What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[JimmyBeans]

6 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Why would soldiers be upset at Micaiah instead of Jarod? What type of lunacy is this? Jarod is the one directly causing the casualties so they'd pin the blame on Jarod especially since he's the enemy and Micaiah is their beloved savior. When a person gains a cult of personality, their flaws, far worse than Micaiah's are purposely overlooked by hardcore fanatics. 

I didn't ignore anything. Your response to my correction doesn't invalidate my correction. Because, not getting yelled on =/= no personal consequences. 

Of course they hate Jarod hes responsible for 90% of there troubles. But do you not think that if someone knew that Michiah had the chance to end the reign of the tyrant responsible for their hardships and found out that she showed him mercy and let him get away that they wouldn't even scratch their head?

Also sure it doesn't invalidate my "correction" but I explained what I meant and you had no response to that at all, since you didn't ignore it and you know what my thinking was why do you feel the need to continue expressing that point?

6 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

I see the question mark but asking such a foolish question does mean you're questioning my intelligence. 

The Begnion occupation forces in the capital. 

Ah I see.... foolish question?? Is this what we are resorting to now? By the way if anything I say seems like a personal attack on you it is not the case, I really get into discussions and arguments because I find them fun and enlightening. I assure you I meant to offense to you, sometimes I type and don't think.

7 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

In that case, either the Black Knight is an inconsistent character or he thought taking Alder's life was enough to conclude the battle and didn't want to stain his blood twice.

Sure. Like I said I believe this scene is up to interpretation so I have no argument here.

7 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Initially, you mentioned Micaiah as one of three examples along with Corrin who is infamous for being a terrible character so how was I supposed to know you think Micaiah is one of he better ones?

Secondly, it was made obvious this was a serious mistake from the get go. Making mistakes doesn't mean people are no longer allowed to love you. What type of logic is this? 

It's like arguing that Ephraim and Eirika aren't flawed when they lose Renais' sacred stone just because they personally don't suffer for it. It's quite clear they both made a bad move. 

You were not supposed to know what I was thinking which is why I explained it to you, I told you what I meant to stop the confusion.

And what type of logic is this? This is a misunderstanding of words if I've ever seen one... And in case this is another misunderstanding let me explain myself.

First of all, someone criticizing someone doesn't mean you have a burning hatred towards that person forever and ever, in fact Michiah could have plenty of opportunities redeem an individuals faith in her, like in a short term example of retaking the capital and ending Jarod.

Secondly, a few members of the massive army having a distaste for her wouldn't be unreasonable, it would only shed another view point which could benefit her character.

No it's not like arguing that towards Ephraim and Eirika at all, because they did not have nearly as much control over the situation, here is when Ephraim loses the stone to Lyon

Spoiler

 

(Ephraim charges at Lyon, but a spell stops Ephraim)

Ephraim:
“Gwaa…ah… What?! My body–!”

Evil Lyon:
“Don’t resist. Soon you will be unable to move at all…”

(Lyon teleports up to Ephraim and takes the stone)

Evil Lyon:
“So you had the Stone of Renais with you after all. If you’ll just give me a moment to destroy it…”

Ephraim:
“Stop…urgh!”

(Lyon breaks the stone)

Evil Lyon:
“And that’s the end of your Sacred Stone… Now then, Prince Ephraim. Are you prepared?”

 

You could argue that Ephraim should of contained his anger and ran away but Lyon can teleport and restrain him with magic as we see in this scene (My only question is what were the rest of the army doing during this exchange).

Contrast this with Michiah having every opportunity to kill Jarod, or let BK kill Jarod but actively let him go. The only way this comparison works is if Ephraim gave Lyon the stone and then later decided he made a bad choice to no ones dismay.

I could see the argument being better made against Eirika since Lyon in that route tricks her into giving him the stone which btw that scene is criticized a lot already. While this scene could of used some retaliation on her part the fact remains that by that point the sacred stone of Rausten is till intact and so hope remains.

 

[NekoKnight]

6 hours ago, Ottservia said:

you know this brings up somewhat of an interesting point. When you get right down to it, narrative in it of itself is inherently contrived. It's weird cause think about about it. As a writer you have complete control over the world, characters, and story and how they are progressed/explored. The fact of the matter is that everything that happens in a story is because the author made it happen and wanted it to happen. It's not necessarily a bad thing but it poses food for thought at least. Dunno where I was going with this but it's something to chew on anyway.

Then there's the whole question of what makes "flawed" character but I dunno. Ugh my brain hurts

I think I understand where you started with this. Was it in relation to the validity of a character's critics depending on the contrived result of the conflict as chosen by the writer? If so, there is definitely a matter of how a conflict is presented and which side's points, before and after, seem valid.  Like, if a character had some insane plan that others called a reckless endangerment of life, it would be valid criticism to call that reckless even if the hero somehow pulled off an impossible feat.

Real flaws should have consequences however. "Reckless" is not a flaw if the hero always succeeds regardless (which is why it's hard to take seriously when SoV pins this on Alm to say he's not perfect).

6 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

You now make me question whether Hector is truly flawed. He does have a moment where somebody recognizes he has a flaw, Oswin, and Hector himself comes to see it. But does the flaw have validity? Does the flaw in question, which can be generalized as being emotional, have a moment when it is seriously detrimental?

Yes, the flaw has validity because it is acknowledged and has a consequence. Hector is grieving for his brother and lashes out at Oswin because Hector doesn't know how to manage his grief besides anger. He gives Oswin the cold shoulder (the consequence) and Eliwood calls Hector out for his mistreatment, which Hector reflects on (flaw acknowledged ). It's a pretty significant but easy to miss character moment.

5 hours ago, Icelerate said:

Micaiah is forced to go out in a final battle when it could all have been avoided. I think being forced to go out for an extra pointless battle is personal punishment that surpasses someone scolding you by far. I'd rather someone get mad at me than being forced to go to war. 

She also indirectly mentioned her reluctance to kill Jarod, the first time around, when she entered Daein keep. 

  Reveal hidden contents

Micaiah:
“That shout…that’s Jarod! For Daein’s sake, this time I swear I will put an end to him.”

Micaiah not being always wrong is good. I don't want a lord that is always wrong either or else why are they even on such a pedestal to begin with? 

Also, other lords like Hector weren't criticized enough for his merciless nature. 

  Reveal hidden contents

Soldier:
“A friend? What? …Urrrgh!!”

Hector:
“Sorry, but I’m in a hurry.”

Serra:
“Ewww! That’s terrible! I loathe violence!”

Oswin:
“I cannot condone resorting to force so quickly…”

Hector:
“Chastise me later, Oswin. First, we deal with these brigands! Come! We must help Eliwood!”

Oswin:
“Help Eliwood? Sounds like a convenient excuse for more violence.”

Hector:
“Oswin!”

Oswin:
“Yes, yes. I’m coming!”

And Hector resorting to violence so quickly against a neutral bystander was never brought up again. 

Lyn and Eliwood don't even criticize Hector for threatening to kill Jaffar right in Nino's face.  

  Reveal hidden contents

Hector:
“Get out of my way, Eliwood! I’m going to kill him!!”

Nino:
“Stop it!”

Jaffar:
“……”

Hector:
“Hey! Why don’t you draw your sword?”

Jaffar:
“I’ve not been ordered to.”

Hector:
“Ordered to?”

Jaffar:
“……”

Nino:
“Please… Forgive Jaffar. I beg you…”

Jaffar:
“Nino.”

Hector:
“Bah… You live… for now. You’re nothing more than a tool. It serves no one to break tools. It’s more important that we stop Nergal. But don’t forget, I don’t forgive you anything.”

 

As far as I'm concerned being merciless is a worse flaw than being merciful and Micaiah has more personal consequences than Hector.

I don't mean to demean Hector as I think he's very well-written as well but alas both characters can be improved. My point is that Micaiah's flaws have more weight than most FE lords. 

Fair enough. That second quote does imply she's learned from a mistake. I just wanted to make a distinction between Micaiah and arguments I've seen in defense of Corrin. People say that because people die as a result of Corrin's actions, it makes him a flawed character. But it really rings hollow when other people suffer and no one criticizes Corrin for it. Although I suppose the bigger issue is, it's not just that no one criticizes him, it's that they specifically absolve him of any wrongdoing he commits.

I don't agree with your points on Hector, however. Being merciless is indeed a part of his character but it's not a flaw in the two scenes you cite. In the case of the soldier, he's allowing brigands to attack a lord and when Hector calls him out on it, the soldier tells him to piss off. Imagine if you saw someone being viciously beaten on the street, and when you call out a cop for standing there doing nothing, he tells you to mind your own business, wouldn't you assume the cop is not a good guy? That's what Hector does, and I think the dialogue implies the soldier was not going to brook interference (and we know they're under orders to let Eliwood die). The relatively lighthearted reactions of Mathew, Oswin and Serra seem to suggest that Hector didn't straight up murder the guy either.

Jaffar is even less sympathetic, having murdered the fiance of Hector's friend so there is no reason why Hector should contain his anger.

[Interdimensional Observer]

5 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

Yes, the flaw has validity because it is acknowledged and has a consequence. Hector is grieving for his brother and lashes out at Oswin because Hector doesn't know how to manage his grief besides anger. He gives Oswin the cold shoulder (the consequence) and Eliwood calls Hector out for his mistreatment, which Hector reflects on (flaw acknowledged ). It's a pretty significant but easy to miss character moment.

It is precisely this moment which does help elevate Hector for me. I mean it is nothing significant in the plot, and the circumstances, a mysterious disease which has struck down both of Hector's parents claims his brother suddenly, is a bit contrived, but the way he handles it is nuanced. Rage at first is justified, but then the rage passes, admits he was wrong, and forgives. It is realistic, if still perhaps a tad idealistic.

Although Hector being on the surface a brute but having more of an understanding of Lycian politics than he allows people to think he does is also part of my reasoning for liking him. The Eliwood dynamic is good to, though now I wish the support between the two didn't devolve into FE6 referencing.

 

6 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

and I think the dialogue implies the soldier was not going to brook interference (and we know they're under orders to let Eliwood die)

And just to provide those exact lines:

Helman:
“Could it be… Do you think Eliwood’s come to ask of his father? If that’s the case… I… I know not what to tell him.”

Ephidel:
“Tell him you know nothing, and let him be on his way.”

Helman:
“Yet… I know young Eliwood well. His father, Elbert, and I are old friends. I’ve no children of my own, and I’ve always treasured Eliwood… I do not believe I could look him in the eye and… I could not lie to him. I could not.”

Ephidel:
“We’ve no choice then. Let us chase the boy away. If you do not speak with him, you need tell no lies.”

Helman:
“Wait! Do you mean to harm Eliwood?”

Ephidel:
“Not harm. Frighten. A scratch or two will leave no scars. He will run home to Pherae and be done with his adventure. He is, after all, all that Pherae has left…”

So in other words, the soldier, presumably one of Santaruz's regulars, is there to make sure nobody interferes with the attack on Eliwood carried out by Ephidel through Zagan's bandits/corrupt Black Fang members. Rather than be neutral, he is just doing his job so Zagan can do his- not neutral at all!

 

6 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

Jaffar is even less sympathetic, having murdered the fiance of Hector's friend so there is no reason why Hector should contain his anger.

It is refreshing in a way. Since so many lords in the series are naive and sentimental and would bow immediately and gently to Nino. Not everyone IRL is so quick to forgive, and while we the player knows Jaffar has turned a new leaf, Hector being in the world has reason to even doubt his conversion. Nino is just an innocent child, what does she know that makes her judgement right?

Not to mention Hector and Matthew are fairly close despite any abrasiveness by Hector, and Leila was Matthew's beloved. If Matthew is killed prior to Dread Isle, Hector says he'll bury them next to each other.

Nor is this to ignore how Jaffar was used to keep HEL from stopping Nergal just before he drained Elbert of his life. Jaffar is party to Elbert's death, and for all we know might have slain some of his Knights of Pherae of whom only Harken survived.

[Icelerate]

12 hours ago, JimmyBeans said:

Of course they hate Jarod hes responsible for 90% of there troubles. But do you not think that if someone knew that Michiah had the chance to end the reign of the tyrant responsible for their hardships and found out that she showed him mercy and let him get away that they wouldn't even scratch their head?

Also sure it doesn't invalidate my "correction" but I explained what I meant and you had no response to that at all, since you didn't ignore it and you know what my thinking was why do you feel the need to continue expressing that point?

Maybe they might end up in denial that their precious maiden can do nothing wrong. Who knows? Would make sense based on her cult of personality similar to how much faith they had in Micaiah despite her constantly failing. 

I responded to all your assertions in full and have either refuted them or agreed with them. 

Quote

You were not supposed to know what I was thinking which is why I explained it to you, I told you what I meant to stop the confusion.

And what type of logic is this? This is a misunderstanding of words if I've ever seen one... And in case this is another misunderstanding let me explain myself.

First of all, someone criticizing someone doesn't mean you have a burning hatred towards that person forever and ever, in fact Michiah could have plenty of opportunities redeem an individuals faith in her, like in a short term example of retaking the capital and ending Jarod.

Okay that's if they are in a position to criticize Micaiah. I have not seen anywhere in the script where random soldiers bringing this event up would be good writing. Unless Micaiah stupidly told the entire army she's at fault but this would decrease morale to find such an incompetent leader. 

Quote

No it's not like arguing that towards Ephraim and Eirika at all, because they did not have nearly as much control over the situation, here is when Ephraim loses the stone to Lyon

  Reveal hidden contents

You could argue that Ephraim should of contained his anger and ran away but Lyon can teleport and restrain him with magic as we see in this scene (My only question is what were the rest of the army doing during this exchange).

Contrast this with Michiah having every opportunity to kill Jarod, or let BK kill Jarod but actively let him go. The only way this comparison works is if Ephraim gave Lyon the stone and then later decided he made a bad choice to no ones dismay.

I could see the argument being better made against Eirika since Lyon in that route tricks her into giving him the stone which btw that scene is criticized a lot already. While this scene could of used some retaliation on her part the fact remains that by that point the sacred stone of Rausten is till intact and so hope remains.

Double standards are strong with this one. The scenes being different doesn't mean they aren't worthy of personal criticism. If you think charging at a teleporting person, especially when you have something precious to protect, is in any way not worthy of any personal criticism, I find it hard to take you seriously. But it's been hard to take you seriously since I started this discussion with you.

Quote

Fair enough. That second quote does imply she's learned from a mistake. I just wanted to make a distinction between Micaiah and arguments I've seen in defense of Corrin. People say that because people die as a result of Corrin's actions, it makes him a flawed character. But it really rings hollow when other people suffer and no one criticizes Corrin for it. Although I suppose the bigger issue is, it's not just that no one criticizes him, it's that they specifically absolve him of any wrongdoing he commits.

From what 

Quote

I don't agree with your points on Hector, however. Being merciless is indeed a part of his character but it's not a flaw in the two scenes you cite. In the case of the soldier, he's allowing brigands to attack a lord and when Hector calls him out on it, the soldier tells him to piss off. Imagine if you saw someone being viciously beaten on the street, and when you call out a cop for standing there doing nothing, he tells you to mind your own business, wouldn't you assume the cop is not a good guy? That's what Hector does, and I think the dialogue implies the soldier was not going to brook interference (and we know they're under orders to let Eliwood die). The relatively lighthearted reactions of Mathew, Oswin and Serra seem to suggest that Hector didn't straight up murder the guy either.

Jaffar is even less sympathetic, having murdered the fiance of Hector's friend so there is no reason why Hector should contain his anger.

So if some police officer in my country decides to become a bystander in a crime scene instead of stopping the criminal, I should attack the police officer? Hector, not the soldier was the aggressor in this instance. The soldier didn't directly harm Hector or Eliwood, he was a neutral party at that point. Hector doesn't know whether the soldier was in cahoots with the attackers or not. 

Hector has all the reason to contain his anger when Nino has just suffered a lot by losing everything and now he wants to take the only one close to her. Have the decency to wait until Jaffar is alone before making a bold threat like that. 

Quote

And just to provide those exact lines:

Hector hasn't heard this discussion. 

Quote

It is refreshing in a way. Since so many lords in the series are naive and sentimental and would bow immediately and gently to Nino. Not everyone IRL is so quick to forgive, and while we the player knows Jaffar has turned a new leaf, Hector being in the world has reason to even doubt his conversion. Nino is just an innocent child, what does she know that makes her judgement right?

So the solution is to make Nino even more upset despite her being in a shitty situation? 

[Tuvy2]

Echoes. Has. Best. Writing.

[JimmyBeans]

1 hour ago, Icelerate said:

Maybe they might end up in denial that their precious maiden can do nothing wrong. Who knows? Would make sense based on her cult of personality similar to how much faith they had in Micaiah despite her constantly failing. 

I responded to all your assertions in full and have either refuted them or agreed with them. 

That would be really lame and unrealistic, like I said it's very likely that at least a few soldiers would display anger I'm not saying half the army, but a few individuals.... It is far more unlikely for every single person to just ignore the truth like Zealots.

1 hour ago, Icelerate said:

Okay that's if they are in a position to criticize Micaiah. I have not seen anywhere in the script where random soldiers bringing this event up would be good writing. Unless Micaiah stupidly told the entire army she's at fault but this would decrease morale to find such an incompetent leader. 

Well then your blind (jk). Which is again why I said it might be better for Jarod to have other means of escape, or atleast keep it the same with no one finding out but have Izuka discover it somehow, which quite frankly I'm still in agreement with.

1 hour ago, Icelerate said:

Double standards are strong with this one. The scenes being different doesn't mean they aren't worthy of personal criticism. If you think charging at a teleporting person, especially when you have something precious to protect, is in any way not worthy of any personal criticism, I find it hard to take you seriously. But it's been hard to take you seriously since I started this discussion with you.

What a joke! Like i said Lyon could restrain him and teleport so it was completely out of his control especially when the rest of his team was apparently miles way, and after Jarod's defeat Michiah had full control over the situation but chose to let him go.

Also for the bold hahaha that's my line. I never seen someone become so triggered over 1 line.

Unless you have some actual points rather than flinging mud this discussion is over.

[Icelerate]

24 minutes ago, JimmyBeans said:

That would be really lame and unrealistic, like I said it's very likely that at least a few soldiers would display anger I'm not saying half the army, but a few individuals.... It is far more unlikely for every single person to just ignore the truth like Zealots.

The thing is every single FE game doesn't explore what every single random soldier thinks and their varied opinions. It would be interesting which soldiers worship her, which admire her but this is all hypothetical and way out of context of the original point. 

Quote

Well then your blind (jk). Which is again why I said it might be better for Jarod to have other means of escape, or atleast keep it the same with no one finding out but have Izuka discover it somehow, which quite frankly I'm still in agreement with.

Sometimes its best to hide the inconvenient truth. 

Quote

What a joke! Like i said Lyon could restrain him and teleport so it was completely out of his control especially when the rest of his team was apparently miles way, and after Jarod's defeat Michiah had full control over the situation but chose to let him go.

Also for the bold hahaha that's my line. I never seen someone become so triggered over 1 line.

Unless you have some actual points rather than flinging mud this discussion is over.

I mean most of the stuff you're saying in this thread is a joke so pot calling the kettle black. He only managed to restrain him due to being in close proximity. Lyon is not some omnipotent god that can paralyze people regardless of range. Teleportation sneak attacks are harder to pull off if you're with the rest of the army so its his fault for going in solo instead of bringing in allies. 

If you improve the quality of your arguments, I wouldn't get mad. 

All I see is bizarre leaps of logic. In what world does not getting yelled at mean no personal consequence? There really is no correlation because scenario A = not getting yelled at and scenario B = no personal consequence are not mutually exclusive. Scenario A is a subset of scenario B but in no way does the lack of A imply the lack of B. 

It's really hard to have an argument with someone who doesn't understand the basic structure of an argument. All you have to do is admit you're wrong if you agree that your argument doesn't follow the basic structure of logic. If you don't I'm afraid I'll have to guide you through step by step through the very beginning. 

 

[JimmyBeans]

23 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

The thing is every single FE game doesn't explore what every single random soldier thinks and their varied opinions. It would be interesting which soldiers worship her, which admire her but this is all hypothetical and way out of context of the original point. 

Your right they don't which why I say yet again if just one person called her out I would of been fine. Again the entire reason the final battle of part 1 exists is just so silly,

23 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

I mean most of the stuff you're saying in this thread is a joke so pot calling the kettle black. He only managed to restrain him due to being in close proximity. Lyon is not some omnipotent god that can paralyze people regardless of range. Teleportation sneak attacks are harder to pull off if you're with the rest of the army so its his fault for going in solo instead of bringing in allies. 

If you improve the quality of your arguments, I wouldn't get mad. 

All I see is bizarre leaps of logic. In what world does not getting yelled at mean no personal consequence? There really is no correlation because scenario A = not getting yelled at and scenario B = no personal consequence are not mutually exclusive. Scenario A is a subset of scenario B but in no way does the lack of A imply the lack of B. 

It's really hard to have an argument with someone who doesn't understand the basic structure of an argument. All you have to do is admit you're wrong if you agree that your argument doesn't follow the basic structure of logic. If you don't I'm afraid I'll have to guide you through step by step through the very beginning. 

 

And yet another overlook here. In multiple cut scenes Lyon teleported many times showing no signs of limitations or fatigue on his part, with the only limitation only arguably range given they found him quickly after he ported away (which may of just been leading them into the trap). Even if Ephraim ran away do you think Lyon would just watch? I'm pretty sure he would just port over to him and do the same thing.

Regardless I can agree with Ephraim not being the smartest for going out alone after seeing that Lyon can teleport around, but still that stones destruction didn't change the fact that Rausten got attacked, and that the sacred stone of said country was still intact. The difference here is that Michiah was made to be stupid just so that last chapter could happen, there is a reason a lot of people throw her in the Eirika and Celica category, and while I think she is better than those two I can see why it is said.

It's easy for you to get mad when you take everything I say to such an extreme level as if that is the only option or else it's bad mindset that you must think I have. What I offered were examples that i thought would of made the said scene better. These aren't leaps in logic, they are examples.... Having someone question their faith in Michiah after a decision like that is only one example that I though of to make the scene better, and then you added that Izuka could work out to which I agreed. My other example was to avoid the entire hiccup entirely by giving Jarod other means of escape to which I didn't dwell on much because I'm not sure how he could do that without, as you said, BK looking incompetent. But even then I think it's still better than what BK did in the scene already. It reminds me when the roar stopped BK from killing Ike which he easily could of done in time before leaving in POR.

As for the bold maybe consider your own ignorance and inability to be reasonable as a contributing factor. Also after that sentence maybe I should eat my words, but who knows?

Before this gets anymore out of hand let me ask you a couple question back on the original topic

1. Do you believe that Michiah letting Jarod go was not detrimental to the plot, and/or not handled poorly? If you believe that it wasn't a bad scene than I will agree to disagree as we have both many times given our peace on the subject.

2. If you think it is handled poorly in any way what would you do to fix said scene or make it better?

My mind is open to other possibilities and I have agreed with some of the points you have made so I see no reason to admit I'm wrong about anything that I haven't already done so far. As I said these are mere examples, in fact that is how this entire thing started so please refrain form taking everything I say taking it as "my way or no way" as that might just be the reason you are confused about the subject.

I'm willing to tone it down and be reasonable if you are willing to do the same, because this accomplishing nothing. The only thing I see this leading to is the topic getting closed.

[Ottservia]

19 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

 

I think I understand where you started with this. Was it in relation to the validity of a character's critics depending on the contrived result of the conflict as chosen by the writer? If so, there is definitely a matter of how a conflict is presented and which side's points, before and after, seem valid.  Like, if a character had some insane plan that others called a reckless endangerment of life, it would be valid criticism to call that reckless even if the hero somehow pulled off an impossible feat.

Real flaws should have consequences however. "Reckless" is not a flaw if the hero always succeeds regardless (which is why it's hard to take seriously when SoV pins this on Alm to say he's not perfect).

 

Now that you mention it, I think it has a lot to do with how much the story wants to emphasize any particular character flaw in order to generate its conflict and explore its themes. To use Alm as an example, the whole point of his story is to explore the logical flaws of his ideals and as such the failures and conflicts resulting from said flaws need to be emphasized heavily in order to work. However the story never really does that making the conflicts and resolution resulting from it feel forced and unearned as you said.

Then there are times when a character has a “flaw” but it’s not really relevant to the themes/conflicts being explored. For example, Lucina’s obliviousness to humor and such(not the best example but it’s all I could think of atm) It is character flaw by definition but it’s never really dwelled upon but at the same time It doesn’t really need to be cause the story only uses it for small comedic moments and the like. 

I guess at the end of the day it all boils down to what kind of story you want to tell and how you go about telling that story

Edited February 13, 2019 by Ottservia

[Thinks Their Own Way]

On 2/9/2019 at 11:49 AM, Dark Holy Elf said:

Echoes's story is misogynistic garbage? (Celica's actions and the contrast between her and Alm, Rinea the wife as sacrificial pawn to develop a man, the outright majority of the game's women needing to be rescued, etc.)

This right here is the main reason why I don't like Echoes, and in regards with Rinea; I am honestly disturbed by how Berkut is so easily forgiven for his actions. That is some white privilege shit. The fact that I see some people in this fandom treat them as #relationshipgoals has me concerned. 

[DarthR0xas]

5 hours ago, I'm a Spheal said:

I am honestly disturbed by how Berkut is so easily forgiven for his actions. That is some white privilege shit.

I'm not quite sure how Berkut being forgiven is white privilege. He isn't seen as redeemable because he's white, he's seen as redeemable as up until he was corrupted by Duma, he was a somewhat nice dude. A bit of an angsty dweeb, sure, but he was nice to you, as long as you were of the right birth. That's his major flaw, and if you wanted to say it was due to any privilege, it'd be rich privilege, or noble privilege. He was the foil to Alm to show what he would be like if he was raised in Rigel. Berkut's obsession with class and the elites are cast away in his final moments, which is why he's seen as redeemable. That said, some of the reason he was forgiven is the Rinea's character is basically "please Berkut, the character", so of course she's going to forgive her. If anything, this is less about how easily Berkut is forgiven, but more about how easily Rinea forgives. And honestly her character isn't really developed enough to draw any proper conclusions on why she so easily forgives, except, again, that her character is literally "please Berkut, the character".

5 hours ago, I'm a Spheal said:

The fact that I see some people in this fandom treat them as #relationshipgoals has me concerned. 

I agree, this is clearly not a healthy relationship. Rinea seems to be constantly fearful of her life. Then again, we do see them at an inopportune time, and Berkut saw her as the most important thing to him (other than his heritage but you can't really sacrifice that at an altar). But it's clear that when put under stress, these two do not mesh that well.

[Ottservia]

Here’s an opinion that I’ve stated before in another thread but have now gained a slightly better understanding of. I believe Peri is a very believable, realistic, and well written character. 

[Thinks Their Own Way]

34 minutes ago, DarthR0xas said:

I'm not quite sure how Berkut being forgiven is white privilege.

Thinking about it, I feel that I should have used a term that was more male oriented, but considering how often the men in games like this are white, I accidentally conflated the two terms. I apologize.

44 minutes ago, DarthR0xas said:

Rinea's character is basically "please Berkut, the character", so of course she's going to forgive her. If anything, this is less about how easily Berkut is forgiven, but more about how easily Rinea forgives. And honestly her character isn't really developed enough to draw any proper conclusions on why she so easily forgives, except, again, that her character is literally "please Berkut, the character".

I feel that Rinea (the victim) of all people forgives him easily is indicative of the game's preference for it's male character. To me it sends the message that it's ok for men to treat women shitty, she'll forgive you no matter what. And the fact that she was a new character for the game is telling of a regression that I hope does not appear in Three Houses. I enjoyed this conversation.

[Ottservia]

3 minutes ago, I'm a Spheal said:

I feel that Rinea (the victim) of all people forgives him easily is indicative of the game's preference for it's male character. To me it sends the message that it's ok for men to treat women shitty, she'll forgive you no matter what. And the fact that she was a new character for the game is telling of a regression that I hope does not appear in Three Houses. I enjoyed this conversation.

Yeah SoV’s story in general is just kind of well....as dark elf put it Misogynistic(god I hate this term) at least in how it chooses to present the prominent female characters in this story. Celica’s arc may be a good way of highlighting the story’s themes but by mila the way it’s presented and how it contrasts with alm’s makes her look to be such a god damn idiot.

[DarthR0xas]

8 minutes ago, I'm a Spheal said:

Thinking about it, I feel that I should have used a term that was more male oriented, but considering how often the men in games like this are white, I accidentally conflated the two terms. I apologize.

It's alright, we all make mistakes.

8 minutes ago, I'm a Spheal said:

I feel that Rinea (the victim) of all people forgives him easily is indicative of the game's preference for it's male character.

Yeah, it's a pretty good showcase. Rinea just feels like an afterthought in my opinion. Like, the writers of the game wanted a foil for Alm, and so they created Berkut. Great, had everything all set, and then someone said "Hey, shouldn't we make him a little more likeable?" So they threw Rinea in there as sort of a patchwork solution, not really caring about her, and more for Berkut.

12 minutes ago, I'm a Spheal said:

To me it sends the message that it's ok for men to treat women shitty, she'll forgive you no matter what.

I mean, I get how one could get this message, but to me it feels like a bit of a reach. For one, Berkut at the end is portrayed as comically evil until he is redeemed. While the relationship isn't the healthiest, he at least treats her nice up until about Act 4. Granted, that's when most of their interactions are (if I recall correctly, haven't played Echoes in about a year), but the Prism Shard showed that Berkut went out of his way to be nice to her. If I had to extrapolate a message, it might be that you can make a serious mistake and still be forgiven and loved, but that's really cheesy and definitely not what the game was going for. But I think the intended message was something along the lines of "Hey look at this cool boss fight, and then wow, isn't Rinea so nice for forgiving Berkut". Or something along those lines.

18 minutes ago, I'm a Spheal said:

And the fact that she was a new character for the game is telling of a regression that I hope does not appear in Three Houses.

I really hope Three Houses has some great female characters. Granted, I like most of the female characters in Fire Emblem, but there aren't many I'd call "great".

19 minutes ago, I'm a Spheal said:

I enjoyed this conversation.

Me too, it was fairly interesting.

11 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Yeah SoV’s story in general is just kind of well....as dark elf put it Misogynistic(god I hate this term) at least in how it chooses to present the prominent female characters in this story.

I'm not a particular fan of the term myself. It's too much of a blanket term, and sometimes can be used in places where more detail would really add to a discussion. That and whenever I see the word I hear one of those Anti-SJW Youtuber say the word in a sneering voice and it's so annoying.

 

[Galap]

One probably unpopular opinion:

Fire Emblem 1 looks better than Shadow Dragon, and the mechanics are better.

[zuibangde]

Sometimes I see 'Birthright is too easy' as a reason why the game is bad. I don't think that's valid criticism on the quality of the game. What's wrong with a game being easy? There's enough freedom in Fates to customize the difficulty of the game for yourself. For example, don't use Ryoma or simply reclass the characters. 

In addition to that, not really an unpopular 'opinion' per se but I am not sure why Birthright gets hated on for throwing you endless reinforcements in later chapters when other games such as Awakening and FE7 does the exact same thing, 

I just finished FE7 and I actually searched up how long reinforcements last in 'Victory or Death' and the longest stretch is from turns 25 to 35 with apparently a grand total of 131 units you had to deal with. 

Or the chapter 'Cog of Destiny' which really should be renamed to Slog of Destiny because I was stuck on a bridge with endless sea of enemy armours blocking the path and dealing 0 damage to Hector. 

Edited February 13, 2019 by zuibangde

[Flere210]

2 hours ago, zuibangde said:

Sometimes I see 'Birthright is too easy' as a reason why the game is bad. I don't think that valid criticism on the quality of the game. What's wrong with a game being easy?

I'll add on that. Sacred stone is way easier than birthright. You can clear SS by loading seth whit javelins and vulneraries, sending him in the midle of the enemy army, and using a vulnerary when needed. You can't do that in birthright whitout grinding skills in my castle, because Ryoma doesn't join in the first chapter.

[JimmyBeans]

4 hours ago, zuibangde said:

Sometimes I see 'Birthright is too easy' as a reason why the game is bad. I don't think that's valid criticism on the quality of the game. What's wrong with a game being easy? There's enough freedom in Fates to customize the difficulty of the game for yourself. For example, don't use Ryoma or simply reclass the characters. 

In addition to that, not really an unpopular 'opinion' per se but I am not sure why Birthright gets hated on for throwing you endless reinforcements in later chapters when other games such as Awakening and FE7 does the exact same thing,

I agree with this to an extent as, for me at least, the game feels like an Archanea to me, more so like new mystery and Awakening but with weaker enemies but adding a ton of them. I actually find birthright fun to play fast as I see what I can do to efficiently kill as many enemies in both phases really fast and progress through the map at nice fun pace and since there are so many enemies if doesn't feel like a slog.

On the other hand a lot of my distaste of birthright comes from the second half of the game where you are bombarded with just crappy levels which is a major contributor to peoples dislike of the game.

Some Examples are
 

Spoiler

 

1. Leo's chapter is annoying if you try to play it normally and just way to easy to cheese. 9 times out of 10 I don't feel like slogging through poison and faceless and just fly a falcon/kinshi over to 1 round Leo because he is also very weak.

2. In Camilla's alleyway the reinforcements are the least of my worries and I'm sure I don't need to explain why that chapter is so frustrating on higher difficulties.

3. Baiting and switching a bunch of weak faceless in the fort dragon fall chapter which is just a really dumb and easy filler chapter.

 

These are only a few examples but the second half of the game has a lot of weird chapters that either bore me or just try my patience.

Besides that Birthright is an underrated game for sure.

[Rose482]

13 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Here’s an opinion that I’ve stated before in another thread but have now gained a slightly better understanding of. I believe Peri is a very believable, realistic, and well written character. 

omg I finally found another Peri fan, I'm not alone anymore ;-; 

[Michelaar]

10 minutes ago, Rose482 said:

omg I finally found another Peri fan, I'm not alone anymore ;-; 

Same here! She's so cute too!

[Tolvir]

26 minutes ago, Rose482 said:

omg I finally found another Peri fan, I'm not alone anymore ;-; 

There's dozens of us. Dozens!

 

Im not a fan of FE4. Ive tried several times, never made it past the first few chapters. The game either bores me to death, or annoys me gameplay wise. Story wise it seems alright. I might get more into it if it ever gets remade, but its just not something Ive been able to get into. Thracia on the other hand has been enjoyable.

I like FE3 over SD/NME. Not sure how unpopular of an opinion that is, but from the bits of 3 I have played, its pretty enjoyable.

I like the idea of an Awakening remake, or at the least a HD rerelease. Awakening has not aged well for being a relatively young game. Its only about 6-7 years old, but it looks rough as hell. And its gameplay is a bit weaker than Fates, at least imo. I think a decent remake of it, that patches up a few of its issues. Maybe reworks its middle arc some or something, smooths the gameplay over, and gives it a facelift graphically would go over pretty well.

Edited February 13, 2019 by Tolvir

[Ottservia]

31 minutes ago, Rose482 said:

omg I finally found another Peri fan, I'm not alone anymore ;-; 

 

23 minutes ago, Michelaar said:

Same here! She's so cute too!

 

7 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

There's dozens of us. Dozens!

Hooray let us all unite for our love of this fun-loving psychopath(or is it sociopath?). But for real though peri gets far too much hate imo when really her character makes so much more sense if you dig deep enough anyway.

[Flere210]

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

 

 

Hooray let us all unite for our love of this fun-loving psychopath(or is it sociopath?). But for real though peri gets far too much hate imo when really her character makes so much more sense if you dig deep enough anyway.

Her character makes sense in a vacuum. What does not make sense is that the fucking Camus is bringing her along of all people. If she was a retainer of Camilla or even Leo she could make sense, but how am i supposed to take seriously the allegedly lawful good paladin when he bring along a serial killer?

Edited February 13, 2019 by Flere210

[Ottservia]

2 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

Her character makes sense in a vacuum. What does not make sense is that the fucking Camus is bringing her along of all people. If she was a retainer of Camilla or even Leo she could make sense, but how am i supposed to take seriously the allegedly lawful good paladin when he bring along a serial killer?

Actually even that makes sense when you realize one simple thing. Peri, as far as I can tell anyway, has anti-social personality disorder. These kinds of people are infamous for being exceedingly charming and manipulative. Hell my psychology professor knew someone who was treating someone with it and even they got pulled in by their patience’s charms. It can happen to anyone and xander is just someone who fell for it.