Samz707

Indeed Narcian is the best, FE6 remake having voiced Narcian would make it the objectively best Fire Emblem game and officially give Heroes no reason to exist anymore outside of breadcrumbing me more SOV. (It always bugs me how people and the game act like Mustafa is an complete innocent when his entire goal is to essentially get the shepherds executed without a fight so his conscience is clean despite the fact he'd still be responsible for their deaths.)

I found Mustafa's whole thing to fall incredibly flat to the point where he actually came off as less sympathetic. He basically causes his own death with his stupidity at worst and at best is a coward who'd rather see the Shepherds captured and executed because he doesn't want to kill them himself but still too much of a coward to attempt letting them go, essentially coming off as incredibly slimy or incredibly stupid to me. I am genuinely baffled anyone felt bad for killing him. I honestly respect outright villains like Narcian more than him.

Outside of maybe references with similar but clearly not intended to be literally the same characters, not really. I like FE being standalone and it doesn't help I did not like any of the characters that returned in Fates. At most, I'd like a small joke where you meed an NPC who's suspiciously similar but not supposed to literally be them as an in-joke. As people mentioned, it at least makes sense in Shadows of Valentia/Gaiden because those are explicitly the same universe and the fact they travelled to Valentia has an actual reason. As opposed to the Awakening characters who are in Fates purely because popular and with (from what I've seen) a half-assed excuse locked away in DLC. I only want to see any returning characters if it makes sense (Like SOV) instead of more multiverse nonsense.

I like the 3H system with how understandable it is (as well as no limits) but I have a soft spot for SOV, mainly because Alm and Faye actually has a negative support effect as Faye loses dodge when close to Alm. It helps sell how obsessed she is.

I personally despise the gameplay and maps, I've only played Conquest.

It's happened for a few: Devil May Cry: Only played the HD Collection, DMC1 was my favourite as I felt it was well designed and extremely fair outside of two bosses, I played it first and really liked it, DMC2 was flawed but at least not too frustrating, DMC3 I felt was awful, it had alot of the same issues as Devil May Cry 2 plus new ones like a unfair difficulty and somehow even worse designed enemies. (I hate 3 so much that I'm genuinely considering dropping the series if this is the "best" one for the post DMC-1 games and I don't want to replay it for Vergil mode despite the fact I did both characters in DMC2.) ARMA/Operation Flashpoint: The original ARMA/Operation Flashpoint (There was a name-change post-release) has one of the strongest campaigns in the series and is ironically one of the more stable games in the series, later campaigns suffer from feature creep, buggy mission scripts and some awful at times design. Sniper Elite: The first game has a unique atmosphere and game-play design that the sequels pretty much abandoned, they also adopted an over-the-shoulder camera which I really, really hate. Resident Evil: I can't remember which I exactly played first but I know the Wii ports of Zer0 or Resident Evil 1 remake (not sure which I got first) and Darkside Chronicles were my first Resident Evil games and I love both Resi-remake and Zer0. And of course not at all for a few: Tomb Raider: I started with Tomb Raider 3 but it's honestly one of my least favorite now, I prefer most games in the series over it, it's simply badly put together with some unfair traps. (It got different developers internally compared to the previous two and it shows.) Fire Emblem: I started with Awakening, I hated it then and I only hate it more now with my second game, Blazing Blade being what actually got me into the series.

Terminator: Dark Fate - Defiance Been playing this, it's a pretty good RTS so far, it's on the same engine as the "Warfare" series of old RTS games so it's a fully featured realistic tactical RTS. (infact they've actually made things more complex it seems.) You can capture vehicles to bring them into later levels for instance and vehicles have realistic armor.

I guess this is unpopular as I seem to be the only person whoever brings it up: Faye really should have had a boss convo with Slayde. Him nearly killing her as a kid and Alm punching him seems like something that'd turn her crush into full on obsession but the fact Slayde was going to kill her specifically never comes up again. It would have been great if she had a special boss convo with him and it's one of my biggest dissapointments with Echoes that she doesn't.

Now I'm just imagining the Swamps as the word's worst boy scouts field trip. You will learn how to swim in filthy swamp water and you will like it. Alternatively it's intended as some sort of defensive area, like building a castle or fort but more poisonous.

Yeah I assumed they still had food in reserve but had either little or no actual overall increase in their surplus. AKA: They would run out or have to ration food if it kept up. Since otherwise they'd be kinda screwed at the end of the game if they were about to all die from famine. (Even with Alm saying how he'll toil the fields myself, which brings to mind the glorious mental image of Alm forcing all the nobles who were sitting on their asses and eating alot to actually help farm.) And of course, trading with Archanea may have helped. (Why didn't we see that you had one job IS.) You can honestly see this lack of thought in IRL situations, where people will see people having food or a food cart and then proclaim that "X country having food issues isn't real" on social media.

I'm of the opposite opinion, I believe Heroes should have used versions of these characters with a few of their alternative design/personality choices in Heroes, it's a god damn multiverse where the Heroes aren't even from the same timeline as each other, I see this less as "customization is bad" and more "Heroes being lazy". If anything I'm dissapointed we never got a more "cold" Byleth in Heroes. (The kind that would pick B in that Linhardt support choice that he finds revolting.) If it's a multi-verse where even the exact same character is from a different universe in an alt, they should have honestly played with that.

And they do incredibly dumb things. Like Corrin There is no way you can write stuff like that and not have me eventually just think that this character deserves to die for their stupidity. Corrin also says alot of dumb things which makes it hard for me to root for them, the 4 hours I managed to play of Valkyria Chronicles had this issue where Welkin was an unlikable dumbass for me which is part of why I dropped it. (He unironically tries to say something among the lines of "we should all get along like animals in nature" to be anti-war, which is objectively wrong, he is also supposed to be someone who's knowledgable on nature.) If I don't like the main character, it gets alot harder to enjoy something. (And both games not having good gameplay didn't help.)

At least so far, I can't recall as many of them feeling as drastic as the Linhardt one, Shez just feels more like a predefined character to me. It's still better than the 3DS Avatars but I feel that more's condemning just how shallow and terrible they are than any real praise for Shez. 3H would have been peak if we let Byleth be more "Ashen Demon" like in that Linhardt support. Yeah Corrin is just flatout a fixed character and not even remotely a likable one like Shez is.

Eh, I'm of the opposite opinion. Robin and Corrin are the exact same for every single player, they say basically the same things every time, every place, they are the exact same person (Which really isn't a good thing especially for them) just with a different cosmetic coat of paint. Byleth meanwhile has actual dialogue choices and even has one mid-game dialogue choice that actually matters outside of support point gain (the CF route split) so IMO I feel like Byleth is more of an actual Avatar for the player, stuff like the Linhardt support for instance are more interesting than just changing their hair style: Linhardt: It's just... I was wondering why it seems as if no one values their own lives. Why do we fight until we die? Why do we kill without hesitation? I hate it. I don't like taking lives or even the sight of blood. In the last battle, some of the soldiers under my command died for foolish reasons. Those soldiers could have pulled back... Instead, they kept fighting...and were overrun. Am I supposed to be satisfied with the victory alone? Even at the cost of such life? Byleth: Choice 1: No, I couldn't be satisfied with that. Choice 2: Yes, I could be satisfied with that. Linhardt: Choice 1 response: Exactly. I don't see the point. Honor? That's a foolish reason to give your life. Glory? Even worse. Choice 2 response: Really? I— Trading someone's life for a bit of honor and glory... You'll pardon me if I say I find that repulsive. While sadly the game doesn't consistently do this, this makes Byleth far more of an avatar since we are allowed to (Not very much and not for much impact admittingly) actually decide how they feel about certain things. (Now if only the game had an alternative dialogue path that let you be more "Ashen Demon" than friendly teacher consistently.) So I'm honestly of the opinion that Byleth is the first real avatar we've gotten since Mark, even if the game sadly doesn't lean into this as much as it should, you and someone else's Byleth could have said or acted in somewhat different ways consistently due to the many little dialogue choices. (which is imo a step in the right direction.) It's why I consider Shez a downgrade, Shez is more of just a fixed character that you can swap the gender of, they're an actually likable "Non-Avatar Avatar" this time around but still not really an Avatar.

Nah, it's understandable. I'm a Tomb Raider fan and that series has never had a "Perfect" game, there's always a big issue with my favourite games in that series.

For the FE games I like, I like the mix of a permadeath srpg but with actually developed characters. Most permadeath strategy games have generics. (X-Com/UFO Afterblank series for instance.) or named characters with personalties but also are pretty static. (Silent Storm and Jagged Alliance.) I like the gameplay as simple to understand (Mostly, I feel Fates/Heroes stray away from that, hence why I'm not too big fans of those among other reasons.) but still strategic game as JRPG combat is honestly too dull for me to enjoy and sometimes I want something a bit more fair than X-com. And of course, I think (in the games I've played...aside from Awakening, Heroes and Fates.) the stories aren't bad, FE3H managed to make me feel a bit bad for having to kill your former friends at the start, something that other games attempt (Not exactly but some way of "Feel bad for these people you killed") but often imo fall completely flat.

For what it's worth, I think it also depends on "how" they survive: Erik in FE7 has Hector yelling at him to get up, so it's clear the implication is that Erik is seriously wounded so while yes, he's alive, the fact we beat the crap out of him is fully acknowledged. Characters fleeing (even if we assume they have rewarp mages on standby) does get a bit silly. (3H moment.) Worst is what Hopes does with Byleth, you fight Byleth, possibly beat them up alot since Musou gameplay doesn't exactly lend itself to difficult bosses...then watch as they completely instantly turn things around and are now winning in a cutscene which is the worst thing they could have done. (or in the cases where you can fight Byleth off, the game's dialogue is clearly written for the "You ran away" outcome and the game doesn't have two different end map dialogue to account for it so it's still annoying.)

This reminds me of a few things that aren't quite the same but similar: Rainbow Six 1 has several maps that are taking place around the same time on different parts of the world, the game warns you about this in the briefing menu, so anyone sent out will be absent for the next mission. Another strategy game I played, Syrian Warfare, usually had you bring only some of your army at the start of every map but certain main objective thresholds/sidequests would let you deploy "reinforcements". (basically the option to deploy more of your army mid-map several times so you can bring in soldiers/vehicles you didn't take with you at the start.)

Admittingly I've not played Tellius but I found Death Knight pretty terrifying in Fodlan since my units were always underprepared to fight him for the early stages. Then Hopes has Byleth who is supposed to be even tougher and scarier who I just effortless juggled in a corner constantly. (Then the game has the gall to say Byleth won afterwards.)

GIves random woman evil powers, refuses to elaborate and never even show up on screen. Honestly bugs me that the SOV post-game is dedicated to Grima instead of Medusa now.

Hey, he only eats the souls of women. (I seriously wonder if Duma turning women into witches was something he did pre-degeneration or not.) I guess Nuibaba exists but also she instead sold her soul to Mesdua instead of Duma. (Was that a thing in Gaiden?, it does bug me how Echoes basically implies there's another big evil thing with Medusa that's never addressed again.)

While I'm not too sure to put Smartest, I do want to say that I think Hector is a little smarter than people think and agree with that line of thought: Hector literally guts that fake soldier in his first Eliwood chapter who tries pulling the "This is none of your business" charade (Not sure what the trope is called but I think I've seen it done before?) while I feel other dumber lords would have actually presumed this was a real soldier and at least tried to argue, Hector seems to catch on right away that he's probably not a real soldier, so he just takes him out and goes to save Eliwood. (This moment may have endeared Hector to me instantly so I might be biased.) I do agree that Corrin is the dumbest by a mile with only Chrom/Robin really putting in any sort of competition. (I only played CQ but CQ finale literally has

The Echoes pairings did work for me. I guess I mean more the "Matchmaker" Fire Emblem games or whatever you want to call the "Supports for child units" games thing. Since as you said, the romance is purely contained to supports and the quality of it is on par with the rest of the writing in those games. (So bad) Granted 3H has matchmaker-y stuff and I liked it there but I think that's more a Testament to the writing quality of Fodlan.

Eh to be fair here, Fire Emblem itself has a very messy relationship wtih romance. I'd say the two most "romance" focused FE games with the first 2 3DS games had some romance writing that was absolutely awful with the supports while I ironically found the less "romance" focused games did better. (I outright ship 3H characters which I can't say for AwakenFates.) It really depends if it's actually well-done stuff that's at a decent pace or if we have...whatever you call "No romance hinted at until S-support and suddenly marriage" stuff we found in 3DS-era that hopefully stays dead forever. Fire Emblem itself for at least two games basically fully embraces awful trashy romance.

Three Hopes Camp the GOAT. My only real complaint is the lack of voiced dialogue.