Jump to content
Leif

A Sardonic Look at Fire Emblem Fates

Recommended Posts

I understand that. It's all about execution.

I just get tired of people doing the same thing because "we've been doing it since forever and it works." I feel like that's the easy way out. You do something that everyone knows will work and you get praised for it. What happened to being different and trying new things? What happened to stepping out of your comfort zone? Hell, that's how I even got into Fire Emblem in the first place.

I'm not saying that the formula itself is bad but people tend to execute it in the exact same manner with only a few nuances to differentiate them. That's just how I feel, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is starting to reveal just how subjective story-telling is. I pretty much believe that there is no objective criteria to it, although there can be some overarching themes of agreement.

Leif's only criticism that he has revealed with Awakening is that it simply has time travel. I think time travel is always going to have plot holes alongside it; I can't really think of a story with time travel that doesn't have plot issues based around it. But I don't really see it as inherently problematic. Awakening's execution felt so right to me in so many regards. Maybe I never stopped to connect the pieces, but that's because I was just so engrossed in the moment-to-moment situations to even care about the plot from a macro perspective. From that perspective, Awakening felt really good. I also have a huge soft spot for the "tactical genius" anime trope seen in Robin.

Regarding the underdog story cliche, I actually really love it because it hasn't worn on me. I haven't played very many FE games at all, so the formula has not grown tiresome to me. I loved the Valm arc of Awakening so much because I felt like it executed this so very well. Usually, the underdog nation is just working to defend itself against the massive oppressive force in its own territory. Awakening threw a nice curveball in that your weaker army sailed across an ocean to fight this bastion of military might on their own turf. This was done using Sun Tsu pro strats and other geurilla tactics. I thoroughly enjoyed how the Valm arc was portrayed in this sense.

And now we have someone arguing in favor of cartoon villains over nuanced dilemmas. It's really all entirely subjective as to what we prefer in stories.

Edited by Natsu_T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't trying to steer the topic. LOL. Just expressing how I felt about Conquest over Birthright and why I preferred it.

Everyone, get back on-topic. Quickly, now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is confusing gray morality with likeness. It's not that. Gray morality would mean the villain just doesn't go "Mwa ha ha ha, I'm gonna destroy the world for the lulz!" and has better motives, probably justified in his own and his subjects views. Resources, land, vengeance, etc, without cliché madness, plenty of ways to do it.

A gray villain (or any gray character, in fact) doesn't need to be likable, he just needs to be understood, even if you don't agree or like him. Even if this villain is charismatic or likable, let's say Lyon, it won't change the fact he is an aggressor, attacking innocents and such, thus wrong and giving me every reason to kill him in my defense and of others.

Now, Garon or even Conq.Corrin, we can't say we like or understand what they are doing.

Edited by Lanko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i actually feel like conquest corrin can only be understood if you were very sheltered like they were.

granted even then, not every sheltered person is such a bleeding heart.

with that said, should corrin have been an edgelord on conquest or would that have been worse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i actually feel like conquest corrin can only be understood if you were very sheltered like they were.

granted even then, not every sheltered person is such a bleeding heart.

with that said, should corrin have been an edgelord on conquest or would that have been worse?

Corrinmui didn't have to be an edgelord but I would have liked a bit more...surety? I can't describe it. There are some problems I have with Corrinmui's childhood in Nohr, in general, regarding how they were raised. While I will admit that if one has been sheltered for the majority of one's life, one will be much more naive and inexperienced than another person.

But, why would Garon keep Corrinmui locked away from the world in the first place? Was Corrinmui truly a political hostage? Why kidnap him and claim them as your child if you were not going to raise them with your ideals and beliefs? Corrinmui said that while they were locked away, reading was one of their only hobbies; why is it that Corrinmui is so ignorant to many things? I would understand Garon possible censoring things but surely Corrinmui has read up on politics or economics or something? What was the point of letting the other siblings interact with Corrinmui? Was all this done to culminate to what is known as Chapters 5 and 6?

Any changes I would personally make to Corrinmui's childhood would most likely make them into something of an "edgelord," I admit that. But I would prefer to have a sensible edgelord over the Corrinmui we have now that was raised with the above questions in my mind.

Edited by SaiSymbolic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i actually feel like conquest corrin can only be understood if you were very sheltered like they were.

granted even then, not every sheltered person is such a bleeding heart.

with that said, should corrin have been an edgelord on conquest or would that have been worse?

I'm not sure about that. Ike and Elincia were also very sheltered, Elincia probably even more. I think Eirika or even Marth were also very sheltered.

The same sheltered Corrin apparently acts very differently in BR and even chooses nobody in REV. If part of the plan was due to naivety of the world, than he also shouldn't have the "wit" for the deceit for the ultimate betrayal plan.

Edited by Lanko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, direct, true, and interesting, what's to not like ?

Can't say anything that wasn't said before by someone else, (damn you someone else), but I wanted to put a word here to thank you for the read.

inb4noticemesenpai. :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree partly with you view on Conquest, however I think the true failing of the story is that it refuses to accept it's own grey nature. Or rather Corrin's grey nature.

From the outset, the morally grey nature of allying with Nohr in order to invade Hoshido is never painted in tha light. Rather, Corrin continues to insist that they only want peace for both nations and everyone just needs to believe in them. Takumi in particular is immediately villainized for not putting more faith in Corrin, despite him only knowing them as the stranger who one day showed up on their doorstep, (indirectly, but he doesn't know this) got their mother killed and then immediately joined back up with the faction planning to invade his homeland. Yet everyone is like 'Why can't he put more trust in Corrin').

Once the plot device of the crystal ball shows up (which conveniantly breaks and Azura never bothers to show it to anyone besides Corrin), the game takes a complete nosedive. The choice of invading Hoshido just to put Garon on a shiny chair, is pretty fucking grey since it means willingly allowing Hoshido to be destroyed in favor of Nohr. Yet it is not only presented as "the only choice", and neither corrin or Azura spend any time thinking of an alternative, but it is presented as a noble sacrifice on Corrin's part. They are shown as a borderline messianic figure for enduring all this pain to achieve their end goal of world peace. Never is it aknowledged that getting thousands of Hoshidans killed is a pretty damn dark, and certainly far from a morally good choice.

Then when they finally do rebel against Garon, it is presented as a complete triumphant moment, rather than a final desperate attempt to put things right. Oh and then possessed!Takumi shows up, shoots Corrin into unconcsiousness, and we get the most undisguised view of how the writers failed to understand their own story. Takumi shows up all friendly and apologizes to Corrin for his own actions. Now please enlighten me as to what he did wrong, besides hurting poor Corrin's feelings? It shows that the messianic portrayal of Corrin was exactly what the writers were aiming for. If Corrin had been the one to apologize for their part in getting Hoshido destroyed and both Ryouma and Takumi killed, I would be a lot less salty about this story.

In the end, all the moral greyness of the story fails in the face of the writers efforts to be sure that Corrin is a completely likeable saint, who can do nothing wrong. Anyone who dislikes them is either a two-dimensional caricature or gets taught the error of their ways.

This is a problem I have with both Robin and Corrin.

Both are portrayed with way too much player empowerment. Robin is portrayed as basically being perfect, able to come up with the perfect strategy for every situation which kind of takes any tension out. Not even Soren, as great a tactician he was, was portrayed as perfect as Robin.

Kris seems to be the only Avatar where he/she isn't portrayed as perfect in every way. Just a common soldier that became a great friend to Marth. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because human conflict is morally gray doesn't make it interesting. Gray stories are boring and try overly hard to get you to sympathize with the other side.

Take Suikoden II for instance. Luca Blight has an excuse similar to say Peri, but he's still a monster who kills for fun. The second antagonist from Suikoden II tries to have human motivation and he's far less interesting than Luca. Suikoden as a whole seems to utterly encapsulate the kind of stories I like. I don't play games to force myself to reevaluate my views on society and morality. The Laguz topic in Path of Radiance was well done, but it was the extent of what I like.

I like Awakening and Birthright and Shadow Dragon most of all, but my other favorite game plots come from Pokemon and Xenoblade. Metal Face is another example of a magnificent horrible person antagonist who I love.

I prefer my villains to be massive elder gods.

Meh, if you want grey morality written well try out ye olde book. Glen Cook is pretty well known for making a carer out of it.

But yeah games are almost universally bad at it. (there is shadow of the colossus though...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a problem I have with both Robin and Corrin.

Both are portrayed with way too much player empowerment. Robin is portrayed as basically being perfect, able to come up with the perfect strategy for every situation which kind of takes any tension out. Not even Soren, as great a tactician he was, was portrayed as perfect as Robin.

Kris seems to be the only Avatar where he/she isn't portrayed as perfect in every way. Just a common soldier that became a great friend to Marth. That's it.

Kris is literally had his own fan club in FE12.

For the most part yeah, he's irrelevant in the long scope which makes it really annoying when Marth claims he does so much

Edited by JSND

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is starting to reveal just how subjective story-telling is. I pretty much believe that there is no objective criteria to it, although there can be some overarching themes of agreement.

Leif's only criticism that he has revealed with Awakening is that it simply has time travel. I think time travel is always going to have plot holes alongside it; I can't really think of a story with time travel that doesn't have plot issues based around it. But I don't really see it as inherently problematic. Awakening's execution felt so right to me in so many regards. Maybe I never stopped to connect the pieces, but that's because I was just so engrossed in the moment-to-moment situations to even care about the plot from a macro perspective. From that perspective, Awakening felt really good. I also have a huge soft spot for the "tactical genius" anime trope seen in Robin.

Regarding the underdog story cliche, I actually really love it because it hasn't worn on me. I haven't played very many FE games at all, so the formula has not grown tiresome to me. I loved the Valm arc of Awakening so much because I felt like it executed this so very well. Usually, the underdog nation is just working to defend itself against the massive oppressive force in its own territory. Awakening threw a nice curveball in that your weaker army sailed across an ocean to fight this bastion of military might on their own turf. This was done using Sun Tsu pro strats and other geurilla tactics. I thoroughly enjoyed how the Valm arc was portrayed in this sense.

And now we have someone arguing in favor of cartoon villains over nuanced dilemmas. It's really all entirely subjective as to what we prefer in stories.

Wanna say that you are not alone. I too enjoyed Awakening's Valm arc, even if it could have been expanded upon much more. And yes, I love the tactician genius trope as well, a very underused concept in FE which relies more on noble princes with magic swords, rather than using tactics and strategy, despite the whole series being about it.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I am surprised of Leif's more positive look on Conquest, considering the massive trash Conquest has gotten storywise in these forums. As somebody who has yet to play Fates (or even find detailed information), I am quite happy to hear other opinions to give me a chance on the games (not that I wouldn't anyway but I don't want to be bogged down by all the negativity).

Edited by Taka-kun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Garon as a great character. He doesn't have any "human" motivations for trying to conquer Hoshido, but who needs them? They only serve to weigh a story down. Garon's insane grasp for all the power makes him that much better to me. I also loved Hans and Iago because they were evil for the sake of it. Those are the most fun villains.

now I can perfectly understand the appeal of villains with no real good motivation

but here's the thing, even though villains can be good even without a "human" motivation, they should still have some kind of appeal to be an actually good character. if you want a villain to be a ridiculous cartoon villain, then let them be something entertaining and silly or someone blatantly evil and intimidating. garon doesn't have any good reason for doing what he does to make the player feel anything towards him, nor does he have enough of a personality to have any real impact on the player. he's just an evil old fuck who wants hoshido. so as it stands, he's not good as a human character or as a cartoon villain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pure evil villains can still be good villains; Valter is very good because he is very intimidating and dangerous and demonstrates cunning and manipulative traits. He does have goals other than simply bloodshed and his motives are kind of human in a way, even if they're purely evil (he's motivated by both lust and his enjoyment in actually fighting). Fomortiis is closer to Garon's level but honestly compared to his peers in Anakos and Grima, he is miles above them because he actually benefits Lyon and the twins' character development. He also displays a surprising amount of personality. He's witty, very sarcastic, and is very good at manipulating people. It's not original or anything but it's present. Ashnard is also surprisingly decent, with his battle conversations fleshing out his philosophy. His philosophy is a lot like the laguz's and Ike's but taken to a rather dark extreme. Sothe notes that his rule is not terrible all things considered and he's given room for commoners and foreigners to improve their status as long as they're talented. Izuka is basically Josef Mengele, which is unique among FE antagonists, though admittedly, he's not that great a villain. Even the senators, who are ridiculously evil, are still motivated by something understandable, which is more political power and wealth. Garon, Hans, and Iago don't have any of that to at least make them passable antagonists.

I find it odd that there are people who prefer villains with absolutely NO real motivations and are only evil for the sake of evil, but there's room for everyone I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to post and say that I loved your review of Conquest, and agree that in the hands of a few skilled writers could be rewritten into something great.

I've always enjoyed stories about protagonists or main characters who struggles to survive in, and possibly reform, a society that is innately somewhere between "lawful neutral" and "lawful/chaotic evil." That's always been a far more interesting premise to me than being part of a group of morally good rebels fighting against a big, bad, empire-------and as someone who just finished leveling and role playing a Sith Warrior on the Star Wars MMO, SWTOR, I can confidently say it's more refreshing to serve a very morally grey/black-grey faction rather than your traditional hero attempting to destroy it. I guess the biggest difference between the Sith Empire in SWTOR and Nohr in Fates is that the protagonist in the former is given countless choices to reform it cunningly and subtly and change it from within, while Corrin is forced to almost always deal with external threats and is never given the opportunity to undermine Hans' or Iago's plans in other parts of Nohr. This is made particularly frustrating as both Corrin's allies and enemies alike throughout the game remark that King Garon's orders are often subject to a great deal of interoperation or misinterpretation, and that plot point should have been expanded upon to allow Corrin to undermine Hans' or Iago's killing sprees, all under the guise of a very loose interpretation of "following Father's orders" . Corrin might not even have to kill Hans or Iago initially, just continuously deny them the ability to be crazed mass murderers.

[spoiler=Conquest plot, mainly ]

I also think Corrin's suffering should have been condensed into the first third, or at longest the first half, of the campaign for Conquest. Have tragedy after tragedy pile up along each other, rather than being spread out throughout the entirety of the campaign, and being separated by unrelated plot points. So [ice Tribe Rebellion] -> [Cheve Rebellion] -> [Notre Sagesse conflict] -> [The death of Felicia, Silas, or a version of Lilith that had a more active role in this the story since Ch. 2-3 onwards, and whose sibling relationship with Corrin was already revealed very early in. Ideally, the death should be the fault of both Hoshido and Iago (+Hans?) alike. Perhaps Iago and Hans, in a more desperate attempt to get Corrin out of the way, leaked information to Takumi and Ryoma about the location of Corrin's army. Both unhinged by bitterness and betrayal, the Hoshidans manage to capture some of Corrin's closest allies in an ambush, and despite his most valiant efforts, Corrin is forced to watch the execution of some of his closest allies by Hoshidans and Nohrian traitors like Hans and Iago alike.] That's when one of the most badass dialogues in Conquest occurs:

----------------------

"Iago: Such betrayal is an act of treason, and the only possible punishment is death. As such, I think I'll go take your pathetic little life myself."

"Corrin: If it's a fight you want, it's a fight you'll get. I always try to avoid needless violence, but there's an exception to every rule. You want me to act more like you? A merciless killer? Then watch this. You maybe be on the side of Nohr, but I will punish you all the same. […] Everyone, ready your weapons! These men have used cowardly tactics to hurt innocent people! They have destroyed the reputation of our beloved kingdom! They are traitors, and they will pay for the crimes with their lives! Hurry my friends, it is time to obliterate [Hans, Iago, and their followers] and take back Nohr!"

(After battle)

"Iago: Eeek! No! Please! I don't want to die!"

"Corrin: It's over, Iago, have some dignity and let me finish you off quickly!"

"Iago: Spare me Lord Corrin! Have mercy! All we did was follow the King's orders, same as you! If you dislike our tactics, blame him! Punish him instead!"

"Corrin: You have always made me out to be a murderer, a traitor, a cold blooded killer. Well maybe you're right, maybe it's time I stop denying an aspect of myself you so readily point out! I've always tried to be virtuous and effective at the same time, to see the best in people! Thank you, Iago, for letting me see how foolish that was! Now experience the wrath of Nohr!"

(Corrin kills Iago and Hans)

------------------------

The Nohrian-Hoshido war/invasion arc happens shortly after this, and plays out similarly to Conquest, although after this point in the story Corrin becomes his own character and is no longer a neutral stand-in for the player. He becomes more jaded, ruthless, and cunning in his attempts to undermine both Garon, makes allies across Nohr, and neutralize Hoshido as a threat once and for all. Garon in this version could still be a corpse possessed by a demon, although the difference is that Corrin and the other royals don't know this until the end-----Corrin's merely acting against him once it's clear he's a political threat to his goals. After Corrin and co. successfully subdue Hoshido, and after Ryoma commits suicide, the "demons" inside Takumi and Garon release themselves, and ravage the world of Fates. The last few maps are dedicated to the survivors of the war repelling this threat, and Corrin eventually ending Garon and Takumi.

The ending cutscene/epilogue would be very, very similar to how Conquest ended, with Xander ascending to the throne and Corrin and Leo being responsible for reforming Nohr in the coming years.

[/spoiler]

As much as Conquest could use a rewrite, I still think it's better than "(almost) everybody lives" Revelations.

Edited by Hoshidoooont

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was surprised by how positive your review on Conquest was--I agree that Garon was almost entirely the sole cause of its problems, but I expected you to at least comment on how poorly-handled some aspects of the plot were (namely, the trip to Valla in Chapter 15).

That said, I do agree that for all its flaws, I find Conquest better than Birthright, not just because of the gameplay, but because it's different. Corrin's actually a pretty tragic hero, a flawed prince who fails almost more than he succeeds, in Conquest, and that's very new and very interesting in Fire Emblem. The moral greyness and theme of sacrificing your morals for your family just make it more interesting than the tried-and-true Birthright, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pure evil villains can still be good villains; Valter is very good because he is very intimidating and dangerous and demonstrates cunning and manipulative traits. He does have goals other than simply bloodshed and his motives are kind of human in a way, even if they're purely evil (he's motivated by both lust and his enjoyment in actually fighting). Fomortiis is closer to Garon's level but honestly compared to his peers in Anakos and Grima, he is miles above them because he actually benefits Lyon and the twins' character development. He also displays a surprising amount of personality. He's witty, very sarcastic, and is very good at manipulating people. It's not original or anything but it's present. Ashnard is also surprisingly decent, with his battle conversations fleshing out his philosophy. His philosophy is a lot like the laguz's and Ike's but taken to a rather dark extreme. Sothe notes that his rule is not terrible all things considered and he's given room for commoners and foreigners to improve their status as long as they're talented. Izuka is basically Josef Mengele, which is unique among FE antagonists, though admittedly, he's not that great a villain. Even the senators, who are ridiculously evil, are still motivated by something understandable, which is more political power and wealth. Garon, Hans, and Iago don't have any of that to at least make them passable antagonists.

I find it odd that there are people who prefer villains with absolutely NO real motivations and are only evil for the sake of evil, but there's room for everyone I suppose.

This. I've seen people say that Garon/Hans/Iago are bad villains because they're pure evil. The problem isn't that, it's that they're the wrong kind of pure evil. M. Bison is one of the greatest video game villains ever in my opinion and as much as I love to shit on Naruto, I found Orochimaru to be absolutely gripping whenever he was on-screen. Even within the Fire Emblem series, you had villains like Valter and Manfroy who are very evil, but they're still leaps and bounds ahead of Fates' villains. In my opinion, the divide comes in the motive. Bison and Orochimaru are unrepentant in their evil actions, but everything they do serves a greater purpose. The villains of Fates meanwhile, are doing evil things because they're just jackasses basically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally like the idea of subjectivity that was introduced a few posts ago, as it brings home a very important point.

We all enjoy different things, even if we enjoy the same genre, or even the same game.

To add my own two cents to the pile, I should probably say I'm one of those who enjoys the aspect of nuance alot more than most, and complex characters really hit it home for me.

Which is why, quite frankly, all three stories dissapointed me in some fashion or another, not so much due to a bad premise, or sloppy storytelling (by itself anyway), but more because I felt there was so much more they could have done with what they had.

In short, They squandered so much, it could have been so much better. You don't even really have to add any new characters, or too much more information, just re-arrange what's already on the table and elaborate on it. Make Garon a deeper villain with more subtlety (even considering his -ehem- condition), expand upon the war, let us fight more of it before you launch us right into a mad dash for the enemy capitol. Perhaps even give us choices for when to spare or kill certain key members of the other faction (why was Shura's scene on the boat of Nohr the -ONLY- place you could do this?)

I personally found Birthright to be rather dull (given my desire for complexity). Its not so much that the 'You're good, they're evil' Story-line is over played, its the way they handled it that really got me, give that, the moment you hit CH 13, you never go back to Hoshido once (technically, you leave it much earlier, but I'm referring to when you go to Cheve), even when Ryouma casually mentions (i forget which chapter this happens in) that Yukimura sent him a letter dated a couple weeks back that Hoshido is in pretty big trouble. All of this, of course, overlooks the key issue that you're basically on a glorified assassination mission that would, quite frankly, serve only to piss off the Nohrians rather than make them surrender, especially given their warlike culture and their now dead/martyred leaders.

Conquest was a curious case for me, given the angst of turning against your bloodkin in favor of your adoptive family. This has the setup and premise to be an epic tale filled with tragedy and deep moralistic choices, but seems to fall flat right from the get-go, given how delusional Corrin is when it comes to believing that the very obviously Villainous father figure is obviously evil. Maybe Xander should have mentioned that he was cackling at the thought of tormenting you, it's not like he had your back or anything... :>_<:. But beyond Corrin's face-slammingly stupid naivety when it came to Garon, I thought there was alot more potential to Conquest's premise than that of Birthright, even if it was executed very questionably.

Revelations is even more of a sore spot for me than either of the other two, mostly because of how face-slammingly stupid everyone -ELSE- is when it comes to Corrin. But I won't go any further because I'm a noob at forums and don't know how to make a spoiler tag.

Edited by Lynx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember this when I had some conversations about stories with some friends some time ago.

Many of my favorite characters are people I find very despicable and lacking any sympathetic qualities and with whom I have nothing in common. Kane, Darth Vader, Walter White, Lucy from Elfen Lied. But many times I really enjoy a character it's because I understand them and think I've figured them out. And perhaps there's also a reaction of joy to keep following them and seeing if my guesses about them are right.

I think what makes a character interesting and entertaining to follow is to learn about them, getting a more complete picture of them, and gaining an understanding of how they think and what they want. This is to me the primary meaning of "character development". Not so much how they change through the story, but how their personalty is expanded. Maybe this is why support convos are so popular in the franchise.

To create characters to which this applies requires that you have to understand them yourself. You need to have a pretty good idea of what they want, how they think, and how they act, so they can remain consistent throughout the full length of the story. Or in case the character goes through a change through the course of the story, you need to understand the change and how it is happening. Once you got that you need to put the character in various different situations to which they can react according to their motives, thinking, and abilities; and through which they can show new aspects of their personalty.

If you have a character whose story consist of fighting orcs six times, trolls two times, and a dragon one time, you won't really show any new facet of the character to the audience after the second or third fight. Instead you'd better cut out half of the fight scenes and perhaps replace them with a scene in which he encounters an escaped prisoner, one scene in which a wounded enemy wants to surrender, and one scene in which he has to get through a heavily reinforced gate quickly. As the character deals with different situations, we get to see different facets of his personalty, and if they remain consistent we can get a better picture of them as a real person.

Dark Evil Lord taking over the world and heroes stopping him because it's the right thing to do won't get you anything like that.

The best stories are those in which the plot is the result of the personalty of the character. If anyone would act the same way if put into the position of the protagonist, then the plot is written in a way that allows almost no agency.

In this aspect, Leif's analysis that Conquest would be the best story in the franchise with the changes he pointed out (and a few others) is correct, as Conquest story and Corrin is indeed unique, as no other Lord of another game had to lie, deceive or face this kind of situation. And no other character would have acted the same way, as the people that could change things (the siblings) all act in the same manner regarding Garon.

Edited by Lanko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, why was IS pushing Azura HARD as the canon love interest for Corrin? What we learn in Revelations about Corrin's specific relation to Azura (they're cousins) makes that whole shipping ordeal messed up.

-Also, what happened during the time skip in Revelations after Anankos was defeated and right before the final epilogue cutscene? How did they escape Valla? What does it mean that land was donated to Valla? How can Corrin be the King of Valla if literally all of the Vallites are dead or insane murderers. These questions are never addressed.

Lastly, I'll try to sum up my opinion of Conquest/Birthright/Revelations:

Conquest: My favorite, more ambitious plot, took more risks, attempted to introduce more grey morality into the mix. I personally think the most problematic aspect that prevented the story from being something better was GLORIOUS NIPPON that didn't do anything wrong, as well as the scathing anti-Nohr bias in the original translation, that Treehouse (to my understanding) balanced out by making Hoshidans more xenophobic and racist in the english translation.

Birthright: A safe plot, and a boring one. I got tired of heroic, underdog rebels fighting against an evil empire a long time ago. It's boring, and safe.

Revelation: The third path that ruins the paths of Birthright and Conquest, once it's apparent both of them only exist to lead up to the events of Revelations. Nearly everybody lives, Gunter and Azura still disappear in this version's ending, and it just feels like one giant power trip. Corrin has the least characterization in this path, and Azura is a walking plot device. It felt like fan fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funnily enough, I never really thought IS was pushing Azura as the "canon" love interest--at least, not in the same fashion as Chrom x Sumia.That is one of the reasons I never really liked them together (that and I was salty Sumia couldn't marry Stahl). Maybe they got better at being subtle or I'm just blind AF. Azura was just there to me--I don't even plan on marrying her when I play as a dude. As the same with many aspects of Fates, they could have done a bit more with Azura to give her a bit more presence. She's like the female version of Kellam to me. LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, why was IS pushing Azura HARD as the canon love interest for Corrin? What we learn in Revelations about Corrin's specific relation to Azura (they're cousins) makes that whole shipping ordeal messed up.

Values dissonance. Cousins is legal in Japan, so for them it doesn't really mess up the shipping. Heck, it's even legal in some parts of the West.

Funnily enough, I never really thought IS was pushing Azura as the "canon" love interest--at least, not in the same fashion as Chrom x Sumia.That is one of the reasons I never really liked them together (that and I was salty Sumia couldn't marry Stahl). Maybe they got better at being subtle or I'm just blind AF. Azura was just there to me--I don't even plan on marrying her when I play as a dude. As the same with many aspects of Fates, they could have done a bit more with Azura to give her a bit more presence. She's like the female version of Kellam to me. LOL.

There's nothing as blatant as a scene called "Lovebirds" or an opening with Azura holding baby Kana (that would require them to put actual thought into the kids), but they really do push her. Three support conversations, three confessions, a fast support growth (which is normally restricted to siblings and retainers), and a lot of shippy dialogue (specifically Chapter 5 and the endgames).

Edited by Abvora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one would have wanted a set pairing and have it play in the story, like Sigurd/Deidre. It would allow for some drama in the story, if IS didn't have to keep it all ambigious because of fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a problem I have with both Robin and Corrin.

Both are portrayed with way too much player empowerment. Robin is portrayed as basically being perfect, able to come up with the perfect strategy for every situation which kind of takes any tension out. Not even Soren, as great a tactician he was, was portrayed as perfect as Robin.

Kris seems to be the only Avatar where he/she isn't portrayed as perfect in every way. Just a common soldier that became a great friend to Marth. That's it.

What? The game pretty much says, "Marth? Shiiiit. He's didn't do anything. Kris was the true hero!" And the game ends with Kris being oh so humble for letting Marth take the credit for all of Kris' achievements by being the hero of shadows because Archanea needs a great king. Fuck. That. Kris is awful. The absolute worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? The game pretty much says, "Marth? Shiiiit. He's didn't do anything. Kris was the true hero!" And the game ends with Kris being oh so humble for letting Marth take the credit for all of Kris' achievements by being the hero of shadows because Archanea needs a great king. Fuck. That. Kris is awful. The absolute worst.

Is that really what happens? New Mystery is the only game I haven't played yet, but I probably won't bother if that's what happens. It's one thing to make a player avatar look better than everyone else (I can think of very few games involving player avatars that don't do that to some extent, and half of them are Dark Souls/Bloodborne, but actively changing a pre-existing story to involve a player avatar that upstages everyone else is unforgivably bad).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...