| This article is based on the exclusive licensing agreement between Campfire and Polygon China, please revert with your consent.
There is no better story than the one that people make for themselves. In some ways, Triangle Strategy embraces this idea, but in others it seems hopelessly forgetful.
Triangle Strategy is a turn-based tactical RPG developed by Square Enix and Artdink, with a scale and ambition comparable to a Tolkien novel. Although its art style is similar to that of The Wrong Way Traveler, and also produced by Tomoya Asano, Triangle Strategy is not just a story about team adventures, but is closer to a grand political drama. The game does not focus on the friendship between friends, but on the relationship between countries. In other words, if "The Misguided Traveler" is like "The Messenger of the Rings", then "Triangle Strategy" is a combination of "The Two Towers" and "The Return of the King".
The story takes place in three countries on the continent of Nozelia: the Principality of Asforst, which controls the iron ore mines in Nozeria, the Archaic state of Saint-Hysand, which monopolizes the supply of table salt, and the Kingdom of Greenborough, which acts as a mediator between the two countries. The game continues the tradition that began with the Final Fantasy Strategy Edition, Fantasy Water Margin 2, and Fire Emblem series, allowing me to create an army and command various characters in a grid-like 3D battlefield. In the 45 hours I experienced the game's battles, the main control was Serenoa, a member of the noble family of the Kingdom of Greenborough, who shook the whole situation in Nozelia.
Arranged marriages, insidious betrayals, and abrupt death scenes, Triangle Strategy's script uses a string of JRPG and fantasy game classics to create the atmosphere, while also introducing a whole host of characters, locations, feuds, and traditions that I can't keep up with after just a few chapters.
Still, my biggest opinion on Triangle Strategy is not the script, but its narrative. As a strategy RPG, it refused to trust me and didn't seem to feel like I could piece together the plot on my own, fill in the gaps, and see the whole story. About half of my time playing Triangle Strategy is spent watching cutscenes, which, while beautiful, are usually irrelevant.
In addition, there are some scenes during the game that will destroy the coherence of the game experience. Square Enix and Artdink desperately want to master the narrative through scenes and dialogue, and constantly put the main twists and possibilities of the battle in front of the player's eyes, which is simply suffocating.
Take one of my favorite characters, General Aurora, who was once a soldier in the Northern Kingdom of Esphrörst, but soon emerged from the army as one of Nozelia's brightest military geniuses. She's cunning and tough, and fierce when necessary, so the game also does a lot of gorgeous cutscenes to describe these features, but many of these cutscenes are unnecessary.
I could see how cunning Aurora was because she would attack my most vulnerable unit first; I could see that Aurora was tough because I needed to hold her back with two of the strongest mages; and I could see how fierce Aurora was, because her sword could knock down my hardest tank unit with a single swipe, as easily as lifting a curtain or opening the way in the fog.
Whenever this game really frees me to build camps, recruit new characters, improve their weapons, manage their carry-on equipment, and deploy each unit in highly interactive and intense battles based on their respective abilities, it becomes an unparalleled game, even if Fire Emblem Awakening doesn't have that momentum (I thought it was the best game of its kind).
In one of the battles, I can choose to use a morally controversial weapon hidden in the city to repel the enemy. The results were terrible, and the victories were bittersweet. After the war, I lingered with remorse. At times like these, the game gives me time to pick up the pieces and assess the situation, which is fantastic.
Sometimes, Triangle Strategy can do well outside the battlefield. In many interactive chapters, Serenoia's role as a diplomat is highlighted, with less emphasis on the capabilities of commanders. By exploring the streets of the city and spending time with my peers at breaks, I discover shared fears, hopes, and beliefs that I can then use during the voting session to persuade core team members to raise their hands for a variety of reasons. For example, on one occasion, a neighboring lord asked for an alliance, but some of his companions distrusted him very much.
Since I was able to figure out every time to turn people's opinions in the direction I wanted, these sessions may feel like they're mixed with a lot of human factors, but they still show a different side of what characters can't show in battle (and in the various cutscenes that have long been tired of watching).
To put it bluntly, what drives me mad most about Triangle Strategy is the lack of confidence in the players by the makers. The game was close to what I had dreamed of, but in some ways it was a bit over-detailed, always uncontrollably trying to force the plot to go the way it "should" work. It felt like some LEGO employee kicked open my door and yelled, just because I didn't follow the manual, and the game gave me almost no room to pick up the "story bricks" and build the "story building" freely.
However, Triangle Strategy's performance in battle always makes me shine when I play, such as on the eve of a major war, when the mage Nevi comes to my camp and bravely and sincerely provides his service. His elemental spells are ok and have great potential. The next morning, I asked him to stay with Lutruff, a hunter who excelled at using a bow, and his mastery of bear traps made him a strong protector. Nevi fought several elite enemies, and Ludruff was on his side to protect him, and they all ended up unscathed and soon became good friends.
This joy lasts at least until the next cutscene.
Translated | Yamamuko
Edit | Zoe