodge, it says so in the bottom right corner with a little star next to it. However outside of the Arcade Mode (replaying levels with a scoreboard) Battle Techniques don’t do anything! And even if they did, there are techniques tied to most of the moves in the game, so even in Arcade Mode score isn’t based on skills and combat variety, just on getting dodges and landing specific attacks.

I'm ultimately just disappointed by the combat because with everything in the game, I think 3 tweaks would completely flip my feelings and make me praise FF16’s combat to anyone that would listen.
- Add multiple pause combos on land and in air, with different functions in combat (like the example I gave above)
- Make some of the Eikon abilities weaker, and make them part of the core kit, not abilities.
- Instead of abilities on cooldown, all abilities should cost MP. Then the incentive to fully experiment and do interesting things with the combat would be that getting hits on enemies would be the sole way you generate MP. With either an added style ranking, or just reworking of the Battle Technique, resulting in a faster increase in MP when playing with skill and combo variety. This way instead of idling playing with the core combat while waiting for the next time you can do big damage, you reward players with tying how often they can do big damage, to how well they are mastering the core combat.

I think with these changes, FF16 could have kept the gameplay interesting throughout the whole experience, while not at all compromising the accessibility options it has for players that wouldn’t wish to, or could not, engage with these systems fully.

I know this would have worked too, because an addition to the combat far later in the game, is a microcosm of my third point! Without spoiling, there is an Eikon move that does big damage, and it is solely charged through that Eikon’s abilities, or the 2nd sword combo in the game (which is tied to that Eikon). This late game addition, is to me, the most interesting add to the combat in the whole game. Albeit still too late, and not enough to retroactively make the combat as a whole more worthwhile. Now that was a lot of text to say “the combat could have been more interesting imo”, but to be fair it was the main reason I was here. That said, the other reason was the early story did hook me. So how did that turn out?


Story
is something I don’t want to spoil here (I might go into spoilers in the comments later after I let the game sit for longer?). My very spoiler free broad strokes are that I wish characters did more than one thing? I was talking about the characters with a friend before I finished the game, and I agree with her when she said “if you think all the characters other than Clive have no agency, the women have double no agency”. FF16 is a game where all the characters other than the singular protagonist, each do (on average) about one thing, they have one moment of character agency. I think it is wild that there are female quest givers that have more going on than the closest character to a female protagonist, Jill. I think Jill has exactly one moment midway through the story where she goes “I have to do this thing, this is what I need to do for my reason”. With everything before/after just being present. I lost count of the amount of cutscenes where there is a conversation between two men, and Jill is also there, just standing. Even worse is in the third act, there is a cutscene that may as well have Clive saying “your agency, let me take it, I can take it for you, you don't have to be a character any more!”. Which is all just frustrating, because there are multiple female characters that are recurring quest givers, that are seen having a goal and working towards it.
I think the only characters I will remember as being neat after finishing the game are three of the men. Cid, who is just fun in almost every scene he’s in, Gav who is a total bro, and Dion who I honestly think would have made for a more interesting protagonist.

The lightest details, here so maybe lightest spoilers for the rest of this paragraph?
The two story hooks for me were:
- The fantasy related mystery, which by the halfway point of the game, the player will have fully figured out, and is sadly pretty standard in comparison to its setup.
- The revenge plot, which is the side of the story more closely tied to the political narrative.
This is the big reason why I think Dion would have been more interesting to follow (or in a differently structured narrative, had joined as a “party member” by the halfway point”). The reason for the revenge plot, then subsequent introduction of the macguffins that need to be dealt with, all but remove Clive (and the player) from the political narrative, you aren’t actively pursuing the villain the prologue sets up. Dion on the other hand, is deeply entrenched in the politics of the setting and is put at odds with the prologue villain! Meaning Dion is the character most tied up in the more interesting human aspects of the story. Clive's only tie to the political plot is his part in helping free the slaves. I don’t want to speak glib, but the other weird aspect of the game is that the game spends way too much time “convincing” the player and Clive that slavery is bad? As if somehow the audience from second one isn’t on board with that sentiment? Also from Clives perspective, they make a point showing ‘he was always nice to the slaves, and seemed as if he thought it was wack’, then you know he becomes a slave for 13 years. Then even after that, characters are trying to convince Clive that “maybe this is all something we should try and stop?”. It comes off as weird that the game spends so much of its first act showing off how bad slavery is. As if the player (and Clive after living it) aren’t already in agreement that it's horrible?

(light spoilers end here)
To wrap up my feelings on the story. The political and more human stories (while some had moments) I think didn’t hit hard since the game itself side-lined them for the more fantasy aspects of the story. I don’t think said fantasy mystery ended up being very interesting as it became the main focus. And most of the characters felt pretty hollow due to lack of story participation and agency, especially the female characters. All of which took place in a world that ultimately felt small due to a lack of diversity (which itself is also infuriating, because at the same time I think the game took positive steps forward in LGBT representation!). Also for what it is worth, I think the ending was weak, but that is the most subjective take I’ve had in this pile of words.

I want to very briefly touch on the
Soundtrack
Some of the tracks were some of my favourites in a mainline FF, most of which are the tracks that don’t typically get put into a setting like this. Even many of the more “typical” tracks were also very good! My only complaint, to continue my feeling of ‘mixed bag’, was that once more interesting tracks started being used in boss fights, many other major boss fights lacking songs of equal quality made the fights feel hollow.


If you read all of this, ultimately what I want to communicate is this. While everything I’ve said might come off as overly critical, it comes from a place of disappointment, not hate. Final Fantasy is a series that when at its peak, changes videogames as an artform for the better. On a positive note, if not for the weird stance on diversity, I would say the FF16 while with issues, is a step in a better direction in comparison to FF13 and FF15. I do sincerely hope that for FF17, we finally get back to interesting stories, with engaging mechanics.