QuestionEmblem

Berkut and his stand［ＲＩＮＥＡ］

The first half of Dark Souls 1 is the best for me, Undead Burg, Undead Parish, Blight Town (yes, i do like it), Sen's Fortress, the Painted World, ending in Anor Londo and the fight against Ornstein & Smough. I'm not a big fan of the second half though, while i enjoy the DLC, the final 4 areas i'm not a fan of, especially the unfinished Izalith. Dark Souls 2 isn't the most inspired, but i feel it has a lot of replayability with the sheer amount of weapons and ability to dual wield them freely. I feel the reverse of Dark Souls 1 about this, i think the second half is way better than the first half, but honestly, that can be worse in some ways. I'd say this is the most "pick up and play" of the three and i wish the game had focused less on DkS1 and more on it's own original plot points about the kings. Dark Souls 3 felt underwhelming, area wise, i think it has more bad than good. It does have the smoothest gameplay of the 3, but that's to be expected from a sequel that came after Bloodborne, although in some ways i felt it was too "Bloodborney", the game puts tremendous value on offense and swinging first rather than the defense and patience of the first game, and in that regard i think the "best gameplay" argument between the multiple entries is valid and doesn't have an obvious answer. How much this game uses DkS1 as a crutch for it's plot is disappointing. So my vote goes to 1 just because i think the first half of that game until the end of Anor Londo is some of the best video gaming in video games that videos have ever gamed.

I don't know who's the best dad, but i know who isn't... Sigurd.

You keep repeating yourself about your interpretations of what i said when i already clarified what i was saying twice, so i will try to be short and concise, to see if you read what i say instead of reading what you want me to say. What you say doesn't change what words mean, and neither does removing the words from the context of the phrase. "My main sticking points where (a) claiming the game could easily run on 3DS" -> The game can easily run on a 3DS if you put what you have right now on it. "It would be able to run without many changes" -> The game can be ported to a 3DS if you make a few alterations to what you have right now. In the industry, the majority of them do, any Ubisoft game for example, you brought up that Nintendo never does this, i hope they don't, but i literaly did not say whether it would look better or worse post release, i commented on what i saw, quote me the part of my post where i said "Three Houses will look worse than the trailer after it is released". You, again, read what you want, not what i say, where am i backpedaling? I said the game looks bad, i stand by this 100%. I said the game could be ported to a 3DS with a few changes, i stand by this 100%. I said i was fearful and had low expectations, i am and i do. Where's the backpedaling? Is this you declaring yourself right once again? Yes, it did. Yes, i wish Three Houses looked like it. Your point? Nitpicky, would be me picking a specific thing, such as the armor on Teacher and focusing on that particular aspect looking terrible, which it does as you can see from a post from a user in this thread. I am saying, the game, in it's majority, looks below expectations and below what the Switch can obviously achieve. The "bunch of other stuff" was me drawing examples of games, on the Switch, that look better than Three Houses, including FEW, because it has what i think is a faithful rendition of FE characters in HD. I also don't see much coming from this either, if all my responses are going to have to be me adressing your speculations of what i'm saying, instead of my actual posts.

I think i see the disconect, i was not particularly specific in my comparison, i wanted to try to be very particular with the words i choose for this not to happen, but i slipped up as i wrote the second Claude post in a more casual manner after a small, pleasant exchange of posts with Nyainou. What i meant was that those who will say there should be more "representation" of other races, or going as far as to say Fire Emblem exhibits racist tendencies, and that more of this "representation" would make the game better can also be seen decrying male oritented fan service and the more sexual aspects of female characters in Fire Emblem. I supose, by my sloppily written post, it would be difficult to find, or take a dump, on a group as specific as "people who praised Three Houses exclusively for Claude being a darker shade of skin colour, while also having complained about fan service in the past, contained within Serene's Forest", but this is no ones fault by my own not thinking enough before posting. I do stand by what i said two paragraphs above and am confident in my ability to provide proof of these posters, should that be necessary. My first point is not outright dishonest, and i don't understand why you would label me as a dishonest person before discussing a clarification of my statements with me, particularly after you said you take issue with labels for the sake of attacking. Three years is obviously different from five minutes, but how long does someone take to change their opinions? You seem to want to use something as abstract as "time taken to change an opinion" as an empirical metric, when this is obviously not possible, i would say that, until the person states they have changed their opinion on an issue, the best we common non-mind readers can do is assume that person still holds to that. I frankly don't understand what is dishonest about not wanting the requirement of validity for the quotes i presented to be an abstract, individual dependent concept. I pulled the first two from a user who was quoting other users in a thread about fan service, i took screenshots because, as i have said, i have nil experience in forums and i'm just learning as i go since...yesterday. The context is that those quotes are self contained opinions about fan service, using Fates as the example, in a thread about fan service. I don't know how relevant these last two points are considering i messed up in specifying Claude, something that limits the subject of what i actualy meant to mere days ago. I did see people in this thread saying the game is looking to be good just from Claude being dark and this i can provide proof of, but i don't know how worth it that would be by itself, as i just wanted to originally state, at the end of my opinions on Three Houses that i disagreed with this and didn't need my physical attributes represented in a video game to enjoy it.

Which is a claim i didn't make, you're implying i said it would easily run on 3DS if you just put it as is. I said it would be able to run without many changes, changing resolutions isn't "many" changes. This is what i said to you in my last post: "I also didn't say the game won't be upgraded before release, i have no way of knowing this, i hope it is, i just said i was on edge, worried, because in a lot of cases the opposite happens." If what you take from this is acting/implying the game WILL look worse than the trailer, i don't think this conversation is going anywhere, because at this point, you're just "hearing" what you want to "hear", as i not only didn't say that, i specified in the second post that i was NOT saying that and yet here you are sticking to it. You can declare yourself right all you want, but all i did was state my opinion on the way the game looks, and i don't think someone's opinion is something you can be right on over them, and then said that the game, from the images in the trailer, could run on a 3DS without many changes, as in, a few changes would have to be made. You also mentioned how Xenoblade lowered the texture resolution and draw distance, these aren't "many" changes, if anything you just identified a way to make Three Houses run on the 3DS. You also said FEW uses imported photographs, but this is actualy a common practice in video games, a lot of the grass, wall and wood textures you see in games are imported photographs, i even remember seeing tires and tin cans in some of the textures in Dark Souls 2. You seem to have gotten a bit heated arguing against two claims. One that i did not make, about the game looking worse than the trailers on release. One that i absolutely made, that the game could be ported to the 3DS, i don't think you showed me anything that would make me think otherwise, if anything, your Xenoblade 3D example just stated exactly what those few changes could be to get it running on the 3DS, so i still stand by what i said. Is this the part where i say you have no idea what you're talking about unless you're a programmer?

Believe it or not, this is actually the first time i post in a forum, so i barely know how this works. My claim was not that people who simply like Claude's skin colour are tearing female fan service apart, my claim was that the same people who will say that the game is now good because it has a "dark skinned character" also tend to be against "male oriented fan service", it might have sounded the same but it's completely different, context is important. This was also in response to what i thought was a great quote from Nyainou, that reminded me of the "tearing female fan service apart" people, as you discribed them. While i understand your issues with my post, i also have a few with what i think you're asking of me: 1. There is no empirically proven amount of time for anyone to change their opinions, someone may have an opinion in one minute, change it in the next and then change it once again on the third minute in a conversation, as such i find it difficult to find a quote that you would find suitable, since even a quote from 5 minutes ago could no longer be valid, as this person could have changed their opinion on the subject in that short period of time and i have no way to prove otherwise. 2. The grievances being discussed by these posters are based on their values and personal feelings, i don't see where the games being different comes into the equation. For example, one of the posters took issues with "sexy talking". Did the poster take issues with "sexy talking" exclusively because this was Fire Emblem Fates, or did he take issues with the "sexy talking" in Fire Emblem Fates because this poster does not like it in their games or just in general? What about the stripping and groping? I would find it bizarre for them to be so upset over all of these being present only, and exclusively, in this specific video game. Respectfully, i do not think using quotes related to Fates has any issues whatsoever. I also regret that in my post, i did not hide Janoss' name, as i find it unsavory to bring people's names into a discussion they are not directly involved in and would like to apologize to him if he does see this at any point.

Would absolutely love to, it's why i bought Conquest, unfortunately Corrin turned out to be the most goody two-shoes MC yet.

Well, that's a cute way to make a counter argument. I could just answer, "well, are you a videogame developer/programmer? Because if you're not you have no idea what you're talking about either", and we would both just take our balls and go home, but that doesn't mean anything i said wasn't right, it just seems you didn't like what you read and would rather break even. I actualy did take a vocational course in programming and computer science, we had a module in C++ and one in Unity where we made a small video game as a project. Does this mean i am now right and you're wrong? Is this what you call a productive discussion? Credential flinging? As someone who works in this area, i wouldn't dismiss somebody for making a comparison between similar products within it. What you said about the visuals of the other games is correct, but i don't see the point, FEW models may have worse quality than the Smash models on paper, but they don't look like ass, how good a game looks is not about what numbers and settings you can get on paper, it's also about graphical cohesion and design. If you look at Super Mario Odyssey on paper, you would think the game would look terrible, but it doesn't, it looks stunning, it's very enjoyable to watch, often times, the way visuals are used will trump a good amount of superior graphical settings. This Fire Emblem has neither, on paper it is very clearly poor, on screen, it's bland and uninspired, minus a particular design or another of a character that looks interesting on the vast seas of the green puke that's suposed to be grass and the few undetailed trees. I also didn't say the game won't be upgraded before release, i have no way of knowing this, i hope it is, i just said i was on edge, worried, because in a lot of cases the opposite happens.

I didn't say it wasn't above the 3DS, i said it wouldn't be difficult to get it running on a 3DS without many changes, and i stand by that, have you seen Xenoblade Chronicles 3D, Kid Icarus or Resident Evil Mercenaries? Just lower the resolution even more for the 3DS screen and you're more than halfway there. The thing with graphical improvements is that, most of the time, trailers look better than the finished product, before the necessary downgrades to get it running well on the console (keep in mind that the developer kits have more RAM and processing power than the actual console that is sold to the public). So, yeah, when i see a trailer, whose job is to awe the spectator and often make the game look better than it actualy is, and it looks extremely underwhelming, it does put me on edge, especially since, if i'm not mistaken, this is Inteligent System's first HD game, so a visual fuck up is absolutely a possibility. We also know that the Switch is capable of much more than was shown in that trailer, while the Switch isn't the 1987 Schwarzenegger of consoles, it does run Doom, it does run Wolfenstein, Zelda looks great, Xeno 2 looks great. I might have had my expectations a bit high, as i wanted the new FE to be about the same visually as FE Warriors, because i think they did a fantastic job making 3D models out of the artwork, but what i saw was even below what i thought the worst was going to be.

That's the thing, growing stale according to who? The people who don't like it and want it to go away? "Its fine if you feel that way, but for others its really important. I wouldn't lose any sleep over other people's happiness. If its inclusion brings a smile to someone's face then I think that's at least a small victory."

It's cool, it's just that from lurking around here, i see that a lot of the "dark people in FE will make the game good" crowd are also the same people that think female fan service should go, and people who like it are the "problem" of NuFE.

Would you also extend the same courtesy for people to whom fan service, characters such as Camilla and waifus would bring smiles to their faces?

I was really disappointed when i saw the trailer at E3, i thought the game looked super bad visually for a Switch game. Now that the screenshots are out, my impressions are even worse. The generic soldiers and NPCs look blurry and have really poor resolution, the buildings are full of super jagged edges and the textures are realy bad. Even the playable characters, who get the most attention, look bad up-close, the textures look just like a 3DS game, especially the environment, in fact, i think this game could probably run on a 3DS without many changes, FE Warriors is on there and it looks better than this. Why are the cutscenes 10 fps, it looks like stop motion, is this Berserk 2019? If we go by sales, Awakening should have had the lowest budget of the newest 4, but this one looks the cheapest. Edelgard looks cool. Teacher is alright. Dimitri looks weird. Claude is terrible, his haircut is disgusting, that earring looks dumb and his face is extremely punchable, it's probably the swordfish nose. Also, while i was skimming through the topic, i saw some people say the game was looking good because it has a dark character? What? I can like, sympathize and identify with characters of any race, thank you very much, i don't need them to look like me and the colour of their skin is definitely not going to make the game better, it's nonsense.