Jump to content

Does the amount of fanservice bother you?


Chiki
 Share

  

565 members have voted

  1. 1. Does it bother you?



Recommended Posts

I'm sorry people don't always stop to articulate this, but "it's optional" doesn't mean "I would never criticize an optional feature," it means "this feature is not objectionable enough for it to impact my playthrough, when I can easily enjoy the game w/o interacting with that content."

It's pointless to respond to that with "but what about this other thing that would be 50x worse than Fates' content?" Obviously the reception to that would be different. Unless you actually think, to reference the argument I was responding to, photographic gore is equally problematic to what we're seeing from Fates. I would assert it's much worse, but I guess I don't speak for everyone.

At least the gore is more realistic to a war game than allowing the entire army to strip for you.

I also speak for no one but myself when I say the simple knowledge of some of this game's features is enough to lessen its value in my mind as a whole. When I personally play the game, or even think about it, the thought of "the developers that are showing me these cool new strategic features and gameplay depth are the same ones that programmed in the possibility of me romancing up my little sister figure" crosses my mind. I suppose I'm jealous of those that can remove that thought from their mind, but I will never be fully comfortable with praising a game that romanticizes incest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 462
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't get the problem with incest. It's not YOUR sister/brother. Incest as been around in history since always, so a medieval game including some eventual incest isn't shocking. I've never heard anyone having trouble with incest in GoT, for exemple.

Let's not start a moral debate, but the only reason Incest has been taught to be disgusting is because of the high risk of inbreeding. But, hey, it's a video game, these riks do not exists here. And no one forces you of doing these supports.

I do get that it can be disturbing when you have siblings, though.

Edited by Krovarion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, here's the thing with me and all this fanservice-y type stuff: The hots springs feature is fine. I could do without the stripping thing. Fire Emblem Amie, while funny in a weird kinda way, I could tolerate. The whole incest thing isn't much of an issue in hindsight, since, you know, it's a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that bothers me is the lack of female characters in Nohr that I find attractive enough to want to make babies with.

Seriously, Awakening has far more waifus than Fates does.

I'd disagree with you there. Camilla is best waifu and all that is necessary.

Edited by Tsunami922
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally I'm fine with fanservice and I usually don't mind strange outfit.

However, I went Knight -> General for my Kamui with +def (I'm on Hoshido so I figured heavy tanking was a good idea).

The thing is... The female General costume (at least for Kamui) is really heavy armor, except that her ass is completely uncovered except for a tiny thong. I wouldn't really mind the thong if it fit the costume, but it's all super-heavy armor otherwise.

When you add that female Kamui as general has a weird "stick out her butt victory pose", and that you often see her from the back in in-game cutscenes... Well, its a bit unsettling for me.

Edited by Ayra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do not worry, thong has always be the finest armor you can have as a girl in RPG games ! The less it cover, the more it protect !

Joke aside, that's too bad, I really don't see the point of doing this, it kinda break the immersion, and it's not even sexy or anything. :Jaffar:

EDIT : God I LOVE this Jaffar smiley !

Edited by Krovarion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go read the thread on this forum with videos and dialogue and the responses in it. Look around on the internet in general. It is a significant draw.

I'm going to be honest, I forgot what I was arguing for here so I'm dropping this point.

Because blatant fanservice is a reminder that "oh right this character is made to cater to players", which as a whole makes it harder to maintain a suspension of disbelief throughout.

I don't consider any of the fanservice in this game that I've seen blatant except that zoom scene on Camilla and facerubbing (in a weird way) but I've already said I don't think it reduces any of the characters individually so we'll just have to disagree over this.

I did not imply that whatsoever. What I said was "that are so easily summed up in an image and description that people already know who they want to fuck and fondle before they even play the damn game", and you are trying to ignore the second half of this statement. This kind of attitude towards members of the cast was nowhere near as apparent, if apparent at all in earlier titles. That is the contrast, not the "bio and image" thing.

I actually wasn't ignoring the second half of your statement, I honestly just got overly caught up in the bio part of your statement and unintentionally ignored it. I don't disagree with second half of your statement, although I'm not sure if you're blaming that attitude on the amount of fanservice in this game or the kind of characters there creating.

This is a pretty bizzare defence. Obviously, if a mechanic to marry characters wasn't present, then people would not be compelled to discuss it. This is like saying that if there wasn't a Warp staff then people wouldn't talk about Warpskipping. It's a complete distraction from the concern at hand. Additionally, there's never been anywhere near the same level of interest on that front in a previous game in the series with marriage (FE4) or games with shipping (FE7, FE8). It wasn't a focus, that I will give you though. But regardless of that, pre-release hype concerning such things where people were already planning out who to pair with whom is far more difficult to even hypothetically imagine even if I was an enthusiastic shipper - you don't know the characters yet, or how they will interact! People have expectations based upon what information they are being given that they want to see fufilled in ways that please them when it comes to these interactions. It's just reinforcing my angle.

Additionally, many people have criticised the badly executed S rank supports in FE13 anyway, so there is not a good precedent to be hyped on it being executed well.

I don't consider it a distraction because my point was that their is an increased focus on matchmaking due to not just due marriage existing, but that the system they put in lets basically any character can marry any opposite sex character in their supports, which includes most of the opposite sex characters. Something about having that much room of control (compared to past games where you had no idea if characters had any compatibility until you played the game and even then it didn't guarantee the characters would be together in the epilogue.)

As for your other point, I have no idea how people can pair up people they don't know or how they'll interact either. I consider interaction to be the basis of whether two characters should be paired when forming couples in FE13 and will do the same in FE14.

The avatar is an exception, I have spent time thinking on who to pair him up with, but like I said last time it's tentative. If I think an opposite sex unit looks like a good unit overall, I think "it'd be nice if I could pair up My unit with a character who I expect to be good". Good referring to their usability in battle and what I've glimpsed of their personality. But like I said last time, that is tentative and fun way to pass the time till the game is released. I can't tell if a character would ship well with the avatar until I've actually seen them interact.

And yes the S supports were executed poorly for many pairs but that doesn't stop people from enjoying the end result. As long as the A to S support transition wasn't flat out bad, I just accepted the flaws but not let them prevent me from ignoring the marriage.

This is kind of a chicken or the egg question, but I think it depends on the context. In the sense of being able to easily identify who you are interested in beforehand, which is clearly a focal point for FE14, yes. But in the sense of the older games, the bio's aren't really there to let you know in advance what to expect so much as just summarise the person they're describing. I know that sounds obvious, but it's like saying "is the purpose of the nountree to define what a tree is, or does the tree itself define the purpose of the word tree?" I feel in older games the latter is more true, whilst now it feels like the former.

No, I think I understand what you mean. I just don't understand why you think it matters if you (assuming I interpreted you correctly) yourself some FE13 characters were enjoyed be people for what they did or said rather than their first impression.

You have an incredible ability to focus on the least important parts of a statement. The older games hypothetically having a more detailed bio wouldn't change the fact that a characters behaviour would be the catalyst through which I could come to like them. Unless the game flat out comes out with exactly what Duessel says to Vigarde in his bio somehow, then there's no inherant worth in just it telling me that he has high morals or w/e.

Now, having said that, there are most definitely characters in FE13 through which people have come to enjoy for things they've done or said rather than just first impressions (Virion), but context matters. The game as a whole is full of polarising characters where whether you'll enjoy them or not is entirely dependant on their exaggerated trait, and generally, the extra reasons for liking a character are already well past the point of you liking them anyway. On average, it would appear that the fanbase feels a wider degree of extreme emotion towards larger portions of the cast as a result.

*sigh* The length of the bios was not my point. It also was not something meant to be taken a part from the notation I put in parenthesizes (I was very tired when I wrote that so I take the blame for using poor spacing with my paragraphs). It was a build-up to my statement about just because a characters bio is a certain way doesn't prevent them from having (going to quote how you put it) "behaviour [which] would be the catalyst through which I could come to like them".

You're going to have to tell me what chapter or chapters you're referring to or what he said, because I don't recall that specific conversation (s).

Regardless, I believe you're saying you liked Dussell for the high morality in his actions rather than you liking characters who have high morals, right? Until then I won't respond since it ties into my answer.

As for the second part of this I don't disagree with anything you said. It's very true the Awakening cast has many units who more people will dislike because of their exaggerated traits rather than if they had a non-exaggerated trait as the most prominent part of their personality. However, and just so we're clear I'm not saying you feel this way or this applies to you (I'm only stating the following because I've heard people who say the same thing you said make similar arguments), there are certain characters whose exaggerated traits/habits don't appear with the frequency or volume that people claim. In short, people who tend to be negative of the Awakening cast exaggerate how much and how often these traits/habits pop up. For example if you don't like Sumia because she's a klutz, that's fine, but it's false to say her being a klutz dominates her supports. Unlike say Cynthia's focus on being a hero and saying cool lines, Sumia's supports are not full of her being clumsy, all though I do recall it pops up in half of her 4 or so appearances in the main story.

Again, did not say this. It's remarkable how many things you're reading that simply are not there.

What I said was that characters who are engaged in subservient hero worship and will submit to your whims are very difficult to take seriously due to their obvious lack of agency.

No, I said that because I was trying to guess what criteria you were going to list to describe the difference in the characters you listed as your favorites vs the characters you listed you liked. Most people say character development, backstory or motivations, but instead you said "that a characters behaviour would be the catalyst through which I could come to like them". I think that partially overlaps, at least in Jill's case, with character development but whatever.

(BTW, you may not give 2 cents about my opinion but I'll say this anyway: I just went to read Jill's supports so I could try to see what you were referring to and I found her support with Lethe really touching.)

I've already stated I disagree with this so I'm ignoring this part.

Everything else I criticised was part of my attempt to highlight this trend permeating throughout the game and the impressions individuals get from it. The contrast was not between whether someone was "wrong" or "right" in making early judgements based off aesthetic preferences, it was that general fanbase behaviour indicates that there are a significantly higher amout of people who are getting stronger impressions of how they feel about characters from basic information. That strength of feeling is because of each person's own preferences being more acutely accomodated to by any given character. Or in shorter terms; "Characters are created with exaggerated traits at the forefront so as to allow a player to easily identify their preferential units with which to experience more content/dialogue/etc with. This plays into the fact that rather than existing for their own sake, the characters obviously exist for the player."

Are you not saying more people are not like characters based on " exaggerated traits at the forefront so as to allow a player to easily identify their preferential units with which to experience more content/dialogue/etc with." rather than liking them because of character's behavior being the catalyst through which you come to like them?

If it's not "right" or "wrong", are you just saying you personally have a problem with characters who exist for the player, rather than their being something wrong with creating a character like created for the player? Because I've never heard that critique used in a positive way.

Make a list if you want, we can disagree over it.

After I understand you're point, sure. But as it is right now, outside of what you say about blatant fanservice dehumanizing them, it's clear I don't really understand your criticism of the characters in the most recent games.

Oh please, this is pure pedantry. The name for this specific technique eludes me right now, but to use a reiterative adjective to describe a noun do not mean that the noun is somehow more predominant. If I say that "there was a peaceful silence" or words to that effect, the silence does not become somehow more silent because of the adjective.

It is not pedantry in this case, the way you worded the phrase to me (although it is clear we're not same page, so I likely misinterpreted you) was the equivalent of saying "this character is a wicked villain" vs "this villain is really evil" (I"m sorry I couldn't think of a better example). The former is an example of that technique while the latter is saying that evil isn't enough to describe them so you had to add a modifier

In short, I interpreted it as you using exaggerated as way to further emphasis how exaggerated the characters are because calling them caricatures wouldn't describe how exaggerated you view them as.

Edited by BlueL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if you're blaming that attitude on the amount of fanservice in this game or the kind of characters there creating.

Both. They're intrinsically connected.

I don't consider it a distraction because my point was that their is an increased focus on matchmaking due to not just due marriage existing, but that the system they put in lets basically any character can marry any opposite sex character in their supports, which includes most of the opposite sex characters. Something about having that much room of control (compared to past games where you had no idea if characters had any compatibility until you played the game and even then it didn't guarantee the characters would be together in the epilogue.)

It's a distraction because it doesn't address the point I was actually making. Yes, if it wasn't the case that you could do that, it wouldn't be discussed, but the way it's being discussed is the concern.

As for your other point, I have no idea how people can pair up people they don't know or how they'll interact either. I consider interaction to be the basis of whether two characters should be paired when forming couples in FE13 and will do the same in FE14.

The avatar is an exception, I have spent time thinking on who to pair him up with, but like I said last time it's tentative. If I think an opposite sex unit looks like a good unit overall, I think "it'd be nice if I could pair up My unit with a character who I expect to be good". Good referring to their usability in battle and what I've glimpsed of their personality. But like I said last time, that is tentative and fun way to pass the time till the game is released. I can't tell if a character would ship well with the avatar until I've actually seen them interact.

Come on, haven't you seen the kinds of posts flying around the internet?

"Alright so, who are you gonna pair with who? I'm taking Camilla, Flannel is taking Elfie, Luna and Owain so they don't have a long distance Marriage, Lazward and Charlotte because if they agreed to an open relationship then fuck it he doesn't have to stay, Leon and Elise because let the fucker have his siscon romance, Xander and Azura because it's also incest, and I can't think of any other pairings I care for. Oh, if I have to choose who gets left out I choose Harold, he's ugly and his son no es bueno."

Not even getting into people are literally making tierlists for who'd they'd fuck or not. If you think this kind of thing is somehow uncommon and you are the majority, you're sorely mistaken.

No, I think I understand what you mean. I just don't understand why you think it matters if you (assuming I interpreted you correctly) yourself some FE13 characters were enjoyed be people for what they did or said rather than their first impression

I addressed this later in the post you're responding to. The point is to look at the overall trend within the game for how characters are created and why they are created, and I was drawing evidence to support my claim.

*sigh* The length of the bios was not my point. It also was not something meant to be taken a part from the notation I put in parenthesizes (I was very tired when I wrote that so I take the blame for using poor spacing with my paragraphs). It was a build-up to my statement about just because a characters bio is a certain way doesn't prevent them from having (going to quote how you put it) "behaviour [which] would be the catalyst through which I could come to like them".

Okay, but again, this is a distraction and I haven't said otherwise. I repeat, I raised such evidence as a way to support my claim about the overall trend in the game. This isn't a case of each singular aspect being solely responsible, it's the combination of them all together through which an impression is formed.

You're going to have to tell me what chapter or chapters you're referring to or what he said, because I don't recall that specific conversation (s).

Regardless, I believe you're saying you liked Dussell for the high morality in his actions rather than you liking characters who have high morals, right? Until then I won't respond since it ties into my answer.

No it's not a singular thing and it's more complicated than that. It's not because "Duessel is a moral man" it's because I found his side story of being torn between his loyalty to his king and country against his own sense of justice to be compelling. I enjoy stories about characters caught between things they value highly and being forced to take decisions that reflect on what they care about most. Before, to serve the Emperor in itself was good, because the Emperor was benevolent. But it takes Duessel some time to realise that the two things are separate, as they've always been taken together for him. Duessel isn't some absoloute moral character in that respect, he wavers in a very relatable way, because he's trying to rediscover his purpose in life. It's really everything from his dialogue that leads up to his outburst in the pre Chapter 9 Ephraim script, and then that quiet resignation at to reality, in the realisation that the Emperor he knew is gone. When he meekly accepts orders, he's just defaulting back to his old behaviour because he doesn't know what else to do at that point, his reason to live has gone. He has to rediscover it.

In a manner of speaking, reaching the opposite conclusion in a convincing way (aka Selena) is compelling as well, because the dilemma presented is interesting in itself. But it's the fact that Duessel manages to come out of it in the way he does that sells me; despite being left with nothing he redetermines his own purpose towards one of higher meaning. I really liked that.

As for the second part of this I don't disagree with anything you said. It's very true the Awakening cast has many units who more people will dislike because of their exaggerated traits rather than if they had a non-exaggerated trait as the most prominent part of their personality. However, and just so we're clear I'm not saying you feel this way or this applies to you (I'm only stating the following because I've heard people who say the same thing you said make similar arguments), there are certain characters whose exaggerated traits/habits don't appear with the frequency or volume that people claim. In short, people who tend to be negative of the Awakening cast exaggerate how much and how often these traits/habits pop up. For example if you don't like Sumia because she's a klutz, that's fine, but it's false to say her being a klutz dominates her supports. Unlike say Cynthia's focus on being a hero and saying cool lines, Sumia's supports are not full of her being clumsy, all though I do recall it pops up in half of her 4 or so appearances in the main story.

Well tbh for Sumia it's more a case of "self deprecation moe" rather than "klutz" that defines her. That is still played up in just about every support she has. People don't really find "klutz" to be a desirable trait, it's the combination of being caring and incompetant that leads the doubt, which people see as "cute", and from there there's a basic desire to prop her up. She's meant to be like a sad puppy trying to climb into your bed, but being too small/silly to do it properly - there's a sense of "d'aww" at the situation, and you feel drawn to helping as a result. So basically that's a misappropriation of what her "gimmick" is.

No, I said that because I was trying to guess what criteria you were going to list to describe the difference in the characters you listed as your favorites vs the characters you listed you liked. Most people say character development, backstory or motivations, but instead you said "that a characters behaviour would be the catalyst through which I could come to like them". I think that partially overlaps, at least in Jill's case, with character development but whatever.

Well, development takes into account what a character does. It's just an explict way of describing it. The point is to get away from first impressions being so predominately important.

Are you not saying more people are not like characters based on " exaggerated traits at the forefront so as to allow a player to easily identify their preferential units with which to experience more content/dialogue/etc with." rather than liking them because of character's behavior being the catalyst through which you come to like them?

Confused by what you're getting at but I'll try to respond anyway. I'm saying that the characters are being made first and foremost with a design concern in mind to accomodate players, rather than to be individuals within a world. Again, I was presenting evidence to support that claim...you keep trying to focus on minor things to do with evidence, spinning it off into some different argument instead of rebutting the main point.

If it's not "right" or "wrong", are you just saying you personally have a problem with characters who exist for the player, rather than their being something wrong with creating a character like created for the player? Because I've never heard that critique used in a positive way.

I think it's uninteresting, because it doesn't have the capacity to leave as strong an impact or to cause self reflection. It bothers me to see this series embrace that approach when it was aiming at something different before, and it was nice to have games to come to that ignored growing trends within the JRPG world for almost a decade. Ultimately, that's just preference though. I could try to make some argument of virtue or what the purpose of art is or whatever but being happy is important, so it's foolish to try to make an absoloute ruling on such a topic. I will say I do think that media with greater goals than mindless self indulgence are worth more, and that I think there's more to this than just preference, but going down that line is going to be long and complicated, because I'll just end up writing a buttload of random existentialist musings and maybe round it off with the usual patronising exclusivity that people as over-contemplative as me tend to arrive at.

EDIT: I think there's also something to be said about the context within genres too I suppose. Characters from traditional FG series don't really need to be anything more than distinctive, because there the focus of the game is overwhelmingly on the mechanical interactions. But in narrative heavy games with room to characterise, it's dissapointing.

Edited by Irysa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well tbh for Sumia it's more a case of "self deprecation moe" rather than "klutz" that defines her. That is still played up in just about every support she has. People don't really find "klutz" to be a desirable trait, it's the combination of being caring and incompetant that leads the doubt, which people see as "cute", and from there there's a basic desire to prop her up. She's meant to be like a sad puppy trying to climb into your bed, but being too small/silly to do it properly - there's a sense of "d'aww" at the situation, and you feel drawn to helping as a result. So basically that's a misappropriation of what her "gimmick" is.

This is why her conversation with Miriel in the Summer Scramble should be canon.

It subverts her completely, in a good way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both. They're intrinsically connected.

Thank you, that's exactly the point. When characters are primarily designed to appeal to the various fetishes and fantasies of the fanbase (otherwise,all this fanservice wouldn't be quite as possible), you're diminishing them. They aren't autonomous individuals anymore that react to the world surrounding them in a believable manner, but pretty, hollow caricatures that just happen to appear in a war game.

That doesn't mean that every characters has to be all gloomy and brooding about the horrors of war all the time; we've had pretty crazy folks like in Fire Emblem games before. But the point is that they were depicted as plausible individuals with their own thoughts, dreams, fears and limitations, not merely as projections for the player's supposed desires. Look at how the gruff, boorish Dozla marvelled at Ewan's futuristic ideas. It was hilarious, and even touching, and totally in line with his character - but it doesn't get any panties wet, so we can't have that anymore.

If you as a developer inplausibly depict your stern, earnest paladin in some swimming trunks to show of his abs, you're taking him less serious as a character. And if the writers themselves don't take their creation serious, than who will?

Edited by The Obsidian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only piece of fanservice that I'm not complaining...

tumblr_nqlg6otfNy1r193sio5_540.png

Thank you IS

Yep, that's the best nod to Lilith that I've seen!

. . .what, I have weird definitions of fanservice, k? :P:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, oh good. I wasn't the only one who focused on the Lilith floatie first before glancing at Marx...Speaking of which, can I have the real Lilith while Marx is cut out, by the way? Not human form, her dragon form is preferable. She is the only one who will be formally invited to my room, everyone else get out. Dragon scales > human flesh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, that's exactly the point. When characters are primarily designed to appeal to the various fetishes and fantasies of the fanbase (otherwise,all this fanservice wouldn't be quite as possible), you're diminishing them. They aren't autonomous individuals anymore that react to the world surrounding them in a believable manner, but pretty, hollow caricatures that just happen to appear in a war game.

That doesn't mean that every characters has to be all gloomy and brooding about the horrors of war all the time; we've had pretty crazy folks like in Fire Emblem games before. But the point is that they were depicted as plausible individuals with their own thoughts, dreams, fears and limitations, not merely as projections for the player's supposed desires. Look at how the gruff, boorish Dozla marvelled at Ewan's futuristic ideas. It was hilarious, and even touching, and totally in line with his character - but it doesn't get any panties wet, so we can't have that anymore.

If you as a developer inplausibly depict your stern, earnest paladin in some swimming trunks to show of his abs, you're taking him less serious as a character. And if the writers themselves don't take their creation serious, than who will?

Now, please don't bite my head off, but let me try to explain where a normal person might be coming from in this case. I've studied a lot of storytelling during my acting training, so hopefully I can remember enough to explain this in a way which hopefully makes sense.

Starting with how characters are made to appeal to various fetishes instead of being their own characters, let me say this: There's only so many character types and possibilities in this world. Sure, Japanese media tend to gravitate towards certain similar tropes (The loli being the one I remember most prominently due to my own distaste for it), but inevitably if you wanted to you could go out and explain how every single character in this game is similar to a character in a novel or another game and how that inevitably locks them into a certain behavior set that appeals to certain people who are attracted to that type of character.

Just because a character has a defining trait does not make them a charicature. This is a mistake a lot of people make. In most media and especially video games, there's not usually a lot of chance for people to see the characters outside of the game before buying it. E3 and such maybe a little, but I think everyone has learned not to trust most things at e3. One of the few things that is pretty solid is the Treehouse stuff, since they play the games, do interviews, and can cover more over three days than you can in a 2 minute trailer.

Going back to why they aren't simple charicatures. You need something defining to stick out to people right from the outset. Once people have latched onto that, you can develop the character inward. However, without that solid defining characteristic, the characters simply come off as 'another addition to your army' and don't seem unique in any way form any other character you've recruited. Sure, the units themselves in gameplay are different, but if Sumia's clumsiness and slight inferiority complex were taken away, what would differentiate her from Cordelia, if Cordelia's survivor's guilt and genius were stripped away? Sure, a bit of overexxageration of your point, but hopefully you see where I'm going with that.

When you first meet Sumia, you learn she is clumsy because she trips and it is implied she likes Chrom. That's a decent amount for a fifteen seconds you get to spend with her character before she joins the army. The only other way to make characters appeal would be to give them a lot more screentime, which to be fair Fates seems to have a lot more character's having importance in a lot more ways throughout the story which is awesome. However, in Sumia's short intro, you know enough now to know whether or not you want to learn more about her or not. If not, you'll likely pair her with Chrom due to her implied crush. If so, you'll learn more about her.

Same for Cordelia. She joins you during the battle and afterwards you learn she is a highly gifted pegasus knight and that she is the only likely survivor from her unit. Do you want to learn more? if not, no harm done, but you learned enough to get a small grasp on what her supports expand upon.

Now, before you crush me with the counter, I do note your second paragraph addressed this to an extent. Saying that not all characters should be brooding about war and Dozla's conversation with Ewan. However, you got a little too angry at the end of this argument, saying that since it doesn't appeal we can't have that anymore. That's more of your personal opinion than a fact, however. In my personal opinion, Awakening had some solid conversations between people who were of the same gender and would not marry. Chrom's conversations with Frederick are hilarious, showing that Frederick is not only reliable but also goes way overboard in his devotion to an extent that Chrom can really get angry about it. His conversation with Lissa is a great family support that shows how the bubbly, hilarious Lissa can get really hung up and afraid about things like if she's really worthy of being his sister. Heck, even some of the eventual romantic supports do some great things. One reason Robin/Cordelia is probably my favorite is because it truly addresses and slowly helps Cordelia get over her survivor's guilt. Not only that, but Cordelia to an extent gets over the problem HERSELF, Robin more being a friend that accompanies her through these rough times. It shows that people sometimes need a shoulder to lean on, but doesn't demean Cordelia's struggle or turn her into a Robin worshipper. Sure, if you go to S rank, they get married, but even that I feel is handled really well. Similarly, characters like Lon'Qu and Gregor have several surprisingly interesting supports. Sure, Lon'qu's mostly deal with his troubles handling women, but Cherche's conversation with him addresses why he has that trouble specifically. Gregor has my favorite Tharja support, even without the S rank. I don't want to spoil it, but it shows the goofy Gregor is actually a really broken guy that can't forgive himself for his mistakes.

Sure, their introductions introduced a main theme for their character, but I in no way felt they were chairicatures with no other important emotions or traits besides the one they were introduced with. See, that's a matter of opinion though. I felt their supports adding great dimension to their character. another person may feel the support did no where near enough to expand upon what was touched upon. It's all subjective.

However, when creating a character, you need it to make some kind of impression and in fire emblem, you get maybe fifteen seconds to do that at most. (3-4 lines of dialogue in Awakening). If you want people to be interesting enough to explore the character, you need them to make an impression. A defining trait is the best way to do that. Otherwise, you'll never learn why the stern paladin puts on that swimsuit. was he forced into it under peer pressure from the other siblings? Don't know, but maybe it shows even Xander can let loose and have a little fun? After all, characters who can't have a range of emotions are chairactures, are they not?

Again, sorry for the long post and you don't have to agree, just hoping I helped a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of people responding to each other very rudely here. Intelligent Systems never promised any of us a 100% serious, gripping, character-driven plot with no deviation from the tone or continuity of past titles.


People who cannot tolerate the mere existence of something that they disagree with (or that disagrees with them) are the most universally damning problem of humanity as a whole. That kind of thinking is the basis for every kind of hate group you can name. The game has not even been released in a version that I'd wager the majority of us can read, and already there are some of us who are crying foul about the watering down of plot and characterization. Our generation (I'm guessing just about all of us were born between 1982 and 2000) is so fixated on controlling our own subjective realities and trying to make the world conform that we can't even be civil with people who are part of our own subculture. It's very disheartening, and I wish that we could all just agree to disagree and give the game a chance (or not, and still not be rude about it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, honestly. I can see where some people are coming from, the fanservice is quite a bit more apperent then previous titles, but at the same time, i've been hearing loads of people rave about how dark and good the story is.

You can have both the more goofy and the more serious in the same game. They aren't mutually exclusive, also if you are in war. Morale has to be boosted somehow be it just having a cheerful time in a dining hall or relaxing in the spa with your fellows in arms, and if there was a couple? You'd bet your top dollar they'd be spending as much time with each other outside of the fighting as physically possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of people responding to each other very rudely here. Intelligent Systems never promised any of us a 100% serious, gripping, character-driven plot with no deviation from the tone or continuity of past titles.
People who cannot tolerate the mere existence of something that they disagree with (or that disagrees with them) are the most universally damning problem of humanity as a whole. That kind of thinking is the basis for every kind of hate group you can name. The game has not even been released in a version that I'd wager the majority of us can read, and already there are some of us who are crying foul about the watering down of plot and characterization. Our generation (I'm guessing just about all of us were born between 1982 and 2000) is so fixated on controlling our own subjective realities and trying to make the world conform that we can't even be civil with people who are part of our own subculture. It's very disheartening, and I wish that we could all just agree to disagree and give the game a chance (or not, and still not be rude about it).

If you can't handle snarky or slightly belligerent rhetoric, perhaps an internet forum isn't the best place for you to be. Besides, it's quite apparent how the abundance of fanservice does indeed conflict with a lot of the themes the developers were shooting for. The fact that they had to alter the Hoshido route with 'oh, they're not really your siblings' is a good example of this.

No-one is insisting that no silly characters or moments should exist, the problem is the sheer magnitude of the fanservice - when it starts to have a significantly detrimental impact.

Edited by Topazd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can't handle snarky or slightly belligerent rhetoric, perhaps an internet forum isn't the best place for you to be. Besides, it's quite apparent how the abundance of fanservice does indeed conflict with a lot of the themes the developers were shooting for. The fact that they had to alter the Hoshido route with 'oh, they're not really your siblings' is a good example of this.

No-one is insisting that no silly characters or moments should exist, the problem is the sheer magnitude of the fanservice - when it starts to have a significantly detrimental impact.

I've been hanging around on internet forums for the past 16 years, so I'm familiar with snark and belligerent behavior (like the condescension in your reply). It's just exhausting, though I've actually managed to have some very good experiences with online communities that are purely constructive and polite. People can walk away from something they don't like, they don't have to mouth off to people who do like it. The reverse is true, too.

So... there is no way to avoid being hypocrite here if I try to explain my reasoning to you. You won't understand my own subjective views unless you choose to make an active effort. I will simply note that you have a problem with the game and go on to see what other people who do like it are talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is right now is that to me, it feels like people are complaining about things they don't like rather than say, does the fan service take away from the over all game-play and story? Which is a fair concern, but until the game makes it over seas we really can't make a complete judgement call. I do understand that with more fan-service there is a possibility of a lower quality game, but we should wait until we've played it and seen what the US version brings before we pass any serious judgement, praise or damnation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, please don't bite my head off, but let me try to explain where a normal person might be coming from in this case. I've studied a lot of storytelling during my acting training, so hopefully I can remember enough to explain this in a way which hopefully makes sense.

Starting with how characters are made to appeal to various fetishes instead of being their own characters, let me say this: There's only so many character types and possibilities in this world. Sure, Japanese media tend to gravitate towards certain similar tropes (The loli being the one I remember most prominently due to my own distaste for it), but inevitably if you wanted to you could go out and explain how every single character in this game is similar to a character in a novel or another game and how that inevitably locks them into a certain behavior set that appeals to certain people who are attracted to that type of character.

Just because a character has a defining trait does not make them a charicature. This is a mistake a lot of people make. In most media and especially video games, there's not usually a lot of chance for people to see the characters outside of the game before buying it. E3 and such maybe a little, but I think everyone has learned not to trust most things at e3. One of the few things that is pretty solid is the Treehouse stuff, since they play the games, do interviews, and can cover more over three days than you can in a 2 minute trailer.

Going back to why they aren't simple charicatures. You need something defining to stick out to people right from the outset. Once people have latched onto that, you can develop the character inward. However, without that solid defining characteristic, the characters simply come off as 'another addition to your army' and don't seem unique in any way form any other character you've recruited. Sure, the units themselves in gameplay are different, but if Sumia's clumsiness and slight inferiority complex were taken away, what would differentiate her from Cordelia, if Cordelia's survivor's guilt and genius were stripped away? Sure, a bit of overexxageration of your point, but hopefully you see where I'm going with that.

When you first meet Sumia, you learn she is clumsy because she trips and it is implied she likes Chrom. That's a decent amount for a fifteen seconds you get to spend with her character before she joins the army. The only other way to make characters appeal would be to give them a lot more screentime, which to be fair Fates seems to have a lot more character's having importance in a lot more ways throughout the story which is awesome. However, in Sumia's short intro, you know enough now to know whether or not you want to learn more about her or not. If not, you'll likely pair her with Chrom due to her implied crush. If so, you'll learn more about her.

Same for Cordelia. She joins you during the battle and afterwards you learn she is a highly gifted pegasus knight and that she is the only likely survivor from her unit. Do you want to learn more? if not, no harm done, but you learned enough to get a small grasp on what her supports expand upon.

Now, before you crush me with the counter, I do note your second paragraph addressed this to an extent. Saying that not all characters should be brooding about war and Dozla's conversation with Ewan. However, you got a little too angry at the end of this argument, saying that since it doesn't appeal we can't have that anymore. That's more of your personal opinion than a fact, however. In my personal opinion, Awakening had some solid conversations between people who were of the same gender and would not marry. Chrom's conversations with Frederick are hilarious, showing that Frederick is not only reliable but also goes way overboard in his devotion to an extent that Chrom can really get angry about it. His conversation with Lissa is a great family support that shows how the bubbly, hilarious Lissa can get really hung up and afraid about things like if she's really worthy of being his sister. Heck, even some of the eventual romantic supports do some great things. One reason Robin/Cordelia is probably my favorite is because it truly addresses and slowly helps Cordelia get over her survivor's guilt. Not only that, but Cordelia to an extent gets over the problem HERSELF, Robin more being a friend that accompanies her through these rough times. It shows that people sometimes need a shoulder to lean on, but doesn't demean Cordelia's struggle or turn her into a Robin worshipper. Sure, if you go to S rank, they get married, but even that I feel is handled really well. Similarly, characters like Lon'Qu and Gregor have several surprisingly interesting supports. Sure, Lon'qu's mostly deal with his troubles handling women, but Cherche's conversation with him addresses why he has that trouble specifically. Gregor has my favorite Tharja support, even without the S rank. I don't want to spoil it, but it shows the goofy Gregor is actually a really broken guy that can't forgive himself for his mistakes.

Sure, their introductions introduced a main theme for their character, but I in no way felt they were chairicatures with no other important emotions or traits besides the one they were introduced with. See, that's a matter of opinion though. I felt their supports adding great dimension to their character. another person may feel the support did no where near enough to expand upon what was touched upon. It's all subjective.

However, when creating a character, you need it to make some kind of impression and in fire emblem, you get maybe fifteen seconds to do that at most. (3-4 lines of dialogue in Awakening). If you want people to be interesting enough to explore the character, you need them to make an impression. A defining trait is the best way to do that. Otherwise, you'll never learn why the stern paladin puts on that swimsuit. was he forced into it under peer pressure from the other siblings? Don't know, but maybe it shows even Xander can let loose and have a little fun? After all, characters who can't have a range of emotions are chairactures, are they not?

Again, sorry for the long post and you don't have to agree, just hoping I helped a bit.

First off all, no, I won't bite your head off, and I'm sorry if my post came off as rude or impolite - it might be due to the fact that English isn't my first language, and my ability to hit the right tone might be insufficient. After all, all these things we are discussing are by nature subjective and a matter of personal taste, so while we can disagree on certain points, I don't see why we should aggressive over something as insignificant as a video game. :)

I agree that having a defining trait in itself doesn't turn a character into a mere caricature; it's a helpful tool that helps determine their function within the narrative and make them unique - and that is all fine and dandy. However, it depends on what these defining traits are, how they are fleshed out, how they relate to the wider context of the narrative, what tone they set, and whether they are actually helpful in making these characters more interesting.

And that's, basically, where our disagreement seems to stem from. I did not like the personalities of the cast in FE13 (our grand example of a FE title with lots of fanservice as a focus) at all - in fact, I found them downright nauseating. The basic plot of Awakening was, as far I remember, a rather basic affair, convoluted by time travel shenanigans. In any case, the world of these characters was about to be destroyed by an existential threat named Grima - and some characters had even witnessed what a pleasant state the world would find itself in if this giant dragon-moth or whatever it was would enter the stage. Yet, none of the playable characters really conveyed a sense of urgency - given the fact that her whole company was slaughtered, Cordelia's survivor guilt is not really a major focus and that support deals a lot more with her (rather unrealistic) self-esteem issues, and Lucina gave us a little bit of angst, but none of that was really explored. (Despite her mission, she couldn't even muster the spine to execute you in order to save the freakin' world - because, after all, her personal feelings are much more important than the fate of millions. We fight for our friends - how much more narcissistic can a cast become?)

Besides that, their defining traits were often reduced pure gimmicks - which found it's expression not only in the ending, where everyone just repeated that one trait that defined them while uniformly coming to the same conclusion, but even in their critical quotes, where they would say their little lines before ripping their opponents head off. Caring Sumia, bless her heart, would let out a nationalist war-cry, and shy dancer Olivia would be enraged about her opponent staring at her delectable features during battle. None of this conveyed any gravitas, any moral dilemma - it's self-absorbed teenage stuff that shows no concern for other beings. Earlier FE's tried to bring in some ambiguity and moral tension, but when you get such a fanservice-y title, these things aren't of any importance - it's the player and his waifus who matter.

Furthermore, the character didn't fit the tone of their setting - they behaved like little brats on a field trip, having some fun kicking the baddies in their respective asses and having some saccharine teenage romance in between. Chrome came across as self-centered to the point where he would even leaving his realm in a time of crisis in order to search for you, the allmighty Avatar; one of the female characters (I can't remember who it was) was of course, all about your player character to the point of stalking and implicitly date-raping you; while most others were wholly consumed by their little crushes and insecurities that would better fit in a high school novel. They were a bunch of self-absorbed teenagers, not real people who are fighting a war.

And maybe I'm repeating myself, but earlier casts in the Fire Emblem series weren't like that, for the most part - they had wider interests, they behaved like people with their backgrounds and contexts plausibly would behave; of course, most of them were attractive and could appeal to certain demographic, but they weren't pandering - Knoll might be irresistible for girls (and guys) who like it angsty and gothic, but his character would behave like a guilt-ridden scientist who is horrified by what he helped creating probably would.

And that's where the problem with fanservice comes into play - it leads to characters that are intended to romantically appeal to an teenage audience, and players with all kind of fetishes; accordingly, they are fully build around these particular type of tropes. In FE:A, you had the rabbit girl for our fellow furries, the brooding, angsty swordsman who just needs to meet the right girl to get over his inner demons <3, the nerdy girl, the goth girl, the muscular jock without a shirt, the adorable klutz, even an improperly clad 6-year old girl for the paedos. Some characters are resurrected to give you a bit more variety - utterly helpless amnesiacs you can advantage off if you're so inclined, for example. And in their supports, all these characters behaved exactly like you would expect them to behave - they give you their fixes by showing the same titillating character traits over and over again, and they will not ever reject you, because they're here to give you a bang for your buck.

And that's a problem - it reduces the types of characters we see, the interactions we get, the themes that are explored. Ambiguity, rejection, moral conflict, age, philosophical viewpoints, social standing are either left out or relegated to the sidelines - sanitized or mentioned in passing - when a game becomes a dating sim. In that way, this focus on fanservice, which is an outgrow of this mentality, does take away from the story and my enjoyment of it.

I am fully prepared to admit that these are, of course, generalizations, and might not fit every single case. Gregor's support seems to be one of the better ones in the game - though, for me, is it a bit ruined by a cheap, non-sequitur marriage ending. Still, this is the general impression I got, and I do think it is a valid one.

Now, of course, this is all about Awakening, and as everyone else, I can't fully comment on Fates. But it seems hell-bent on verifying my worst suspicions; for instances, we get tons of opportunities to ogle our virtual love interests in swim-suits and frolicking around some beaches. Doesn't this strike you as implausible? Doesn't this run counter to the established time and setting, and kill of any tension the supposedly dark story tries to build? True, even during war, people need to relax, but has it to be on such a high-school level? These are supposed to be adults, and young adults, raised in a hierarchical feudal society, after all - can you imagine Henry V. playing volleyball with his companions on the beaches of Normandy? What purpose does this serve besides us drooling over their figures? I'm not against attractive characters and silly moments (Fire Emblem always had them, and I'm not expecting a dead serious game with Shakespeare-level writing) but you can have that without killing the atmosphere.

Apart from that, we get some lewd comments out of our husbandos by feeling them up a little, and good ol' Xander has no problem to fuck his adopted sister he has known since childhood, because getting off on incest is apparently a thing. Here, shipping and fanservice agains ruins some potentially good characters. (And for god's sake, have some class, people!)

Plus, from the few spoilered supports I've read, the writing doesn't seem to get much better.

Please keep in mind that these are subjective impressions, as all aesthetics are - there is no universal solution to what constitutes good writing, and my taste and reading may differ vastly from yours. I just tried to clarify my standpoint, and you are welcome to disagree.

Edited by The Obsidian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't get why there are so many people here bad-mouthing each other in one way or another.

This is a game. Sure, a game that differs from the earlier titles of it's series, but just a game nontheless.

I don't watch Harem animes because of the fanservice being the central point. Other people like that stuff though and that is fine. I like THIS game because of the overall story and game play mechanics. The fanservice isn't the focal point and, hey, it's totally fine with me that it's there, though I wouldn't necessarily miss it if it wasn't present.

I just want to say: I don't really care about fanservice overall, but hey. I don't go to the cinema, watch a comedy and then get angry because it featured a romantic subplot. And if I KNOW that I don't like the romantic subplot beforehand, then I simply don't watch the movie.

You either buy the game or you don't. You don't HAVE to like the new extra stuff that the creators think keeps the franchise alive, but hey, don't talk down to people that can live with these features or even like them. This stuff isn't the spawn of Satan. It's a feature with game play mechanics and thus, has at least a PURPOSE. (Not Amie, I'm talking about marriage. Though I DO like the style of amie, it's great for artistic references. Certainly not a feature that I will use often, but I like the style of it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we stop talking about a fanservice that is optional?

Because IT'S NOT.

gif reference, and it's just and example: https://gfycat.com/PerfectShoddyDegus

You can't just turn the fanservice off when it's EVERYWHERE, and is even needed on the plot parts of the game..

Some people around reddit are a bit overreacting ofcourse, but there are people here too that are defending the "fanservice" style FE in a exaggerating way, defending something that is cleary not defensible in any way.

We all have our opinion thanks god and you like it.. But it's not nice to joke around a fanbase with blind comments

You know that gif finally made me realize why I dislike her armor so much. It looks like every ugly cosplay that's just shoddily put together by someone who has zero sense of design and just wants an excuse to wear underwear in public. It's barely covered genitals with super ugly 'lol this is medieval rite?' stuff randomly put around to try and make it look like a costume when it's not. Frankly this woman http://i.4cdn.org/cgl/1435292554658.jpg(warning not safe for work or eyes) should sue fire emblem for stealing her costume almost entirely.

For gods sakes it's just so dumb looking. They need a new character designer or at least have them heavily assisted by someone who knows how to make things look sexy without making them look dumber than a box of rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of people responding to each other very rudely here. Intelligent Systems never promised any of us a 100% serious, gripping, character-driven plot with no deviation from the tone or continuity of past titles.

They also didn't promise us this, and there is an expected precedent due to it being a long running series. Next you'll be telling me they didn't promise us the next game would even be an SRPG, so there's no issue with people getting mad if it happened to be an eroge.

People who cannot tolerate the mere existence of something that they disagree with (or that disagrees with them) are the most universally damning problem of humanity as a whole. That kind of thinking is the basis for every kind of hate group you can name. The game has not even been released in a version that I'd wager the majority of us can read, and already there are some of us who are crying foul about the watering down of plot and characterization. Our generation (I'm guessing just about all of us were born between 1982 and 2000) is so fixated on controlling our own subjective realities and trying to make the world conform that we can't even be civil with people who are part of our own subculture. It's very disheartening, and I wish that we could all just agree to disagree and give the game a chance (or not, and still not be rude about it).

Strawman. It's not "tolerating" that's the issue, of course we can "tolerate" the fact that something exists. The question in the title is "does it bother you?", and to say "yes" does not mean you are not tolerant. I don't believe anyone has flat out said "this game should not exist in it's current form because it offends me" but they have said "I find that these additions to the game have lowered my opinion of the title and the developer, because I believe they have a negative impact on the narration's ability to maintain suspension of disbelief". If you want to just agree to disagree, then all the more power to you, but making some snide comments about people's own preferences to character presentation being an issue and comparing them to hate groups gives the impression you're just here to pull some self-righteous holier-than-thou mantra.

I've been hanging around on internet forums for the past 16 years, so I'm familiar with snark and belligerent behavior (like the condescension in your reply). It's just exhausting, though I've actually managed to have some very good experiences with online communities that are purely constructive and polite. People can walk away from something they don't like, they don't have to mouth off to people who do like it. The reverse is true, too.

So... there is no way to avoid being hypocrite here if I try to explain my reasoning to you. You won't understand my own subjective views unless you choose to make an active effort. I will simply note that you have a problem with the game and go on to see what other people who do like it are talking about.

Yeah because comparing disliking gratuitous fanservice to being part of a hate group surely isn't belligerent.

Starting with how characters are made to appeal to various fetishes instead of being their own characters, let me say this: There's only so many character types and possibilities in this world. Sure, Japanese media tend to gravitate towards certain similar tropes (The loli being the one I remember most prominently due to my own distaste for it), but inevitably if you wanted to you could go out and explain how every single character in this game is similar to a character in a novel or another game and how that inevitably locks them into a certain behavior set that appeals to certain people who are attracted to that type of character.

It's not just Japanese media that gravitates towards tropes, all media from everywhere does. Tropes are fine, they're just a tool and are not the concern. The concern is the type of trope and the extent it is played up. For example, the basic concept of a tsundere isn't really a problem, because some people really just are kind of bitchy until you get to know them. It's the contemporary overexaggerated moment to moment bipolar mood swinging aspect that becomes the polarising factor. Common sense applies here because going extremes in any area will ostracize moderates, and change indifference to loathing in those who have incliations against that angle.

Then you've got stuff like tokusatsu imitators and chuunibyou wannabes...this goes beyond romanticised and enters the area of comedies and parody.

The acuteness and intensity of a character's behaviour increases the acuteness and intensity of the feeling felt towards them. If a character does nothing interesting and says nothing interesting, you do not actively dislike or like them because they have no identifiers. If they do or say things then you begin to make judgements. If they do or say things to an extreme, your judgements will likely become more extreme as well.

Just because a character has a defining trait does not make them a charicature. This is a mistake a lot of people make. In most media and especially video games, there's not usually a lot of chance for people to see the characters outside of the game before buying it. E3 and such maybe a little, but I think everyone has learned not to trust most things at e3. One of the few things that is pretty solid is the Treehouse stuff, since they play the games, do interviews, and can cover more over three days than you can in a 2 minute trailer.

Nobody said simply having a defining trait made someone a caricature. Caricatures in writing are characters who have an exaggeration of some characteristics and oversimplification of others. You need both to qualify, and you'll find most of FE13's cast revolve around an exaggerated presentation of a personality gimmick that completely overwhelms and oversimplifies the rest of their character.

I can't speak for this game as a whole in that respect but it is not an unreasonable assumption to make at this point when looking at precedent and the fact that there are bunch of clones who even have the same personalities. Additionally, it is not just critics that are assuming things here, fans are too because they were making distinctions about who to marry, kill, and fuck before the game even came out.

Going back to why they aren't simple charicatures. You need something defining to stick out to people right from the outset. Once people have latched onto that, you can develop the character inward. However, without that solid defining characteristic, the characters simply come off as 'another addition to your army' and don't seem unique in any way form any other character you've recruited. Sure, the units themselves in gameplay are different, but if Sumia's clumsiness and slight inferiority complex were taken away, what would differentiate her from Cordelia, if Cordelia's survivor's guilt and genius were stripped away? Sure, a bit of overexxageration of your point, but hopefully you see where I'm going with that.

When you first meet Sumia, you learn she is clumsy because she trips and it is implied she likes Chrom. That's a decent amount for a fifteen seconds you get to spend with her character before she joins the army. The only other way to make characters appeal would be to give them a lot more screentime, which to be fair Fates seems to have a lot more character's having importance in a lot more ways throughout the story which is awesome. However, in Sumia's short intro, you know enough now to know whether or not you want to learn more about her or not. If not, you'll likely pair her with Chrom due to her implied crush. If so, you'll learn more about her.

Same for Cordelia. She joins you during the battle and afterwards you learn she is a highly gifted pegasus knight and that she is the only likely survivor from her unit. Do you want to learn more? if not, no harm done, but you learned enough to get a small grasp on what her supports expand upon.

...

However, when creating a character, you need it to make some kind of impression and in fire emblem, you get maybe fifteen seconds to do that at most. (3-4 lines of dialogue in Awakening). If you want people to be interesting enough to explore the character, you need them to make an impression. A defining trait is the best way to do that. Otherwise, you'll never learn why the stern paladin puts on that swimsuit. was he forced into it under peer pressure from the other siblings? Don't know, but maybe it shows even Xander can let loose and have a little fun? After all, characters who can't have a range of emotions are chairactures, are they not?

You are simply reiterating the point I made before.

"Characters are created with exaggerated traits at the forefront so as to allow a player to easily identify their preferential units with which to experience more content/dialogue/etc with. This plays into the fact that rather than existing for their own sake, the characters obviously exist for the player."

Being "easily identifiable" just strengthens the argument that the game is making it plainly obvious that this is your playground and all the characters in the game are pets for you to play with, and is thus diminishing it's own tone and ability to make people take it's narrative aspects seriously. There is no compelling reason as to why they have to be easily identifiable as individuals from the get go without accepting that it's to facilitate the player. Honestly this is something of a looping scenario, your units are exaggerated in order to acutely please players so they can identify which of their pets are the most appealing to play with because the units are exaggerated to the point of polarising people so players need to identify which is pleasing to avoid being displeased.

And regardless, one can form impressions of an individual without them being exaggerated, even in a short span of time. And these games have enough optional script to facilitate it. If you're balking at the prospect of being in the dark and using and reading interactions of people that you might not end up liking in the end then frankly that comes off as very insular.

As for the rest of the post detailing other aspects of characters, you're again forgetting that because of the way the game presents it's cast, people act based on that first impression because they find whatever it is about that impression appealing. That's the thing that predominately sells the character, not the later stuff. You're already sold at that point instead of it being tentative.

Additionally it is somewhat vexing as to how people keep trying to focus on this single "exaggerated character" criticism whilst trying to sidestep the larger issue at hand. It is but one factor in the overall concern, and is honestly dwarfed by the fact that the game enables you to grope all your soldiers or oogle them in underwear whilst they'll say all sorts of gross subservient shit like "It is an honor to be touched by you".

Edited by Irysa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Additionally it is somewhat vexing as to how people keep trying to focus on this single "exaggerated character" criticism whilst trying to sidestep the larger issue at hand. It is but one factor in the overall concern, and is honestly dwarfed by the fact that the game enables you to grope all your soldiers or oogle them in underwear whilst they'll say all sorts of gross subservient shit like "It is an honor to be touched by you".

Wait.

They say what?

.... Okay, I think I can now speak on what Fates is going to be. A demeaning pile of dung that treats its audience like malicious perverts, that is. I don't know who wants to fantasize over such a kind of relationship, but they should probably take a long, hard look at themselves.

Edited by The Obsidian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...