FE: Fates survey result will be revealed in this week's Famitsu

[Great Geargia Gateway]

Personally from you know...playing the game these things only adds to the strategy to the point that position in which a character attacks a specific enemy from becomes important for both Attack Stance Dual Strikes and also the aura skills like Demoiselle, Devilish Wind, Battle Command can become rather important.

What avenues of strategy have been lost going to this that haven't been thoroughly exhausted by New Mystery of the Emblem? And what's to lose from mechanics that simultaneously appeal to a new more casual audience while existing as features long term players can appreciate when playing the higher difficulty modes? If you call a game that reinvigorates the gameplay being a zombie, what do you call the period of staleness before Awakening?

Miss-use. Just remember what made Awakening sell well and which what would have made previous titles succeed.

[ivanhellsing]

*Reads translated polls*

Well... This is it... I think I should start playing... XCOM... yeah.

Funny though, I see a monkey paw in this. For a series that came back to life, people sure do love it for being a zombie.

its not like XCOM will be better lol and I wonder what would SF think about kris (FE12) I heard she is awful like robin and kamui and that zombie comment like its a videogame not the end of the world drama queen :/

[arvilino]

I think people who don't give a single shit about the story and care ONLY about shipping and pairing and children, and would sacrifice the quality of all other aspects of the story just for shipping, might be better off playing a dating sim game.

While I'm not going to claim that FE stories were ever masterpieces, what they did do better than Awakening and Fates was that they didn't portray once side as in the right and the other side as in the wrong. In some games the bad guys' motivations and reasons were better detailed. Even if you didn't agree with the motivations or think it was lame.

Why did Ashera want to destroy the world? Because watching the laguz and beorc fight was like watching her children kill her other children, and she thought that if all they were going to do was fight there was no point for them to exist. Why did Zephiel want to hand over the rule of Elibe to the dragons? Because he was so jaded by his asshole father (who did what he did out of jealousy and resentment) that he felt that humans sucked. What happened with Lyon? He was distraught by the death of his father the emperor and he tried to bring him back to life, and got possessed while trying to do so. Why does Garon want to invade Hoshido? Oh wait, that's Hydra? Why does Hydra want to invade Hoshido? Oh, he wants to see Nohr and Hoshido burn? Well, why? Because the humans forgot his gratitude? What was that act of gratitude? … Anyone?

War is a really complicated thing that affects our lives to some extent whether we know it or not. FE is a game in which war is a major theme, and I think that they should at least try to take it seriously. Why do I think Nohr's story sucked so much? Because the writers took what could have been a very interesting personal AND moral dilemma … and then they completely dropped the ball so that Kamui's actions are excused and/or justified because they don't want the player feeling bad. WAR IS SUPPOSED TO MAKE YOU FEEL BAD. There is no person who can remain so "pure" and "untouched" in war, that's bullshit! If you want to write a feel-good story about how this one "pure" and "chosen" person is always right where being able to marry everyone is the most important part of the story, then choose a setting where that can at least be justified! Like a dating sim! If you're going to write a story where the characters are involved in war, I think the consequences that has on people and the player is more important than who you're gonna fuck.

I don't think the quality drop is related to the supports alone. I think it's related to IS trying to please everyone and not being able to take a stand and to "take a risk" with FE14. The marriage system didn't have to be exactly like it was in FE13. Characters could've had limited marriage options. The children didn't need to be in FE14, they have no plot relevance. And the plot definitely needed to be less worried about "offending" players and call out the avatar when they did a stupid and let them learn from it, instead of coddling Kamui about giving them passes.

On what pedestal does the story exist that it could dictate that certain game mechanics like children can't be in and that marriage options should be limited? These are features that extend to gameplay in terms of units to recruit, the way you recruit them(flexible across the whole game) and expanding the support systems usefulness widely across the game, so those kind of features should take precedence over the story provided they have atleast some loose justification for what happens since this is a videogame and not a book or a movie.

Ofcourse you can't say the story of the past Fire Emblem games are masterpieces. The Fire Emblem series has received about as much acclaim for its story and representation of war as the Advance Wars series does, which coincidentally is a light hearted feel-good series with its major theme about war that not only isn't a dating sim but is a turn based strategy is more gameplay focused than Fire Emblem is. We also have the case the most recent story heavy Fire Emblem game, Radiant Dawn actually was criticised in reviews for its story quality and that bloated overbearing story slowed the games pacing and overstayed its welcome so that it could tell a tale that wasn't even really considered anything special. Call it pandering but at the very least now what they're doing with the games provide benefits and interesting elements to the gameplay while maintaining a brisk pace to the way the plot unfolds.

I don't see the value in forcing in more plotlines and putting a detailed explanation for everything any time they add a new character, mechanic or location that, it adds nothing to the game itself and slows the pacing. I'd personally prefer you off reading a visual novel than those who like shipping playing a dating sim because atleast what the shippers want adds to the number of interesting gameplay mechanics whereas what you want involves them witholding and limiting the mechanics just so you can feel better about just the story.

Edited September 23, 2015 by arvilino

[Jedi]

On what pedestal does the story exist that it could dictate that certain game mechanics like children can't be in and that marriage options should be limited? These are features that extend to gameplay in terms of units to recruit, the way you recruit them(flexible across the whole game) and expanding the support systems usefulness widely across the game, so those kind of features should take precedence over the story provided they have atleast some loose justification for what happens since this is a videogame and not a book or a movie.

Ofcourse you can't say the story of the past Fire Emblem games are masterpieces. The Fire Emblem series has received about as much acclaim for its story and representation of war as the Advance Wars series does, which coincidentally is a light hearted feel-good series with its major theme about war that not only isn't a dating sim but is a turn based strategy is more gameplay focused than Fire Emblem is. We also have the case the most recent story heavy Fire Emblem game, Radiant Dawn actually was criticised in reviews for its story quality and that bloated overbearing story slowed the games pacing and overstayed its welcome so that it could tell a tale that wasn't even really considered anything special. Call it pandering but at the very least now what they're doing with the games provide benefits and interesting elements to the gameplay while maintaining a brisk pace to the way the plot unfolds.

I don't see the value in forcing in more plotlines and putting a detailed explanation for everything any time they add a new character, mechanic or location that, it adds nothing to the game itself and slows the pacing. I'd personally prefer you off reading a visual novel than those who like shipping playing a dating sim because atleast what the shippers want adds to the number of interesting gameplay mechanics whereas what you want involves them witholding and limiting the mechanics just so you can feel better about just the story.

But the thing is, we want an interesting story with these new mechanics, is that too much to ask for? Like I had no issues with any FE story before Awakening came around. Sure they weren't masterpieces, the only ones you really could even call close to that in terms of Story is FE4 and FE9. But at the same time, we lost something when Awakening came around and I loved how Awakening did gameplay, but I find myself skipping the story and caring less overall about the characters i'm utilizing, when in the first place the individual stories these characters had and shared with a select few characters are part of the reason I got into FE in the first place.

Forced Romance and Shipping is bad. I actually preferred how Radiant Dawn did it, considering it didn't make you force any romantic threads that had no bearing to even start, unlike how recent games are. Tellius actually had a good amount of characters with actual chemistry.

Awakening and Fates not so much, there are the good ones, but there are many bad ones

Edited September 23, 2015 by Jedi

[Sunwoo]

@arvilino: I think you're missing quite a few important things. First, we were told that the story of Fates would be good. Yes, there will be people still bitching about the story. But if IS wasn't pushing and raving about this story, most people wouldn't have expected much out of it. I don't expect FE stories to be masterpieces. But when the developers tell me that the story is going to be good I hold them to that. And in this case, the story had a lot of potential but it feels like they let themselves be held back because they wanted to add things that ended up outright contradicting their damn theme and because Kamui is a black hole.

Second, why does marriage and children have to be in every game? Seriously, look at the previous FE games. Marriage and kids were first seen in FE4, and it did not return in FE5. Or FE6. Or any FE until 13. Why? Because even though it was a mechanic that was interesting and different, marriage and children being integrated with the gameplay and plot was not an integral part of any game until FE13. FE5 had the capture mechanic, which wasn't seen again until FE14. FE7 had a tactician, and that didn't come back until FE12. FE6 and FE8 had major path splits in the story, but those weren't in FE7 or the Tellius games. The Tellius games had base conversations and FE10 had the third tier, those haven't returned. FE8 had branched promotions as well, which didn't come back until FE13.

What is my point? Aside from the basic turn-based gameplay and a few things like support conversations (which doesn't even fully count, the Archaenea remakes and arguably FE10 didn't have support conversations) there were variable mechanics in every game. Notice that from FE4 - FE10 at the very least various elements like marriage, children, capture, branched promotions, and third tiers were not brought over from the previous installment. Sometimes, they were in one and not the next few until they were seen again. Barring maybe the first three games which I know nothing about, I can't think of any other game where practically every single variable gameplay element was brought over from the previous game to the following one, even if it wasn't needed. Which is the case for Fates. Marriage is the big one because the way the kids were implemented in FE13 is already considered by some to be hard to believe. FE14's is just downright ridiculous and it's so obvious they're just shoehorned in.

Not including children or marriage of every character to every character is not "limiting". Was it "limiting" when it didn't return until FE6? Was it "limiting" when the tactician/avatar system didn't return until FE12? Or when branched promotions was removed in FE9? Of course not. If anything, I'd argue that IS is limiting themselves by not taking risks and just coping the Awakening formula, even the parts that don't make sense for this particular game. Besides, I like the pair up system. It's far less broken and more fun to play around with. I don't expect a masterpiece of FE's stories. But I do expect it to be good at the very least when the freaking developers make it the main part of their advertising. And various gameplay elements always changed in FE and didn't just return from the previous game. And there would've been nothing limiting about the game if children didn't return because the game has nothing to do with kids.

[Taka-kun]

I can only imagine the rage if MGS5 had a bad story (thankfully, it didn't).

I have mixed feelings about the whole children inclusion really. It wasn't so bad in that they are not plot-relevant at all, so you could just ignore them altogether (In Awakening, it was weird if Lucina was the only one coming from the future). Also, it isn't everyday we get games where characters have children so I understand if people would miss it if the mechanic dissapeared. I definitely don't think the existence of the children screwed the story in anyway. Yes, the reason for their inclusion is ridiculous but we all know that the story was f*cked up not because of them but because of other "family" factors.

[Jedi]

I can only imagine the rage if MGS5 had a bad story (thankfully, it didn't).

I have mixed feelings about the whole children inclusion really. It wasn't so bad in that they are not plot-relevant at all, so you could just ignore them altogether (In Awakening, it was weird if Lucina was the only one coming from the future). Also, it isn't everyday we get games where characters have children so I understand if people would miss it if the mechanic dissapeared. I definitely don't think the existence of the children screwed the story in anyway. Yes, the reason for their inclusion is ridiculous but we all know that the story was f*cked up not because of them but because of other "family" factors.

I can name a good number that have eugenics as a game mechanic.

[Sunwoo]

Oh, I agree that things went awry way before you get the chance to recruit a single kid. It's more the "do you really expect us to take this seriously" factor, since the explanation given for the kids doesn't exactly make sense. And it's still the marriage system that lets you marry your siblings.

[Taka-kun]

I can name a good number that have eugenics as a game mechanic.

Please. Actually please do. I only know of Agarest and Conception, both which sucks.

Oh, I agree that things went awry way before you get the chance to recruit a single kid. It's more the "do you really expect us to take this seriously" factor, since the explanation given for the kids doesn't exactly make sense. And it's still the marriage system that lets you marry your siblings.

So you would be totally fine with it if you couldn't marry your siblings?

[Sunwoo]

So you would be totally fine with it if you couldn't marry your siblings?

With marriage, you mean? Not completely. I'd feel better about it if it didn't shoehorn in kids that had nothing to do with the plot. I'd probably be okay with it if it also gave characters limited marriage options. I mean, to name an example, Takumi and Felicia seem to have little chemistry, and I don't think it even benefits Kisaragi.

And yes, I know there are people who would ship the "missing" pairings, but let's be real people ship everything and gameplay limitations has never stopped them from shipping things anyway.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Sunwoo

[arvilino]

@arvilino: I think you're missing quite a few important things. First, we were told that the story of Fates would be good. Yes, there will be people still bitching about the story. But if IS wasn't pushing and raving about this story, most people wouldn't have expected much out of it. I don't expect FE stories to be masterpieces. But when the developers tell me that the story is going to be good I hold them to that. And in this case, the story had a lot of potential but it feels like they let themselves be held back because they wanted to add things that ended up outright contradicting their damn theme and because Kamui is a black hole.

Second, why does marriage and children have to be in every game? Seriously, look at the previous FE games. Marriage and kids were first seen in FE4, and it did not return in FE5. Or FE6. Or any FE until 13. Why? Because even though it was a mechanic that was interesting and different, marriage and children being integrated with the gameplay and plot was not an integral part of any game until FE13. FE5 had the capture mechanic, which wasn't seen again until FE14. FE7 had a tactician, and that didn't come back until FE12. FE6 and FE8 had major path splits in the story, but those weren't in FE7 or the Tellius games. The Tellius games had base conversations and FE10 had the third tier, those haven't returned. FE8 had branched promotions as well, which didn't come back until FE13.

What is my point? Aside from the basic turn-based gameplay and a few things like support conversations (which doesn't even fully count, the Archaenea remakes and arguably FE10 didn't have support conversations) there were variable mechanics in every game. Notice that from FE4 - FE10 at the very least various elements like marriage, children, capture, branched promotions, and third tiers were not brought over from the previous installment. Sometimes, they were in one and not the next few until they were seen again. Barring maybe the first three games which I know nothing about, I can't think of any other game where practically every single variable gameplay element was brought over from the previous game to the following one, even if it wasn't needed. Which is the case for Fates. Marriage is the big one because the way the kids were implemented in FE13 is already considered by some to be hard to believe. FE14's is just downright ridiculous and it's so obvious they're just shoehorned in.

Not including children or marriage of every character to every character is not "limiting". Was it "limiting" when it didn't return until FE6? Was it "limiting" when the tactician/avatar system didn't return until FE12? Or when branched promotions was removed in FE9? Of course not. If anything, I'd argue that IS is limiting themselves by not taking risks and just coping the Awakening formula, even the parts that don't make sense for this particular game. Besides, I like the pair up system. It's far less broken and more fun to play around with. I don't expect a masterpiece of FE's stories. But I do expect it to be good at the very least when the freaking developers make it the main part of their advertising. And various gameplay elements always changed in FE and didn't just return from the previous game. And there would've been nothing limiting about the game if children didn't return because the game has nothing to do with kids.

Yes those were limiting, maybe if you placed a blind eye to the implementation of them games and treat each mechanic as if it would be exactly the same regardless of the entry you'd see it as limiting . Fates has changed the things that have been carried forward more than whole Fire Emblem games have changed between iterations, the Fates version of Pair Up/Dual is not the same as Awakening's and it significantly alters the way the player will approach combat. How Fates handles Children as recruitable characters bares some similarities to Awakening's, yet it is not the same as Awakening's. In many ways they've improved the way its implemented and as mentioned in an earlier post they're a type of recruitment you couldn't have otherwise and arguably a massive improvement upon the quality of typical late-game recruits, remove them and where is the dynamically levelling, customizable units with flexible recruitment units in Fates? There wouldn't be any.

I'll tell you an example of how what they did in the past was limiting for a previous game you mentioned. In FE8 they introduced the idea of characters promoting two different types of units except there was one problem, the character's growths didn't change based on the class meaning a character ended up largely the same if they weren't ramming caps or the two options were very different. With that in mind would scrapping it be the brightest idea? No, the mechanic didn't have a chance to be fully realised and yet they threw away the concept for half a decade until Shadow Dragon and the feature itself until Awakening. Also letting the story dictate what mechanics they can't include is ridiculous, they can't iterate/refine the children mechanic because of the story? That train of thought is bonkers, it'd be like no Mushrooms in any Mario game that doesn't take place in the Mushroom Kingdom.

IS barely ever implement a mechanic as well as they possibly could do the first time they do it, but a lot of the time they threw it away and sometimes simply not replace it with anything. The issue with this is like the branched classes and unlike pair up a lot of the time their new mechanics(e.g. Knives in PoR/RD, Laguz) were too weak to be that useful which mean that the gameplay revolved around on the mechanics that did survive game to game and for years they barely even touched them and it largely resulted in the games feeling extremely similar because the successful playstyle was the same every single time, most of the tried and tested things worked best and only a small amount of the new stuff was a blip on the player's radar. Part of the reason Fates feels fresh is that they've refined a lot of the mechanics and the new stuff are well worth using, old stuff is rebalanced.

Also while they said they were going to improve the story in the Iwata Asks, I don't recall them raving about the story being greater anymore than they would a typical Fire Emblem game. For example even Awakening includes the idea that the choices you make have consequences or Blazing Sword's "Trust Nobody" advertising. Plus Corrin's involvement is appropriate for the theme, if he/she wasn't centric to the whole thing his/her decision would lack impact if he/she wasn't the most important factor in the campaigns going the direct they do, otherwise the course of the story would change for no real reason other than you picked a different route.

Edited September 23, 2015 by arvilino

[Dark Sage]

But in none of the Fire Emblems did they bother to hire an acclaimed writer or trumpet his involvement in their advertisements. Certainly they really seemed to play up the story this time around compared to the previous entries. Why else would they hire a critically acclaimed writer if they weren't ambitious about the quality of the story?

And if you play up the story this much, then people expect the mechanics to make some sense within the story's context. Contrary to popular belief, games aren't just piles of features; games aren't improved just be adding in gameplay features. RPGs in general are text and story heavy and the plot is one of the reasons people play them. So when you have a mechanic like marriage and children added to a game that really doesn't need it or fit with it and give it a BS explanation (hyperbolic time travel my butt), that's a genuine flaw you can't just brush off because it hurts the story and it wrecks suspension of disbelief.

On another note, I'd contest with your notion that children are even that great an addition in the first place or a big improvement over lategame recruits. Yes you can customize them and in this game, they do dynamically improve with your army, but a) as I pointed out earlier, you don't need kids to have dynamically improving lategame units and b) customization and eugenics are not inherently better than no customization and eugenics, especially since most of the time it has very little impact on the maingame and only really matters for postgame. Lategame recruits are generally pretty good in most FEs, or at least salvageable; even below average ones like Garret can have some use. The exception is New Mystery and Shadow Dragon but low unit quality is not a feature solely exclusive to lategame recruits in that game either. There is some value in being given a fixed unit (as in not dynamically changed or customized) and trying to make something of it.

Kids also have a problem that simply doesn't happen with lategame recruits in other FEs; let's say you don't like using a unit, or you don't like the supports of a lot of units and don't want them to marry. Or, more commonly, you simply don't want to deploy some parent units because they're not useful and don't fit in your team. You're locked out of a sizeable portion of the cast, which is BS. If you want all recruits, you're obliged to pair everyone up and waste time trying to build supports whether you like it or not. Contrast that to someone like Harken, Vaida, or FE9 Haar where you can get them as long as you talk to them. There are some exclusive characters in other games that you can't get in some playthroughs (Eyrios/Olwen, Samson/Arran, Harken/Karel) but it's usually one unit of a pair, not a good portion of the cast.

[maybe]

Second, why does marriage and children have to be in every game? Seriously, look at the previous FE games. Marriage and kids were first seen in FE4, and it did not return in FE5. Or FE6. Or any FE until 13. Why? Because even though it was a mechanic that was interesting and different, marriage and children being integrated with the gameplay and plot was not an integral part of any game until FE13. FE5 had the capture mechanic, which wasn't seen again until FE14. FE7 had a tactician, and that didn't come back until FE12. FE6 and FE8 had major path splits in the story, but those weren't in FE7 or the Tellius games. The Tellius games had base conversations and FE10 had the third tier, those haven't returned. FE8 had branched promotions as well, which didn't come back until FE13.

alright I don't mean to derail this thread but

have you played FE12

because it actually does have both base conversations and support conversations

not really relevant, I just wanted to clarify

[Ryo]

Also while they said they were going to improve the story in the Iwata Asks, I don't recall them raving about the story being greater anymore than they would a typical Fire Emblem game. For example even Awakening includes the idea that the choices you make have consequences or Blazing Sword's "Trust Nobody" advertising. Plus Corrin's involvement is appropriate for the theme, if he/she wasn't centric to the whole thing his/her decision would lack impact if he/she wasn't the most important factor in the campaigns going the direct they do, otherwise the course of the story would change for no real reason other than you picked a different route.

Kamui being the center of the story isn't inherently a problem. Most protagonists in fictions are. The following things, which are directly related to that fact, however, are:

- The writers twisted the story around Kamui's "decision", to the point that some characters and plot points (most notably Azura and all of her shenanigans) also had to twist themselves according to such decision, which leads to major inconsistencies between the tree routes. Azura, Lilith, the three Awakening children could never do anything despite their knowledge and having many chances to act, all because Kamui's "choice" forbid them to do as they will. Otherwise there won't be any alternate routes. (Except there can still be, if the writers are willing to put some thoughts into that...)

- Kamui is unnecessarily discussed and/or praised in support conversations or story dialogues that either have nothing to do with them, or are better spent on something else.

- Some characters follow Kamui out of sheer loyalty and/or admiration without any clear motivation (Silas, Felicia, Gunther etc.), to the point that they are willing to assist Kamui in invading their own country and killing their own people, for reasons never even explicitly brought up in any part of the narrative (Suzukaze). And then there will always be characters like Camilla who's being obsessed with Kamui in a disturbing way.

- Kamui is always forgiven even after committing atrocities or were responsible for their families' lost. The same can also be said for Kamui's naivety, which did more harm than good.

- etc.

Most of these aren't even because of gameplay demand. And even if they were, there are many alternatives for the developers to take, without having to resort to shoddy writing.

[Taka-kun]

Kamui being the center of the story isn't inherently a problem. Most protagonists in fictions are. The following things, which are directly related to that fact, however, are:

- The writers twisted the story around Kamui's "decision", to the point that some characters and plot points (most notably Azura and all of her shenanigans) also had to twist themselves according to such decision, which leads to major inconsistencies between the tree routes. Azura, Lilith, the three Awakening children could never do anything despite their knowledge and having many chances to act, all because Kamui's "choice" forbid them to do as they will. Otherwise there won't be any alternate routes. (Except there can still be, if the writers are willing to put some thoughts into that...)

- Kamui is unnecessarily discussed and/or praised in support conversations or story dialogues that either have nothing to do with them, or are better spent on something else.

- Some characters follow Kamui out of sheer loyalty and/or admiration without any clear motivation (Silas, Felicia, Gunther etc.), to the point that they are willing to assist Kamui in invading their own country and killing their own people, for reasons never even explicitly brought up in any part of the narrative (Suzukaze). And then there will always be characters like Camilla who's being obsessed with Kamui in a disturbing way.

- Kamui is always forgiven even after committing atrocities or were responsible for their families' lost. The same can also be said for Kamui's naivety, which did more harm than good.

- etc.

Most of these aren't even because of gameplay demand. And even if they were, there are many alternatives for the developers to take, without having to resort to shoddy writing.

What is the problem with people being loyal to Kamui? I have only read the supports and summaries so I don't really know what's going but alot of people seem to agitate on Kamui, a prince, having the loyalty of his retainers. Is it because he hasn't earned it? I recall Gunther and Jakob in their supports that they devote to Kamui because he is the only one who genuinely cared about them, while others treated them like shit. Gunther even saw Kamui as his own son. I don't really buy this magnetism bullcrap but I think in this case Kamui actually did something?

[NeonZ]

I don't think Shin Kabayashi is particularly critically acclaimed. He's an established writer, but his name really isn't that big or famous. It is odd though that they highlighted his presence in the Direct, considering how previously the writers were never mentioned in marketing.

Regarding the story, considering the model they went with (separate games) rather than an actual in-game choice, I actually think it'd have been better if the stories had been completely separate from the start, rather than attempting to frame them around a player "choice" that's actually made before the game is bought.

And if you play up the story this much, then people expect the mechanics to make some sense within the story's context. Contrary to popular belief, games aren't just piles of features; games aren't improved just be adding in gameplay features. RPGs in general are text and story heavy and the plot is one of the reasons people play them. So when you have a mechanic like marriage and children added to a game that really doesn't need it or fit with it and give it a BS explanation (hyperbolic time travel my butt), that's a genuine flaw you can't just brush off because it hurts the story and it wrecks suspension of disbelief.

That's probably why the children have no role in the main story in the first place. They wanted the mechanic there without hurting the story by forcing it to accommodate those children. The method chosen to implement them is exactly one that won't hurt the main story. The actual issue is that the story is being rejected altogether, so this is seen as just another messy element of the disliked story, rather than a feature existing alongside a beloved storyline without getting into its way.

Whether you like or dislike the 2nd generation system, it was a popular feature, so it was kept. They could have randomly changed things up without caring about popularity, something that the series itself has done previously, but that wasn't a very rational decision in the first place. Rather than that, what they chose to change here were elements that were disliked by some fans while mostly not relevant to others, like the complete revamp of the pair up system.

Edited September 24, 2015 by NeonZ

[artishe]

I'd imagine the character loyalty issue stems more from Suzukaze and Felicia than anything else. They're the only two where their betrayal is actually confronted in the plot, so if you didn't find their reasons for defection on the appropriate route particularly compelling than the intended mark of that lil moment is kinda just missed.

The characters who join you on both routes out of loyalty are pretty main plot irrelevant anyways. They've got a few moments here and there, but they're rather quickly pushed aside once you get more royals. The servants pretty much stop talking in the main plot post choice scene, Cyrus a few chapters after, and Suzukaze becomes relevant at random.

[Ryo]

What is the problem with people being loyal to Kamui? I have only read the supports and summaries so I don't really know what's going but alot of people seem to agitate on Kamui, a prince, having the loyalty of his retainers. Is it because he hasn't earned it? I recall Gunther and Jakob in their supports that they devote to Kamui because he is the only one who genuinely cared about them, while others treated them like shit. Gunther even saw Kamui as his own son. I don't really buy this magnetism bullcrap but I think in this case Kamui actually did something?

There are a few problems with people being loyal to Kamui:

1. There are too many of them. Some people aren't even Kamui's personal retainers to begin with (Silas is more like a childhood friend with a loyalty oath, and you need to reach A-support or Hoshido C15 for Suzukaze to actually swear loyalty to Kamui). And this is not including the royal siblings and other characters who are constantly obsessed with Kamui.

2. Like I said, regardless of whether Kamui did actually earn it or not (this is subjective), characters following Kamui (even if that means leaving, and later killing, their country, old comrades and family) simply because they're loyal and/or attracted to them is very lazy writing. They don't have motivations or philosophies of their own, and their characters fall flat as a result. These characters are also mostly plot-irrelevant, which certainly doesn't help. You can even argue that some exist purely for fan-service (Jakob).

3. IMO, some of the defections/betrayals feel really forced or simply just don't make sense. And nowhere did the story even try to justify that.

4. More personal opinion here, but I don't see anything appealing in Kamui's character and personality to attract that much attention. They are a generic naive and idealistic hero.

[Thor Odinson]

One idea I've been playing with is what if Suzukaze defects back to Hoshido if you don't have someone S support him (or hell, lock him out of S ranks and make him defect regardless)--or hell, what if he even tries to assassinate Kamui by chapter 16 -- and granted, he'd fail because obvious we don't want to end the game there, and he'll prolly be killed, but it'd do his character more justice. Thanks game.

Of course I don't think he should've defected in the first place, but I got these ideas from his potential death in Hoshido.

... what if he "defected" just to spy on Kamui and Nohr at large

game why don't you do these things

Edited September 25, 2015 by Thor Odinson

[JupiterKnight]

I think an A support where he chooses to stay with them would work honestly, but he'll betray them if its lower than that and die in battle. I see why he joined Kamui since they do defend him and Rinkah from Marx and he saw Leon spare the both of them and fake their deaths, showing that the Nohrians aren't as bad as he's likely heard.

[Aquaze]

There are a few problems with people being loyal to Kamui:

1. There are too many of them. Some people aren't even Kamui's personal retainers to begin with (Silas is more like a childhood friend with a loyalty oath, and you need to reach A-support or Hoshido C15 for Suzukaze to actually swear loyalty to Kamui). And this is not including the royal siblings and other characters who are constantly obsessed with Kamui.

2. Like I said, regardless of whether Kamui did actually earn it or not (this is subjective), characters following Kamui (even if that means leaving, and later killing, their country, old comrades and family) simply because they're loyal and/or attracted to them is very lazy writing. They don't have motivations or philosophies of their own, and their characters fall flat as a result. These characters are also mostly plot-irrelevant, which certainly doesn't help. You can even argue that some exist purely for fan-service (Jakob).

3. IMO, some of the defections/betrayals feel really forced or simply just don't make sense. And nowhere did the story even try to justify that.

4. More personal opinion here, but I don't see anything appealing in Kamui's character and personality to attract that much attention. They are a generic naive and idealistic hero.

eh I agree and disagree

1. In terms of people defecting for Kamui, I feel like almost all of them make sense. For example, Felicia probably has as strong feelings towards Kamui as Flora does, considering they are from the same tribe and started serving kamui at the same time and on the Hoshido route Flora would rather kill herself than hurt kamui. Now take into account that Felicia is clumsy and always messing up unlike Flora. Frankly in her mind Kamui would have been justified in calling her useless etc, but Kamui doesn't and instead appreciates her good points, so she likely feels more devoted than even Flora does. That is Kamui doing something, even if its small. Gunther sees Kamui as his own child and practically raised them. Not only that IIRC Gunther was recruited by Nohr after they destroyed his village, Not hard to see why he would be more loyal to someone he considers his own than a country like that.

Kaze makes sense as well. Early on in the story Kamui betrays Nohr and protects Kaze when Garon orders Kamui to kill him, then when Garon tries to kill him himself. Kaze would be dead from the get go without kamui, that is kamui doing something, a large something. The only one thats honestly questionable is Joker.

I do agree that Kamui's personality is not that great, being Naive and all is fine but there needs to be some balance. Erika was naive but she had Seth there to balance that out. Chrom was naive but he had Robin and Lucina there to balance that out. I feel like Aqua was supposed to be Kamui's balancing factor and advise kamui more but she wound up just going along with things and in some paths like Nohr actively making things worse. You can't have both protagonists be really naive or it just makes things not make sense.

My biggest issue with the plot personally is how in essence theres no point to the Hoshido and Nohr stories because they are both bad endings. Hydra is still alive, two of the holy weapons wind up unusable and Aqua who was the only one who knew about Hydra is gone. Well except the awakening trio who should have been more important in the story but weren't. Back on Aqua, there were plenty of times for her to advise kamui properly. For example in Nohr she even goes to the Invisible kingdom and for some reason doesn't tell kamui about the true mastermind being there despite not being under effects of the curse anymore. Why? This makes no sense.

On the topic of the awakening 3 this is my other large gripe. They should pretty much never oppose Kamui. It makes no sense for them to do so. In the Hoshido path they are willing to die for their respective lords. Why? They've been in this world for like a few months to a year at best, why do they feel so much loyalty to Nohr even at the cost of saving the world? In the Nohr path why did none of them TRY to hint to Kamui about what they should be doing? Or maybe even ask kamui to go to the infinite chasm and jump down there?

Invisible kingdom isn't perfect but I feel like the story would have been alot better if the other two endings weren't bad endings by default because of Hydra still being alive.

[Ryo]

eh I agree and disagree

1. In terms of people defecting for Kamui, I feel like almost all of them make sense. For example, Felicia probably has as strong feelings towards Kamui as Flora does, considering they are from the same tribe and started serving kamui at the same time and on the Hoshido route Flora would rather kill herself than hurt kamui. Now take into account that Felicia is clumsy and always messing up unlike Flora. Frankly in her mind Kamui would have been justified in calling her useless etc, but Kamui doesn't and instead appreciates her good points, so she likely feels more devoted than even Flora does. That is Kamui doing something, even if its small. Gunther sees Kamui as his own child and practically raised them. Not only that IIRC Gunther was recruited by Nohr after they destroyed his village, Not hard to see why he would be more loyal to someone he considers his own than a country like that.

Kaze makes sense as well. Early on in the story Kamui betrays Nohr and protects Kaze when Garon orders Kamui to kill him, then when Garon tries to kill him himself. Kaze would be dead from the get go without kamui, that is kamui doing something, a large something. The only one thats honestly questionable is Joker.

My point is that there are many many ways to handle these defections other than "muh loyalty". And when that many people use such an excuse to be devoted to you, it feels very flat and lazy. Despite my problems with FE10's plot, I think it handled this matter much better than Fates by setting up some conditions to recruit certain enemies, and also make certain characters with special connections cannot attack one another.

Also, I think the biggest problem in Kaze's defection is not the defection itself, but he actively helps Kamui in invading Hoshido and kills its people, including his brother and former comrades. That is not okay. Not to mention that everything Kamui and the Nohrian's been doing in the second half of Conquest directly contradicts with their initial plan and promise when his recruitment took place: to avoid as much Hoshidan and civilian's casualties as possible. It's not until Kamui confirmed to him of such a plan that he decided to join them. But then what happened afterwards? Despite all that, he still stays and helps Kamui...

I simply don't buy Felicia's reason for defection either (was there even a reason other than loyalty to begin with?) I think she's more of a case of walking fan-service so the devs just want to make sure that she's available on all routes for the players' sake. Though at least she doesn't assist people in destroying her homeland, it's that Flora's betrayal leaves her no choice. (Ironically, she actually helps Kamui beating her clan in Conquest, though nobody dies there.)

...Eh, but I think I'm derailing the topic.

[CyborgZeta]

The only one thats honestly questionable is Joker.

Joker is actually one of the least questionable. He was abandoned by his parents, and was incompetent as a servant. Despite that, Kamui took him in as their own servant; "giving him a place to belong" as he puts it.

Felicia is the questionable one, since she never extrapolates. She's just loyal to Kamui, and that's it.

[Taka-kun]

Joker is actually one of the least questionable. He was abandoned by his parents, and was incompetent as a servant. Despite that, Kamui took him in as their own servant; "giving him a place to belong" as he puts it.

Felicia is the questionable one, since she never extrapolates. She's just loyal to Kamui, and that's it.

Doesn't Felicia have similar standing as Jakob in the past though? She is a total klutz and incompetent in maid tasks, but Kamui keeps her around anyway. She could have been delegated far worse tasks and be separated from Flora, considering Nohr's nature.

[artishe]

Doesn't Felicia have similar standing as Jakob in the past though? She is a total klutz and incompetent in maid tasks, but Kamui keeps her around anyway. She could have been delegated far worse tasks and be separated from Flora, considering Nohr's nature.

That'd be my guess, and it'd make sense given what we know about everyone else and her character. I don't think Felicia says anything explicitly anywhere, so technically, you could write it all away as speculation.

I'd imagine you're supposed to infer that Kamui did something to earn her loyalty, but if it wasn't a 'one thing' life changing/saving kinda deal like Joker, Suzukaze, and Cyrus all got, there's not much reason for it to be mentioned in game. Like how none of the Nohrian royal siblings detail how Kamui earned their affection.