Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ottservia

  • Rank
    I love Severa far more than I reasonably should
  • Birthday January 24

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Within the the mirror where everything is opposite

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game

Member Badge

  • Members


  • I fight for...

Recent Profile Visitors

2,014 profile views
  1. Peri: I like Peri. I really do but even I can admit she’s a bit on the inconsistenct side of things. I find Peri’s character to be at its best when her sort of childlike innocence is allowed to fully shine through like in her supports with Kagerou and Laslow. It’s supports like these that really show how ignorant and close minded she is and just really needs to be nudged in the right direction. But then you have supports like her Kaden and Odin supports that kinda go against that idea because they both imply some kind of self-awareness on her part. It’s very weird honestly.
  2. I agree with this. What I love about limitations especially in games is they can be used to breed creativity. Like to use BoTW as an example. One of the best parts of that game is eventide isle. Throughout the majority of the game you've exploring, collecting all manner of things from food, to weapons, to new pieces of Armour, etc. Eventually it gets to the point where a lot of aspects of the game become trivial because of all the resources you've amassed along your journey. Then you reach this island and suddenly everything you've worked so hard to gain is taken away just like that and now you're essentially forced to take on the many challenges of this island with nothing but your wit, skill, and whatever you scrounge up on the island. I love this part because it takes away all your resources and restricts the player in a way that forces them to think outside the box. Like for example, there is a hinox on the island that has a "key" on his neck that you need to access the shrine. Now normally you'd have plenty of weapons and armor strong enough to take him down no problem but because all of those things have been taken away you have to get creative. Like say say sneaking on top of his hand and have him lift you on top of him so you can just swipe the key and just run to avoid combat all together. Or maybe You can scrounge up some weapons and food to give yourself a boost to take him down the old fashioned way. Or do something entirely crazy like using stasis and magnesis to fling rocks at him. The choice is entirely up to you but you would not have even thought of these options had you not been stripped entirely of all your resources. And I really like that. The game forces forces you to think outside the box and really think about all the mechanics of the game in way you would never consider simply by limiting your resources. It's the one reason I like conquest so much from a gameplay perspective. Your resources are extremely limited like exp and what not so you have to consider everything you have at your disposal and use them in creative ways in order to complete each map. It's that precise design philosophy that makes me love games like monster hunter and dark souls. If one method can't work try a different one. Don't think about what you can't do but rather what you can do and use those things to overcome the challenge at hand. 3H simply doesn't have that if you ask me because resources are just so plentiful so it's like why bother thinking about it when there's really no consequence to using up resources.
  3. The trap still occurs after her death though. So basically Edelgard used poor Bernie as bait so that when she died their enemies could be lit on fire. In other words she used Bernadetta as a suicide bomber. It’s kinda fucked up when you think about it
  4. If you wanna talk copy paste there is certain series with a wealth of scenes like that(*cough*Naruto*cough*) or a song that I novelized as my first entry into this contest. Maybe I could revisit that. Then again I think Len has died enough in his songs. *shrug* we’ll see. So many ideas running through my head so little time.
  5. I didn’t find this BHB hard at all. I just had Selena sit there and tank everything while Grima mopped up everything that didn’t die. Twas a simple endeavor
  6. I find Loki to be fun. Evil as she may she’s having fun while doing it and I like that. Probably the best villain in heroes thus far if you ask me though that isn’t saying much.
  7. I feel there was a miscommunication here somewhere and for that I apologize but my main issue with your statement is that you kept saying the writers should’ve not used a death scene to resolve that thematic conflict (at least that’s how I interpreted your statements if I’m wrong please correct me) which is something I disagree with. I think Rodrigue’s death is still a valid way to resolve that conflict because that’s how the story wants to convey its ideas. As for the execution of the plot point in question its fine if a little rushed because I do agree with Byleth not using divine pulse and the lack of emotional build up with Rodrigue. I also feel it could’ve been handled better but I just don’t think it’s as bad as you’re saying it is because really it would require very little fixes to make it work.
  8. That’s kinda impossible though because Personas themselves are based on various figures in myths, legends, and other stories throughout history so no Persona is “original” and I’m willing to bet atlus has used a good majority of those myths and legends already so....
  9. You’re missing my point. It’s totally okay to criticize a story for having a bad character arc like it’s okay to criticize Wendy’s for making a bad sandwich cause y’know that’s the point of what both things are trying to do. However, what my point was in all of that is that you shouldn’t criticize something for merely existing. Just because you didn’t like the fact that the plot hinged on a death scene then that doesn’t make it bad. What makes it bad is the lack of proper build up and pay off as well as all the inconsistencies it brings to light not the fact that it exists. Tropes are universal in fiction and for good reason. A trope isn’t bad merely for existing. No it’s bad because it was poorly executed. That’s my point. Rodrigue’s death is a pivotal plot point that the writer’s used to get their ideas across. The plot point isn’t bad because they “should’ve thought of something else” cause you can say that about literally every other plot point in the story. No it’s bad because of the lukewarm buildup and inconsistency to the plot it brings to light(eg Byleth not turning back time when they could).
  10. Yes but the story is not bad simply because you disagree with how it chooses to explore its ideas. That is a matter of personal opinion. There is nothing wrong with having that opinion of course but a story is not bad because of your subjective tastes. That was pretty much my point in all of that. A story is not bad simply because you personally disagree with it. again judge a story by what it wants to do not what you want it to do. Like you don't go into wendy's or something and complain that it doesn't serve authentic chinese food because that was never the intention. No one goes into Wendy's to eat authentic chinese food so to criticize wendy's for not doing that is moot. Wendy's doesn't wanna serve that kind of food so they don't so why complain about it. Stories are the same way. Like if a story wants to explore it's themes in a way then it should be able to do that. If they want to use a death scene to get the point across, it should be judged based on whether the death scene gets that point across while remaining consistent not the fact that you don't like that there's a death scene there. Like if that's the point and it's conveyed well with inconsistencies then there's no problem. Again, there are so many different ways to go about storytelling so to say one way is better than another is just close minded and arrogant.
  11. Could they have thought of something else? yes they could have. Is it bad that they didn't? absolutely not. Like saying that they should have thought of a different way resolve that particular thematic conflict is like saying that Edelgard didn't need be the villain. could the writer's have come up with a different villain? yes, they most certainly could have but they didn't want to. It really is that simple there is no "correct" way to to explore a character's arc and a story's thematic through line. A writer can explore the themes of their stories and characters however they please. How they choose to explore those things is entirely up to them. All that really matters is if it's consistent and is structurally sound. Execution is what matters most. I've said this a million times before but always judge a story on its terms not your own. Judge the story based on the themes and messages it wants to explore and how it goes about exploring them not the themes and messages you think it should explore and in the way you think it should. Just because a story explores it's themes in way that you personally disagree with that doesn't make it bad. It's only bad if it actively contradicts the themes it wants to explore(like SoV for example) or it's inconsistent or whatever. If a story wants to use a death scene to explore the ramifications of justice through hate and vengeance it should very well have the right to and there's nothing wrong with the idea alone. There's nothing wrong with that idea. It's the execution of the idea that matters. There are about a million different ways to tell a story and explore ideas and deliver messages. To say one idea is the "wrong" way to explore that theme is ignorant of that notion cause there really is no "wrong" way to explore an idea or theme. Like said judge a story based on what it wants to be not how you think it should be or how you want it to be. Y'see that's fair criticism as nitpicky as it is because it actively reveals inconsistencies within the plot which can indeed take away from the intensity of the scene and can take away from the overall theme or message.
  12. Are we really comparing the moral high ground between Dimitri and Edelgard when the entire point is that they're both terrible in their own ways. They're supposed to act as foils to each other in essence. They both want a more peaceful world but they each have their own definition of what that world is. Edelgard as far as I can tell is very close minded and stubborn. She has a set path and refuses to deviate from that path because it is the only one she chooses to walk. She feels it is the only way to bring about a peaceful no matter how much blood may be shed. The ends justify the means and all that. Dimitri on the other hand is actually more open minded than Edelgard(least as far as I can tell I haven't finished BE yet). He's more naive and idealistic while Edelgard is far more cynical and grounded. Honestly their relationship reminds me a lot of Naruto and Sasuke actually. Because Edelgard is Cynical yet idealistic as well. She sees how much of a failure this current system is and decides to do something about it despite how bloody her hands become. Dimitri on the other hand sees the destruction she causes and cannot agree with it. In essence he won't stand on a peace made from corpses(which I know is a contradiction given his actions but the game does indeed recognize that and it is corrected). Dimitri overall actually does agree with Edelgard that the current system is awful but to him her system isn't much better as the weak will still continue to suffer. In that sense Dimitri is more naive and idealistic than Edelgard. Honestly there's a lot to dig up regarding the relationship between these two but my memory is a little hazy at the moment so I'll just leave it at that. Their conversation near the the end of BL really does shed some light on the differences and similarities between the two. It's fascinating really. You're framing it as if that's a bad thing. Yeah the narrative relies heavily on rodrigue's death to push itself forward. What's wrong with that? It's not like the death is meaningless. It makes sense within the context of the story and has the impact it should on the characters it needs to. I don't see the problem with it other than the fact that Felix took it surprisingly well(then again Felix should have had a bigger role in this story overall but whatever). Like if no one was affected by his death that would be worse. I mean how else is Dimitri supposed to realize the contradiction in his ideals?
  13. So then does that make @TheSilentChloey the winner instead? cause this right here then breaks the tie. As for my vote well I guess I'll give mine to Chleoy as well. The only reason I didn't vote earlier today was because I didn't want to disrupt anything but seeing how Azure here already has well now we got something to discuss.
  • Create New...