Rapaille

Feel indifferent about the target audience which Fire Emblem currently goes after. All media tries to reach a certain audience and will design the product to reach that audience, which can be distracting ones you notice it. Even something like Climax (a movie that's entirely about dancers tripping on LSD), a movie that seems designed to alienate certain audiences also tries to reach a certain demographic. The most important thing for me is that I enjoy it. Thracia 776 & Three Houses both appeal to a different demographic (of course there is overlap) but I still like them both. My reason for disliking Fates isn't because it panders to otakus, it's because I found the story often aimless & terribly written, the maps often gimmicky and the character underdeveloped within the story. I'm also not the biggest fan of Path of Radiance despite it's problems not being the same as Fates'. What I do think however is that pandering often draws more attention to the already existing problems (for me at least). If Fates was more toned down I would most likely not notice the problems as quickly. But I would also have forgotten the game more quickly. Blazing Sword to me has many of the same problems as Fates but due to it feeling calmer when it comes to fanservice I don't notice them as quickly and just kind of forgot the game as a whole. In that way one could argue that the pandering was actually benecifial because at least I didn't forget it (unlike fe7, fe8, fe9 & fe15 which also had equally big problems but didn't leave a impression on me at all). I will always remember Fates as that one Otaku Fire Emblem game with Pokemon Amie. Long story short: Don't really care as long as the game is good but if it isn't good, might as well shove in as much fanservice as possible so I at least remember something.

I tend to not often feel passionate about popular characters (there are exceptions but they're that for a reason) but I never actively dislike them because I can often understand why people like them. I always found it more to find out why characters appeal to people then talk about who I dislike. That being said, I always liked female characters way less then male characters in Fire Emblem. They often feel more one-note and like they aren't allowed to be characters. I think this is because the games are made mostly by males for a generally male audience. This means that male characters tend to be more well defined because are the characters most of the player base will relate to and female characters tend to fill supporting roles (with a couple of exceptions like Micaiah & Edelgard). Even within supports I often found them lacking and often felt they lacked a well defined personality. Of course there are female characters that I like a lot but even some of those are more because of their design or qualities as a unit. Don't know how other people feel about this and maybe it's just me having a hard time relating to female characters but thought it was worth mentioning. For other games Dislike Keldeo for outclassing Poliwrath as a water/fighting type in every way conceivable but don't really know how popular Keldeo is. All characters in Kingdom Hearts. Really like the gameplay but despise whenever the characters talk (especially Dream Drop Distance).

Fair enough. Just like I said in my original posts there are ideas that could have worked. The problem is that they couldn't follow up on any of these factors because they needed a self insert.

So my anime trope knowledge is limited but from what I know kuudere is basically the Rei-archetype (there probably are older kuudere characters but Rei is probably the most well known and the only one I know anyway). First I want to ask. In what way makes Byleth being a kuudere interesting? We are just said that he had no personality and slowly got one over time. Then after the Loli-fusion nothing is done with Byleth as a character beside giving Dimitri a 5 minute long therapy which somehow fixes his mindset (which is dumb but I won't get into it since it isn't related to my current point I'm trying to make). In all other routes he just hangs around and doesn't do anything interesting except for his S-support. It's fun to categorize characters/stories but it doesn't automatically make them good. That's like saying that I need to realize Suicide Squid is a superhero movie and then everything will make sense (maybe a bit hyperbolic but still).

Seliph with Leif being as a very close second Seliph is great not because I know a lot about him but I know almost nothing about him. Story-wise he never does anything interesting and suffers from the fact that he only talks with one person who is basically an exposition-bot. But there are a few small moments which give insight into his personality which don't give me the feeling he is that heroic and that it's all an act. By telling us so little about him it makes him actually interesting and relatable since a lot of people don't act the way they feel or actually are which is a problem I often have with a lot of other lords (although I might also be me overthinking it). Leif is great for the opposite reasons that Seliph is. He is a great because he is an amazing lead that has flaws and makes mistakes that actually have real consequences. Simply put, he feels like a real human being because you see him act like a real human being. (I wrote some short thoughts on Marth, Sigurd & the 3h lords because I also like them but not as much as Seliph & Leif. )

Well, no need to wait anymore! To be perfectly honest I can understand why people like Path of Radiance and it's not like I dislike it solely for the slow & easy gameplay (just look at FE4). I just think it isn't interesting enough to warrant having both slow & easy gameplay. The characters, while generally good, also never resonated with me. Most character fell in the "Yeah, they're cool I guess..." category which is quite a crowded category. Same with the story, it works but didn't leave an impression on me. Bonus EXP also wasn't that special because they are just extra level-ups for units you where gonna use anyway. If I was able to skip enemy phases it would be still not be one of my favourites because of what I mentioned before, but I would at least consider playing it again as oppossed to now where I feel that it just wastes my time without offering anything unique.

"All I have are half baked thoughts" Intelligent System while creating Byleth Byleth doesn't work in any way that you look at him. As a self insert you barely have control over his actions (I wouldn't jump in front of an axe to possibly save a girl I just met) and the limited dialogue options mean you can't express yourself through him/her (Why can't I be sarcastic/cynical?). As a character there are ideas that could work but all of them are executed badly. His/her whole shtick with having a god inside him is never utilized in an interesting way. He/she doesn't seem to have any motivation/goal and just goes along for the ride and is basically used as an excuse to explain to the player what is going on. The relation between him and Jeralt is barely developed and we never get an idea of how he lived prior to the monastery and how it is that he knows nothing about the world despite having lived the mercenary life for almost his entire life. The player worship also is still ridiculous (You are god, Edelgard sees you as her only equal, you are the one who turns Dimitri back to normal, you are the leader of the church in 3 routes because you are somehow more qualified then Seteth and become a god-king in 2 routes or leader of the main religion in 1 route). What really saves him/her is the fact that he/she is never obnoxious and that the other characters are mostly great (which is one of the reasons why Kris is horrible since he is one of the only characters in fe12 with dialogue within the story). The fact that there are ideas I like also helps since it makes me think about how I would write him/her. Tl;dr, Byleth bad but I don't care enough to get mad.

Lord of the Rings Online; First I want to make clear that this game isn't great. It's your average MMO which forces you to pay absurd amounts of money if you want to experience the game to it's fullest. But if you're like me and have grown up with Lotr this is a truly breathtaking game. despite being almost 15 years old, the way it bring Middle-Earth to life is is mesmerizing. Of course you have well known locations like the Shire & Gondor but it are the places that are never visited in the books that are the main selling points. the fact that they clearly took inspiration from the appendix and how they incorporated new ideas into these places without them feeling forced or unfaithful (Unlike some other Lotr games that shall not be named in the same breath as LOTRO) is truly something to behold. The music is also pretty good and raids can be pretty fun but the world is really what sells it for me. Outside of LOTRO there are quite a few other games I would consider some of my favourites. Ocarina of Time, Link's Awakening, Breath of the Wild, Call of Duty World at War, pretty much every Pokemon game up until White 2 (only enjoy the competitive side of Pokemon beyond that and SwSh kinda ruined that for me too), Final Fantasy IV ds, Super Mario Galaxy, Medievil, Morrowind, Skyrim, Super Smash Bros & (of course) around half of the Fire Emblem games (to be more specific; fe3, fe4, fe5, fe6, fe10, fe11, fe12 & 3H)

FE1; Battle Map 1 FE2; Final Map FE3; Liberation (Favourite map theme) FE4; The Last Holy War FE5; Adversity FE6; For the Commanders (The one that plays on the Western Isles) FE7; Winds across the plains FE8; Truth, Hope & Despair FE9; Change of Scenery (Almost picked Crimea's attack since that one is in smash and because of that is one of the few tracks I remember but after listening to the soundtrack again I think I like this one more) FE10; Eternal Bond FE11; A hero's destiny FE12; Holy War (sounds way better in this game. Would have picked Liberation again but that seems redundant) FE13; Conquest FE14; Dusk falls Fe15; What lies at the End FE16; Funeral of Flowers

Don't strongly dislike him, just not a big fan of his lazy/oblivious personality and I feel that his interactions with other characters aren't interesting. Most of them boil down to either crest research or him being lazy. Maybe it's because I have only used him on my first playthrough where I only recruited 1 student so maybe I just need to read more of his supports. There is also the fact that I really like the cast in Three Houses so when a character would have been annoying but tolerable in other games, I dislike it more because I directly compare it to the other characters in the game (which is why I dislike Sylvia & Kris way more then for example Nowi & Corrin despite my reasons for disliking being pretty much the same).

Disliked characters are plenty with me. Fates' cast, Sylvia, Linhardt, Sophia(fe6), Faye & Micaiah all come to mind but not one of these characters is capable of ruining the entire game for me. Maybe the cast for Fates but that's more because of the horrendous writing which is easy to get over since it is more one enormous problem that can only be solved by redoing the whole thing instead of one factor ruining something that could have been good. However there is one character that while not ruining the entire game still frustrates me enormously, that character is Kris. If Kris didn't exist Fe12 would be my favourite Fire Emblem game. But because of Kris it joins the rank of being a contender instead of clearly being the best. With other characters I dislike I can at least understand why they where added to the game, why they are written the way they are and what the appeal is behind it. As much as I might dislike Camilla I can understand the reasoning behind the character and the appeal. With Kris I kinda understand the reasoning and why it might appeal but when it's executed I have to go back to rethinking it. Because not only does Kris have a clear personality (which is the most obnoxious personality in all of Fire Emblem) but there also aren't real character interactions with other characters and options to romance which is the biggest appeal behind avatars. Sure you can support but those supports only display basic personality traits which would be way more effective if they supported with other characters. Fe12's also is clearly not written with an avatar in mind which makes Kris stick out even more. Every scene with him is forced and unnatural which even Corrin doesn't have since Corrin perfectly fits in with the other terrible writing of Fates. To put it simply, Nothing about Kris works and he/she drastically decreases my enjoyment of an otherwise amazing game.

Short answer; if it's necessary do it like fe12 but don't give him a personality that makes me want to play fe3. Long answer: something I've noticed about avatars is that I both dislike them because they have no personality but also dislike them because they have a personality. Robin & Byleth both fall in the awkward middle-ground of not having enough personality/relevance for me to like them as characters but also to much of a personality to be a self insert. Byleth also has the problem of not having enough diversity with what he can say. For example, I'm a pretty sarcastic person in real life and because there barely are options to be sarcastic I can never see myself as Byleth since I can't express how I would really act in such a situation. The only option I see is the fe12 route but instead of giving a little bit of dialogue which goes a long way in frustrating me give him no dialogue. But this will not work because people seem to like shipping themselves which will be impossible with no dialogue. But giving them dialogue will alienate people who don't talk like the self insert. What I'm trying to say is that as long as Fire Emblem keeps the plot structure they currently use, avatars will never work for me. But removing them also removes an appeal of the modern games so no matter what we are most likely stuck with them and we will keep complaining about how much we hate avatars for another 10 years.

For me my favourite FE game changes every day. This is because there are so many things which Fire emblem can excel in so picking a definitive one is impossible. Most of the time however it's between fe4 & fe12. Fe4 excels in being the odd duck among Fire Emblem games. While the gameplay is obviously flawed it never got to the point that it bothered me. It also has without a doubt the best story of any Fire Emblem game. It's really a case of a flawed game which flaws never personally bothered me (which it did with fe2) and me being fascinated by how unconventional it feels compared to every game after it. Fe12 on the other is super conventional but it's gameplay is the best in the series when you ask me. The fact that it can be easy, challenging or frustatingly difficult is a big feed only fe10 could comes close to matching. The story is bad and the characters not as strong as some past entries but gameplay is more important to me so i don't mind it to much. But there also days it's fe5 for it's combinations of a good story and good, but occasionally frustrating, gameplay, fe6 or fe11 for their simplicity and the fact they are easy to pick up play, fe3h for feeling modern while not having any of the enormous problems that other modern games have (by modern I mean fe13 and onwards) and there are even weird days I feel that fe10 is the best game for the things it tried to do despite not always succeeding.

Team Garons horrible writing is front center so the fact that it's horrendous isn't hard to miss. But I find them quite entertaining for how bad they are since I've decided in that fates story is a satire of stories in RPG's (makes it easier for me to enjoy fates even if I know it isn't true). Those who slither in the dark are generic and boring which, while not technically as bad as he Garon squad, is worse since I get nothing out of it. 3h's story while not great (it's a bit to melodramatic for my taste and often tells then shows) is still pretty good so something being bad is way noticeable despite having way less screen-time then the Garon squad. Also they lack presence which made the Lopto church decent. The Garon squad is objectively worse but TWSITD's badness is more noticeable. Since I was way more frustrated with the Garon squad on my first play-through I voted for them but it could either way (also because I went in with the lowest standard for 3h's story so it's story could never disappoint me while my expectations for Fates' story where quite high which made the revelation of it's plot quite a shock).

Probably Granvalle (although Thracia could also contend as one of the best). Mostly because the entirety of the conflict of fe4 & 5 is the caused by a political power struggle in Granvalle which is the entire focus of the game. It's main shortcoming is the fact that it's only seen from one perspective but because of how Fire Emblem is structured it's very limited in how it can develop it's continent when compared to games like the Elder Scrolls and Zelda.

Shrek, the Lion King & the Incredibles are movies that I watched religiously as a child. I also remember watching Paprika at a very young age. Probably shouldn't have watched it so young but in the Netherlands they apparently think it is suited for all ages.

I would argue that you shouldn't try to write supports for every pair up because some pairings simply don't make sense (Tiltyu & Finn for example) and because of this supports will seem forced (which is often the case in Awakening & Fates). By not addressing it you don't draw attention to it, but if they where to write supports they have to explain why, which likely won't go well (Well I just met a girl who was hanging out with a priest and then we went to snow-land and within one year I had two kids with her before leaving with my master. Totally makes sense.). I could see it work if they take the Alec/Sylvia or Lachesis/Dew approach where they are more considered as lovers but not married rather then married but don't know if that is the route they want to take. I also think that most characters in Genealogy of the Holy War have an easily identifiable personality (of course there are exceptions like Holyn, Noish and some gen2's) and I think that adding supports wouldn't improve their personality. I rather have more talk conversations since those have more focus and variance then supports (which often have to build towards romance or friendship with a couple of exceptions). Maybe it's because I'm not the biggest fan of supports but I think that adding them in a fe4 remake wouldn't improve the game and would actually make it worse in most cases.

There are two and a half things I would like to see. The reason why I say two and a half is because of my fear for what a fe4 remake could be. Remaking Genealogy of the Holy War isn't easy because I think everyone would want something different from it. Some people would change almost nothing and just give it voice-acting and a graphical update. Others would change it to such a degree that the game would be totally different. I personally lean towards changing only a couple things like adding a rescue command, a few more talk conversations, maybe having battles inside the castle when you want to siege it and of course updating the presentation. But it's pretty clear that this isn't what most people would want. Some would like to add supports which is something I'm absolutely against because they will likely take the modern approach of everyone has to romance everyone (except Quan, Ethlyn, Sigurd & Deirdre for obvious reasons) which generally results in bad/forced supports. I'm also afraid that they will pull a Kris on us and try to insert an avatar in a story that doesn't need one and makes everyone around him look dumber. In general the reasons why I like fe4 are probably the reasons why other people dislike it so if they are gonna remake it they will most likely fix issues which I don't perceive as issues. Something I would really like to see is a real-time strategy Fire Emblem game. While the average game play of Fire Emblem is fun I think they should also play around with new ideas and experimenting with Real-time could be interesting. The easiest thing and probably smartest thing they could do is localize all Japan exclusive games. Only thing that could go wrong is localization. Beyond that it's the option where the least amount of things could go wrong and we don't have to be a bunch of pirates to play every game in English.

Rutger is a really good boss-killer. Sacred is really easy. They should have developed the Dawn Brigade more. Thracia fog of war is super annoying. And most importantly. I really like Fire Emblem. Could list some things about unit performance most people agree on but that would be to easy and kinda boring so I keep it at one.

I also like the idea behind Byleth being a introvert (that's what kuudere is right?) and learning to open up to other people. My main problem comes from how we are told how important he is but those factors never actually being expanded on. Like fusing with a god. Besides escaping the void, it never actually plays an important in the story or really affects the story besides Rhea trying to awake Sothis by having him sit on a throne (which she would probably also have done if he didn't fuse with Sothis because that's her entire goal). Byleth could have escaped any other way and it wouldn't change the story. Pacing of the story however is something I 100% agree with. In the first half almost nothing happens of importance until the last 2 chapters. The first half basically goes... Basically the first half is setup and the pay-of is super fast and after that the story basically is set in motion without any big surprises (except Verdant Wind & Silver Snow where a final battle is shoved in at the end without any setup). The world building suffers from the same issues (despite personally not having an issue with it). It all comes from exposition dumps in the first half with almost nothing being added in the second half.

There are different ways how my favourite would look like. There are however two main ways that appeal to me. I have been considering combining Fire Emblem with Age of Empires. Basically you have an big overworld that is in real time where you plan out how your armies move, army composition (since you move around multiple armies) and resources and when opposing armies meet it switches to turn-based combat. The battlefield is based on the ground on which armies engage (if armies meet in a mountain they fight in mountains, if they meet while on a boat you get a boat map etc). During the preparations for a encounter you can request reinforcements. The turn they arrive and where they arrive is based on their movement-type and their distance. This game would sacrifice story for gameplay which is why there are two ways for me to make the 'perfect' Fire Emblem game. The other way of making my 'perfect' Fire Emblem game is a linear game that has fe5 gameplay and the story I described in a previous thread.

I think I understand what you mean. What I think is the main cause is Byleth. He/she is the strongest and most important character in the entire world and the game constantly tells us how important he/she is and how much the lords need his/her support. But Byleth actually never influences the plot in a important way. Things just happen to him/her and he/she never reacts despite the fact that almost 50% of the story is about him/her (except Silver Snow, there it's worse). As much as I dislike Robin & Corrin, at least they influence the plot and actually play an important role. Byleth is more like Kris but with way more screen-time. Also having no personality doesn't help. 3h's story has the same issues that I think fe9 has but to a larger degree. Both have a very detailed world and a main character that isn't really related to the main conflict. But at least Ike has a rivalry which drives him during the story and actually has a personality.

Depends on the story. A movie like Amour has to be more realistic then something like Star Wars because it wants to tell a realistic story. Also some people simply dislike stories that are unrealistic. I remember recently going to a movie named a Hidden Life and being endlessly frustrated by the fact that the characters speak English despite the fact that the story is based on true events during WW2 in Austria (also extras spoke German in the background just to put salt on my wound). Now one could say that a lot of movies do this (The Pianist is one of my favourite movies and the Polish characters also speak English in that movie) so I need to consider why those movies worked for me and why this movie didn't since they share the same flaw but it is more noticeable in one of them. Doing this I can better understand what I'm looking for in a movie and in which way I consume them (I guess you could say the same about other forms of media). I guess what I'm trying to say is that you criticize a movie anyway you want as long as you properly explain why you feel that way and that it's okay to disagree. One of my favourite directors, Micheal Haneke, said that he found the film Der Untergang repulsive and irresponsible because it depicts Hitler in a sympathetic way while not challenging the audience in any way to think for itself and come to his own conclusion and added that movies like Schindler's List create melodrama from serious issues which he dislikes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_osgrcpes4). While I disagree with this statement (I think that humanizing someone like Hitler pulls him down to Earth which is important because we have built a myth around him by making him a taboo which led to some people being attracted to him), I do understand where he is coming from and it makes me consider why our opinions differ. Tl;dr, your critique is only as strong as your arguments and it's okay to disagree.

Most characters from Fates; I don't like fates and it's characters. But something I dislike more is the fact some people act like the problems that Fates characters have are unique to that game even though they are very common in many other fe games (extremely shitty writing & avatar worship started with fe7, shipping started with fe4 and was expanded upon in fe13). You could argue that Fates characters presents them worse but almost nobody says this, instead they complain that Camilla is pandering while ignoring a character like Sylvia who is just as bad and even worse in many cases. I wouldn't have this problem if people explained why they think a character like that isn't as bad (tbh, this is something I also don't always do so it's something I could improve in). Seliph; I understand why Seliph isn't popular. That doesn't I wish he was more popular (although CYL4 gave me a little bit of hope). Edelgard, Rhea & Dimitri; The lack of nuance in discussions about these characters is what irritates me the most.

Seliph Innes Leif Ares Azelle Tana Treck Marianne Finn Shanna Frederick Shiida Quan Palla Haar If I wouldn't include lords, then Ethlyn & Lex would be 14 & 15.