Camilla is Insane + More?

[Thane]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'll never understand why they felt the need to include an identical set of four siblings on both sides. It should've been obvious that they could never balance that many characters and write them well - in the case of Xander, he's effectively two different people in the main story and in the supports.

[DragonFlames]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'll never understand why they felt the need to include an identical set of four siblings on both sides. It should've been obvious that they could never balance that many characters and write them well - in the case of Xander, he's effectively two different people in the main story and in the supports.

Which is sad, because in his supports, Xander is actually a pretty decent fellow. Cut to the story and... well, ya know.

A few of the supports with Camilla get an 'Aww' or two from me as well, especially the ones that DON'T concern Corrin.

I don't know why they felt the need to put in two sets of four people, especially since most of them end up getting shafted in-story as well, examples include Hinoka, Sakura and Camilla on Birthright, Camilla, Elise and especially Sakura (where she isn't even allowed to be the boss of her OWN FREAKIN' CHAPTER!) on Conquest and all of the females on Revelations.

Elise was at least relevant on Birthright...

That is, until she died pointlessly to... you know what? Screw it! You know how it goes, if you opened this spoiler. I'm angry about that scene, even though it was the saddest scene in all of Fire Emblem Fates, just because Xander once again proves a giant piece of **** he is. If a member of your family dies, you HONOR their last wish, no matter what! That's what is calles having balls! Damn it!

[Augestein]

Honestly I'm wondering if the writing is so bizarre in part because of what Miyazaki said about the anime industry: people don't observe or communicate enough with others to make credible portrayals of how characters in their work should act. I'm sure there are numerous reasons as to why the dialogue in this game is so bad (or in many cases, non-existent where there should be something), but the fact that so many characters act incredibly stupid and unrealistically makes me wonder if it's just because they don't know how to write normal human reactions. That might be overly harsh, and I've got no proof for that being the case, but it's not a good impression to get.

Oh, and don't misunderstand me, I'm fully aware we're dealing with a fantasy world and anime characters, but that doesn't explain the utter lack of logic in some characters' actions, like AzureSen mentioned with Corrin apologizing to Camilla, or Hinoka wanting to side with Corrin after invading Hoshido and kicking the crap out of her.

I think that might be some of it, but I think the bigger problem is just a clear lack of communication. Where the story has synopses made for certain key scenes that the other writers might know about, but you don't get all of the details of the scene itself. IE, Leo might call person X deplorable for their actions, but the synopses never actually defines what the deplorable action is from the person, so the writer has to make something up on the fly. If you're into visual novels, you can see this happen a lot in games. When you take other character routes (or just different routes in general), it makes the story less cohesive rather than more cohesive because not only are you seeing certain events from a different perspective, but there will be events that happen in other routes that are just plain impossible based on time frames and circumstances despite supposedly happening at the same time.

You know, I seem to remember Radiant Dawn treating characters like the Nohrian family like hypocritical cowards only interested in saving their own skin; I wonder what happened to that mentality. Case in point:

The difference here and there is that the protagonists are doing the condemning, as usual. So we can't really use "what happened to that mentality." Because as far as I'm concerned, nothing has changed. The main characters are always talking like a bunch of self-righteous zealots whether they are actually in the right OR the wrong.

As much as I want to like Camilla because some of her supports hint at a really interesting backstory (and some of the only world building in the game), the depth and details of her character, as AzureSen notes here, are mostly fanon. It pains me that some people arguing in Camilla's favor are treating their fanon like canon.

She'd make an interesting, maybe even tragic character if the game gave her more attention. I think they should have merged Leon and Camilla into one character. Also, Hinoka and Ryoma, but that's another discussion.

This is pretty much the same boat I'm in with Camilla. I like the idea of the character; a person that's slightly unhinged and actually showing some sociopath tendencies for everyone outside of the small frame of people that she has developed an affection for but there really isn't enough depth to it really. What ends up happening is that you have a woman that's merely obsessed with Corrin and really doesn't do much outside of her introduction in every route she's in.

I agree. Honestly, I felt that both Hinoka and Camilla didn't get enough attention out of the royals.

[Thane]

The difference here and there is that the protagonists are doing the condemning, as usual. So we can't really use "what happened to that mentality." Because as far as I'm concerned, nothing has changed. The main characters are always talking like a bunch of self-righteous zealots whether they are actually in the right OR the wrong.

You don't think that scene speaks for itself? I think it conveys that mentality rather well actually, and it can be directly applied to Conquest: the royals fear for their lives to the extent where they're ready to commit atrocities or allow them to happen to keep themselves alive, which is exactly what Sanaki despises. In fact the entire fourth arc of Radiant Dawn is about coming together and standing up against impossible odds and doing what you think is right no matter who says otherwise. Some charactes have their resolves weakened, but never to the point where they're ready to give up, and that's the major difference between Radiant Dawn and Fates - someone like Ike would fight to his dying breath whereas Corrin would be the first to side with Ashera.

What exactly does playng Conquest do to make us believe the Nohrian royals are good people? Show us they're upset when their underlings slaughter people? Show us that Xander would rather sacrifice a huge number of people to keep his 'honor' intact rather than letting someone kill four people and end the war then and there?

[BrightBow]

The difference here and there is that the protagonists are doing the condemning, as usual. So we can't really use "what happened to that mentality." Because as far as I'm concerned, nothing has changed. The main characters are always talking like a bunch of self-righteous zealots whether they are actually in the right OR the wrong.

Nothing changed just because in both cases it was the main characters condemning someone? It doesn't matter what they actually condemn and whether or not they are hypocritical with their conviction? Which Sanaki is most certainly not, given that she actually was working against the corruption among Begnion nobility instead of being the obedient little puppet that they wanted her to be.

Not to mention that Hetzel is not portrayed the same way as Iago, Hans and of course Zola either. Hetzel is a genuine sympathetic antagonist whose position is the result of an easily relatable human weakness. Meanwhile those three clowns are written as smug douchebags without any humanizing qualities that our heroes happily cut down when they get the opportunity.

And maybe it's worth mentioning that the main characters aren't the only ones who aren't fond of Hezel's outlook:

Hetzel: Wait… I remember you… You were one of the dracoknights that fled to Daein, defying the senators… You opposed the almighty Begnion and the word of the goddess… Why? Why would you defy such power?

Haar: You could live another lifetime, and you’d still never understand.

Hetzel: I don’t understand any of you. How can you oppose the goddess? It’s only natural that people live to please the gods… the weak follow the strong.

Jill: Strong, weak… It doesn’t matter. I fight on the side of my conscience, and have yet to regret my battles.

Hetzel: Mortals cannot measure up to gods. Any child knows as much. Why do you not kneel before her?

Astrid: That would be throwing away my own beliefs to live a life of blind obedience. I stopped doing that three years ago, and I’ve never looked back.

[Augestein]

Nothing changed just because in both cases it was the main characters condemning someone? It doesn't matter what they actually condemn and whether or not they are hypocritical with their conviction? Which Sanaki is most certainly not, given that she actually was working against the corruption among Begnion nobility instead of being the obedient little puppet that they wanted her to be.

In this case, yes. We can't really say that the writing mentality has changed so much as any person that the protagonist opposes will be wrong. The scene itself makes sense. But that in and of itself isn't definitive evidence of the change in mentality so much as it is the games functioning with a "the protagonist is always in the right." For instance, Sanaki's test for Elincia in PoR has Ike act like a complete douchebag in the cutscene, and the scene carries out as if Ike was in the right and even though what he did should have him executed, everyone just kind of shrugs it off and ignores it. It's not like this garbage didn't happen with the characters in the game from before. Characters like Shinon that call Ike out for having everything handed to him (such as the company despite his lack of leadership and fighting ability when he initially started out) and not having to truly work as hard as others like him or Gatrie is treated as Shinon being a dick rather than actually having a point. We've seen this before. That's why I'm not entirely convinced here.

Not to mention that Hetzel is not portrayed the same way as Iago, Hans and of course Zola either. Hetzel is a genuine sympathetic antagonist whose position is the result of an easily relatable human weakness. Meanwhile those three clowns are written as smug douchebags without any humanizing qualities that our heroes happily cut down when they get the opportunity.

Hetzel is written as pathetic. You can sympathize with him, but he's still written to be a miserably pile of filth. Hans and Iago are portrayed in the same light as someone like Valtome or Izuka. Just straight up villainous through and through and they really aren't developed for why they are such scumbags, and you aren't really supposed to care. Hetzel is more comparable to Birthright Zola in that regard. Pathetic and sort of sympathetic.

And maybe it's worth mentioning that the main characters aren't the only ones who aren't fond of Hezel's outlook:

They are still the protagonist. What you'd need is a non-protagonist (or really any NPC), a villain, declaring the heroes' actions as hypocritical and I'll believe that it's not merely Fire Emblem slapping on the "protags are right" mantra that so many games go by.

You don't think that scene speaks for itself? I think it conveys that mentality rather well actually, and it can be directly applied to Conquest: the royals fear for their lives to the extent where they're ready to commit atrocities or allow them to happen to keep themselves alive, which is exactly what Sanaki despises. In fact the entire fourth arc of Radiant Dawn is about coming together and standing up against impossible odds and doing what you think is right no matter who says otherwise. Some charactes have their resolves weakened, but never to the point where they're ready to give up, and that's the major difference between Radiant Dawn and Fates - someone like Ike would fight to his dying breath whereas Corrin would be the first to side with Ashera.

Not in the way you're thinking. The condemning doesn't work because we need a situation where the villains call the heroes out on their BS. Unless that happens, we can't say for certain of anything from the difference in these scenes. In the end of the day, you still have your heroes spouting how the villains are wrong and they are in the right (even if one situation is seemingly more stupid than the former). It doesn't compare to Hetzel at all-- The Nohrians eventually part from Garon and stop him. Hetzel doesn't try and continues to stammer that he was too weak. Even when finally confronted about it up close and in person. When people confront Corrin, he just straight up says "I'm trying to end this peacefully and I won't let you destroy Nohr." I will admit that Corrin being too weakminded to stand up to Garon is definitely a thing, I will also admit that his "trying" isn't actually "doing," but he's far better off then Hetzel in this case.

Corrin probably wouldn't side with Ashera on the account that he's trying to save his skin. If Conquest!Corrin sided with Ashera, it would be because there are people that side with Ashera that he wishes to protect and he would realize that if there are people preserved with Ashera and they aren't bad people, that Ashera can't be that terrible. Otherwise all versions of Corrin are definitely going to side with Yune. Conquest!Corrin is a selfish individual in that regard, they aren't very wise, and in some aspects I'd go as far to say that they are stupid. Conquest!Corrin would probably rationalize at that point that there MUST be a reason that Ashera petrified everyone and he'd want to know, as she has no reason to just petrify everyone-- despite the people seemingly being dead. That's what Conquest!Corrin would do. He's as dumb as a sack of bricks, but that's not bad writing, that's a protagonist being stupid ... So stupid that it's frustrating to watch a naive, foolish person... Be naive and foolish and net the results of their stupidity and lack of wisdom. I think it's just really hard for people to accept that they are playing as an idiot.

[NekoKnight]

In this case, yes. We can't really say that the writing mentality has changed so much as any person that the protagonist opposes will be wrong. The scene itself makes sense. But that in and of itself isn't definitive evidence of the change in mentality so much as it is the games functioning with a "the protagonist is always in the right." For instance, Sanaki's test for Elincia in PoR has Ike act like a complete douchebag in the cutscene, and the scene carries out as if Ike was in the right and even though what he did should have him executed, everyone just kind of shrugs it off and ignores it. It's not like this garbage didn't happen with the characters in the game from before. Characters like Shinon that call Ike out for having everything handed to him (such as the company despite his lack of leadership and fighting ability when he initially started out) and not having to truly work as hard as others like him or Gatrie is treated as Shinon being a dick rather than actually having a point. We've seen this before. That's why I'm not entirely convinced here.

They are still the protagonist. What you'd need is a non-protagonist (or really any NPC), a villain, declaring the heroes' actions as hypocritical and I'll believe that it's not merely Fire Emblem slapping on the "protags are right" mantra that so many games go by.

Not in the way you're thinking. The condemning doesn't work because we need a situation where the villains call the heroes out on their BS. Unless that happens, we can't say for certain of anything from the difference in these scenes. In the end of the day, you still have your heroes spouting how the villains are wrong and they are in the right (even if one situation is seemingly more stupid than the former). It doesn't compare to Hetzel at all-- The Nohrians eventually part from Garon and stop him. Hetzel doesn't try and continues to stammer that he was too weak. Even when finally confronted about it up close and in person. When people confront Corrin, he just straight up says "I'm trying to end this peacefully and I won't let you destroy Nohr." I will admit that Corrin being too weakminded to stand up to Garon is definitely a thing, I will also admit that his "trying" isn't actually "doing," but he's far better off then Hetzel in this case.

Why does being the protagonist discredit the value of their statements? In Ike's case, he was calling out Senaki for toying with Elincia's feelings on a whim, and Senaki let's it pass because she recognizes she went too far. In Senaki's case, she called out Hetzel for being a coward and allowing tragedies he could have prevented. Is that not an accurate summary of what happened?

The Nohrian siblings only rebelled against Garon and his lackeys in the very final chapters of the game (and in Iago and Hans case, they attacked first). They don't even oppose Garon he directly tries to kill them all. Their "we'll eventually do something after a lot of bad things happen on our watch" isn't much better than Hetzel.

Corrin probably wouldn't side with Ashera on the account that he's trying to save his skin. If Conquest!Corrin sided with Ashera, it would be because there are people that side with Ashera that he wishes to protect and he would realize that if there are people preserved with Ashera and they aren't bad people, that Ashera can't be that terrible. Otherwise all versions of Corrin are definitely going to side with Yune. Conquest!Corrin is a selfish individual in that regard, they aren't very wise, and in some aspects I'd go as far to say that they are stupid. Conquest!Corrin would probably rationalize at that point that there MUST be a reason that Ashera petrified everyone and he'd want to know, as she has no reason to just petrify everyone-- despite the people seemingly being dead. That's what Conquest!Corrin would do. He's as dumb as a sack of bricks, but that's not bad writing, that's a protagonist being stupid ... So stupid that it's frustrating to watch a naive, foolish person... Be naive and foolish and net the results of their stupidity and lack of wisdom. I think it's just really hard for people to accept that they are playing as an idiot.

Stop right there. Nothing in the game suggests that Kamui is being foolish. Insane, cowardly and hypocritical as his actions may be, not once does the game frame it as such. That's the definition of bad writing.

[Thane]

The Nohrian siblings only rebelled against Garon and his lackeys in the very final chapters of the game (and in Iago and Hans case, they attacked first). They don't even oppose Garon he directly tries to kill them all. Their "we'll eventually do something after a lot of bad things happen on our watch" isn't much better than Hetzel.

It's worse. Hetzel was a passive onlooker whereas the entire Nohrian royal family didn't have the guts to do what was right most of the time and actively took part in Garon's schemes. Hetzel is mentally and morally much stronger than Xander, who's portrayed as a hero.

[Augestein]

Why does being the protagonist discredit the value of their statements? In Ike's case, he was calling out Senaki for toying with Elincia's feelings on a whim, and Senaki let's it pass because she recognizes she went too far. In Senaki's case, she called out Hetzel for being a coward and allowing tragedies he could have prevented. Is that not an accurate summary of what happened?

But Sanaki is also the face of the Apostle. Letting anyone just do that to her, let alone a no name mercenary is pretty extreme and makes her look weak as a ruler. So yes, it IS worth noting there. It's not his affair. Also, the test was to see Elincia's resolve in the face of hardship. She passed. I don't see anything wrong with what Sanaki did there. It's not very nice, but it's a fair test considering how exactly Elincia was raised. Seeing if she's a strong enough person to even be able to rule the country is the least Sanaki could do. For Hetzel, it's accurate, but you're still missing my point with Hetzel. The issue is that we always have our playable characters preaching at people and the game portraying it as right. I'd be more apt to buy that these are these are coincidences that the people that are called out on this are just happening to actually be deplorable people rather than there actually being any logic outside of the protagonist is right mentality. I don't agree with the Ike scene with Sanaki at all. He should have kept his mouth shut.

Stop right there. Nothing in the game suggests that Kamui is being foolish. Insane, cowardly and hypocritical as his actions may be, not once does the game frame it as such. That's the definition of bad writing.

Nothing in the game suggests that he's smart. Quite the contrary actually. The game simply has Corrin him/herself suggest that what he's doing is right and the only way. But we the player know that this is false. Well, I present to you Hoshido and Revelations (as bad as it is, it's still a smarter choice than Nohr). Hell, Corrin even laments and wonders if what he/she is doing is right in the Nohrian path. When Garon tells Corrin to lead against the chapter 14 rebellion, Corrin is shocked as (s)he states that there are better choices. You have supports like Corrin / Azura having Corrin question that as well. So no. There in fact ARE things that suggest that what Corrin is doing is foolish and may very well be stupid. Characters in the game praise Corrin for trying to do the right thing, being a nice guy, or things like Elise's "he's the best person in the world." And why wouldn't they, the Nohrians, have nice things to say about him in Conquest? Whether Corrin is doing something that's "objectively stupid" doesn't change the fact that what (s)he's doing is actually beneficial to them.

Evil country or not. You don't see the enemy Hoshidans saying positive things about Corrin in Nohr .And why should they? He's a conqueror to them plain and simple even if Corrin himself doesn't want to admit that. You might say that I'm headcanoning things to make them sound better, but really, seeing Corrin as just stupid makes the story make a hell of a lot more sense. Yes, people are hypocrites, but people are in fact, hypocrites in life. I don't see how having a shitty cast makes for a bad story in this case. Bad writing is stuff like say... Azura's magical crystal ball (so it's not like I'm giving Conquest a free pass). Not ... Well a dumbass character.

It's worse. Hetzel was a passive onlooker whereas the entire Nohrian royal family didn't have the guts to do what was right most of the time and actively took part in Garon's schemes. Hetzel is mentally and morally much stronger than Xander, who's portrayed as a hero.

And that's still dependent on how you view things. I'd stand by it isn't. "Better late than never."

[Thane]

And that's still dependent on how you view things. I'd stand by it isn't. "Better late than never."

I bet that's what they tell themselves at night as they hear the screams of the people they've killed.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Thane

[Azure Sen]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'll never understand why they felt the need to include an identical set of four siblings on both sides. It should've been obvious that they could never balance that many characters and write them well - in the case of Xander, he's effectively two different people in the main story and in the supports.

Heck, they originally didn't--the Hoshido side original just had Ryoma, Takumi and Sakura, with the intention of Corrin being sibling #4. But because IntSys doesn't know what constitutes good writing anymore, they added Hinoka, and also drastically altered at least Camilla's personality to establish a bunch of parallels between the Hoshido and Nohr royal siblings that honestly don't work because they're so forced.

The difference here and there is that the protagonists are doing the condemning, as usual. So we can't really use "what happened to that mentality." Because as far as I'm concerned, nothing has changed. The main characters are always talking like a bunch of self-righteous zealots whether they are actually in the right OR the wrong.

They are still the protagonist. What you'd need is a non-protagonist (or really any NPC), a villain, declaring the heroes' actions as hypocritical and I'll believe that it's not merely Fire Emblem slapping on the "protags are right" mantra that so many games go by.

What are you trying to argue here? Do you even know at this point? Because I certainly don't. You've completely lost me with all of this bending over backwards and mental gymnastics you're doing to prove why Conquest's writing isn't awful. The "protagonists are always right" is a criticism for when the protagonists do objectively awful things and aren't called out or punished for it and people who do call them out or try to punish them are shown as villainous. It is not used for when the protagonists are actually right.

Characters like Shinon that call Ike out for having everything handed to him (such as the company despite his lack of leadership and fighting ability when he initially started out) and not having to truly work as hard as others like him or Gatrie is treated as Shinon being a dick rather than actually having a point. We've seen this before. That's why I'm not entirely convinced here.

Aside from the fact that no one else raises any such point, Ike was, according to Titania, always going to inherit the Greil Mercenaries and everyone was aware of that fact; he just ended up inheriting it earlier than they thought due to Greil's untimely death. Add to that his completely unjustified antagonism of Ike before Ike becomes commander and suddenly Shinon's point goes poof. Plus, the only conversation where he brings that up is his A Support with Janaff, where he admits that his reasons for hating Ike are things that are no fault of Ike's own and he actively chooses to hate Ike anyway.

For instance, Sanaki's test for Elincia in PoR has Ike act like a complete douchebag in the cutscene, and the scene carries out as if Ike was in the right and even though what he did should have him executed, everyone just kind of shrugs it off and ignores it.

Sanaki admits in that same scene that her "test" was just her screwing with Elincia and Ike for fun, and that she already knew Elincia was the true heir of Crimea thanks to Sephiran. Ike jumped the gun and spoke when he shouldn't have, but that doesn't make his criticism of Sanaki any less right. Not to mention that Sanaki intervened and made sure Ike wasn't executed specifically because she needed him to take care of the laguz slave trade (and probably because, as Neko Knight mentioned, because she realized she had crossed a line).

He's as dumb as a sack of bricks, but that's not bad writing, that's a protagonist being stupid ... So stupid that it's frustrating to watch a naive, foolish person... Be naive and foolish and net the results of their stupidity and lack of wisdom. I think it's just really hard for people to accept that they are playing as an idiot.

Nohrrin's naive stupidity is 100% bad writing, because we're not supposed to see her naivete as a flaw or her ready condemnation of Hoshido as stupidity. We see them as flaws because we have critical thinking skills and don't just accept what the narrative tells us without thought, but the game certainly doesn't treat them like flaws.

I can accept playing as a naive idiot if 1( the narrative actually treats my character as an idiot, 2( recognizes that it's an actual character flaw instead of playing it off as something endearing in the case of the nativity, and 3( the character actually grows and stops being a naive idiot at some point. None of which is actually applied to Nohrrin.

Edited July 20, 2016 by AzureSen

[Sunwoo]

Wow, I missed a lot.

There is a major, major difference with the way PoR's characters are written versus how Conquest's characters are written. PoR lets its characters change and grow in response to difficult events. Conquest does not. To take the example that was brought up above, when Ike yells at Sanaki he is told by Titania and Nasir that he should be grateful to the apostle for sparing his life, and he realizes that if the apostle was truly angry then Elincia's chances of restoring Crimea would be gone -- no matter how irrational it may be. He apologizes to Elincia, saying that his ignorance does not excuse his stupidity. Regardless of how people feel about this scene, it does go on to say that Ike's actions were not right, and that in Begnion it is enough to lose one's head to speak ill of the apostle as he did.

Conquest Corrin? Corrin does far stupider things than Ike or Micaiah or any protagonist could've done. Corrin is a naive child, but the game doesn't seem to think it's a bad thing. This naive child is given control of an army, despite their more experienced siblings also being present. Do we ever see Corrin receiving useful advice or tactics lectures from his siblings? I'd have been fine if Corrin was in charge of the army because Garon wants to see Corrin cry, but if it were made clear that Xander or Leon were the ones who were giving him advice on what the right decision to make in this case is. But we don't. They just follow Corrin's orders because Corrin wants them to. Corrin is just some amazing hero who's making sacrifices to their happiness by razing a country that is only defending itself, and the Hoshidans are the ones who need to "understand" Corrin and that Corrin is really on "their" side. It's disgusting how the game wants a country that is being conquered to sympathize the idiot invading them and to acknowledge that person as their savior who is only trying to help them by invading them.

There's just so many missteps with Conquests, to the point where I have a hard time taking its existence seriously at all. Conquest is presented as pretty much a selfish path -- not just in that Corrin picks and fights for a corrupt country for only a select few, but just the way it's structured. Birthright at least shows us what goes on in Nohr while Kamui is with the Hoshidans. It shows Xander and Elise conversing with one another about midway through the path. It lets us see the Nohrian siblings in a more sympathetic light. In Conquest? Well … we don't ever see the Hoshidan siblings unless we're fighting them. There's no insight into their plans or how they interact with one another or how this is affecting their country. All of the attention is on Nohr. Again, selfish plan where the only focus on anything is on Nohr. This is pretty unlike other FE games.

Fates in general has a pretty dramatic writing shift compared to the earlier FE games, in which protagonist-centered morality is favored over morally complex situations. But Conquest itself makes that a lot more evident than the other two routes.

As people have been repeating, the Nohrian siblings are RD Hetzel. They are younger, more attractive RD Hetzels who are given a game of their own and hailed as heroes despite doing everything Hetzel did (or didn't do) -- and get away with it because they're good-looking and in the protagonist position.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Sunwoo

[NekoKnight]

But Sanaki is also the face of the Apostle. Letting anyone just do that to her, let alone a no name mercenary is pretty extreme and makes her look weak as a ruler. So yes, it IS worth noting there. It's not his affair. Also, the test was to see Elincia's resolve in the face of hardship. She passed. I don't see anything wrong with what Sanaki did there. It's not very nice, but it's a fair test considering how exactly Elincia was raised. Seeing if she's a strong enough person to even be able to rule the country is the least Sanaki could do. For Hetzel, it's accurate, but you're still missing my point with Hetzel. The issue is that we always have our playable characters preaching at people and the game portraying it as right. I'd be more apt to buy that these are these are coincidences that the people that are called out on this are just happening to actually be deplorable people rather than there actually being any logic outside of the protagonist is right mentality. I don't agree with the Ike scene with Sanaki at all. He should have kept his mouth shut.

1. Watch the scene again, Senaki was just screwing with Elincia because she was bored. It wasn't to test Elincia's resolve.

2. The game agrees with you that Ike should have kept his mouth shut. Titania and Nasir tell him this exactly.

Bolded: What you are suggesting here is that the writers don't care if Ike is right or wrong and it's merely a coincidence that the people he faces are objectively wrong. That...doesn't make any sense. Ike isn't right because he's right, he's right because he's the protagonist? Huh?

Nothing in the game suggests that he's smart. Quite the contrary actually. The game simply has Corrin him/herself suggest that what he's doing is right and the only way. But we the player know that this is false. Well, I present to you Hoshido and Revelations (as bad as it is, it's still a smarter choice than Nohr). Hell, Corrin even laments and wonders if what he/she is doing is right in the Nohrian path. When Garon tells Corrin to lead against the chapter 14 rebellion, Corrin is shocked as (s)he states that there are better choices. You have supports like Corrin / Azura having Corrin question that as well. So no. There in fact ARE things that suggest that what Corrin is doing is foolish and may very well be stupid. Characters in the game praise Corrin for trying to do the right thing, being a nice guy, or things like Elise's "he's the best person in the world." And why wouldn't they, the Nohrians, have nice things to say about him in Conquest? Whether Corrin is doing something that's "objectively stupid" doesn't change the fact that what (s)he's doing is actually beneficial to them.

That's the conclusion a player should reach after a critical analysis but that's not what the game intended you to think. The game bends over backwards to justify the Conquest plot, with heaps upon heaps of contrivances to make Kamui's decisions have an ounce of logic. If the game wanted you to think Kamui and friends were dumb and immoral, someone in the story would have said that. The game is pretty consistent in portraying them as well-intentioned heroes, even if we the players can see how morally/logically unsound their actions are. Conquest has a bittersweet if not happy ending. There's no "way to get a bunch of innocent people killed" message anywhere in the story.

Sanaki admits in that same scene that her "test" was just her screwing with Elincia and Ike for fun, and that she already knew Elincia was the true heir of Crimea thanks to Sephiran. Ike jumped the gun and spoke when he shouldn't have, but that doesn't make his criticism of Sanaki any less right. Not to mention that Sanaki intervened and made sure Ike wasn't executed specifically because she needed him to take care of the laguz slave trade (and probably because, as Neko Knight mentioned, because she realized she had crossed a line).

when Ike yells at Sanaki he is told by Titania and Nasir that he should be grateful to the apostle for sparing his life, and he realizes that if the apostle was truly angry then Elincia's chances of restoring Crimea would be gone -- no matter how irrational it may be. He apologizes to Elincia, saying that his ignorance does not excuse his stupidity. Regardless of how people feel about this scene, it does go on to say that Ike's actions were not right, and that in Begnion it is enough to lose one's head to speak ill of the apostle as he did.

These are the important bits of the scene. Ike is told directly by two of his supporters that his actions nearly ruined Elincia's cause and would have gotten himself killed had Senaki not decided to spare him out of kindness (and probably pragmatic interest). Ike admits he messed up. The game makes it clear that even if his convictions are on point, his actions were wrong.

Fates never had the courage to call out Kamui (and his supporters) for their stupidity, despite it being far greater than Ike's.

Edited July 21, 2016 by NekoKnight

[DragonFlames]

I think it all comes down to this with Conquest's plot: You play the villain. Period.

I take the statement back that I liked Fates' story more out of all the Fire Emblems, because all of you good people have reminded me of the awesomeness that was PoR's story (and RD's by extension) and then there is FE7 with a story so heartbreaking you almost want to cry (especially the small romance budding between Eliwood and Ninian. Compared to that, Corrin/Azura seems SO forced!).

It doesn't stop Fates from being an awesome game with awesome characters, don't get me wrong. It's just that I feel the wrong characters are in the spotlight. If it were me, I would have let the retainers have the main spot, the Royal siblings as tactical advisors for Corrin (on all three sides) are fine, but for me, the retainers are so much more interesting than most of the Royals. Case in point:

• Saizo's and Kagero's backstory
• Hana's willingness to follow in her father's footsteps and unwillingness to have him critcised
• Odin, Selena and Laslow. Why are they relegated to mere extras whose backstory you only learn if you play DLC? Oh yeah, money.
• Peri's backstory
• Beruka's backstory
• Oboro's crush on Takumi. Why does she have it?
• Hinata

All of these things could have been explored.

If they made the time in the story, these characters could have been fleshed out more. But nope! Each of them only exists to be a doormat for the Royal they serve. Or rather worship. Seriously. The only reason the retainers exist is to make the Royals seem even cooler than they are (NOT!) or to say it wrestling terms, bring the Royals 'over' with the crowd. Well guess what? It didn't work on me!

It's sad, really and a huge Richard Relocation on the writer's part.

I love how this has become a thread discussing the overall plot of Fates and the mental health (or lack thereof) of the Nohrian Royals, not just about Camilla.

Edited July 21, 2016 by DragonFlames

[Augestein]

What are you trying to argue here? Do you even know at this point? Because I certainly don't. You've completely lost me with all of this bending over backwards and mental gymnastics you're doing to prove why Conquest's writing isn't awful. The "protagonists are always right" is a criticism for when the protagonists do objectively awful things and aren't called out or punished for it and people who do call them out or try to punish them are shown as villainous. It is not used for when the protagonists are actually right.

The writing is bad for Conquest, but not for the reasons that people are saying on this point. I think all of you guys are actually just missing what I'm saying here because you somehow think that because I'm saying "Conquest is not bad for the reasons you're saying because other games are guilty of this as well" and confusing THIS with "Conquest has good writing." You can't just change what I'm saying and expect that to fly. That's not what I'm saying. It's almost such blind hatred for Conquest that it's ignoring the flaws of other things. The whole "make Corrin suffer" and it's not addressed for what that even means? Garbage. Corrin crying over the Rainbow Sage? Pretty stupid but minor because the sage was dying anyways but still dumb. Azura having a dragonstone randomly to stop Corrin from turning into a dragon? Trash. Azura having a magical ball that she can show the true soul of Garon that she decides to only show to Corrin knowing full well that the bloody thing will shatter? Stupid for a myriad of reasons. Corrin being stupid? Well it's annoying, but considering that Corrin is consistently dumb, I can't call this bad writing.

1. Watch the scene again, Senaki was just screwing with Elincia because she was bored. It wasn't to test Elincia's resolve.

2. The game agrees with you that Ike should have kept his mouth shut. Titania and Nasir tell him this exactly.

Bolded: What you are suggesting here is that the writers don't care if Ike is right or wrong and it's merely a coincidence that the people he faces are objectively wrong. That...doesn't make any sense. Ike isn't right because he's right, he's right because he's the protagonist? Huh?

I did. Sanaki says she was bored. But she also says she was to test her:

Sanaki : Yes. I apologize for testing you. You see, life here in the palace is dreadfully dull. I am always so very bored. Thanks to the princess and her brazen little escort, this interrogation proved to be an amusing diversion.

It was both amusing to her and a test. I don't see why it can't be both. Is there any reason it can't be? She even apologizes for it afterward. Had Ike blown up first and foremost before? That'd have made sense with his spill about Elincia's integrity. But he doesn't, it's after it's revealed.

That's the conclusion a player should reach after a critical analysis but that's not what the game intended you to think. The game bends over backwards to justify the Conquest plot, with heaps upon heaps of contrivances to make Kamui's decisions have an ounce of logic. If the game wanted you to think Kamui and friends were dumb and immoral, someone in the story would have said that. The game is pretty consistent in portraying them as well-intentioned heroes, even if we the players can see how morally/logically unsound their actions are. Conquest has a bittersweet if not happy ending. There's no "way to get a bunch of innocent people killed" message anywhere in the story.

But how do you know that? If the game bends over backwards for Corrin here when everything blew up in his/her, I'm still standing by that the game also did this for Ike. Ike stupidly runs off the ship to investigate the lands that the dragons live. Not only do the dragons not kill him, like they are supposed to by law, but that same group just so happens to have the prince and he just feels like not only helping them to leave the place, but he also resupplies their stock. That's pretty unbelievable too. No consequences. Nothing. It's the same level of stupid here.

Aside from the fact that no one else raises any such point, Ike was, according to Titania, always going to inherit the Greil Mercenaries and everyone was aware of that fact; he just ended up inheriting it earlier than they thought due to Greil's untimely death. Add to that his completely unjustified antagonism of Ike before Ike becomes commander and suddenly Shinon's point goes poof. Plus, the only conversation where he brings that up is his A Support with Janaff, where he admits that his reasons for hating Ike are things that are no fault of Ike's own and he actively chooses to hate Ike anyway.

Yeah, and that doesn't help the writing there at all and only kind of helps my point here. The people that ever point anything out are immediately labeled as bad. Even going so far as the characters themselves. The characters are willing to die for someone that's really inexperienced and just kind of shrug it off as "it just happened sooner than we expected." Yeah... A lot sooner, why not just put Titania in charge? She's second in command and just two days ago she was giving Ike orders. It doesn't really make sense.

There is a major, major difference with the way PoR's characters are written versus how Conquest's characters are written. PoR lets its characters change and grow in response to difficult events. Conquest does not. To take the example that was brought up above, when Ike yells at Sanaki he is told by Titania and Nasir that he should be grateful to the apostle for sparing his life, and he realizes that if the apostle was truly angry then Elincia's chances of restoring Crimea would be gone -- no matter how irrational it may be. He apologizes to Elincia, saying that his ignorance does not excuse his stupidity. Regardless of how people feel about this scene, it does go on to say that Ike's actions were not right, and that in Begnion it is enough to lose one's head to speak ill of the apostle as he did.

The issue comes about when Ike never faces consequences for any of his actions. It really doesn't matter if someone is like "you're lucky," every single time. That's the issue here. The game doesn't actually make it out that Ike is entirely wrong because everyone again, just kind of shrugs it off. That's even less believable than Corrin being a moron. I'm sorry, I fail to see how everyone just kind of rolling over and being okay with things from Ike is any better than Corrin. We aren't talking Seth's speech to Ephraim and Eirika when he's like "these people aren't cheering for you because they like/love about you, they just expect you to not be as terrible as Orson." It's brutal and truthful to the protagonist. Much better than anything that came after SS. And no, it's not just because SS is one of my faves in the series either.

[Thane]

The writing is bad for Conquest, but not for the reasons that people are saying on this point. I think all of you guys are actually just missing what I'm saying here because you somehow think that because I'm saying "Conquest is not bad for the reasons you're saying because other games are guilty of this as well" and confusing THIS with "Conquest has good writing." You can't just change what I'm saying and expect that to fly. That's not what I'm saying. It's almost such blind hatred for Conquest that it's ignoring the flaws of other things. The whole "make Corrin suffer" and it's not addressed for what that even means? Garbage. Corrin crying over the Rainbow Sage? Pretty stupid but minor because the sage was dying anyways but still dumb. Azura having a dragonstone randomly to stop Corrin from turning into a dragon? Trash. Azura having a magical ball that she can show the true soul of Garon that she decides to only show to Corrin knowing full well that the bloody thing will shatter? Stupid for a myriad of reasons. Corrin being stupid? Well it's annoying, but considering that Corrin is consistently dumb, I can't call this bad writing.

Are you doing the internet equivalent of covering your ears and loudly chanting "I'm not listening"? Because it seems as if you're purposefully misunderstanding everyone on the thread to repeat your point ad nauseum. Just a few posts above this one AzureSen already replied to this:

Nohrrin's naive stupidity is 100% bad writing, because we're not supposed to see her naivete as a flaw or her ready condemnation of Hoshido as stupidity. We see them as flaws because we have critical thinking skills and don't just accept what the narrative tells us without thought, but the game certainly doesn't treat them like flaws.

I can accept playing as a naive idiot if 1( the narrative actually treats my character as an idiot, 2( recognizes that it's an actual character flaw instead of playing it off as something endearing in the case of the nativity, and 3( the character actually grows and stops being a naive idiot at some point. None of which is actually applied to Nohrrin.

Corrin is treated as a hero at the end of Conquest in spite of all they've done - we're not supposed to reflect over their stupidity or how things could've been better, we're supposed to cheer for them and for Xander taking the throne even though he didn't even consider lifting a finger to stop his father until it was revealed he was a LITERAL monster, for all the difference that makes.

We get your point. We just don't agree.

I take the statement back that I liked Fates' story more out of all the Fire Emblems, because all of you good people have reminded me of the awesomeness that was PoR's story (and RD's by extension) and then there is FE7 with a story so heartbreaking you almost want to cry (especially the small romance budding between Eliwood and Ninian.

TRIGGERED.

Must...resist urge to...rant and derail the thread further...

[Moblin Major General]

As a legendary Feldmarschall in the Wehrmacht, I can empathize with Camilla. Personally, I didn't exactly obey the orders of my methhead Parkinson's Head of State, but I really tried to achieve the (military,not political)objectives he was going for. Granted, I was coerced into suicide before I found out his ravings were carried out at the expense of 12 million non-combatants, and unlike Garon, he was actually a real person with reasoning (drug use notwithstanding and unexcused). Unlike Nohrrin, I never denied that bloodshed is in fact a part of war, nor did I go out of my way to let my enemies escape like he did. My fellow soldiers and Nazis obviously didn't choose the easiest way to cow the Poles, French, Russians, or Slavs, as doing so wasn't the goal of Hitler's ethnic cleansing. Nohrrin could've and should've, but when I look at Zola and the leader of Mokushu, all I see is another mounted head in Hitler's Bavarian castle. Hitler didn't want peace, and neither did Garon. They wanted destruction, both of an entire race of people, and in General. Was Nohr just as stupid as Germany? Yes. Will they take a long time to be forgiven? If they ever are, yes. It's easy to forget that something as deplorable as Nazi Germany still had good people in it. Xander reminds me of my teacher Gerd von Rundstedt, who on multiple occasions did things worthy of a Nuremberg trial for him, but had misgivings about the politics of Germany. Camilla represents many faceless adjutants and soldiers, half-willfully doing contemptible things as to not anger their "Fearless Leader." I see Leo in myself, supporting Garon's reign, but often openly refusing to carry out senseless atrocities to further a pointless political goal. Elise is the German People: wishing a stop to the fighting, not knowing it's being artificially dragged out so that the true horrors can be inflicted. I can't tell you how many people have suffered the same fate as Scarlet in Chapter 13 of Conquest.

[blah the Prussian]

As a legendary Feldmarschall in the Wehrmacht, I can empathize with Camilla. Personally, I didn't exactly obey the orders of my methhead Parkinson's Head of State, but I really tried to achieve the (military,not political)objectives he was going for. Granted, I was coerced into suicide before I found out his ravings were carried out at the expense of 12 million non-combatants, and unlike Garon, he was actually a real person with reasoning (drug use notwithstanding and unexcused). Unlike Nohrrin, I never denied that bloodshed is in fact a part of war, nor did I go out of my way to let my enemies escape like he did. My fellow soldiers and Nazis obviously didn't choose the easiest way to cow the Poles, French, Russians, or Slavs, as doing so wasn't the goal of Hitler's ethnic cleansing. Nohrrin could've and should've, but when I look at Zola and the leader of Mokushu, all I see is another mounted head in Hitler's Bavarian castle. Hitler didn't want peace, and neither did Garon. They wanted destruction, both of an entire race of people, and in General. Was Nohr just as stupid as Germany? Yes. Will they take a long time to be forgiven? If they ever are, yes. It's easy to forget that something as deplorable as Nazi Germany still had good people in it. Xander reminds me of my teacher Gerd von Rundstedt, who on multiple occasions did things worthy of a Nuremberg trial for him, but had misgivings about the politics of Germany. Camilla represents many faceless adjutants and soldiers, half-willfully doing contemptible things as to not anger their "Fearless Leader." I see Leo in myself, supporting Garon's reign, but often openly refusing to carry out senseless atrocities to further a pointless political goal. Elise is the German People: wishing a stop to the fighting, not knowing it's being artificially dragged out so that the true horrors can be inflicted. I can't tell you how many people have suffered the same fate as Scarlet in Chapter 13 of Conquest.

Dude, for the love of god don't role play as Erwin Rommel. Seriously. In any case, the difference here is that we accept that the soldiers of the Wehrmacht were wrong; that they supported evil. You don't here even the worst Holocaust deniers declaring that the Wehrmacht had to support Hitler because otherwise he would never be exposed as a goo monster. That is why Conquest's plot is so frustrating.

[Augestein]

Are you doing the internet equivalent of covering your ears and loudly chanting "I'm not listening"? Because it seems as if you're purposefully misunderstanding everyone on the thread to repeat your point ad nauseum. Just a few posts above this one AzureSen already replied to this:

No. I also get what you're saying. I disagree as well. Ganging up on someone doesn't suddenly mean that they are repeating themselves because they respond back to multiple people. Nor does it somehow make everyone else right because someone else is in the minority on a belief. Especially when some go well out of their way to misinterpret points. Like saying I'm saying "Conquest has good writing by going through mental gymnastics." I never claimed that. So naturally, I'm going to correct someone for their erroneous assumptions. If you don't understand why someone is repeating things regardless, maybe you should reflect on what you're saying as well.

Corrin is treated as a hero at the end of Conquest in spite of all they've done - we're not supposed to reflect over their stupidity or how things could've been better, we're supposed to cheer for them and for Xander taking the throne even though he didn't even consider lifting a finger to stop his father until it was revealed he was a LITERAL monster, for all the difference that makes.

We get your point. We just don't agree.

Of course Nohr treats him as a hero. He is to Nohr. And for people like Sakura and HInoka, I'm not sure, what the hell do people expect them to do at this point? They were conquered and spared. It doesn't really make any sense to be hostile towards them. I don't see any problem with that. I really don't. That's not bad writing in and of itself. That's all I'm saying. And when prompted for why I would believe this, I point things out, but this is apparently shouting "I'm not listening?" No. I'm willing to beat up Conquest for a million other things it does that I don't like: this is not one of them.

So how, oh how, does that come across as confusing or me saying "I'm not listening?"

Seriously. In any case, the difference here is that we accept that the soldiers of the Wehrmacht were wrong; that they supported evil. You don't here even the worst Holocaust deniers declaring that the Wehrmacht had to support Hitler because otherwise he would never be exposed as a goo monster. That is why Conquest's plot is so frustrating.

And I can agree that this can be frustrating to see, because it IS contrived. And I hate the idea of that, but Corrin's reaction to it being his idiotic plan I can't call that bad writing. It's very difficult to have an incompetent character be followed and it's even more frustrating to see someone you might not like be liked by other characters. Fictional or not.

Edited July 21, 2016 by Augestein

[Azure Sen]

Since I have a lot to respond to, let me just address the most recent post while I type up a response to the one responding to me and Neko Knight.

Like saying I'm saying "Conquest has good writing by going through mental gymnastics." I never claimed that.

A friendly tip: when you're trying to make a point about being misunderstood or people putting words in your mouth, make sure you're actually responding to something the other person actually said. I specifically said that you were trying to convince us that "Conquest's writing isn't awful." I never claimed that you were trying to convince us it was good.

Of course Nohr treats him as a hero. He is to Nohr. And for people like Sakura and HInoka, I'm not sure, what the hell do people expect them to do at this point? They were conquered and spared. It doesn't really make any sense to be hostile towards them. I don't see any problem with that. I really don't. That's not bad writing in and of itself. That's all I'm saying. And when prompted for why I would believe this, I point things out, but this is apparently shouting "I'm not listening?" No. I'm willing to beat up Conquest for a million other things it does that I don't like: this is not one of them.

So how, oh how, does that come across as confusing or me saying "I'm not listening?"

You're missing the point. The point in this case isn't how the characters in-game are supposed to perceive Nohrrin as a hero, although there are some issues with that but they're not relevant to mine or anyone else's point at current. The point is that we the players are clearly supposed to accept that Corrin is the hero at the end of the game. There is not a hint of reconsideration, subversion or deconstruction to be found, and the end of the game is unironically played as a happy ending with Nohrrin suffering zero consequences for her actions. Again, the only reason we know better is because we have the critical thinking skills to recognize how poorly constructed the plot is.

[Augestein]

A friendly tip: when you're trying to make a point about being misunderstood or people putting words in your mouth, make sure you're actually responding to something the other personactually said. I specifically said that you were trying to convince us that "Conquest's writing isn't awful." I never claimed that you were trying to convince us it was good.

And I still never said that either. I never even hinted that Conquest's writing wasn't terrible overall, just that I think people are stretching too far for how badly the plot is written. So my point still stands. That's how ludicrously unfair you're being right now.

You're missing the point. The point in this case isn't how the characters in-game are supposed to perceive Nohrrin as a hero, although there are some issues with that but they're not relevant to mine or anyone else's point at current. The point is that we the players are clearly supposed to accept that Corrin is the hero at the end of the game. There is not a hint of reconsideration, subversion or deconstruction to be found, and the end of the game is unironically played as a happy ending with Nohrrin suffering zero consequences for her actions. Again, the only reason we know better is because we have the critical thinking skills to recognize how poorly constructed the plot is.

And I'm not so sure that's the case. Even if it were, there's still something of value to be taken from it. The ending didn't feel very extraneously happy to me. That might be because I played Revelations first, but the ending does not feel nearly as "satisfying" as Revelations, or even Hoshido to a certain extent. So having that in mind, I see it as the happiest ending that could have happened for Corrin at that point. It's sort of how we don't concentrate how Sigurd spends most of the game smashing everyone to pieces in Genealogy of the Holy War, we concentrate on the better aspects-- whether unintentional or not. We don't just degenerate the game's plot down to Sigurd smashes everyone to pieces while people get worried about him-- even if that is essentially what ends up happening each chapter (it's Fire Emblem, it's going to make you do it at some point). We don't just ignore that even though Nergal spends most of the game not even knowing why he does what he does, you can still appreciate the sort of tragic backstory he was given. In RD, rather than concentrate incessantly on how disjointed the entire adventure is and how clunky the narrative is at moments, we can instead focus on the more interesting political intrigue as well as appreciate the decently crafted continent Tellius-- and how because of the technological limits being set much higher than prior installments, the game could take advantage of that.

There's a point where dissection and analysis of a plot or tale can hit the point of nitpicking, and some of the posts in this topic have gone well beyond that.

[Sunwoo]

I wouldn't have hated Conquest's plot as-is if Nohrrin either learned the stupidity of their actions and realized how much unnecessary damage they caused Hoshido, or if Hinoka and Sakura refused to let him off the hook and weren't so buddy-buddy with him at the end. There's a difference between being tactfully polite and way too chummy. Hinoka and Sakura are too friendly with Corrin, as if they've already forgiven them. Heck, isn't Hinoka STILL playing the "we know you only did what you felt was right" angle to Corrin?

Conquest the plot doesn't think Corrin is wrong. The players themselves may think Corrin is wrong, but the plot itself gives no such evidence that's what the players are supposed to feel. The brief moments of Corrin's regret in any supports, or selected story scenes? We're not supposed to realize what a naive coward Corrin is, we're supposed to feel sorry for them because they feel so bad about things and is "helpless" to stop them. Corrin doesn't feel bad for the Hoshidan people, not really. They just feel bad for themselves, because "their happiness is the price to pay" and "the Hoshidan people don't understand why I am doing this". Corrin is a self-centered piece of shit who has the nerve to tell Hinoka they want to be siblings and to be a family and laugh -- mind you, this is one chapter after Takumi threw himself off a wall so as far as Corrin knows one Hoshido sibling may have already died, and you still think you have the right to say this to Hinoka?

A few scenes suggest that Corrin feels bad, but in the very end of the game there is no such message. Corrin feels like they're a fucking hero and that they "saved" the Hoshidans, and the Nohrian siblings are acting like they were fighting for the "good cause of peace" all along, and no one is called out on anything they did. Fuck Nohrrin and the Nohrian siblings.

[Azure Sen]

I think all of you guys are actually just missing what I'm saying here because you somehow think that because I'm saying "Conquest is not bad for the reasons you're saying because other games are guilty of this as well" and confusing THIS with "Conquest has good writing."

You’ve given a handful of examples of how older games are guilty of the same problems Conquest, none of which actually show those problems, and all of your examples come from one game. Other games in the series supposedly sharing the same flaws doesn't excuse Conquest for having those flaws as well.

Corrin being stupid? Well it's annoying, but considering that Corrin is consistently dumb, I can't call this bad writing.

Nohrrin not being allowed to grow and mature as a character is bad writing. Nohrrin never learning from her mistakes is bad writing. Nohrrin never facing any consequences for her mistakes is bad writing. Nohrrin participating in the invasion of Hoshido and having it portrayed as a noble action is bad writing. Nohrrin being a sanctimonious hypocrite with no hint of self-awareness is bad writing.

I’m going to drop the points about Sanaki and Shinon because it’s clear that discussion is going nowhere and there are more important points to be discussed.

The issue comes about when Ike never faces consequences for any of his actions. It really doesn't matter if someone is like "you're lucky," every single time. That's the issue here. The game doesn't actually make it out that Ike is entirely wrong because everyone again, just kind of shrugs it off. That's even less believable than Corrin being a moron. I'm sorry, I fail to see how everyone just kind of rolling over and being okay with things from Ike is any better than Corrin.

You’ll have to excuse me if things get a little disjointed, the magnitude of problems in this statement is going to take some time to sort through.

-First, Ike isn’t entirely in the wrong in either scenario.

-By default, getting called out by the narrative and other characters for his mistakes makes Ike far superior to Nohrrin.

-As does the narrative acknowledging that Ike makes mistakes, even if he doesn’t necessarily get punished for them. Every time Nohrrin gets called out in Conquest, it’s by characters who are portrayed as either irrationally hateful or ignorant.

-Also, Ike actually grows as a character because the narrative isn’t afraid to call him out. Nohrrin does not.

-None of Ike’s mistakes compare to the severity of the mistakes that Nohrrin makes.

-Two “lucky” saves (one of which wasn’t actually luck, but part of a larger plan by Sanaki) doesn’t compare to Conquest twisting itself into knots to justify and excuse Nohrrin’s villainy.

-Sanaki has an established reason for sparing Ike, in that she needs someone that the Senate can’t get to in order to eliminate the laguz slave trade. Two (feeling regret for being a jerk), depending on your interpretation of her silence during Ike’s speech and her words after.

-Ike didn’t know that Goldoa was hostile to outsiders, or even that they were in Goldoa at all, and left the ship because they were stranded with no visible way of escaping the reef the ship was caught in. If anyone, Nasir deserves the blame for not informing anyone beforehand that they were in Goldoa. Unless you’re going to argue that Ike was in the wrong for not magically knowing all of that information?

-Kurthnaga’s actions are supposed to establish that he’s a kind individual who firmly believes in co-existence of beorc and laguz and opposes his father's isolationism.

-And, finally, other characters and Ike himself addressing Ike’s actions and criticizing him for them does not constitute them being “shrugged off.”

And I'm not so sure that's the case. Even if it were, there's still something of value to be taken from it. The ending didn't feel very extraneously happy to me. That might be because I played Revelations first, but the ending does not feel nearly as "satisfying" as Revelations, or even Hoshido to a certain extent. So having that in mind, I see it as the happiest ending that could have happened for Corrin at that point.

Nothing about this statement changes or disproves my point. If you feel there are elements of Conquest’s ending or even its narrative as a whole which are legitimately deconstructive or subversive, then please share what they are and explain why you feel they are. Otherwise, the game portrays Conquest’s ending as a happy one, even if the player doesn’t necessarily agree.

Bolded: Only if you accept that Conquest’s plot as it played out was a complete inevitability like the game presents.

Edited July 21, 2016 by AzureSen

[SageHarpuiaJDJ]

But, at the end of the day, talking about this merely highlights how a lot of Fates suffers from missed opportunities. I still enjoyed Fates and its characters for what it was despite the numerous grievances I have with it and I can only hope and pray with bated breath that IS has taken the fans' response into consideration.

Also, just to clear up any misunderstandings, just because I empathize and sympathize with Camilla doesn't mean I automatically brush away any wrongdoings she has done. I just don't find it necessary to constantly point out something that should be understood by all—that is, a sob story doesn't excuse the actions a person takes in their life. They may explain them but they certainly to not excuse them, same for fiction as it is with reality apparently. /rant over

I mean, yeah, we can only talk about what we were given but, let's be honest, we've been talking about what we've been given since the game has come out. We know all the flaws of the game and characters; we have talked about it to the point where there is little else to talk about in regards to it. From that, we talk about the next best thing: what could have been.

People like Camilla for whatever reason. Yes, she kills innocents. Yes, she is obsessive and possessive to the extent of insanity and it is played as more of an endearing trait instead of the mental and psychological issue that it truly is. Yes, she has the ability to marry the younger brother that she has mothered since he was young. But, despite not being as serious or well-written as she could have been, I like Camilla because I like the attempt they made with her.

It may be a stupid reason but it's my reason. So, yeah. *shrug*

*brofists*

This is my thoughts in a shell nut. Of all the things that been discussed when it came down to flaws, the writing would always be the most discussed, but nothing really new was brought to the table. It got to a point where RD comparisons led to a thread comparing both lords of said series. In fact, all the points from threads from the past look the same, but either longer, more heated, or not really that different. Everyone's just a broken record at this point and it feels like all the flaws of the story and writing have been laid out and reproduced tenfold. Although in spite of this, there have been discussions on how these flaws can be approved, but I can't help but feel like those discussions would get so heated that it would feel more mean spirited rather than an interesting discussion.

I dunno, I've never really let either stories bothered me even tho they're so meh. Conquest had so much wasted potential storywise, but I wouldn't grit my teeth and lose sleep over it.

[Thane]

No. I also get what you're saying. I disagree as well. Ganging up on someone doesn't suddenly mean that they are repeating themselves because they respond back to multiple people. Nor does it somehow make everyone else right because someone else is in the minority on a belief. Especially when some go well out of their way to misinterpret points. Like saying I'm saying "Conquest has good writing by going through mental gymnastics." I never claimed that. So naturally, I'm going to correct someone for their erroneous assumptions. If you don't understand why someone is repeating things regardless, maybe you should reflect on what you're saying as well.

No one is ganging up on you. People are disagreeing with the points you make because they're rather weak and you explain them in a convoluted and verbose way.