Defending the Story of Fates.

[RedRob]

In Conquest, the blood sibling who [spoiler=SPOILER]dies would be Ryoma, and after you defeat him in battle he does what any good Samuria would do and commits seppuku. This is supposed to spare MU the despair of killing his own brother, but in my opinion driving him to disembowel himself right in front of you after defeat isn't much better than just killing him yourself. Especially since seppuku would be a brutal, horrible way to go out.

Well, I meant more in the idea that the fear he might be forced to kill his siblings would cause nightmares, not to mention all the other stuff that happens that would easily traumatize a person.

Well, seppuku is considered honorable in Japan, so it probably wasn't brutal to Ryouma.

Though the scene loses impact when you realize from the angle he's holding his sword, he's stabbing himself in the balls, with an ELECTRIFIED katana. Then it just becomes nonsensical.

[Augestein]

Honestly, out of all of the plots, I feel like Conquest is the only one that's worthy of actually being defended to be honest. Conquest actually tries to have your character do something that might not necessarily be the right thing. Conquest actually has some form of tension and interesting dynamics out of all the stories presented. It's admittedly not done very well, but it gets major points for trying something that distinctly *not* the same as every other Fire Emblem in existence. Your character can't take the higher moral ground in arguments on the account that they are actually not entirely in the right-- with more evidence leaning towards the fact that they may be in the wrong. I like this. The team did not have the skill necessary to handle this type of story, but the fact that they tried was nice and a bit of fresh air honestly.

What I like about Conquest is that Corrin sticks with his "wrong" decision and makes the best of what (s)he feels that they can do despite being woefully inept and under-prepared for the decision they make. Conquest being a colossal train-wreck is specifically because Corrin is an idiot. The game's dialogue is a bit wonky, but the fact of the matter is that things do not turn out "great" at the end of Conquest, and I like the bittersweet ending that was presented here more than the "and magically everything was good" in the very end. In that regard, I feel like Conquest captures the essence of a war far better than any other game in the series. People are happy that the war is over, but there were plenty of casualties to still cause stings overall.

Some say Corrin is not a hero. But (s)he is a hero. To the Nohrian people. (S)He freed them from Garon's tyranny while simultaneously not allowing the country to be destroyed. Sure, you might say that "Hoshido was not the aggressor blah, blah, blah," but does that really mean that Nohr deserves to be trashed because Hoshido wasn't in the wrong? The answer to that is "no." This story is not very good, and definitely has some weak points, but I have seen much, much worse from video games.

This story is no masterpiece, but I think people ARE a bit too harsh on it. Especially Conquest. At least it tried to do something out of the norm for Fire Emblem.

[Mikhail Naumov]

I feel the Paralogues (and DLC) in Fates was its weakest point in terms of story. Every single Paralogue in Fates felt extremely empty in terms of story and none of it really tied to the main plot. Awakening had this issue as well but at least the Paralogues in Awakening were a little more fleshed out, the Fates Paralogues literally feel like objectives with no real descriptive elements past the parents briefly talking to the child. Awakening did this in some but most of the Paralogues actually fleshed out the antagonist in the situation (The Boss) a little more.

Edited June 27, 2016 by Mikhail Naumov

[arvilino]

Honestly, out of all of the plots, I feel like Conquest is the only one that's worthy of actually being defended to be honest. Conquest actually tries to have your character do something that might not necessarily be the right thing. Conquest actually has some form of tension and interesting dynamics out of all the stories presented. It's admittedly not done very well, but it gets major points for trying something that distinctly *not* the same as every other Fire Emblem in existence. Your character can't take the higher moral ground in arguments on the account that they are actually not entirely in the right-- with more evidence leaning towards the fact that they may be in the wrong. I like this. The team did not have the skill necessary to handle this type of story, but the fact that they tried was nice and a bit of fresh air honestly.

What I like about Conquest is that Corrin sticks with his "wrong" decision and makes the best of what (s)he feels that they can do despite being woefully inept and under-prepared for the decision they make. Conquest being a colossal train-wreck is specifically because Corrin is an idiot. The game's dialogue is a bit wonky, but the fact of the matter is that things do not turn out "great" at the end of Conquest, and I like the bittersweet ending that was presented here more than the "and magically everything was good" in the very end. In that regard, I feel like Conquest captures the essence of a war far better than any other game in the series. People are happy that the war is over, but there were plenty of casualties to still cause stings overall.

Some say Corrin is not a hero. But (s)he is a hero. To the Nohrian people. (S)He freed them from Garon's tyranny while simultaneously not allowing the country to be destroyed. Sure, you might say that "Hoshido was not the aggressor blah, blah, blah," but does that really mean that Nohr deserves to be trashed because Hoshido wasn't in the wrong? The answer to that is "no." This story is not very good, and definitely has some weak points, but I have seen much, much worse from video games.

This story is no masterpiece, but I think people ARE a bit too harsh on it. Especially Conquest. At least it tried to do something out of the norm for Fire Emblem.

I'd agree Conquest covers new ground in terms of how Fire Emblem's stories are concerned. I think there’s also an interesting difference in the story even as early as simply Corrin's aims after joining each side and not the outcome. By joining Hoshido Corrin helps fight back Nohr defeating them in order to end the war and achieve peace, in Birthright Corrin is chooses a position where he/she can only end the war by force. Which is standard Fire Emblem in any other Fire Emblem game that would be seen as right, Hoshido are in the right because they aren’t the original aggressors…but they want to defeat Nohr to stop the war and Corrin does too in Birthright.

However the choice in Conquest introduces a different perspective. When Corrin sides with Nohr in Conquest his/her original intentions have him/her attempt to prevent the war with compassion(minimal casualties on either side) and by trying to change the Nohrian way. What Corrin tries is stopping rebellions (at least the Ice Tribe) without causalities and also trying to show during conflict with Hoshido that Nohr isn’t just filled with monstrous people.Of course in the end it doesn’t work and what Corrin tried was naïve. But if Corrin did successfully change “the Nohrian way” and Hoshido was receptive to his/her attempts to showcase this, assuming the war could have been stopped "Corrins way" then Conquest may have the lower body count than the other two routes and in a way it could be argued Corrin actually sides with Nohr with better intentions than he/she does with Hoshido. Corrin joins Hoshido with the idea of defeating/stopping Nohr, Corrin doesn't join Nohr to defeat Hoshido.

What's also interesting is how Corrin goes about this until the invasion of Hoshido makes me think of some of the observations of previous Fire Emblem games like the idea "Every enemy soldier you kill had a family". Corrin frequently sparing the enemy forces in Conquest is interesting, since he isn't just sparing his siblings or the enemy leader in each engagement(e.g. all the Ice Tribe survive and the villagers acknowledge you going to the villages, yet a named character like Crimson gets slaughtered). Things like these are interesting since it's pretty rare that the series treats any unit without a name with significance even during dramatic situation, similarly Corrin and Azura's support in Conquest reflecting Corrin's regret over the impacts of the choice.

[Alazen]

Conquest is too busy framing Corrin as a good boy who dindu nuffin to do the "Noble boy raised in a corrupt land who gets challenged by what he sees in the war until he's driven to invade his birthplace" schtick. And Corrin being able to beat all those maps without any enemies dying is silly.

[Original Alear]

They wanted to invoke thoughts from the player with a black and white conflict where everything is solved by killing a third party? You're right, that does sound like Code Geass, because in that anime that's how they solve things as well, and it's not just how the world works - if they're going to try and invoke thoughts or make a political statement, it should at least be somewhat realistic. Everyone effortlessly uniting to defeat a third guy and then to expect there to be no complications afterwards is silly and naïve.

Thing is, even though Lelouch's consistent allies w/in the Black Knights in CG are largely sympathetic and hard to dislike, Lelouch himself is definitely not black or white, and is willing to admit (often embrace) his dark side. Yet, is not all the way bad either. With Corrin, I feel like things are always presented such that Corrin's morally questionable acts are still the best he/she could have done under the circumstances, and isn't it noble how bad Corrin feels. Britannia also has characters that are both not cartoonishly evil and also not completely paralyzed/ineffectual (Suzaku being the most obvious). CG <<<<< LoGH but CG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fates IMO.

It's strange how everyone says the hate is over the top but agrees with the problems; what is over the top, in that case?

I think it's more like why these debates are still being rehashed and (it seems to me) so little being added? I don't think the flaws in FE Fates are that interesting, personally. I mostly posted the above because it gave me an excuse to post about Geass, which has a lot of flaws but is a bit dear to my heart all the same.

I understand that new, inactive, or elsewhere active people probably come in wanting to discuss this stuff, but I do see you on just about all of these threads. I don't have a bone to pick but I do wonder. I waste time on the net too so it's nothing I can criticize you for. Your opinions generally seem well considered so it's not like I think you're wrong.

Well, seppuku is considered honorable in Japan, so it probably wasn't brutal to Ryouma.

Though the scene loses impact when you realize from the angle he's holding his sword, he's stabbing himself in the balls, with an ELECTRIFIED katana. Then it just becomes nonsensical.

It might have been considered honorable, but most people only disembowel themselves once - I think it's probably a pretty brutal experience even if you've seen someone else do it. Ryoma's a badass but I still think it would have been a hellish final experience. He didn't even have a second - I don't know when they became commonplace, but samurai typically had someone waiting to behead them once they completed the cut (or if there were complications).

I feel the Paralogues (and DLC) in Fates was its weakest point in terms of story. Every single Paralogue in Fates felt extremely empty in terms of story and none of it really tied to the main plot. Awakening had this issue as well but at least the Paralogues in Awakening were a little more fleshed out, the Fates Paralogues literally feel like objectives with no real descriptive elements past the parents briefly talking to the child. Awakening did this in some but most of the Paralogues actually fleshed out the antagonist in the situation (The Boss) a little more.

I actually liked several of the parent/child conversations in the last chapter a lot, even though the basic content of each one was the same (I'm going to save you pa). I can't really think of a point in the main story of Fates or the supports that I thought was as moving. Edited June 29, 2016 by PP UP