Fire Emblem: Fates - Complete Story Discussion

[RedMage]

I'm curious what the original draft of the story was. Probably better than what's in the game.

Even if I can see a lot of flaws in Fates' story, I still like it, more than Awakening's at least.

I think the main reason to join Hoshido was Mikoto sacrificing herself to save Kamui, not really the bloodline thing. You can see from the transformation cutscene that Kamui was really angry with her death and good reason to oppose Garon.

But one thing I'm irked about is that the female siblings don't really play a significant role. Yeah, they have cutscenes but the main spotlight is always on the male siblings. They get the weapons that can beat the main villain, they get more dialogue, etc. In the third route, the female siblings hardly have an effect on the story, aside from Sakura and have little dialogue for the majority of the route and in laters chapters, like no dialogue AT ALL ( i think, correct me if i'm wrong), like totally forgotton. Yeah there's a cutscene for them, but that's it. For a story that focuses on the royal families so much, this bugs me.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Yuina

[Sunwoo]

I agree that the story didn't seem to care enough about the sisters to the point where they might as well have not existed. On the Hoshido route, I kept on wondering where Hinoka was and why the dialogue didn't seem to care that she existed a good portion of the time. Even Sakura seemed to have less focus than Ryouma or Takumi, and of course the whole "neither older sister got a holy weapon" thing did bother me a little.

Although I can see why Kamui had four siblings on each side (two older, two younger of each gender), it might've been better for Kamui to have had less siblings since the writing didn't give them equal importance and seemed to forget some of them existed.

[Frelia]

I'm curious what the original draft of the story was. Probably better than what's in the game.

Even if I can see a lot of flaws in Fates' story, I still like it, more than Awakening's at least.

I think the main reason to join Hoshido was Mikoto sacrificing herself to save Kamui, not really the bloodline thing. You can see from the transformation cutscene that Kamui was really angry with her death and good reason to oppose Garon.

But one thing I'm irked about is that the female siblings don't really play a significant role. Yeah, they have cutscenes but the main spotlight is always on the male siblings. They get the weapons that can beat the main villain, they get more dialogue, etc. In the third route, the female siblings hardly have an effect on the story, aside from Sakura and have little dialogue for the majority of the route and in laters chapters, like no dialogue AT ALL ( i think, correct me if i'm wrong), like totally forgotton. Yeah there's a cutscene for them, but that's it. For a story that focuses on the royal families so much, this bugs me.

Yeah that really bothers me too. I think it was a bad move for the IntSys writers to not give the royal sisters the same treatment. I don't have an issue with Kamui having four siblings on each side, but the sisters don't seem to get the same attention and it's quite irksome.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Frelia

[Thane]

I think Hinoka having like zero impact on the story in any route is the weirdest part of it, since she's an older sibling who has spent her entire life trying to get Kamui back and then...she just fades into the background.

As for the original draft, I'm inclined to believe it didn't include Hydra, or at least not to that extent. In the "Iwata asks", the writer said that he really liked Awakening but thought he could do it better - I don't think he meant "I'm gonna make a much better dragon than you guys!". Of course, I've got no proof of this, but I get the feeling Intelligent Systems simplified a lot of the draft to fit their style, and that they really wanted a dragon in it because hey, tradition is tradition, no matter how boring it is.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Thane

[Sunwoo]

Hinoka seems to play the smallest role of the siblings from what I've seen, even on the third route it feels like she's an afterthought and the writers forgot to give her a significant role. I haven't played Nohr so I can't say for sure, but what was Camilla's role in that one compared to Hinoka's in Hoshido?

[The DanMan]

Hinoka seems to play the smallest role of the siblings from what I've seen, even on the third route it feels like she's an afterthought and the writers forgot to give her a significant role. I haven't played Nohr so I can't say for sure, but what was Camilla's role in that one compared to Hinoka's in Hoshido?

From what I've seen, you just fight her twice and capture her so she's around for the ending. So, yeah... Hinoka isn't that important.

[The Fir Coat]

Honestly here guys... Once they announced the third story did ANYONE have any hope remaining for the other two stories to not suck? Prior to that it seemed like a neat choice although it did suck you had to make it with your wallet, but as soon as the third version was announced it turned into "What content are they keeping from us to put in this version?". Sure enough, everything from the third story completely invalidates the choice and means that you can buy either incomplete version of the game with a bad ending for full price but if you want to play the REAL game and fight the real enemy you need to fork over another Jackson.

This is EA level DLC price gouging from the big N themselves.

Edited July 14, 2015 by IsAnthraxBayad

[Hunter Nightblood]

This is EA level DLC price gouging from the big N themselves.

Yeah, no.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/ios/dungeon-keeper

When Nintendo starts pulling this crap, let me know.

[Thane]

So apparently, Yukinori Kitajima contributed to the third path and he and his team wrote the support conversations for Conquest and Birthright.

This guy has also worked on Ace Attorney: Dual Destinies and Professor Layton vs Ace Attorney, two story-driven games with mostly painful writing, slow pacing, lame plot twists and overall uninteresting murder cases. In comparison, Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, the first entry in the series, is my favorite story-driven game of all time.

I'm more than a little miffed at this guy right now.

Source: http://www.siliconera.com/2015/07/14/senran-kagura-writer-worked-on-fire-emblem-fates-third-story-path/

[sforzur]

From what I've seen, you just fight her twice and capture her so she's around for the ending. So, yeah... Hinoka isn't that important.

Sakura is the one held hostage, as she and Yukimura surrendered. Hinoka and her subordinates are urged to flee before Garon orders their executions. She returns at the end with Sakura for the sake of keeping peace, as she is now to be Hoshido's queen. Otherwise, two fights just about sums it up. Her final boss quote was pretty, at least.

With that said, I agree wholeheartedly that the older sisters deserved more attention than they were given. Takumi had three/four subplots in the Hoshido route alone; they could have assigned Hinoka at least one of them instead. Despite specifically keeping an eye out for her, she hardly ever spoke once the aforementioned younger brother joined in chapter 10. From then on, she became completely invisible and only popped up every five or so chapters, like for the first battle against Camilla and then Ryouma's return. Even her one line against the final boss was lumped in with the rest of the surviving party members. I like having eight siblings, but they weren't handled fairly.

Edited July 15, 2015 by sforzur

[The Fir Coat]

Yeah, no.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/ios/dungeon-keeper

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpdoBwezFVA

When Nintendo starts pulling this crap, let me know.

I said EA level, not Free-to-play mobile game level.

[Thief]

Fire Emblem joining Pokemon and going free-to-play on mobile phones?

[Thane]

I said EA level, not Free-to-play mobile game level.

It was published by EA though. This is still irrelevant to the discussion though, especially since the game is solid gameplay-wise, although I will admit that they've tried very, very hard to push DLC in the wrong way, there's still a lot of content in all the routes, so you definitely get a finished product...aside from the story.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Thane

[The Fir Coat]

It was published by EA though. This is still irrelevant to the discussion though, especially since the game is solid gameplay-wise, although I will admit that they've tried very, very hard to push DLC in the wrong way, there's still a lot of content in all the routes, so you definitely get a finished product...aside from the story.

Well yeah, I wasn't commenting on the gameplay as I haven't played the game yet. Fact is though you pay full price for one of the two bad stories and then you can pay another half for the good story.

When it was just Hoshido vs. Nohr is was a choice. After they announced the third route Conquest and Birthright stopped being stories potentially well told and started being incomplete and sad so people will buy the sunshine and rainbows third path. Every single story decision made in the two routes is now designed to sell the third route instead of designed to be part of a good story.

This would be different if you fought the same final boss in all three routes, but that isn't the case. In the two bad routes you basically accomplish nothing, and then in the third route you actually accomplish something.

[Thane]

I know, and I agree. In fact I believe I said as much in the original post. The third route makes the other two irrelevant and most likely non-canon, since you don't face the mastermind behind it all.

There should only have been two routes, or just the third route. As it stands now, two thirds of the game are more or less redundant.

[Kirokan]

I don't have much to add to the thread, other than that I agree with your points, and this comes from someone who understood the story. I did the story summaries for Hoshido/Touma, but not for Nohr (because it requires going through it again xD...so progress is a little slow)

Such is Fire Emblem, in the end I liked it better than Awakening, but I will try not to get my hopes up for the next game when it comes to story, even with outsourced writers.

[Iron Griffin]

I'm still divided over the narrative there are a lot of things I really like here but there are also things that bug the hell out of me. I didn't expect a perfect story but I expected something stronger than we got. I would have loved to have been the fly on the wall for some the decisions made there.

That being said I'm looking forward to these games and yes I intend on playing all three routes. I loved Awakening despite all its issues so I'm hopeful here. Of course what this means for future installments is uncertain but unless there is enough constructive criticism made on to the misfires in Fates I wouldn't be surprised if such hiccups persist in the future.

[Sunwoo]

I know, and I agree. In fact I believe I said as much in the original post. The third route makes the other two irrelevant and most likely non-canon, since you don't face the mastermind behind it all.

There should only have been two routes, or just the third route. As it stands now, two thirds of the game are more or less redundant.

Agreed on the last sentiment, although I'm personally leaning towards an improved third path. I'm not opposed to the idea of one game splitting into two very different futures based on a crucial decision, but there are other times when I feel that the choice of Nohr vs Hoshido may have caused a further fracture amongst FE fans (including the more obnoxious people who feel the need to assert that "their" side is superior and the other side is "bad") … not to mention people who wanna argue about whether Nohr or Hoshido is the "canonical" ending. The third path being the only path would've at least saved us that headache.

[Thane]

Agreed on the last sentiment, although I'm personally leaning towards an improved third path. I'm not opposed to the idea of one game splitting into two very different futures based on a crucial decision, but there are other times when I feel that the choice of Nohr vs Hoshido may have caused a further fracture amongst FE fans (including the more obnoxious people who feel the need to assert that "their" side is superior and the other side is "bad") … not to mention people who wanna argue about whether Nohr or Hoshido is the "canonical" ending. The third path being the only path would've at least saved us that headache.

While you're most likely right, I wouldn't have considered either side canon if they only made Birthright and Conquest, at least if we can assume that content from the third path had been split evenly between the two versions.

I think a split fanbase is better than a fractured game.

[Sunwoo]

While you're most likely right, I wouldn't have considered either side canon if they only made Birthright and Conquest, at least if we can assume that content from the third path had been split evenly between the two versions.

I think a split fanbase is better than a fractured game.

I'm sure there are many people who would be reasonable and assume that neither Hoshido nor Nohr were truly canon. But there are just as many people out there who are not reasonable who've taken this "choosing sides" thing way too far and will insist that their side is right and never in the wrong and is the actual canon because reasons! I'd rather have a game that was done so well that the fanbase didn't have to split itself in half.

You're right that a split fanbase is better than a fractured game, but it is also the rest of the fans who aren't splitting themselves over the two sides that has to hear the people arguing, so neither situation is really a win-win!

[Thane]

I'm sure there are many people who would be reasonable and assume that neither Hoshido nor Nohr were truly canon. But there are just as many people out there who are not reasonable who've taken this "choosing sides" thing way too far and will insist that their side is right and never in the wrong and is the actual canon because reasons! I'd rather have a game that was done so well that the fanbase didn't have to split itself in half.

You're right that a split fanbase is better than a fractured game, but it is also the rest of the fans who aren't splitting themselves over the two sides that has to hear the people arguing, so neither situation is really a win-win!

While true, I often find it easier to ignore the fanbase than the faults of a game. I love Awakening, but at the same time recognize its flaws. However, I ignore the people who slam it just because and without anything to back them up (I've seen several people complain about Virion without reading his supports, for instance) since it often leads to "my opinion is better than yours".

I can't stand Blazing Sword, but I won't go to that part of the forum and complain about it either.

So yeah, it would be great if developers didn't think about potential squabbles of their fans when making their game. Still, Intelligent Systems probably gave us the third path to squeeze money out of us, rather than to stop fanbase infighting.

[Dark Sage]

I still think the Invisible kingdom path would've been a lot more palatable if it was a branching off point later in the game, with each kingdom having their own version. Also not givng the player the entire cast too.

You might need to rewrite the story a bit, but given what i know, this already feels like a first draft so :/

[Iron Griffin]

In my opinion from what I have seen I prefer the 3rd route to the other two by a lot with Hoshido in second place although it mostly gets its points for the Feels factor while Nohr get its for characters that stand out a bit more.

Its frustrating having to wait for the official release but I rather grit my teeth and wait for the official release rather than buying a different version of the DS and the game overseas a trilogy of games that I need an entire forum site just to read.....I'd like to get a hands on experience hell even a demo. :/

[arvilino]

I know, and I agree. In fact I believe I said as much in the original post. The third route makes the other two irrelevant and most likely non-canon, since you don't face the mastermind behind it all.

There should only have been two routes, or just the third route. As it stands now, two thirds of the game are more or less redundant.

Having two or three separate routes each leading towards the same confrontation doesn't rub well with me and with what they've got going for the gameplay and differences between campaigns, a single one would ruin that part of it.

Story-wise when there's mutually exclusive paths I don't see the desire to always want to knock off big bad as the final boss in the same kind of confrontation at the end of all routes while considering the possibilities and endings were you don't kill it off as incomplete(regardless of writing quality). There's tendency for RPGs with choices(probably to appease everyone avoid this "complete route" argument), games proposed to have a variety of possibilities to just end up converging towards a single end(or rarely diverging regardlss of what you do) making what occured inbetween seem rather arbitrary.

When it comes to choices I think it's more interesting to see "where will this choice lead?" rather than fret whether or not you'll get to face the "true final foe" in choice X, Y and Z or making a big deal whether what you picked was the "really real canon this actually happened" route rather than just one of a number of possibilities.

[astrophys]

I basically agree with arvilino's position here.

As an extension, I see all three endings as existing on the same level of "trueness". The ending of the third route is definitely happier overall, but I don't consider the other routes any less true because of this, because as arvilino says, the idea is seeing "where this choice will lead".

What happens in the other routes, both the good and the bad, is part of the choice of where that choice will lead.