What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[Jotari]

11 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Not necessarily, as it's not the same kind of situation.

Ultimately, the game is not a chronicle. For the sort of story it wants to tell, how the wyverns got there isn't as important as to show that are there now, in contrast to two thousand years ago when they weren't. Just like how we're not told how exactly the United Kingdom of Archanea fragmented into Ylisse, Plegia, and Regna Ferox, because that's not the story the game wants to tell. Would it be nice to know? Very. Are we obliged to know? For those things, not necessarily.

 

For the sort of story it wants to tell, it didn't need to be a sequel. It only was for fanservice. That's the issue. You change a few names and Awakening isn't an Archanea sequel at all.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Jotari

[Acacia Sgt]

29 minutes ago, Jotari said:

For the sort of story it wants to tell, it didn't need to be a sequel. It only was for fanservice. That's the issue. You change a few names and Awakening isn't an Archanea sequel at all.

The setting is as removed as Jugdral's story is. A big enough time lapse to expect what you're familiar with. Not as detached, though, since we're not in a new continent, unlike what Jugdral is to Archanea and Valentia. Who, by the way, have their own version of the wyvern/dragon (though there's certainly no relation to the degenerated wyvern/flying tribe)... with no explanation whatsoever of why it's there either.

Perhaps you shouldn't let the "for fanservice" argument cloud you so much. Some things are valid to be left questioning why there's no more info, like with the taguel. Others, however, are more like making mountains out of molehills.

[Jotari]

29 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

The setting is as removed as Jugdral's story is. A big enough time lapse to expect what you're familiar with. Not as detached, though, since we're not in a new continent, unlike what Jugdral is to Archanea and Valentia. Who, by the way, have their own version of the wyvern/dragon (though there's certainly no relation to the degenerated wyvern/flying tribe)... with no explanation whatsoever of why it's there either.

Perhaps you shouldn't let the "for fanservice" argument cloud you so much. Some things are valid to be left questioning why there's no more info, like with the taguel. Others, however, are more like making mountains out of molehills.

And to that I addressed here.

3 hours ago, Jotari said:

You're looking at things backwards. I suggest things be written in such a way that explanation isn't necessary. Like putting Wyvern valley in Macedonia. Or having the Demon's Ingle actually be located in the place where Duma died. These are trivially simple things to do, especially the Wyvern valley one as it's disconnected from the plot, but they didn't because they just blatantly didn't care. Aside from a castle (which is one of the least permanent landmarks you can have) and maybe the ruins of Duma's Tower in Brady's paralogue, there is zero similarity between Gaiden and Awakening. Literally zero. No Mila's Temple ruins. No giant continent spanning damn. No eastern desert. No Witch Mountain. No Falchion. No Mila statues. It's not that they under explained things, it's that they didn't care about consistency at all. If we weren't literally shown the world map you'd never even know Valm is meant to be Valentia. All there'd be is a random reference to Mila. Because Valm wasn't designed to actually be Valentia. It was designed to reference Gaiden for fan service alone. They put about as much effort into it as they did bringing back the Deadlords and Holy Weapons. And before you say it, no, I don't think these are nitpicks. I think this is basic expectation that if you're going to bring something back, it needs to be in some way recognizable as the thing it was before. Valm isn't. It doesn't look like Valentia at all. Any similar aspects came from the remake patching the holes Awakening made.

[Acacia Sgt]

4 minutes ago, Jotari said:

And to that I addressed here.

Once again, it hinges on the idea of expecting Valm had to remain the same, despite the two thousand year gap it has with Valentia. Which wasn't going to happen. They weren't going to bring back Valentia. They were going to show a Valentia after a long span of time has happened by. It has enough stuff to recognize it as a changed Valentia, while also showing in how it is now different.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Once again, it hinges on the idea of expecting Valm had to remain the same, despite the two thousand year gap it has with Valentia. Which wasn't going to happen. They weren't going to bring back Valentia. They were going to show a Valentia after a long span of time has happened by. It has enough stuff to recognize it as a changed Valentia, while also showing in how it is now different.

I'm not expecting it remain the same. I'm expect it to at least resemble what it was. They're not showing a progression of past Valentia to future Valentia. They're showing something that is completely unrelated to both.

[Etrurian emperor]

11 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

If Valm was Valentia in a hundred years or perhaps even as far a thousand, you may have a point. However, the span of two thousand years means they can't really have Valentia remain largely static. You claim they didn't care, I'd say that by the very scenario they thought up they couldn't. Valm is Valentia in the far future. How much of Europe today is recognizable to the Europe of the Roman times? It's also a gap of two thousands years.

While any time traveling Roman would probably be very confused if he ended up in 2020 I'd say plenty of the Roman Empire is still with us today. Most notably the city of Rome and the Roman Catholic church are still very important institutions in our current day, many European countries are roughly comparable to their respective roman provinces, and ancient cities like Athens, Marseille and Alexandria still exist.

And in that sense there's very little binding Ylisse and Valm to Archenea and Valentia. Very little important cities or institutions from the old continents survive in Awakenings era. Sophia castle, the Archenean capitol, Nomah's reformed church and even Altea itself are all gone without even an easter egg to be found about it. Even Lucina, Marth's biggest fangirl never seemed to take note that Altea randomly turned into a dessert. 

Of course seeing the passage of time from Archenea to Ylisse be akin to how the real world developed is too much to ask. But its pretty clear that turning Ylisse and Valm into future versions of their old continents was very low on the priority list. 

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:

While any time traveling Roman would probably be very confused if he ended up in 2020 I'd say plenty of the Roman Empire is still with us today. Most notably the city of Rome and the Roman Catholic church are still very important institutions in our current day, many European countries are roughly comparable to their respective roman provinces, and ancient cities like Athens, Marseille and Alexandria still exist.

 

I'm glad you brought that up because I was on the verge of posting a comment to that effect before I decided it would be a bit too off topic. The biggest thing would probably be the roads. Much of the European roads are the same as the ones the Romans made way back when because they did such a great job of it. The original population centers might have grown massively, but a well traveled Roman popping up in modern day would probably be able to find their way around pretty decently. Rome was a really big deal, so much so that for a millennium after it fell we have multiple empires trying to claim it was the successor.

[Interdimensional Observer]

3 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

the Archenean capitol

Actually:

Pales is presumed to be red castle above "Akaneia", and dot 6 is Ylisstol.

There might have been a little drift, but the two capitals don't appear too far away, it's possible they're in the same spot. Cities can change name with time.

This is solely a nitpick however, I am in total agreement with your general point, despite some counterexamples like China's handful of capital shifts prior to the Ming dynasty.

 

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Rome was a really big deal, so much so that for a millennium after it fell we have multiple empires trying to claim it was the successor.

Rome's continued survival owes something to its spiritual significance. Having St. Paul die near the city, and St. Peter maybe somewhere in it (surprisingly, there is no absolute hard evidence in scripture or architecture to confirm if Peter ever as much as went to Rome, much less died in it, it's partly a matter of faith that people think he did) did a lot for the city. Although I was surprised to learn Rome was the spiritual boonies despite the big two saints' remains, Antioch, Smyrna, Jerusalem, and Constantinople were far superior in spiritual refinement initially.

-I've been reading a general history of the Papacy. Can someone make an FE fangame that copies Medieval Rome? It'd require every third or fourth battle be suppressing mob violence in the capital, often with the prior battle being a liberation of the city where the same mobs welcome you with open arms. Be ready to familiarize yourself with the two rival elite families slitting each others' throats that change in name but not substance every so often.

No wonder the Popes fled to Avignon at one point, the Medieval papacy demanded the selflessness of a saint and Rome was Hell. You'd find it hard to clear the imperial ruins and restore the aqueducts when a Hohenstaufen or the Roman people leveled the city and installed a new pope/antipope every Thursday.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Interdimensional Observer

[Samz707]

I reckon this is probably unpopular. (Also sorry if I already said this as I can't remember if I stated this before on this site or not as I've said this before on another site and I'm kinda terrible at remembering where I have/have not said things.)

I don't like pre-rendered fight cutscenes in the series, in my experience (first bit of Th, Echoes, Awakening and Fe7.), they tend to have character performing silly jumping attacks where they leap leg-breaking heights in the air (Such as the Marth and Chrom fight or even just "Marth"'s introduction where they jump from lethal heights out a portal but just fine.) or even knocking others flying into the air. (Such as Byleth and the bandit leader dude in Three House's prologue, which he survives because plot-armor is a totally not obnoxious thing in a perma-death series.)

In Echoes case it even sorta detracts from the Rudolf/Alm bad future fight since it looks extremely out of place in the scene and kinda ruins the serious tone a bit.

At best, I'm indifferent (Such as Echoes) while in others it's sapping my already limited interest in the story. (Awakening.) Someone kicks someone's ass in a cutscene? they did it purely because it's a cutscene and it doens't feel like it reflects gameplay, at all, the magical world of pre-rendered FE cutsscenes feels like Faye from 6 could beat the crap out of Rudolf in hand-to-hand combat because the plot said so.

Jaffar's introduction however, which has him killing Lelia in-game with I think his actual in-game stats  (Yes I know technically the roll is rigged but you know what I mean) had me kinda terrified of fighting him, I saw how this character would destroy my own units in-game, It felt like a scene reflecting on how it would actually go down if he say, got an attack in on Lyn, I was honestly terrified of the prospect of fighting him and was relieved when he becomes an ally without having to fight him.

Actually seeing someone's stats in action is a whole other story than seeing someone's purely cutscene plot powers in action.

(Also they fight like actual warriors like they do in-gameplay rather than crappy anime fight scene stuff like in the cutscenes I mentioned.)

So I feel having in-game battle cutscenes, that show their actual in-game stats are actually A: less stupid looking and B: can do alot more to make an enemy boss seem alot more of a threat.

 

Edited June 12, 2020 by Samz707

[GlitchWarrior]

2 hours ago, Samz707 said:

I reckon this is probably unpopular. (Also sorry if I already said this as I can't remember if I stated this before on this site or not as I've said this before on another site and I'm kinda terrible at remembering where I have/have not said things.)

I don't like pre-rendered fight cutscenes in the series, in my experience (first bit of Th, Echoes, Awakening and Fe7.), they tend to have character performing silly jumping attacks where they leap leg-breaking heights in the air (Such as the Marth and Chrom fight or even just "Marth"'s introduction where they jump from lethal heights out a portal but just fine.) or even knocking others flying into the air. (Such as Byleth and the bandit leader dude in Three House's prologue, which he survives because plot-armor is a totally not obnoxious thing in a perma-death series.)

In Echoes case it even sorta detracts from the Rudolf/Alm bad future fight since it looks extremely out of place in the scene and kinda ruins the serious tone a bit.

At best, I'm indifferent (Such as Echoes) while in others it's sapping my already limited interest in the story. (Awakening.) Someone kicks someone's ass in a cutscene? they did it purely because it's a cutscene and it doens't feel like it reflects gameplay, at all, the magical world of pre-rendered FE cutsscenes feels like Faye from 6 could beat the crap out of Rudolf in hand-to-hand combat because the plot said so.

Jaffar's introduction however, which has him killing Lelia in-game with I think his actual in-game stats  (Yes I know technically the roll is rigged but you know what I mean) had me kinda terrified of fighting him, I saw how this character would destroy my own units in-game, It felt like a scene reflecting on how it would actually go down if he say, got an attack in on Lyn, I was honestly terrified of the prospect of fighting him and was relieved when he becomes an ally without having to fight him.

Actually seeing someone's stats in action is a whole other story than seeing someone's purely cutscene plot powers in action.

(Also they fight like actual warriors like they do in-gameplay rather than crappy anime fight scene stuff like in the cutscenes I mentioned.)

So I feel having in-game battle cutscenes, that show their actual in-game stats are actually A: less stupid looking and B: can do alot more to make an enemy boss seem alot more of a threat.

 

I know. In my opinion, that made Awakening's "Basilio Vs. Walhart" duel all the more suspenseful. However, then Basilio came back. That alone made it lose infinite amounts of impact in my opinion. And like Jaffar Vs. Lela, Valter Vs. Glen and Zephiel vs Cecilia were both wonderfully done. What is it with the GBA and having the best scripted battle cutscenes?

On a related note... The Yied Massacre. Cutscene battles kinda suck. In-engine battles are more awesome. Now imagine you have to PLAY the hopelessly doomed battle. Geez, that's a whole new level of good.

[Troykv]

3 hours ago, Samz707 said:

Jaffar's introduction however, which has him killing Lelia in-game with I think his actual in-game stats  (Yes I know technically the roll is rigged but you know what I mean) had me kinda terrified of fighting him, I saw how this character would destroy my own units in-game, It felt like a scene reflecting on how it would actually go down if he say, got an attack in on Lyn, I was honestly terrified of the prospect of fighting him and was relieved when he becomes an ally without having to fight him.

Actually seeing someone's stats in action is a whole other story than seeing someone's purely cutscene plot powers in action.

(Also they fight like actual warriors like they do in-gameplay rather than crappy anime fight scene stuff like in the cutscenes I mentioned.)

So I feel having in-game battle cutscenes, that show their actual in-game stats are actually A: less stupid looking and B: can do alot more to make an enemy boss seem alot more of a threat.

 

They actually pulled of this with Basilio and Walhart, and I found it kind of exciting how he only really survived the first encounter thanks to technically game mechanics, he was left almost dead after that battle.

[Icelerate]

4 hours ago, Samz707 said:

I reckon this is probably unpopular. (Also sorry if I already said this as I can't remember if I stated this before on this site or not as I've said this before on another site and I'm kinda terrible at remembering where I have/have not said things.)

I don't like pre-rendered fight cutscenes in the series, in my experience (first bit of Th, Echoes, Awakening and Fe7.), they tend to have character performing silly jumping attacks where they leap leg-breaking heights in the air (Such as the Marth and Chrom fight or even just "Marth"'s introduction where they jump from lethal heights out a portal but just fine.) or even knocking others flying into the air. (Such as Byleth and the bandit leader dude in Three House's prologue, which he survives because plot-armor is a totally not obnoxious thing in a perma-death series.)

In Echoes case it even sorta detracts from the Rudolf/Alm bad future fight since it looks extremely out of place in the scene and kinda ruins the serious tone a bit.

At best, I'm indifferent (Such as Echoes) while in others it's sapping my already limited interest in the story. (Awakening.) Someone kicks someone's ass in a cutscene? they did it purely because it's a cutscene and it doens't feel like it reflects gameplay, at all, the magical world of pre-rendered FE cutsscenes feels like Faye from 6 could beat the crap out of Rudolf in hand-to-hand combat because the plot said so.

Jaffar's introduction however, which has him killing Lelia in-game with I think his actual in-game stats  (Yes I know technically the roll is rigged but you know what I mean) had me kinda terrified of fighting him, I saw how this character would destroy my own units in-game, It felt like a scene reflecting on how it would actually go down if he say, got an attack in on Lyn, I was honestly terrified of the prospect of fighting him and was relieved when he becomes an ally without having to fight him.

Actually seeing someone's stats in action is a whole other story than seeing someone's purely cutscene plot powers in action.

(Also they fight like actual warriors like they do in-gameplay rather than crappy anime fight scene stuff like in the cutscenes I mentioned.)

So I feel having in-game battle cutscenes, that show their actual in-game stats are actually A: less stupid looking and B: can do alot more to make an enemy boss seem alot more of a threat.

 

I disagree. Animated cutscene fights are more likely to represent a fluid fight than pure gameplay where the fighters take turns hitting each other. FE characters are supposed to be stronger than regular humans so them being unrealistic doesn't bother me at all.  

[Interdimensional Observer]

2 hours ago, GlitchWarrior said:

On a related note... The Yied Massacre. Cutscene battles kinda suck. In-engine battles are more awesome. Now imagine you have to PLAY the hopelessly doomed battle. Geez, that's a whole new level of good.

Playing Belhalla would be fun, in a DLC-like fixed-units battle.

In-engine battles aren't always good. Chapter 4 Genealogy and Mahnya's massacre comes to mind. I'm stuck watching the entire thing, waiiiiting several turns for Silesse to fall, despite units who were it not for the arbitrary denial of passage, would be able to cross into Castle Silesse territory and assist.

[Jotari]

22 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

I disagree. Animated cutscene fights are more likely to represent a fluid fight than pure gameplay where the fighters take turns hitting each other. FE characters are supposed to be stronger than regular humans so them being unrealistic doesn't bother me at all.  

Not sure where I fall on the spectrum here, but I do feel obligated to note that Chrom's big rolling jump attack he and Lucina use in the prerendered cutscene is his critical animation when killing an enemy.   I don't think he goes as high, but the point is that the fmv is rendering the same things the gameplay does. And even the GBA sprites don't always avoid the ridiculous factor, the infamous Nomadic Trooper rocketing off their horse using only ass muscles being the prime example.

[Ottservia]

5 hours ago, Samz707 said:

I reckon this is probably unpopular. (Also sorry if I already said this as I can't remember if I stated this before on this site or not as I've said this before on another site and I'm kinda terrible at remembering where I have/have not said things.)

I don't like pre-rendered fight cutscenes in the series, in my experience (first bit of Th, Echoes, Awakening and Fe7.), they tend to have character performing silly jumping attacks where they leap leg-breaking heights in the air (Such as the Marth and Chrom fight or even just "Marth"'s introduction where they jump from lethal heights out a portal but just fine.) or even knocking others flying into the air. (Such as Byleth and the bandit leader dude in Three House's prologue, which he survives because plot-armor is a totally not obnoxious thing in a perma-death series.)

In Echoes case it even sorta detracts from the Rudolf/Alm bad future fight since it looks extremely out of place in the scene and kinda ruins the serious tone a bit.

At best, I'm indifferent (Such as Echoes) while in others it's sapping my already limited interest in the story. (Awakening.) Someone kicks someone's ass in a cutscene? they did it purely because it's a cutscene and it doens't feel like it reflects gameplay, at all, the magical world of pre-rendered FE cutsscenes feels like Faye from 6 could beat the crap out of Rudolf in hand-to-hand combat because the plot said so.

Jaffar's introduction however, which has him killing Lelia in-game with I think his actual in-game stats  (Yes I know technically the roll is rigged but you know what I mean) had me kinda terrified of fighting him, I saw how this character would destroy my own units in-game, It felt like a scene reflecting on how it would actually go down if he say, got an attack in on Lyn, I was honestly terrified of the prospect of fighting him and was relieved when he becomes an ally without having to fight him.

Actually seeing someone's stats in action is a whole other story than seeing someone's purely cutscene plot powers in action.

(Also they fight like actual warriors like they do in-gameplay rather than crappy anime fight scene stuff like in the cutscenes I mentioned.)

So I feel having in-game battle cutscenes, that show their actual in-game stats are actually A: less stupid looking and B: can do alot more to make an enemy boss seem alot more of a threat.

 

I don’t necessarily disagree but it’s anime like come on. I just love me some cool well animated and choreographed sword fights which isn’t possible within the engine. My only complaint with them is that they don’t go all the way and truly go nuts with the animation. I don’t mind them being short but they could stand to do more with them. The dire future 2 cutscene is one of my favorites due to how well it portrays the sense of power and terror that Grima poses which really isn’t possible within awakening’s engine. Also am I the only one slightly disappointed that they got fucking MadHouse to help with background character design and DIDN’T have them do cutscene work for awakening?! Like come on it’s god damn MadHouse. Talk about wasted opportunity.

speaking of missed studio opportunities, did you know that trigger actually helped work on fates? They are credited as helping with the live2D illustrations for the private quarters and stuff. But imagine if they were thr ones who helped with Fates’s cutscenes. Studio anima ain’t bad but they aren’t trigger.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Ottservia

[Icelerate]

I don't think there is anything wrong with the game not killing a villain if you defeat them on the map. If anything, if they always die when you kill them, the plot becomes a lot more predictable because you know they'll die after the chapter is over. Furthermore, defeating someone in combat =/= killing them. I don't see anime or manga fans complain about characters surviving fights despite being gravely wounded so I'm not sure why FE fans sometimes complain about this. 

  

7 hours ago, Samz707 said:

At best, I'm indifferent (Such as Echoes) while in others it's sapping my already limited interest in the story. (Awakening.) Someone kicks someone's ass in a cutscene? they did it purely because it's a cutscene and it doens't feel like it reflects gameplay, at all, the magical world of pre-rendered FE cutsscenes feels like Faye from 6 could beat the crap out of Rudolf in hand-to-hand combat because the plot said so.

 

You can just say everything is plot lol. All fights in Naruto and One Piece are plot because the scenario made one win over the other. I do agree that if a character beats another in a cut-scene, it should be reflected with stats as well. 

Edited June 13, 2020 by Icelerate

[Jotari]

11 hours ago, Icelerate said:

I don't think there is anything wrong with the game not killing a villain if you defeat them on the map. If anything, if they always die when you kill them, the plot becomes a lot more predictable because you know they'll die after the chapter is over. Furthermore, defeating someone in combat =/= killing them. I don't see anime or manga fans complain about characters surviving fights despite being gravely wounded so I'm not sure why FE fans sometimes complain about this. 

  

You can just say everything is plot lol. All fights in Naruto and One Piece are plot because the scenario made one win over the other. I do agree that if a character beats another in a cut-scene, it should be reflected with stats as well. 

The difference between Fire Emblem and most other mediums is the perma death. There's a factor of "If my unit dies in combat they're dead, this should apply to the enemy as well." It's also something the series largely adhered to before Awakening with only a few exceptions, mostly in Genealogy of the Holy War.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Jotari

[Samz707]

22 hours ago, Icelerate said:

I don't think there is anything wrong with the game not killing a villain if you defeat them on the map. If anything, if they always die when you kill them, the plot becomes a lot more predictable because you know they'll die after the chapter is over. Furthermore, defeating someone in combat =/= killing them. I don't see anime or manga fans complain about characters surviving fights despite being gravely wounded so I'm not sure why FE fans sometimes complain about this. 

 

It's a perma-death series so I kinda think it should go both ways.

Echoes just barely manages to somewhat excuse Fernand/Berkut getting away by being on a horse and even then I feel it starts feeling contrived when they've "retreated" more than twice.

Meanwhile again, Bandit Dude from TH opening, we beat him up in regular combat then Byleth via cutscene powers sends him flying in the air...then somehow, he shows up alive later, did no one check the enemy was dead?, it felt contrived enough when he could sprint at Edelgard after I had her cut him up with an axe but nah, he's just fine.

Same with other fights such as Raimi in Awakening, sorry but I do not buy, even with healing magic, that I can burn, stab, arrow and do other sorts of highly lethal methods of attack on someone and then in the cutscene afterwards, nah, they're fine, not even acting like it hurts them or any ill will towards the protagonists. (After all getting hit by a fireball is comparable to a getting a pillow thrown at you apparently and getting a lance thrusted into you is no big deal.)

Erik in FE7 at least is actually not able to fight and is captured due to being heavily injured, rather than suddenly showing up fine later inexplicably, I'm fine with that as long as it doens't happen too often.

As someone who does enjoy some Manga/Anime, (Such as Ghost in the shell or Jojo), I actually do dislike it when characters survive injuries that really should kill them/walk off serious injuries,  Ghost in the shell Standalone Complex (A TV series) actually goes out of it's way to show how the cast don't really walk off injuries, one character spends a decent chunk of time in the hospital after getting heavily injured in an action sequence and two other characters who are Cyborgs are shown having to actually go get a new body/parts for their body after getting heavily damaged in fights going wrong, they don't suddenly appear fine after a scene transition.

23 hours ago, Jotari said:

Not sure where I fall on the spectrum here, but I do feel obligated to note that Chrom's big rolling jump attack he and Lucina use in the prerendered cutscene is his critical animation when killing an enemy.   I don't think he goes as high, but the point is that the fmv is rendering the same things the gameplay does. And even the GBA sprites don't always avoid the ridiculous factor, the infamous Nomadic Trooper rocketing off their horse using only ass muscles being the prime example.

In Fe7/Gaiden the over-the-top animations are generally saved for Critical hits, so they're kinda cool in that they're rare even when they're kinda silly, the characters are not shown to generally fight in silly over the top ways so the silly flashy animations are actually cool since they're a rare treat that lets you know the poor other dude is about to probably not be alive for much longer.

It's like explosions in an action movie, they tend to get boring if they're  done over and over, the rare silly animation that kicks in when a critical hit animation happens is alot more exciting then characters suddenly fighting like bad anime characters in cutscenes.

On 6/13/2020 at 3:59 AM, Icelerate said:

I disagree. Animated cutscene fights are more likely to represent a fluid fight than pure gameplay where the fighters take turns hitting each other. FE characters are supposed to be stronger than regular humans so them being unrealistic doesn't bother me at all.  

I don't really get the sense in FE7, Gaiden or Awakening that any of my characters are extremely super-human, I get the sense that maybe a small handful of them in the tank roles are a bit stronger. (Such as Hector/Valbar) but I can't see Eliwood, Lyn, Chrom or Robin having any sort of super strength, if anything I get the sense that lyn,Eliwood and Chrom are kinda weak considering how regular bandits can easily kill them.

They don't even look fluid IMO, infact some of them kinda look awfully static. (Such as Lucina saving Lissa in Awakening at the start...by crouching down with her sword on her back, in a really stupid looking position to block the Risen's sword in a way that should not have worked.) ,  None of them I've seen are impressive fluid fight scenes, they're just fight scenes where everyone does really silly jump attacks rather than any sort of flashy fast swordsmanship, just jumping towards each other actually looks worse than any sort of dynamic fight scene with proper blocking/use of swords.

The actual gameplay animations actually look more like actual combat, especially in Echoes with having multiple animations, a round of combat in Echoes actually looks better than the bad future Rudolf vs Alm fight as characters dodge and attack such as Mycen dodging an attack then having his horse kick the enemy as opposed to just two people jumping at each other over and over, the actual in-game animations actually look more varied and exciting than any pre-rendered fight scene I've seen outside of TH's opening CG fight and so far that's really the exception and not the rule.

 

 

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by Samz707

[Ottservia]

52 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Echoes just barely manages to somewhat excuse Fernand/Berkut getting away by being on a horse and even then I feel it starts feeling contrived when they've "retreated" more than twice.

This is what I mean when I say contrivance is subjective. That kinda thing doesn’t bother me personally. Now I’m not saying it shouldn’t bother you because if it does it does. It just won’t bother everyone the same way.

 

52 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Same with other fights such as Raimi in Awakening, sorry but I do not buy, even with healing magic, that I can burn, stab, arrow and do other sorts of highly lethal methods of attack on someone and then in the cutscene afterwards, nah, they're fine, not even acting like it hurts them or any ill will towards the protagonists. (After all getting hit by a fireball is comparable to a getting a pillow thrown at you apparently and getting a lance thrusted into you is no big deal.)

Dude it’s anime(or at the very least anime styled game) where shit like getting slammed into a wall at mach speed is considered a “walk off injury” sometimes you just gotta learn to accept it. It’s like monster hunter. If I slashed at a beast with a great sword that big it should be cut in half but it’s not because video game. Shit doesn’t always have to be realistic. Again not saying you should just get over it because if it bothers you it bothers you. It’s fine to feel that way. I just personally find it to be rather minor thing to complain about.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Ottservia

[Hawkwing]

My two cents on the whole "enemies don't actually die when you defeat them" shtick is that it is fine when done sparingly and with enemies that are optional to fight. Getting to hear some unique dialogue is a neat bonus for destroying an opponent earlier than intended without wrecking the overall story. Granted, it could be cool if defeating enemies like that actually did affect the plot, but that is not always practical from a design standpoint. What might combine practicality and awesomeness would be to have said enemies gain a scar or loose a limb or something along those lines and have higher stats and new abilities for the mandatory battle to show that they're taking the heroes much more seriously compared to if the player avoided the optional fight. That I would like to see done someday.

* * * * * *

I throwing this out there more out of curiosity than because I think it is unpopular, but I would like to see a far more strategically focused Fire Emblem game someday. Where instead of having linear levels, the player would move several generals across a map, picking where and when to fight as well as whether to attack or to reinforce their position. Instead of a set amount of characters to recruit, your forces would be made up of normal soldiers that you have to hire and train. You would have to secure resources like horses and steel in order to maintain certain classes and equip specific weapons, and building certain buildings and defenses would affect the maps you fight on. It would be a Fire Emblem game were you could actually loose every single soldier without causing a game over, and finally have the chance to fight against an enemy that actually cares about self-preservation and long-term planning.

Not to say that it would be entirely without character. It would be cool if generals fulfilled different niches, such as warriors that were fierce combatants in their own right, commanders that could lead larger than usual armies and served a more supportive role, mages that had could fling spells of all kinds all across the map, and so on. Individual units, ally and enemy, could still have personal skills that set them apart, maybe have a moral system so that causes units on both sides to react as cowards or heroes, and each faction could have their own set of unique classes. Speaking of factions, there could be combinations of humans, shapeshifters, dragons, undead, monsters, and so on. While the story might have to be more broad, there are still several paths to take, such as conquering other nations, leading a rebellion, fighting against a swarm of undead and monsters, heading a quest to find an ancient artifact, being the evil overlord for once, and so much more. Heck, the game could even be scenario driven and have more than one of these.

I would expect it to be a smaller project like Echoes was, as it would inevitably lack several features that help the series stand out, such as supports and a linear story, and if they go the scenario route, they may have to limit the amount of portraits, voice acting, CG's, etc. Yet I am extremely curious in seeing the structure of Fire Emblem gameplay be applied in ways we haven't seen before. Were we have larger scale battles that aren't scripted, we can loose battles without causing a game over, having to deal with different forms of resource management not seen before, and just plain seeing Fire Emblem gameplay mesh with aspects from other strategy games.

[GlitchWarrior]

12 hours ago, Hawkwing said:

I throwing this out there more out of curiosity than because I think it is unpopular, but I would like to see a far more strategically focused Fire Emblem game someday. Where instead of having linear levels, the player would move several generals across a map, picking where and when to fight as well as whether to attack or to reinforce their position. Instead of a set amount of characters to recruit, your forces would be made up of normal soldiers that you have to hire and train. You would have to secure resources like horses and steel in order to maintain certain classes and equip specific weapons, and building certain buildings and defenses would affect the maps you fight on. It would be a Fire Emblem game were you could actually loose every single soldier without causing a game over, and finally have the chance to fight against an enemy that actually cares about self-preservation and long-term planning.

Not to say that it would be entirely without character. It would be cool if generals fulfilled different niches, such as warriors that were fierce combatants in their own right, commanders that could lead larger than usual armies and served a more supportive role, mages that had could fling spells of all kinds all across the map, and so on. Individual units, ally and enemy, could still have personal skills that set them apart, maybe have a moral system so that causes units on both sides to react as cowards or heroes, and each faction could have their own set of unique classes. Speaking of factions, there could be combinations of humans, shapeshifters, dragons, undead, monsters, and so on. While the story might have to be more broad, there are still several paths to take, such as conquering other nations, leading a rebellion, fighting against a swarm of undead and monsters, heading a quest to find an ancient artifact, being the evil overlord for once, and so much more. Heck, the game could even be scenario driven and have more than one of these.

I would expect it to be a smaller project like Echoes was, as it would inevitably lack several features that help the series stand out, such as supports and a linear story, and if they go the scenario route, they may have to limit the amount of portraits, voice acting, CG's, etc. Yet I am extremely curious in seeing the structure of Fire Emblem gameplay be applied in ways we haven't seen before. Were we have larger scale battles that aren't scripted, we can loose battles without causing a game over, having to deal with different forms of resource management not seen before, and just plain seeing Fire Emblem gameplay mesh with aspects from other strategy games.

This idea came right out of nowhere. But I think it sounds AWESOME. The idea of having multiple playable factions in particular intrigues me. I mean, we've done that twice before in this series, but I'd rather a game where those factions are chosen at the start and are ALL mutually exclusive. As for using individual soldiers throughout the game, that almost sounds more Wars than FE, but... Hm.

[Samz707]

12 hours ago, Hawkwing said:

My two cents on the whole "enemies don't actually die when you defeat them" shtick is that it is fine when done sparingly and with enemies that are optional to fight. Getting to hear some unique dialogue is a neat bonus for destroying an opponent earlier than intended without wrecking the overall story. Granted, it could be cool if defeating enemies like that actually did affect the plot, but that is not always practical from a design standpoint. What might combine practicality and awesomeness would be to have said enemies gain a scar or loose a limb or something along those lines and have higher stats and new abilities for the mandatory battle to show that they're taking the heroes much more seriously compared to if the player avoided the optional fight. That I would like to see done someday.

* * * * * *

I throwing this out there more out of curiosity than because I think it is unpopular, but I would like to see a far more strategically focused Fire Emblem game someday. Where instead of having linear levels, the player would move several generals across a map, picking where and when to fight as well as whether to attack or to reinforce their position. Instead of a set amount of characters to recruit, your forces would be made up of normal soldiers that you have to hire and train. You would have to secure resources like horses and steel in order to maintain certain classes and equip specific weapons, and building certain buildings and defenses would affect the maps you fight on. It would be a Fire Emblem game were you could actually loose every single soldier without causing a game over, and finally have the chance to fight against an enemy that actually cares about self-preservation and long-term planning.

Not to say that it would be entirely without character. It would be cool if generals fulfilled different niches, such as warriors that were fierce combatants in their own right, commanders that could lead larger than usual armies and served a more supportive role, mages that had could fling spells of all kinds all across the map, and so on. Individual units, ally and enemy, could still have personal skills that set them apart, maybe have a moral system so that causes units on both sides to react as cowards or heroes, and each faction could have their own set of unique classes. Speaking of factions, there could be combinations of humans, shapeshifters, dragons, undead, monsters, and so on. While the story might have to be more broad, there are still several paths to take, such as conquering other nations, leading a rebellion, fighting against a swarm of undead and monsters, heading a quest to find an ancient artifact, being the evil overlord for once, and so much more. Heck, the game could even be scenario driven and have more than one of these.

I would expect it to be a smaller project like Echoes was, as it would inevitably lack several features that help the series stand out, such as supports and a linear story, and if they go the scenario route, they may have to limit the amount of portraits, voice acting, CG's, etc. Yet I am extremely curious in seeing the structure of Fire Emblem gameplay be applied in ways we haven't seen before. Were we have larger scale battles that aren't scripted, we can loose battles without causing a game over, having to deal with different forms of resource management not seen before, and just plain seeing Fire Emblem gameplay mesh with aspects from other strategy games.

Reminds me a bit of Close Combat a bit. 

I would definitely be interested in an even more strategy focused FE game.

[Icelerate]

On 6/14/2020 at 12:02 AM, Ottservia said:

This is what I mean when I say contrivance is subjective. That kinda thing doesn’t bother me personally. Now I’m not saying it shouldn’t bother you because if it does it does. It just won’t bother everyone the same way.

 

It being subjective doesn't mean it should be ignored and never criticized. The blood pact is contrived to a lot of people, which is subjective, but that doesn't mean no one is allowed to criticize it. I know you haven't played RD but you'll understand soon enough what my example entails. 

On 6/13/2020 at 12:54 PM, Jotari said:

The difference between Fire Emblem and most other mediums is the perma death. There's a factor of "If my unit dies in combat they're dead, this should apply to the enemy as well." It's also something the series largely adhered to before Awakening with only a few exceptions, mostly in Genealogy of the Holy War.

That doesn't apply to many playable characters in PoR such as Soren. They just get injured and retreat. The exceptions are FE4, FE9 and FE10. Perma death isn't something that needs to be followed to a T anyway and an FE game not following tradition isn't a bad thing. FE4 doesn't follow the typical FE tradition in many ways, does that make it a bad FE game? 

On 6/13/2020 at 11:14 PM, Samz707 said:

Meanwhile again, Bandit Dude from TH opening, we beat him up in regular combat then Byleth via cutscene powers sends him flying in the air...then somehow, he shows up alive later, did no one check the enemy was dead?, it felt contrived enough when he could sprint at Edelgard after I had her cut him up with an axe but nah, he's just fine.

 

If that's the case, I would make it a condition in the gameplay that Kostas doesn't lose all of his health in the gameplay battle for gameplay-story integration. 

On 6/13/2020 at 11:14 PM, Samz707 said:

I don't really get the sense in FE7, Gaiden or Awakening that any of my characters are extremely super-human, I get the sense that maybe a small handful of them in the tank roles are a bit stronger. (Such as Hector/Valbar) but I can't see Eliwood, Lyn, Chrom or Robin having any sort of super strength, if anything I get the sense that lyn,Eliwood and Chrom are kinda weak considering how regular bandits can easily kill them.

They don't even look fluid IMO, infact some of them kinda look awfully static. (Such as Lucina saving Lissa in Awakening at the start...by crouching down with her sword on her back, in a really stupid looking position to block the Risen's sword in a way that should not have worked.) ,  None of them I've seen are impressive fluid fight scenes, they're just fight scenes where everyone does really silly jump attacks rather than any sort of flashy fast swordsmanship, just jumping towards each other actually looks worse than any sort of dynamic fight scene with proper blocking/use of swords.

The actual gameplay animations actually look more like actual combat, especially in Echoes with having multiple animations, a round of combat in Echoes actually looks better than the bad future Rudolf vs Alm fight as characters dodge and attack such as Mycen dodging an attack then having his horse kick the enemy as opposed to just two people jumping at each other over and over, the actual in-game animations actually look more varied and exciting than any pre-rendered fight scene I've seen outside of TH's opening CG fight and so far that's really the exception and not the rule.

 

I don't know about that, Lyn moves so fast in her animations that she can't be properly seen. 

Dimitri's cutscene where he owns a bunch of imperial soldiers was slick. Much more interesting than seeing him defeat them in gameplay one after the other where they take turns attacking him and getting slaughtered. 

[Jotari]

5 hours ago, Icelerate said:

 

That doesn't apply to many playable characters in PoR such as Soren. They just get injured and retreat. The exceptions are FE4, FE9 and FE10. Perma death isn't something that needs to be followed to a T anyway and an FE game not following tradition isn't a bad thing. FE4 doesn't follow the typical FE tradition in many ways, does that make it a bad FE game? 

 

Who said anything about a bad game? I'm just explaining why this is viewed as an issue by some people more in this series than comparable ones. Sams707 did a write up sharing the same perspective too including an enemy situation (Erik) comparable to Tellius retreat but permanently injured ones.

[Samz707]

On 6/13/2020 at 4:43 AM, Ottservia said:

I don’t necessarily disagree but it’s anime like come on. I just love me some cool well animated and choreographed sword fights which isn’t possible within the engine. My only complaint with them is that they don’t go all the way and truly go nuts with the animation. I don’t mind them being short but they could stand to do more with them. The dire future 2 cutscene is one of my favorites due to how well it portrays the sense of power and terror that Grima poses which really isn’t possible within awakening’s engine. Also am I the only one slightly disappointed that they got fucking MadHouse to help with background character design and DIDN’T have them do cutscene work for awakening?! Like come on it’s god damn MadHouse. Talk about wasted opportunity.

speaking of missed studio opportunities, did you know that trigger actually helped work on fates? They are credited as helping with the live2D illustrations for the private quarters and stuff. But imagine if they were thr ones who helped with Fates’s cutscenes. Studio anima ain’t bad but they aren’t trigger.

Anime really is just "Japanese animated" so it doesn't really dictate the theme/style or pretty much anything about it though.

Ghost in the shell, Konosuba, Jojo and Space Dandy are all technically anime but are world's apart in basically everything but "Made in Japan."

If you mean the sterotypical anime that's used as an insult, then really only Awakening (and what I've seen of FE Fates) really feel like one in my experience, FE7 and such feel like fantasy stories that happen to be Japanese rather than intentionally trying to be sterotypically Anime.

Personally, I do actually dislike characters in any sort of serious work walking off injuries, I can tolerate it occasionally as long as it doesn't stretch my disbelief but that's more "character got thrown across a room or stabbed in a kinda important part but can just barely keep going" rather than "Character just got directly hit by a fireball, hit with arrows then critically hit by a lance." It's not even an "Anime" thing as there are works that try to be serious (Such as Tomb raider 2013) that have their characters very obviously have plot armor and it annoys me there too.

Fe Echoes and Awakening kinda show this by just comparing Celica's drastically different design in both games. (or just compare Female character design in general in say, FE7 compared to Fates.) They're both technically anime but they're not really the same style.

I think for a perma-death series, you should try to generally stick to a "People die when they are killed" rule for the most part, it sorta cheapens any dramatic moments when it feels like characters could survive pretty much anything and makes the entire perma-death thing feel arbitrary and only included because the previous games had it when tons of people have plot armor, 'cause if people are generally going to not die, why have perma-"Death" in the first place. (Again, such as Awakening giving most of the females plot armor.)

Again, seeing that character who I just set on fire, fired arrows at and stabbed just standing up perfectly fine when much, much less would generally kill most other characters comes off as contrived when I SEE them fall down "dead" in combat then bam, they're fine not even a minute later.

I feel FE actually kinda makes it even more obvious than most since well, I'd imagine fireballs, Lightning and other magical attacks to be pretty damn lethal. (and in games such as Echoes they really, really are.)

Edited June 16, 2020 by Samz707