Do you hate Avatar character(s)? If so, why?

[Sunwoo]

We are talking about the poll results from the Famitsu that Kirokan translated a while back, yes? Isn't it possible that they just didn't put the more negative responses in the results?

[blinkingbrave]

The translation that popped across my Tumblr said that they had received some rather harsh criticisms of the game from long time fans (kirokan's might have said this, too, but I don't think that's the one I read). Even with that counted for though, the game was still received overwhelmingly positively, and a lil number crunching says 59% of people put it 90/100 or higher. With that in mind, Famitsu not publishing whatever these harsh criticisms were was probably less about trying to sell the game (though I'm sure that was part of it) and more about displaying the majority opinion.

Story seems like it might have gotten mixed reception given as it's the only thing to receive a slightly snippy comment alongside praise, but everything else seems to have been received generally well. There's even a lil blurb hoping the MU will appear in the next game as well.

The poll was also a lot more about how you used various features instead of opinions (minus children, which seemed popular as well). You can kinda surmise some stuff, and there are some more opinion-y comments in there, but whether these are the majority opinion is kinda speculation.

Edited October 7, 2015 by blinkingbrave

[CocoaGalaxy]

Numerical scales are always a rolling larf

As an example, from a scale of 0-10 (10 being best), the average score of the anime I watch is 9.9

I don't really know how many people bought Awakening in Japan, but I vaguely recall lots of players having played Awakening, so it might have something to do with that.

It's not that awakening is a bad game to start with, but you can't compare if you don't know much else

Edited October 7, 2015 by CocoaGalaxy

[blinkingbrave]

Yeah... I've always wondered if newer fans would... like older games the same? I started with Awakening and went back and played older games, but I also like strategy games in general. A lot about the story and the characters is very different, and it... feels to me like the larger pull for the people I know (which I guess would be fanartists, fanfic-ers, and people more on tumblr) is the character and story component.

I wonder if it could just be indicative of a fanbase shift in that direction...

[CocoaGalaxy]

Classically speaking, I would think that, "there has been a fanbase shift" of sorts.

Granted, I'm using myself as a basis for..."older" players, which can be arguable, since I never played FE1-5 which "everybody seems to praise" (in my opinion)

As it is I generally still feel they did a good job..but there's the problem that it's still kind of hard to get them to "change" (and they'd be worrying about losing their other fans), so.....you can really only hope "they pull a miracle" or something

[wumples]

I find myself somewhat disliking player characters for the same reason as many others: the character development sucks. I don't like it when all of the characters are obsessed with you in some way or another (really, all of the royals are. Takumi is obsessed with you in a different way).

Also, if Fates gets figures and stuff later on, there's no chance for Kamui to get one. It will all be expensive fanservice scale figures of like, Camilla. It just won't happen, because people will want the figure to look like their Kamui.

I guess I don't really hate them, but I miss having a "solid" (not customizable is what I mean) main character.

[Augestein]

I'm late to the scene: I think that the Avatar is a good idea but done horribly. I think that the avatar SHOULD be the lord instead of there being some forced guy/gal every chapter that's not able to be customized. I'm not even talking about the appearance, I'm talking about base stats, growths, and weapon choice as well. One of the biggest problems I have with FE after they introduced the weapon triangle is the dominance of sword lords regardless. Any person is going to basically choose 1 of each weapon type -- assuming that no one is outlandishly bad or good in the game, to cover all of the various weapons and niches that each weapon/class could fill for their team, so it's always bothered me that you get a sword unit like that. Let's take FE7 for instance, you are basically forced to have 2 sword users and an axe user. Obviously, the first thing you are going to look for are lance users and mages before you look for another sword user, or even an axe user. With an avatar, this is no longer an issue because your hero uses whatever weapon you chose instead.

[HTakara82]

I think the better question would be "do you hate the implementation of Avatar characters in Fire Emblem", which I would resoundingly agree with. And a further question behind that would be "What's the point behind Avatar characters anyway?". There's certainly a degree of fun to be had customising your a unit aesthetically and having a little bit of a say over their growths and such but trying to argue this is the primary reason they exist is being disingenuous.

It's fairly obvious that there is meant to be some sort of connection between the player and the Avatar. Characters look at the screen and address the player in FE7 for example. FE12 is very explict about this as well, when you're creating your Avatar Anna breaks the fourth wall and addresses the player and calls you a hero and asks about your name and past. In FE13 Robin is the Tactician and "sees" all the info you can see about stats and the like, and is credited with formulating the strategies the player would to achieve success, various cutscenes are done through first person view, as are confession scenes, and you can support/marry just about everyone. I don't really know the specifics about FE14 but I doubt much has changed in that regard, and you certainly choose how to go about marriage, building things or groping your units in more PoV stuff so I'm pretty sure there's plenty more reinforcable points about a player character connection.

So why is there a connection? What's the point of that? The most general answer would be that it's meant to create a degree of attachment and a feeling of personal involvement in the world as presented to the player, rather than simply acting as an observer. This principle is fine, getting the player more invested in the game translates to a more engaging experience. However you have to actually attempt to maintain this status, and this is basically the crux of the issue.

FE7 did absoloutely nothing to break the connection between the player and the Tactician, beacuse the Tactician never actually gets to say anything. Their only role is exactly what the player does; ordering units around on the battlefield. This is extremely bland.

FE12 added actual character traits to Kris. This creates a rift between the player and the Avatar, but doesn't really sever it. The player is aware that Kris is "My Unit" and that Kris functions as a vessel for the player, but the lack of identification with the character results in an awareness that causes the player to view the story as an observer anyway, without being able to see Kris as a standalone character in their own right. Rather than just observing the events of the narrative relating to Kris and taking them at face value as an observer, one cannot help but interpreting those events with the knowledge of Kris as some kind of self-insert. That leads to greater dissatisfaction and scrutiny because many events are seen to be attempting to elevate the player and their importance at the cost of other aspects of the narrative. Or rather, it creates the view that there's a subtraction in the actual game world to attempt to add to something not part of that world (the player). FE is occasionally self aware but it's hardly postmodern, so there isn't really anything that can be further extrapolated from this kind of observing yourself observing the game line of thinking, and it only really serves to further remove the player from the occurances within the game world.

FE13 has pretty much all the same problems amplified (although Robin is probably better written than Kris is, but then again, fan translations), and FE14 seems to have the same problem again.

Obviously, not everyone actually thinks about things like this in the same way, and there are people who have higher capacity for suspension of disbelief than others. In fact, some games thrive on being self aware and deliberately encouraging this kind of "meta-think", and then engaging with the player's own thoughts that go past the actual game world excellently, whilst intertwining that with an in world narrative (Metal Gear Solid titles are an easy and prolific example). But Fire Emblem really doesn't strive to do anything like this, and it probably never will, and it's own systems and stories don't sustain analysis like that very well either. Introducing elements that lead to suspension breaking critique in moment to moment dialogues is a recipe for disaster if players think critically and you don't work to direct those types of thoughts.

The "solution" to problems like these is basically for people to "stop overthinking" things. Turn your brain off, as they say. That's what Fire Emblem is meant to be now in many respects WRT to everything that isn't core tactical gameplay. But frankly, that's pretty hard to do if you like thinking about things, and you can't really "unthink" that either.

I would like to add, that I love your answer.

People need to remember that this in it's essence is a jRPG, and expect a complete blank slate like it was in the 80s and 90s for jRPGs, and modern day wRPGs

[Augestein]

People need to remember that this in it's essence is a jRPG, and expect a complete blank slate like it was in the 80s and 90s for jRPGs, and modern day wRPGs

But there are still examples of silent protagonist in JRPGs, White Knight Chronicles did it, Dragon Quest, and Shin Megami are all examples of games that still use the silent protagonist. The issue isn't necessarily that the protagonist is silent, as WRPGs such as Bioware's games don't have a silent protagonist but still manage to make a decent avatar character. The issue is that the more the character says, the more it needs to be the player's choice. Otherwise you end up with a poor avatar because players cannot relate as well because it talks too much and says more and more things that they might not agree with.

The only real choice you have for your avatar in Fire Emblem is the character you marry-- which while this does have some impact for the player, it doesn't have much overall and merely allows them to ship themselves with characters they find interesting or attractive.

[HTakara82]

But there are still examples of silent protagonist in JRPGs, White Knight Chronicles did it, Dragon Quest, and Shin Megami are all examples of games that still use the silent protagonist. The issue isn't necessarily that the protagonist is silent, as WRPGs such as Bioware's games don't have a silent protagonist but still manage to make a decent avatar character. The issue is that the more the character says, the more it needs to be the player's choice. Otherwise you end up with a poor avatar because players cannot relate as well because it talks too much and says more and more things that they might not agree with.

The only real choice you have for your avatar in Fire Emblem is the character you marry-- which while this does have some impact for the player, it doesn't have much overall and merely allows them to ship themselves with characters they find interesting or attractive.

those games despite having silent protagonists, it didn't really matter, it didn't impact story and character progression.

As I mention before, a silent protagonist is only good for some people. Others don't like silent protagonist, and others don't get it. It's why it's been a running joke with jRPGs having silent protagonists. Good for RPers but not for everyone else. Having let's say Commander Shepard, actually speak for some, break immersion, as it's suppose to be your voice.

[astrophys]

Yeah... I've always wondered if newer fans would... like older games the same? I started with Awakening and went back and played older games, but I also like strategy games in general.

Well, I cannot speak for newer fans in general, but I started with Awakening and afterwards I went back to both The Sacred Stones and Genealogy of the Holy War (Seisen no Keifu), both of which I enjoyed very much and both of which I beat. Although I had also liked strategy games in general beforehand to: SRPGs such as Final Fantasy Tactics and its spin-offs, RTS games like Age of Empires, etc.

[Book Bro]

I thought Robin was a terrible "self insert" because of all the player worship, so I'm really worried seeing him getting praise compared to Kamui. :|

[secondworld]

I always thought that the three avatars were inherently flawed, even before taking into account how they were executed.

Fire Emblem isn't a Mass Effect or an Elder Scrolls or a Dark Souls. In most other games with a customizable avatar protagonist like those I mentioned, you are in full control of your avatar, right down to the most basic things like walking where you want to.

But in Fire Emblem, you, the player, are not the star, you are the director. This simply isn't a game that can use a playable avatar well, it's kind of a contradiction really. Even if the next game has the best possible implementation of this feature, I still won't be able to get the kind of connection to the game they want me to have.

Edited October 8, 2015 by DavidSW

[HTakara82]

I always thought that the three avatars were inherently flawed, even before taking into account how they were executed.

Fire Emblem isn't a Mass Effect or an Elder Scrolls or a Dark Souls. In most other games with a customizable avatar protagonist like those I mentioned, you are in full control of your avatar, right down to the most basic things like walking where you want to.

But in Fire Emblem, you, the player, are not the star, you are the director. This simply isn't a game that can use a playable avatar well, it's kind of a contradiction really. Even if the next game has the best possible implementation of this feature, I still won't be able to get the kind of connection to the game they want me to have.

Sounds like stubbornness, and adverse to change.

[Irysa]

those games despite having silent protagonists, it didn't really matter, it didn't impact story and character progression.

As I mention before, a silent protagonist is only good for some people. Others don't like silent protagonist, and others don't get it. It's why it's been a running joke with jRPGs having silent protagonists. Good for RPers but not for everyone else. Having let's say Commander Shepard, actually speak for some, break immersion, as it's suppose to be your voice.

I think you're sort of confusing what RPing has to do with anything. When looking at narratively heavy games, players may primarily feel the events of the game through a self insert or they may they objectively observe the events and derive thoughts or emotions as the observer. One doesn't have to really be RPing to have a sense of empathy and attachment to characters within a story, just look at films or literature. Heck, I can stretch this to real life; Haven't you ever admired or respected someone you didn't know personally because of things you've heard they'd done or whatever? You can even look at historical context as well. People are not "self inserting" into anybody's shoes neccessarily in order to have these feelings, because people are perfectly capable of evaluating situations without having to think about how they feel from the inside. Instead, they look at them from their own outside perspective, as an individual part of present reality. Even if one thinks about it from the inside, they are often empathising with multiple invidiuals, not just one. Empathy doesn't require RPing, and self inserts are just supposed to be the first person you empathise all the events through.

As I said before, the idea of a "self insert" is to focus on getting the player to primarily feel the events of the game through that character, as opposed to other characters or as the observer. Any fantastical story requires some suspension of disbelief to be properly engaged with, so extending that to "my character does not have the same voice as me" isn't much of a stretch (people often make their own characters look nothing like them, if anything, they become more of an ideal self, but that's a different topic). There is a difference between allowances like that and having to accept that the majority of what this character says and does has nothing to do with you at all (or even in extreme cases like FE13 where Robin does things behind your own back) whilst the game still tries to treat the character as "the player". And then that gets back into the rift that ends up being created as a result.

If we pretend for a moment that we can ignore the implications of having a "tactician/commander" character or whatnot in the games, then in the case of FE12, people would criticise Kris even if we removed all the player connection elements as being a poor fanfic-tier, retcon of a character that detracts from rest of the established and developed cast. I think the criticism would not be as strong for FE13, although people would likely not be praising Robin as a great protagonist or anything, and criticising some of their decisions, but ultimately I don't think they'd be under all that much more scrutiny than Chrom himself often is. For FE14, it appears that most would dislike Kamui as a character regardless of this different viewpoint, and probaly argue for them as an intended self insert even if all the customisation and PoV stuff was changed because of how the world revolves around them.

That kind of hypothetical illustrates how the Avatar characters aren't just bad Avatars, they're pretty bad characters by themselves. Them being Avatars only makes the problem worse.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Irysa

[secondworld]

Sounds like stubbornness, and adverse to change.

You really don't like a lot of the opinions that have come up in this thread huh? What I said wasn't any of those things.

If IS wants to have player avatars, I think they need to implement it in a way that actually makes sense for what kind of game this is.

I'd start with the FE7 tactician as a base and work from there.

[HTakara82]

You really don't like a lot of the opinions that have come up in this thread huh? What I said wasn't any of those things.

If IS wants to have player avatars, I think they need to implement it in a way that actually makes sense for what kind of game this is.

I'd start with the FE7 tactician as a base and work from there.

You literally said "even if it's implemented well, that you won't like it, cause it's fire emblem."

[mikethepokemaster]

I like the Avatar idea I was happy when it was included, I remember when I seen it on a TV ad that you could make an avatar. I like that feature on Fire Emblem aka blazing Sword, wish Mark was more involved in the story plus I shipped Mark with Lyn lol. Wish number 7 was remade that way they have an excuse for children again well they would have to remake 6 and 7 together so the chapter count would be lik 50+chapters. Well compare to Fates 74 chapters sound pretty short. Well after the first gen story over you shift over to Roy story with the Avatar aka Mark kid being his future tactaian. You can also customize and choose his/her gender, I would like that.

[secondworld]

You literally said "even if it's implemented well, that you won't like it, cause it's fire emblem."

I was saying that there is an inherent flaw with the playable avatars no matter how IS writes them or whatever dialogue choices they might add or whatever they do to try to make a connection with the and the game that makes them see the avatar as them. I'm not actually controlling what my supposed avatar is doing during the fight, I'm telling them where I want them to go and what I want to see happen, not actually doing it. This creates a disconnect that can't be fixed without changing the core mechanics of the game. Again, in Fire Emblem the player is the director telling the actors where they need to be and what part they need to play, not actually performing.

Having an in-game avatar for the player to use to directly interact with the world and characters is by no means a bad idea. I just think the way IS implemented them was misguided.

Edited October 8, 2015 by DavidSW

[Auro Astum]

I'm not too up in arms over player avatars. TBH it really took me out of FE7 when people would address Mark, and he ended up being a practical non-entity.

I was super hyped for the feature when I popped in awakening (since I didn't know it existed until I saw it at walmart). I really liked the feature at the time.

Alot of my (and probably other people's) issues with Kamui is the excessive worship. Really kills him/her as a character.

I think that avatars can be done fine, they just need to add more choices and tone down/remove the player worship.

[Augestein]

those games despite having silent protagonists, it didn't really matter, it didn't impact story and character progression.

As I mention before, a silent protagonist is only good for some people. Others don't like silent protagonist, and others don't get it. It's why it's been a running joke with jRPGs having silent protagonists. Good for RPers but not for everyone else. Having let's say Commander Shepard, actually speak for some, break immersion, as it's suppose to be your voice.

Yes it did. The fact that they were silent meant that it was a character that was you. And your character progression was directly tied in the fact that you were able to raise your character as you wanted to. You were "you," not "Chrom the lord that uses swords and has a sister named Lissa." So this left room to include your character on the adventure without making the character interrupt the story. You still had a role. You were the person that was assisting with the adventure. If you don't want to assist in the adventure, then you don't play the game-- hence why it works so well. In WKC, you were a person that was hired to help Leonard deliver the wine and ended up being dragged along on the adventure-- like Leonard was.

It doesn't matter if it's only good for some people. What matters is that the designer picks a medium to use the character and sticks to it rather than try to do all of them at once and fail on all accounts. The reason why the avatars are generally disliked in Fire Emblem is because IS isn't entirely sure WHAT they want to do with them. There has been almost no consistency between the avatars outside of your ability to customize them in the Fire Emblem games. If they make them a character that you can customize that already exists in the universe, that's fine, if they want the avatar to be a character that is supposed to be you in the game, that's fine too, but they need to design the game around that notion. Take Mark for instance, some people say it's weird that Mark wasn't a huge role, but Mark did exactly what Mark did-- was a tactician. He was in pretty much every scene, and the reason that Mark didn't have a canon appearance is because Mark was... You. It works extremely well in this regard. Could they have had more characters directly address you at moments? Perhaps, but for what it was, it was the best "player inclusion" without having your character directly interfere with the plot.

If they want your character to be integral to the plot for Fire Emblem and still be your avatar, that means that they will have to allow you make more decisions and be your own mouthpiece.

[Sunwoo]

Etrian Odyssey is a good series to have avatar characters. Barring the remakes of the first two games, the Untold series, you play as a guild of characters you choose and name at the beginning of the game. Playable characters don't get development, because they're "you". It's the NPCs and the villains who get that characterization, and you're merely there reacting (or not) to it all. That's fine because EO's not a character-driven game, and it's not very story-driven there. The only reason a story seems to exist is to give you some place to go and to have a way to end the game.

FE is a game that has always given you a relatively large cast of playable characters. Support conversations give more insight into the characters, their motivations and their past and their personalities. FE is a game that seems to want you to grow attached to your units and sympathize with them just as much as the NPCs and villains. Do we really need an avatar there as some additional character trying to steal some of that limelight? Not really, and in the case of FE14 it hurt the game. I feel like in FE, all of the other characters should be the main focus of characterization, and the avatar should just be there as an observer without inserting their own little drama into it.

[mikethepokemaster]

I think the next Avatar should be a nobody by that I mean Like lets say it has the generic fire emblem plot A Evil Empire trying to take over the world. Our 'Lord' family is killed right before his eye by an elite solider and he wants revenge against that solider. A long his journey he meets the party of character that will band together for the kingdom, but the twist is No body really like him at first,the Avatar a jerk a asshole, and he kind of a loner since his family was killed before his eyes. As the plot goes along he begins to care for his party and he grows both as a leader and a Tactician of War. Hes not perfect He will kill an opposing force if they mess with him and his party unless one of the forces is a party member to you have recruit. To get back to the No body like him at first we have the 'Kamina' like character every body like him he the Lord of the game everybody favors but by chapter 10 he get killed off, also the dude was close to the Avatar and he was the only one to get the Avatar to open up and his death effected him the most. At the end of the game he becomes the new king of the land(The people wanted him, he down it down but the people wouldn't let him. he become quite humble and commander like.) and the land prospers Like all the other fire emblems games.

Edited October 8, 2015 by mikethepokemaster

[Sunwoo]

I wish FE would take a break from the avatar in the next game. Not saying that they have to be gone forever because we all know that is not happening, but like how FE7 had a tactician and then FEs 7-11 didn't I wish they'd give the avatar a break in the next installment and then maybe bring them back later. The last three FE games have all had avatars. It's getting repetitive.

[HTakara82]

Yes it did. The fact that they were silent meant that it was a character that was you. And your character progression was directly tied in the fact that you were able to raise your character as you wanted to. You were "you," not "Chrom the lord that uses swords and has a sister named Lissa." So this left room to include your character on the adventure without making the character interrupt the story. You still had a role. You were the person that was assisting with the adventure. If you don't want to assist in the adventure, then you don't play the game-- hence why it works so well. In WKC, you were a person that was hired to help Leonard deliver the wine and ended up being dragged along on the adventure-- like Leonard was.

It doesn't matter if it's only good for some people. What matters is that the designer picks a medium to use the character and sticks to it rather than try to do all of them at once and fail on all accounts. The reason why the avatars are generally disliked in Fire Emblem is because IS isn't entirely sure WHAT they want to do with them. There has been almost no consistency between the avatars outside of your ability to customize them in the Fire Emblem games. If they make them a character that you can customize that already exists in the universe, that's fine, if they want the avatar to be a character that is supposed to be you in the game, that's fine too, but they need to design the game around that notion. Take Mark for instance, some people say it's weird that Mark wasn't a huge role, but Mark did exactly what Mark did-- was a tactician. He was in pretty much every scene, and the reason that Mark didn't have a canon appearance is because Mark was... You. It works extremely well in this regard. Could they have had more characters directly address you at moments? Perhaps, but for what it was, it was the best "player inclusion" without having your character directly interfere with the plot.

If they want your character to be integral to the plot for Fire Emblem and still be your avatar, that means that they will have to allow you make more decisions and be your own mouthpiece.

That boils down to personal preference, I thought Mark was some shoehorned garbage, it'll have the same effect if they never had that option. And I can't stand silent protagonists, because most times they do "talk" but you just don't see it, NPCs would talk to you and answer questions that you supposedly ask, or a statement you supposedly make, but you don't see it. But this is most prominent in jRPGs, I don't ever recall a jRPG with any meaningful dialogue choices. except for dating sims and visual novels.

Also, just because you don't have thousands of dialogue tree choices that ultimately means nothing, doesn't mean you're not making any choices. You still decide which side you go with, and depending on your choices your actions through the chosen choice can result in bad things to happen. Also, there's the choice of doing supports or not doing supports, if you don't bother to do supports, it's the same as a wRPG, as choosing the option to tell the npc to bugger off. But that's just me.

Anyway, long story short, after nearly 30 years of gaming, I've come to accept jRPGs for what they are and enjoy them for what they are, as well as with wRPGs. And try to expect the way one genre does things to happen with another. But feel free to correct me though, if there's a jRPG that flows in the same veins as wRPGs, like with BioWare and Bethesda, I'd like to know.

But in the end, I question if Kamui is even intended to be a self insert, but rather just allowing the player to name and design the lead they want, over "insert gary stu blue haired lord".