Jump to content

What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, DragonFlames said:

 

And now, for another maybe unpopular opinion on Fire Emblem just to not derail the thread too much:
I love the self-aware, lighthearted nature of many of Awakening's supports and the DLC in particular, and I would greatly enjoy an entire game in this style.

To be kinda blunt, I hate that about Awakening.

Echoes also has somewhat lighthearted nature at times but it has dialogue change at points to acknowledge when people die. (And FE7 has a few moments where deaths are acknowledged)

When Awakening is light hearted, then stays light hearted when someone kicks the bucket and not a single person seems to care and is still light-hearted, frankly, it makes everyone look like irredeemible sociopaths for me rather than friends. (And them being able to S-rank almost anyone from the opposite gender just makes them look like they would "S-rank" anything with the other gender's organs between their legs rather than actually liking anyone in particular.) If there were actually death reactions this wouldn't be a problem but there isn't so it's incredibly jarring to me.

And then you have the Arena Ferox border, where we kill border guards over an incredibly contrived misunderstanding and seemingly not a single shepard feels any remorse and also don't care if any of the Shepards die in this pointless battle if anyone does.

Plus mechanically the power of friendship is just "Robin kills everything while paired-up" which kinda isn't good since Robin and Pair-up are overpowered, it's not like FE7/Echoes where I'm using everyone all the time then deliberetely trying to make sure that other characters can chip in if things get too bad rather than functioning as my self-inserts skill boost.

Then you have story moments where Awakening awkwardly flip flops and it's just obnoxious, such as how chapter 2, you have the earthquakes,  fireballs and undead raining from the sky...then Virion shows up, asking a random woman he's never met before to marry him because that's not an absurd whiplash at all, in the same pre-battle cutscene.

We're fighting undead and trying to stop an evil dragon trying to kill everyone but hey buy our swimsuit beach outfit DLC that we actually had to censor in certain countries!

It doesn't fit for a Perma-death game IMO, it could fit if the tone actually only stayed light as long as the player managed to keep everyone alive. (So the mood and tone would go down for a bit if anyone actually bit the bucket.)

Edited by Samz707
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

14 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

When Awakening is light hearted, then stays light hearted when someone kicks the bucket and not a single person seems to care and is still light-hearted, frankly, it makes everyone look like irredeemible sociopaths for me rather than friends. (And them being able to S-rank almost anyone from the opposite gender just makes them look like they would "S-rank" anything with the other gender's organs between their legs rather than actually liking anyone in particular.) 

I’m sorry but this complaint doesn’t make any sense. It feels like you’re reaching here. No game other than maybe echoes or the tellius games bother to acknowledge permadeath at all through its other characters. So by the logic here, the characters of Blazing blade, SS, new mystery, shadow dragon, SS, etc. are all sociopaths because the developers didn’t think to program a line or two in there for them to acknowledge the death pf their comrade. Again to my knowledge the tellius games and echoes are the only ones to do this. Also wtf about the S-supports?! Yeah everyone can marry everyone but that doesn’t make everyone a harem lord like what are you even saying?! That’s like saying I am attracted to multiple different girls therefore I’m some kind of skirt chaser or sexual deviant um no that’s not how that works. Like it’s just shipping fodder like dude it’s not that serious. I don’t know how you ended up at that conclusion. 

 

25 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

And then you have the Arena Ferox border, where we kill border guards over an incredibly contrived misunderstanding and seemingly not a single shepard feels any remorse and also don't care if any of the Shepards die in this pointless battle if anyone does.

 

I think it’s implied that no one actually died during that little skirmish. Maybe heavily wounded but not dead at least I don’t think so. Besides the map objective is just simply “defeat the commander” who is alive afterwards so again I don’t think anyone actually died here. Like I don’t really understand what exactly you’re complaining about.

 

28 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

We're fighting undead and trying to stop an evil dragon trying to kill everyone but hey buy our swimsuit beach outfit DLC that we actually had to censor in certain countries!

You do realize the dlc is completely optional right? 
 

1. you don’t have to buy it.

2. The timing of which it takes place is left vague enough to the point where it can happen at anytime during the story. It could just as well happen after Emmeryn’s death as it could happen after Grima is defeated. It’s left open ended like that for a reason. Again not an actual criticism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I think it’s implied that no one actually died during that little skirmish. Maybe heavily wounded but not dead at least I don’t think so. Besides the map objective is just simply “defeat the commander” who is alive afterwards so again I don’t think anyone actually died here. Like I don’t really understand what exactly you’re complaining about.

Just a point of clarification, I believe Mustafa does die based on his defeat quote(Please...spare my men...), but I’d also believe he was the only one to bite it as Robin and Chrom were mainly focused on getting out alive.

EDIT: I misread the initial quote and thought it said Plegia Border, ignore me, you right.

Edited by SoulWeaver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

I’m sorry but this complaint doesn’t make any sense. It feels like you’re reaching here. No game other than maybe echoes or the tellius games bother to acknowledge permadeath at all through its other characters. So by the logic here, the characters of Blazing blade, SS, new mystery, shadow dragon, SS, etc. are all sociopaths because the developers didn’t think to program a line or two in there for them to acknowledge the death pf their comrade. Again to my knowledge the tellius games and echoes are the only ones to do this. Also wtf about the S-supports?! Yeah everyone can marry everyone but that doesn’t make everyone a harem lord like what are you even saying?! That’s like saying I am attracted to multiple different girls therefore I’m some kind of skirt chaser or sexual deviant um no that’s not how that works. Like it’s just shipping fodder like dude it’s not that serious. I don’t know how you ended up at that conclusion. 

I think it’s implied that no one actually died during that little skirmish. Maybe heavily wounded but not dead at least I don’t think so. Besides the map objective is just simply “defeat the commander” who is alive afterwards so again I don’t think anyone actually died here. Like I don’t really understand what exactly you’re complaining about.

 

Fe7 at least changes some dialogue if Matthew dies at least, while Awakening has Virion talk about Robin never making sacrifices in a support that never changes if people actually are dying, the game has at least one moment where it praises you for not making any sacrifices while completely ignoring if anyone actually did die before that point, FE7 as far as I remember never has anyone praise Mark for not letting anyone die, so Awakening makes the issue more apparent.

While FE7 is my only pre-Awakening game, I do think it's stupid that they never programmed lines in Awakening and other pre-Echoes games as the standard, I can understand for the limited space on a GBA but considering how Jagged Alliance 2 in 1999 on the PC managed to have a good few death reactions (Since any units that were friends/lovers in their backstories would react if the other died.) I think it's silly that it's such a rarity in the series. 

I think it's a dumb oversight but Awakening letting most units become friends and having a lighter tone I feel exaggerated the issue, no one reacting when Guy dies in FE7 at least kinda makes sense since really only Matthew knows him (and I don't think he knows him particularly well.), meanwhile when Chrom doesn't react to Lissa getting beaten up to Mechanically dead but still alive-story-wise and not reacting bugs me, Awakening's lighter tone simply I feel exaggerates the issue and makes it stick out even more than usual. (and as a newcomer kinda fresh off JA2, it stuck out to me right away as odd.)

As a newcomer, it bothered me and even now, I think it's silly how it took til' Echoes to realise that maybe having people react when their friends/loved ones die might be important as the standard.

They're not Harem lords but it does make it harder to see the relationships as genuine that way personally when there's that many romantic options, it feels more like throwing two people together rather than a genunine romantic bond if it can exist between literally almost anyone.

As for the Border, it's a perma-death series and any of my units in the exact same battle die, even if the game did state "No don't worry, it's okay no one died" it'd feel contrived considering how we're throwing fireballs around and fire isn't exactly known for being non-lethal, the devs simply shouldn't have had us fight border guards with such a flimsy excuse IMO as I don't believe that we somehow didn't kill anyone after stabbing them with swords and setting them on fire among other things.

 

 

 

Edited by Samz707
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Fe7 at least changes some dialogue if Matthew dies at least, while Awakening has Virion talk about Robin never making sacrifices in a support that never changes if people actually are dying, the game has at least one moment where it praises you for not making any sacrifices while completely ignoring if anyone actually did die before that point, FE7 as far as I remember never has anyone praise Mark for not letting anyone die, so Awakening makes the issue more apparent.

While FE7 is my only pre-Awakening game, I do think it's stupid that they never programmed lines in Awakening and other pre-Echoes games as the standard, I can understand for the limited space on a GBA but considering how Jagged Alliance 2 in 1999 on the PC managed to have a good few death reactions (Since any units that were friends/lovers in their backstories would react if the other died.) I think it's silly that it's such a rarity in the series. 

I think it's a dumb oversight but Awakening letting most units become friends and having a lighter tone I feel exaggerated the issue, no one reacting when Guy dies in FE7 at least kinda makes sense since really only Matthew knows him (and I don't think he knows him particularly well.), meanwhile when Chrom doesn't react to Lissa getting beaten up to Mechanically dead but still alive-story-wise and not reacting bugs me, Awakening's lighter tone simply I feel exaggerates the issue and makes it stick out even more than usual. (and as a newcomer kinda fresh off JA2, it stuck out to me right away as odd.)

As a newcomer, it bothered me and even now, I think it's silly how it took til' Echoes to realise that maybe having people react when their friends/loved ones die might be important as the standard.

As for the Border, it's a perma-death series and any of my units in the exact same battle die, even if the game did state "No don't worry, it's okay no one died" it'd feel contrived considering how we're throwing fireballs around and fire isn't exactly known for being non-lethal, the devs simply shouldn't have had us fight border guards with such a flimsy excuse IMO as I don't believe that we somehow didn't kill anyone after stabbing them with swords and setting them on fire among other things.

 

 

 

Even so all these issues are not exclusive to awakening but rather the series as a whole. Canonically speaking none of the characters actually die(unless stated otherwise like with all the first generation in Lucina’s future) cause if that were the case I should be complaining about Hardin showing up in new mystery because I killed him off in my shadow dragon play through. Because permadeath innately relies on player skill and choice, the writers have no way of knowing whether a character is dead or alive or how many characters died in any given chapter and to account for all that would be too much unnecessary work. Why else do you think side characters don’t show up in story cutscenes cause the story has to account for their “deaths”. And even if this was exclusive to awakening you also have to remember casual mode exists and again the writer has no way of knowing if the player is playing classic or casual so might as well just ignore pemadeath all together cause it’s a lot simpler to do that. Every Fire Emblem game does this. It’s not exclusive to awakening. 

 

30 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

They're not Harem lords but it does make it harder to see the relationships as genuine that way personally when there's that many romantic options, it feels more like throwing two people together rather than a genunine romantic bond if it can exist between literally almost anyone.

But that’s just a fact of life though, there are about 8 billion people on this planet meaning there are about 8 billion potential romantic interests for any person on this planet. I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here because it doesn’t make sense. Yeah there are plenty guys or girls in the world I can date so does that mean any relationship I get into isn’t genuine because there are plenty of other fish in the sea. Like what are you even complaining about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Fe7 at least changes some dialogue if Matthew dies at least

IIRC, that is the only GBA moment where something like that happens; there is alternate dialogue for Matthew's death in H11 and if he dies before the dread isle. Otherwise, the missed dialogue is only from supports and the like, and in FE6's case, the dialogue when getting a sacred weapon.

Oh, and I guess there's also Alternate dialogue if Joshua died before  Ch. 14 on Eirika's route of Sacred Stones.

Point is, dialogue like that is not the norm for most of the games and it's not really a criticism of awakening so much as the series at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

Even so all these issues are not exclusive to awakening but rather the series as a whole. Canonically speaking none of the characters actually die(unless stated otherwise like with all the first generation in Lucina’s future) cause if that were the case I should be complaining about Hardin showing up in new mystery because I killed him off in my shadow dragon play through. Because permadeath innately relies on player skill and choice, the writers have no way of knowing whether a character is dead or alive or how many characters died in any given chapter and to account for all that would be too much unnecessary work. Why else do you think side characters don’t show up in story cutscenes cause the story has to account for their “deaths”. And even if this was exclusive to awakening you also have to remember casual mode exists and again the writer has no way of knowing if the player is playing classic or casual so might as well just ignore pemadeath all together cause it’s a lot simpler to do that. Every Fire Emblem game does this. It’s not exclusive to awakening. 

 

Yes I know but Awakening being even more comedic and trope-y only serves to highlight the issue for me, some of the character interactions are IMO basically straight out of a romance comedy anime and they sorta don't mesh well with the "people dying" thing, it highlights the issue more so than usual for me, it's trying to have everyone be more wacky and quirky than the other games in my experience and it just doesn't mesh well for me. (Plus I find most of the cast so far obnoxious anyway so it's bad comedy and horrors of war-kinda for me personally which really don't mix well.)

While I can't speak for most of the games, FE7 didn't try to be comedic in this wayt and as much. (In addition to not as heavy having a power of friendship message.) so while I do consider it a bit of an issue, it didn't highlight it as much as for me personally since there aren't that many comedic moments. (And nothing like say, an entire support that's just characters walking in on each other naked because that's funny...somehow.)

The lower tone only serves to make it seem like the cast care even less if someone dies. (And then you have again, Virion's support, which IMO should definitely have had alternate versions to account for anyone dying.)  Awakening trying to be funny with stuff like Robin walking in on Chrom naked in their B support only serves to make the game feel incredibly bipolar even before we factor in perma-death. (Probably doesn't help that personally I generally find this kind of comedy incredibly unfunny generally so I admit maybe I'm a bit biased.)

And even then I feel it's still got moments not even involving perma-death with mood whiplash such as Virion's introduction awkwardly happening after a serious scene, you can practically get a broken neck I feel from the amount of mood-whiplash in that scene and it was bad enough to make me kinda hate Virion right away, I can't really get invested if awful comedy moments can just spring out of nowhere and ruin a scene.  

 

Edited by Samz707
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Yes I know but Awakening being even more comedic and trope-y only serves to highlight the issue for me, some of the character interactions are IMO basically straight out of a romance comedy anime and they sorta don't mesh well with the "people dying" thing, it highlights the issue more so than usual for me, it's trying to have everyone be more wacky and quirky than the other games in my experience and it just doesn't mesh well for me. (Plus I find most of the cast so far obnoxious anyway so it's bad comedy and horrors of war-kinda for me personally which really don't mix well.)

And even then I feel it's still got moments not even involving perma-death with mood whiplash such as Virion's introduction awkwardly happening after a serious scene, you can practically get a broken neck I feel from the amount of mood-whiplash in that scene and it was bad enough to make me kinda hate Virion right away.

I mean personally I’m not bothered by it because the supports are still well written in any case and awakening’s story is very shounen-esque so some of the zaniness is to be expected. I mean it can’t be too doom and gloom all the time. Levity is important to the tonal balance of any story. But different strokes for different folks I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I mean personally I’m not bothered by it because the supports are still well written in any case and awakening’s story is very shounen-esque so some of the zaniness is to be expected. I mean it can’t be too doom and gloom all the time. Levity is important to the tonal balance of any story. But different strokes for different folks I guess

It's fine if you like but for me the Zaniness kinda tips it over. (I'd actually admittingly find it a bit annoying even without Perma-death as I really don't enjoy the kind of comedy Awakening tries to go for, kinda at all  but I feel adding any sort of permanent death system to a game needs to be accounted for in some capacity, admittingly I also wouldn't enjoy Awakening's kinda of Zaniness at all even without perma-death but having a serious permanent death system and Awakening's Zaniness (and The fact so many characters have plot-armor) makes me wonder if Perma-death was even intended for Awakening since as I said before, at least one support falls apart if you actually start losing people (With Virion and Robin.) and basically most of the female cast at least have it.

The sheer amount of plot-armor/and at least some dialogue and events that were clearly written almost for a "No one dies at all" run makes me start to doubt classic was ever intended for that game. (I know it didn't originate casual.)

Edited by Samz707
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

It's fine if you like but for me the Zaniness kinda tips it over. (I'd actually admittingly find it a bit annoying even without Perma-death but I feel adding any sort of permanent death system to a game needs to be accounted for in some capacity, admittingly I also wouldn't enjoy Awakening's kinda of Zaniness at all even without perma-death but having a serious permanent deaht system and Awakening's Zaniness (and The fact so many characters have plot-armor) makes me wonder if Perma-death was even intended for Awakening since as I said before, at least one support falls apart if you actually start losing people. (With Virion and Robin.)

I wouldn’t say that support falls apart because what Virion says does make sense for Robin’s character regardless of if there’s perma-death or not. Robin does not like sacrificing people. He’s unwilling to intentionally take that risk even if it sometimes happens which is why Virion continuously beats him. Virion is willing to sacrifice his own pieces for the sake of victory which is true to his character(he did that when he fled Roseanne). Robin is not which is true to how we as players play the game. Y’know constantly restarting every time a character dies so we can win without any casualties. Sacrificing a soldier may win him a battle in some cases but Robin refuses to throw someone’s life away for that purpose. He’d rather find a different strategy that involves keeping everyone alive which in that sense makes him the better tactician on the actual battlefield but not a very practical one in regards to actual strategy like on a gameboard. Hell this is something Severa even calls him out for in their B-support where in she says:

”Oh. My. Gawds. Are you serious?! You think you can win a war with pretty ideals and zero casualties? Wake up! You think the war fairy is gonna come flying over and sprinkle victory dust everywhere? ...This isn't about the plan at all, is it? You're just making fun of ME! Well, I'm sorry if I'm not as smart as my mother!”

Edited by Ottservia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Yes I know but Awakening being even more comedic and trope-y only serves to highlight the issue for me, some of the character interactions are IMO basically straight out of a romance comedy anime and they sorta don't mesh well with the "people dying" thing, it highlights the issue more so than usual for me, it's trying to have everyone be more wacky and quirky than the other games in my experience and it just doesn't mesh well for me. (Plus I find most of the cast so far obnoxious anyway so it's bad comedy and horrors of war-kinda for me personally which really don't mix well.)

As much as I love Awakening, I'd have to agree that the character interactions (not necessarily the main story) are the most inconsistent part of the game's writing. There are too many supports that involve some of the weirdest and dumbest events or topics that they outweigh the meaningful, well-written supports that give the characters the quality portrayals they deserve. For example, you have Gaius and Maribelle's excellent support chain, which shows how both Gaius and Maribelle bonded over his selfless efforts to save Maribelle's life and exonerate her father, or you have Inigo's support chain with whoever his father is, which shows an emotionally vulnerable side to Inigo that most supports don't. Conversely, you have supports like Chrom and F!Robin's supports which can be summed up by "I saw you bathing! Let's get married!" or basically every support involving Kellam that won't stop mentioning that everyone forgets that Kellam even exists. If I had one major criticism about Awakening's characters, it's that they usually have one defining characteristic, and that same characteristic is stressed so much that it becomes overbearing and obnoxious (Cordelia's Chrom crush, Kjelle being a training-obsessed jackass, Sumia's clumsiness, Vaike's...uh, Vaikeness, Henry's bloodlust, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, twilitfalchion said:

If I had one major criticism about Awakening's characters, it's that they usually have one defining characteristic, and that same characteristic is stressed so much that it becomes overbearing and obnoxious (Cordelia's Chrom crush, Kjelle being a training-obsessed jackass, Sumia's clumsiness, Vaike's...uh, Vaikeness, Henry's bloodlust, etc.).

I am so tired of hearing this criticism cause for one it’s not really a criticism at all and I find it to be more of an insult to the writers if anything. You can boil anything down to a surface level. I can say that Severa is nothing more than a shallow cliche tsundere with nothing else to her or that Inigo is just a shallow skirt chaser character when to say that would be to completely ignore all the subtle nuances, complexities, and layers of depth these characters do in fact have if you bothered to look beyond the surface. Frankly, I find it insulting to the creator that you would ignore the effort put into writing these characters just to boil them down to a one note gimmick without bothering to look any deeper. If there is actually nothing there(like with Kellam) fair enough but at least try to make that effort instead of reading one support and writing them off completely. There is nuance here. You have to look for it though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought of Awakenings characters as pretty concrete, besides a select few, of course. Of course the characters have noticable flaws, they do every FE game. I suppose it just comes down to they cant make every character super complex, for the sake of development time and such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2020 at 5:53 PM, Alastor15243 said:

@Hawkwing Gonna agree with you there. I actually think Three Houses is one of the ugliest games in the series. So much of the game's animation feels... dead... in a way few others do. But more to the point, a lot of what the game does to make it seem bigger only makes it feel emptier to me. Yes, this is the first game to have animated talk scenes where their 3D models actually gesture and talk instead of just using portraits... but that only serves to draw attention to how little they actually do with those cutscenes, even when they're saying that they're doing things. They're still just standing and talking, same as in every game in the past. All the animated models really do is strip you of the ability to fill in the blanks with your imagination like you previously could with the portrait talks all the previous games used.

Yeah, I really felt that Three Houses got the worst of both worlds with its presentation. It's not broad enough for my imagination to fill in the gaps, and not specific enough to be entertaining to watch in its own right. I also found it even more frustrating than usual when the game fell into the "telling instead of showing" trap that plagues the series. They're actually showing the characters and locations far more often, yet they don't really take advantage of it!

37 minutes ago, twilitfalchion said:

basically every support involving Kellam that won't stop mentioning that everyone forgets that Kellam even exists.

Except that not a SINGLE CHARACTER actually forgets that Kellam exists in ANY of his support conversations. Instead, the joke is that he is ridiculously difficult to spot despite wearing a conspicuous suit of armor. Even then, it's really only the focus of Miriels support and in a different way Cordelia's, with every other time it being a joke before diving into the meat of the conversation. Now I do think that they didn't go as far as they could have with Kellam's clever and stubborn sides, especially since they are rather interesting when they show up, but not every support he has revolves around his lack of presence.

He isn't the only character that has this issue. A ton of people claim that Ricken's entire character is "stop treating me like a child!" when in truth only one support chain is like that (and predictably, it's his worst one). If anything, the focus of his supports is how he wishes to become a war hero to help raise his families reputation after they fell on hard times, with a few underrated "war is hell" conversations regarding that. Yeah, there are jokes here and there how Ricken wants people to treat him with greater respect, but they're just that: jokes. Nearly every single character has some variant of this situation.

I'd say that Awakenings issue is how questionable most characters first impressions are as well as how reliant the characters are on supports fleshing them out. This is a double edged sword, as it makes it even more rewarding to unlock supports to flesh out the units and see them go from one-dimension tropes to well-rounded characters, yet if someone doesn't use a character for one reason or another, then they'll be stuck with a questionable first impression for a while. It's the main reason I believe the sentiment that Awakenings cast is "one-note" is so reoccurring.

I still enjoy Awakenings cast, yet I will compliment Three Houses for having their cast speak up more outside of supports, making them less reliant on the player having to use them in battle to get an idea of what the rest of their personality is like. Echoes also kind of did this, though base conversations were random, supports noticeably ranged in quality, and while I got a good impression of what a character was like by what they said in battle (same situation for Fates, I might add), not everyone did.

 

On a side note, things like Fredricks, Kellams,and Libra's unit description as well as the latter two's endings gave me the impression that those things are written first and the supports are sorted out later. I wouldn't be surprised if the writers originally intended for the other characters to forget that Kellam existed, but changed their mind and decided they would get more mileage out of  changing the joke to him being ridiculously stealthy despite not trying to be. A similar situation may have occurred with Libra, as they found his "dude looks like a dudette" shtick to be less interesting than the other aspects of his personality and past. Why they didn't change Kellam and Libra's endings during the final edits to reflect this, I couldn't tell you aside from them maybe running out of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

I am so tired of hearing this criticism cause for one it’s not really a criticism at all and I find it to be more of an insult to the writers if anything. You can boil anything down to a surface level. I can say that Severa is nothing more than a shallow cliche tsundere with nothing else to her or that Inigo is just a shallow skirt chaser character when to say that would be to completely ignore all the subtle nuances, complexities, and layers of depth these characters do in fact have if you bothered to look beyond the surface. Frankly, I find it insulting to the creator that you would ignore the effort put into writing these characters just to boil them down to a one note gimmick without bothering to look any deeper. If there is actually nothing there(like with Kellam) fair enough but at least try to make that effort instead of reading one support and writing them off completely. There is nuance here. You have to look for it though

If 9 supports are about the exact same thing and the 10th features some character depth, it isn't really a testament to nuance. Gimmicky characters are no stranger to Fire Emblem (love me some Shannam), but Awakening's choice to make almost the entire cast gimmick based does make the writing style quite tiresome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Jotari said:

If 9 supports are about the exact same thing and the 10th features some character depth, it isn't really a testament to nuance. Gimmicky characters are no stranger to Fire Emblem (love me some Shannam), but Awakening's choice to make almost the entire cast gimmick based does make the writing style quite tiresome.

Yes, but if 7 supports are well varied and decently written with 3 being one note jokes would it be right to call that character bad simply because you only read one support. That is what I mean. Most awakening characters have good supports. You’re just not reading them or glossing over the nuances. While what you say is true of some characters(Hi Inigo) it’s definitely not true for the majority. To say Cordelia is nothing more than a one note character who’s only defining character trait is her attraction to Chrom is just absurdly incorrect because there’s far more to her character than that. I could say the same for a lot of awakening’s characters like Vaike, Virion, Gaius, Tharja, Nowi, Maribelle, Robin(surprisingly enough), Olivia, Sully, Ricken, and like almost all the future kids(I’ve gone at length as to the amount of depth that can be found with Severa’s character). Like I said you can boil any character down to the just their surface level gimmicks but to do that would be to completely ignore the underlying nuances and layers of depth these characters indeed have and showcase regularly

Edited by Ottservia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Yes, but if 7 supports are well varied and decently written with 3 being one note jokes would it be right to call that character bad simply because you only read one support. That is what I mean. Most awakening characters have good supports. You’re just not reading them or glossing over the nuances. While what you say is true of some characters(Hi Inigo) it’s definitely not true for the majority. To say Cordelia is nothing more than a one note character who’s only defining character trait is her attraction to Chrom is just absurdly incorrect because there’s far more to her character than that. I could say the same for a lot of awakening’s characters like Vaike, Virion, Gaius, Tharja, Nowi, Maribelle, Robin(surprisingly enough), Olivia, Sully, Ricken, and like almost all the future kids. Like I said you can boil any character down to the just their surface level gimmicks but to do that would be to completely ignore the underlying nuances and layers of depth these characters indeed have and showcase regularly

But the issue is that Awakening itself is boiling the characters down. Even the well written supports feature the gimmicks to some extent. And it's not just the supports. Incidental text, picking up items, visiting the barracks or whatever it's called, all of them highlight the gimmick front and center. It's what people see first because it is what's highlighted most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Jotari said:

But the issue is that Awakening itself is boiling the characters down. Even the well written supports feature the gimmicks to some extent. And it's not just the supports. Incidental text, picking up items, visiting the barracks or whatever it's called, all of them highlight the gimmick front and center. It's what people see first because it is what's highlighted most.

And that defeats my argument how exactly? A character showcasing a defining personality front and center is not a bad thing. Yeah sure that’s what you see first but that doesn’t mean that’s all there is. My point is just because that’s what you see first you shouldn’t completely write off a character because of that. If you don’t feel the need to dig through their supports simply because you didn’t want to that’s fine but don’t act like these characters have no depth when you didn’t bother to look for it. What pisses me off is people writing off characters for being one note when they’re not and they didn’t even bother to read anymore than one support. Don’t like the character fine but don’t say they’re poorly written simply because you couldn’t be bothered to read a few supports or whatever cause that’s just pretentious to me. A character isn’t poorly written because you say so or because you didn’t like them. Don’t make argumenitive claims you can’t back up.

There is nothing wrong with a character “gimmick” cause all that really is is just overly defining personality trait and like all personality traits regarding character writing there is nuance attached to it or at least there should. Take Cordelia for example, her love of Chrom comes from her sort of perfectionist nature in that she views him as the perfect kind of husband but part of her character is learning not to be such a perfectionist and to not hold herself or others to such high standards and overcoming that is what makes her character work. You want another example? Take Owain, whose chuunibyo antics are a result of a long repressed inferiority complex and coping mechanism so that he can feel worthy of his royal blood despite him failing to save so many innocent lives in the world he grew up in. 

Edited by Ottservia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

And that defeats my argument how exactly? A character showcasing a defining personality front and center is not a bad thing. Yeah sure that’s what you see first but that doesn’t mean that’s all there is. My point is just because that’s what you see first you shouldn’t completely write off a character because of that. If you don’t feel the need to dig through their supports simply because you didn’t want to that’s fine but don’t act like these characters have no depth when you didn’t bother to look for it. What pisses me off is people writing off characters for being one note when they’re not and they didn’t even bother to read anymore than one support. Don’t like the character fine but don’t say they’re poorly written simply because you couldn’t be bothered to read a few supports or whatever cause that’s just pretentious to me. A character isn’t poorly written because you say so or because you didn’t like them. Don’t make argumenitive claims you can’t back up.

Well 1) Calm down. Maybe I'm missing interpreting your text, but you seem overly emotional about this.

2) I never claimed any of the characters were poorly written or bad characters. The words used, by someone else, was overbearing and obnoxious. Were not talking about characters and character quality here, were talking about overall writing and presentation, which is an entirely different thing. As I've noted, gimmick characters are nothing new to the series, Ilyana is just as gimmicky as any Awakening character. The issue here is that Awakening's cast, unlike Tellius's cast, leans into it far heavier than any entry before or since. Now we can discuss whether or not that's a good or bad thing, but first we should acknowledge that it is a thing. Awakening characters are designed around a gimmick. That is not inherently good or bad and does not equate a lack of depth, but it is, I think, an undeniable facet of the game.

3) The simple fact is that a lot of people (probably not the majority given how Awakening sold so well) do write off the characters as one note. That is also an undeniable fact. Taste being taste it is not our place to pass judgement and say people are wrong for doing so, in my opinion. People will react however they react. You can't be wrong about how you feel. What we can talk about and examine is the why of things, which is what I'm doing. And I believe the why is inundation. People are less willing to give Awakening characters a chance because the repeated gimmicks become repetitive and tiresome. The stuff that doesn't rely on gimmicks to function needs to be hunted after and a not insubstantial number of people are not interested in hunting.

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

Wel 1) Calm down. Maybe I'm missing interpreting your text, but you seem overly emotional about this.

2) I never claimed any of the characters were poorly written or bad characters. The words used, by someone else, was overbearing and obnoxious. Were not talking about characters and character quality here, were talking about overall writing and presentation, which is an entirely different thing. As I've noted, gimmick characters are nothing new to the series, Ilyana is just as gimmicky as any Awakening character. The issue here is that Awakening's cast, unlike Tellius's cast's leans into it far heavier than any entry before or since. Now we can discuss wether or not that's a good or bad thing, but first we should acknowledge that it is a thing. Awakening characters are designed around a gimmick. That is not inherently good or bad and does not equate a lack of depth, but it is, I think, an undeniable factet of the game.

3) The simple fact is that a lot of people (probably not the majority given how Awakening sold so well) do write off the characters as one note. That is also an undeniable fact. Taste being taste it is not our place to pass judgement and say people are wrong for doing so, in my opinion. People will react however they react. You can't be wrong about how you feel. What we can talk about and examine is the why of things, which is what I'm doing. And I believe the why is inundation. People are less willing to give Awakening characters a chance because the repeated gimmicks become repetitive and tiresome. The stuff that doesn't rely on gimmicks to function needs to be hunted after and a not insubstantial number of people are not interested in hunting.

You see all of that is fine and something I can somewhat agree with. People can have tastes and opinions. I’m not one to take that away from people. What makes me angry is people twisting it into an actual negative critique when it really isn’t. Like or dislike whatever you want just don’t claim to be objective unless you can back up what you say. I’m not arguing with the fact that awakening’s cast does indeed over exaggerate certain aspects of its characters for the sake of making them memorable and it worked for the most part but I will also agree there are downsides to it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems to be very unpopular: I either like characters or I don't. I like some tropey characters, I dislike some tropey characters, (Even with the same trope often!) I like some deep characters, I dislike other deep characters. I think people read too much into fitting with the theme of the plot or being a trope; when it comes down to it, I just know if I like the character or not.

Take Nah and Gatrie or Ilyana, for example. Nah annoys me to death because she is tropey and relitavely one-note. There is more to her character than that, but it is rarely shown and she annoys me anyways. Gatrie is even more one-note, and I love the guy. He's got no backstory whatsoever, but he's hilarious; same with Ilyana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

You see all of that is fine and something I can somewhat agree with. People can have tastes and opinions. I’m not one to take that away from people. What makes me angry is people twisting it into an actual negative critique when it really isn’t. Like or dislike whatever you want just don’t claim to be objective unless you can back up what you say. I’m not arguing with the fact that awakening’s cast does indeed over exaggerate certain aspects of its characters for the sake of making them memorable and it worked for the most part but I will also agree there are downsides to it

Well I think it's useful to step back and see that no one, at least here, has said that it's an objective thing. Samz707 consistently said that it was their opinion and twilifalchion prefaced their criticism by saying they love Awakening but this it was problem they had, so it obviously wasn;t a condemnation of the entire a game and was about something specific that doesn't gel for them. I think a good rule of thumb would be that unless someone specifically says they think something is an objective fact, then it's best to assume they mean it's in their opinion. Doubly say if they literally say IMO or use the words "I find" or "I have".

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

Well I think it's useful to step back and see that no one, at least here, has said that it's an objective thing. Samz707 consistently said that it was their opinion and twilifalchion prefaced their criticism by saying they love Awakening, so it obviously was a condemnation of the entire a game and was about something specific that doesn't gel for them. I think a good rule of thumb would be that unless someone specifically says they think something is an objective fact, then it's best to assume they mean it's in their opinion. Doubly say if they literally say IMO or use the words "I find" or "I have".

Those two did frame their statements as critiques when you really look at what they were saying. Need I quote twilifalchion when they said and I quote:

“If I had one major criticism about Awakening's characters, it's that they usually have one defining characteristic, and that same characteristic is stressed so much that it becomes overbearing and obnoxious (Cordelia's Chrom crush, Kjelle being a training-obsessed jackass, Sumia's clumsiness, Vaike's...uh, Vaikeness, Henry's bloodlust, etc.).”

I dunno about you but that sounds like an argumentative claim to me and with the way it’s framed sounds negative which I take issue with because “gimmicks” are not necessarily a bad thing and awakening isn’t even all that bad with it in most cases. Hell I don’t even know where the “Cordelia is obsessed with Chrom” thing comes from cause it’s only a focal point in like a few support chains and the S-supports. Even her barracks dialogue doesn’t have much to do with it.

as for Samz, my issue with his statements was that they were just blatantly incorrect and not exclusive to awakening. I mean if he just doesn’t like it fine. It’s when you try to justify with blatently incorrect information that gets on my nerves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Those two did frame their statements as critiques when you really look at what they were saying. Need I quote twilifalchion when they said and I quote:

“If I had one major criticism about Awakening's characters, it's that they usually have one defining characteristic, and that same characteristic is stressed so much that it becomes overbearing and obnoxious (Cordelia's Chrom crush, Kjelle being a training-obsessed jackass, Sumia's clumsiness, Vaike's...uh, Vaikeness, Henry's bloodlust, etc.).”

I dunno about you but that sounds like an argumentative claim to me and with the way it’s framed sounds negative which I take issue with because “gimmicks” are not necessarily a bad thing and awakening isn’t even all that bad with it in most cases. Hell I don’t even know where the “Cordelia is obsessed with Chrom” thing comes from cause it’s only a focal point in like a few support chains and the S-supports. Even her barracks dialogue doesn’t have much to do with it.

as for Samz, my issue with his statements was that they were just blatantly incorrect and not exclusive to awakening. I mean if he just doesn’t like it fine. It’s when you try to justify with blatently incorrect information that gets on my nerves. 

You see you're focusing on the wrong word there.

“If I had one major criticism about Awakening's characters, it's that they usually have one defining characteristic, and that same characteristic is stressed so much that it becomes overbearing and obnoxious (Cordelia's Chrom crush, Kjelle being a training-obsessed jackass, Sumia's clumsiness, Vaike's...uh, Vaikeness, Henry's bloodlust, etc.).”

That's it, that's the word that makes it their opinion. The I. It's his criticism, not an objective truth. I mean correct me if I'm wrong @twilifalchion then do clarify things, but I think someone saying that it is their criticism means it's something that they personally find. Same for Samz. And while I'm at it I might as well point out how this is the unpopular opinions thread, everything should be taken, by default, to be an opinion. Someone who believes differently to you isn't necessarily, and I would even go so far as to say rarely, is suggesting that you are fundamentally wrong for holding an opinion. You jumped to the same conclusion with me too when I haven't expressed any personal opinion, good or bad, on the quality of Awakening's cast as characters. The only personal opinion I've put forward as far as individual characters go is that Shannam's pretty great (which I stand by).

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...