What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[Benice]

1 minute ago, twilitfalchion said:

Tbh, FE characters have never really had practical armor in any game, apart from armor knights maybe, Kaga-era included.

War mages wear armor-Of course, that is one kind of enemy that is FE4 exclusive and you (fortunately) didn't get far enough to meet 'em, I think.

2 minutes ago, twilitfalchion said:

I definitely don't fault 3H's visuals being the way they are because they tried to do too much. If anything, they didn't put nearly enough effort into the visuals and performance, with choppy frame rates and awful textures in some spots. They simply didn't make the best use of the Switch's hardware, which is perfectly capable of handling detailed environments and higher frame rates.

I feel like they tried to do too much given what the team could handle within the time limit and with everything else they tried to do-Three houses was incredibly ambitious and visuals did frequently suffer for it. Three houses was delayed and still was released unfinished, and you can tell in many different spots-Maddening being the most profound IMO.

[Jotari]

9 hours ago, Benice said:

Most characters post-Kaga aren't really wearing proper armor or battlewear-this is not a Three houses- or Post Awakening exclusive problem. For example in the GBA era, aside from knights, wyvern riders and cavs, most characters aren't wearing "Practical" clothing. Pegasus riders, for example, are wearing miniskirts, which aren't exactly combat-appropriate, among other things. Clerics and mages have never worn armor post-Kaga era (And only specific classes wore armor in Kaga's day,) so Lissa is not the only offender of poor armor choice.

Plus, overall, the GBA animations were also quite over-the-top. Swordmasters come to mind as superhuman in their animations, not to mention Hector leaping around with tons of armor, etc. I'm not saying that the GBA animations are bad, (Because they're not,) but they're more or less the same a 3h with less detail. They are very much unrealistic. (And simpler too. IMO the biggest problem with 3h's visuals are how much it tried to bite off leading to low quality overall.)

I do agree with your point of simplicity is better, but saying that 3h is bad for unrealistic visuals compared to the GBA era isn't really fair when neither are gonna win any awards for being logical or realistic.

Realistic animations can never be a thing so long as we have Pegasus and draco riders. There is no practical way to fight on those things with melee weaponry. Genealogy and Awakening come closest, with Genealogy giving them really long Lance's and Awakening making the mount pretty small, but both still run into serious realism issues (this is not necessarily a problem though).

9 hours ago, Samz707 said:

At least they aren't constantly having speedlines, dramatic close ups and wind effects. (Since wind effects and other stuff are actually saved for critical hits.)

I swear it's a thing in Modern FE games to drag out combat animations as much as they can and it just contributes to how tedious I find them to actually play. (I'm only on my third battle in TH and I'm already skipping the animations because they last too long while I was well over halfway through FE7 before I started speeding them with the emulator..)

Have you played Tellius? The load time between animation transitions just make them completely untenable for me. Fortunately the map animations look pretty decent.

9 hours ago, twilitfalchion said:

Tbh, FE characters have never really had practical armor in any game, apart from armor knights maybe, Kaga-era included.

I definitely don't fault 3H's visuals being the way they are because they tried to do too much. If anything, they didn't put nearly enough effort into the visuals and performance, with choppy frame rates and awful textures in some spots. They simply didn't make the best use of the Switch's hardware, which is perfectly capable of handling detailed environments and higher frame rates.

Fire Emblem armour Knights have way too much armour. A single solid hit would knock them flat on their ass. Look at real life armour, tightly for wouldn't be the most exact term, but compared to fire emblem knights real armour is a skin suit. Paladins in most games have much more realistic armour.

(Armour Knights being over blown also isn't a problem as the exaggeration better displays their gameplay utility).

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Jotari

[Samz707]

14 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Realistic animations can never be a thing so long as we have Pegasus and draco riders. There is no practical way to fight on those things with melee weaponry. Genealogy and Awakening come closest, with Genealogy giving them really long Lance's and Awakening making the mount pretty small, but both still run into serious realism issues (this is not necessarily a problem though).

Have you played Tellius? The load time between animation transitions just make them completely untenable for me. Fortunately the map animations look pretty decent.

Nope I've not played Tellius.

 

9 hours ago, Benice said:

War mages wear armor-Of course, that is one kind of enemy that is FE4 exclusive and you (fortunately) didn't get far enough to meet 'em, I think.

I feel like they tried to do too much given what the team could handle within the time limit and with everything else they tried to do-Three houses was incredibly ambitious and visuals did frequently suffer for it. Three houses was delayed and still was released unfinished, and you can tell in many different spots-Maddening being the most profound IMO.

I think it's to the point where Echoes actually looks better, you don't have generic troops constantly vanishing/appearing, Character's faces in combat actually look better with less jagged edges and there's actually more color in Echoes intentionally dead and horrible looking Swamps than in the "Unforgettable" Red Canyon in Three Houses, which is actually the most bland location I've ever seen in an FE game, to the point where I'm semi-impressed at how dull a location it actually is.(And how the script keeps insisting it's somehow majestic/unforgettable.)

Sometimes the maps don't even look like they're the same art style to be honest in Three Houses, the Red Canyon looks like something out of a bland and grey "realistic" Modern Military shooter than an fantasy game, the map is almost entirely brown and grey.

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Samz707

[Sidereal Wraith]

Fates isn’t as bad as people say it is and Awakening isn’t the second coming of Christ in the form of a video game.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Wraith

[Samz707]

12 hours ago, Benice said:

Most characters post-Kaga aren't really wearing proper armor or battlewear-this is not a Three houses- or Post Awakening exclusive problem. For example in the GBA era, aside from knights, wyvern riders and cavs, most characters aren't wearing "Practical" clothing. Pegasus riders, for example, are wearing miniskirts, which aren't exactly combat-appropriate, among other things. Clerics and mages have never worn armor post-Kaga era (And only specific classes wore armor in Kaga's day,) so Lissa is not the only offender of poor armor choice.

Plus, overall, the GBA animations were also quite over-the-top. Swordmasters come to mind as superhuman in their animations, not to mention Hector leaping around with tons of armor, etc. I'm not saying that the GBA animations are bad, (Because they're not,) but they're more or less the same a 3h with less detail. They are very much unrealistic. (And simpler too. IMO the biggest problem with 3h's visuals are how much it tried to bite off leading to low quality overall.)

I do agree with your point of simplicity is better, but saying that 3h is bad for unrealistic visuals compared to the GBA era isn't really fair when neither are gonna win any awards for being logical or realistic.

Actually I didn't mention it but I do like how Mages don't wear armor because it's actually reflected in their stats/role, they're not supposed to get in close-combat so I don't mind it. (Then you have designs like Charlotte in Fates, who despite being a close combat class is not wearing much armor and what armor she does wear doesn't actually protect her that much.)

I don't mind non-combat/non-close combat classes lacking armor but when a close-combat character is mostly lacking armor it just looks silly. (Such as Fem-Byleth who looks more like she strolled out of a modern day night club than an actual mercenary.)

Edited July 18, 2020 by Samz707

[null]

2 hours ago, Wraith said:

Fates isn’t as bad as people say it is and Awakening isn’t the second coming of Christ in the form of a video game.

I completely agree. People tend to venerate Awakening as one of the best more for the fact that it helped keep the series afloat in the west as opposed to its actual quality. I like it quite a bit, but it is far from a perfect game, and it essentially started the trend of FE games playing more like traditional RPGs than tactical RPG games (a decision I'm not particularly fond of). Likewise, Fates is bashed by a lot of people because of issues that have been overemphasized in comparison to their actual place in the game. True, you'll hear me pick on Fates quite a bit; but honestly, it's mostly because of the high levels of fanservice, otaku pandering, and abundance of bad supports. The gameplay itself is pretty good (even if BR and RV both had bland maps and RV was poorly balanced), and according to many, Conquest has some of the best gameplay in the series (I've never played it).

[Jotari]

4 hours ago, Wraith said:

Fates isn’t as bad as people say it is and Awakening isn’t the second coming of Christ in the form of a video game.

Maybe I'm just old hat, but I was under the impression that the people who criticize Fates are largely the same people who criticize Awakening.

[Deer's Wolf]

1 hour ago, twilitfalchion said:

I completely agree. People tend to venerate Awakening as one of the best more for the fact that it helped keep the series afloat in the west as opposed to its actual quality. I like it quite a bit, but it is far from a perfect game, and it essentially started the trend of FE games playing more like traditional RPGs than tactical RPG games (a decision I'm not particularly fond of). Likewise, Fates is bashed by a lot of people because of issues that have been overemphasized in comparison to their actual place in the game. True, you'll hear me pick on Fates quite a bit; but honestly, it's mostly because of the high levels of fanservice, otaku pandering, and abundance of bad supports. The gameplay itself is pretty good (even if BR and RV both had bland maps and RV was poorly balanced), and according to many, Conquest has some of the best gameplay in the series (I've never played it).

agree completely!

[Sidereal Wraith]

21 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Maybe I'm just old hat, but I was under the impression that the people who criticize Fates are largely the same people who criticize Awakening.

Awakening seems to be put on a pedestal while Fates seems to be burned in effigy every night by most FE fans based on the comments I've seen. 

[Shrimpica]

I think the reason why people burn Fates so much is that it doubled down on everything people hated in awakening.

Imagine if FE17 (or 18) doubles down on school aspects instead of story and gameplay aspects people liked in FE16. The reaction will be the same

[Sidereal Wraith]

I still feel that at the very least Fates has more of its own identity as an FE game, unlike Awakening which brows so liberally from other games in the series it does seem to have an identity all its own.

[Interdimensional Observer]

25 minutes ago, Wraith said:

I still feel that at the very least Fates has more of its own identity as an FE game, unlike Awakening which brows so liberally from other games in the series it does seem to have an identity all its own.

That was kinda the point. FE sales had been in decline for a number of successive games, to the point that Nintendo never bothered to release New Mystery aboard factoring in it coming at the end of the DS's lifespan. Awakening was made in the mindset "If FE is going to die forever tomorrow, let's celebrate what its life was, let's sing of every cherished game in one way or another.".

In practice, Awakening leans more on Archanea than others, and the Thracian and Elibean influences are definitely minimal, but that's somewhat expectable coming after Shadow Dragon and New Mystery, which just so happen to be remakes of the original FE and its sequel. End it all where it began (despite minimal continuity in practice), not a bad idea on paper.

[Sidereal Wraith]

52 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

In practice, Awakening leans more on Archanea than others, and the Thracian and Elibean influences are definitely minimal, but that's somewhat expectable coming after Shadow Dragon and New Mystery, which just so happen to be remakes of the original FE and its sequel. End it all where it began (despite minimal continuity in practice), not a bad idea on paper.

Sure, but the game has aged like fine milk as a result of not having much originality and coming off more as a nebulous entry when compared to the other games in the series. Plus the whole Robin being the vessel of an evil dragon, the concept of the second generation of characters, including Lucina’s importance in the story, and the concept of the Brand comes straight from FE 4.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Wraith

[Ottservia]

1 minute ago, Wraith said:

Sure, but the game has aged like fine wine as a result. Plus the whole Robin vein the vessel of an evil dragon l and the concept of the second generation of characters, including Lucina’s importance in the story, and the concept of the Brand comes straight from FE 4.

True but awakening still manages to tell it's own story even with those "borrowed" elements. I have yet to play FE4 but from what I do know about that game and its story, the roles those elements play in both seem to be relatively different. Awakening is a story about overcoming the failures of the past which is what the future kids of awakening represent. They are a living breathing reminder of all the failures of their parents as they would never had had to suffer if not for those failures. Grima in turn is also representative of this theme. Grima is essentially the result of failure. Robin's failure to overcome the fate dictated by his birth to be more specific. He and Chrom failed to rewrite their own destinies because they couldn't escape the past. Grima says he and Robin are the same. Robin's entire reason for existing was to become Grima that was his fate. In the original timeline he accepted it because he felt he couldn't overcome his own past. Again at least that's the implication. Him being the only one to be able to kill Grima is basically him confronting his past mistake. Grima is a reflection of his dark past and the mistakes there in so killing him results in Robin both accepting his as a part of who he is while also overcoming it and not be weighed down by it.

[Sidereal Wraith]

25 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Awakening is a story about overcoming the failures of the past which is what the future kids of awakening represent. They are a living breathing reminder of all the failures of their parents as they would never had had to suffer if not for those failures. Grima in turn is also representative of this theme. Grima is essentially the result of failure. Robin's failure to overcome the fate dictated by his birth to be more specific. He and Chrom failed to rewrite their own destinies because they couldn't escape the past. Grima says he and Robin are the same. Robin's entire reason for existing was to become Grima that was his fate. In the original timeline he accepted it because he felt he couldn't overcome his own past. Again at least that's the implication. Him being the only one to be able to kill Grima is basically him confronting his past mistake. Grima is a reflection of his dark past and the mistakes there in so killing him results in Robin both accepting his as a part of who he is while also overcoming it and not be weighed down by it.

Overcoming the mistakes of the past with the children of the previous generation is basically the entire plot of the second half of FE 4. Robin is also like Julius, the vessel of Loptous, except we get to know him/her unlike Julius. Also Robin didn’t accept his fate of being Grima’s vessel so much as it was forced on him by saving Chrom from Validar’s last attack in the original timeline. Without Lucina’s intervention in Awakening Robin and Chrom would have failed again in the their timeline just like the original.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Wraith

[Samz707]

3 hours ago, Shrimperor said:

I think the reason why people burn Fates so much is that it doubled down on everything people hated in awakening.

Imagine if FE17 (or 18) doubles down on school aspects instead of story and gameplay aspects people liked in FE16. The reaction will be the same

Honestly I'd be kinda impressed (And definitely never buying it.) if they managed that considering how overbearing the school system already is for me. (3 hours in and not even a single hour combined time of battles which is just frankly tedious as sin, doesn't help the battles are as over as quickly as the GBA games once you actually get into one.)

If we really get another base system in the next game, I'd rather we got something like X-com where the base stuff actually matters rather than just throwing in some really not good fetch-quests/bad Avatar interactions,  I'd rather manage a base with resources than "Talk to X Character and pick one of two options with the only long-lasting effect being one gives a support point."  while running around grabbing blue particle effects for items.

The Avatar interactions in general in 3H aren't very good in my experience. (I get pretty annoyed anytime I pick a dialogue option, only for the characters to clearly speak as if I picked another dialogue option that I didn't actually pick.)

I'd rather have more buying resources, managing a source of in-come and maybe even recruiting new randomized units. (So like X-com I guess, just replace researching laser weapons with tracking down magical weapons/creating new magical weapons/spells and taking down UFOs attacking cities to stopping Bandit attacks/invasions.)

Honestly I think modern FE would benefit from borrowing more stuff from X-com, like being able to destroy defensive tiles with powerful enough spells and being able to shape the battlefield, Playing TH just feels like playing a worse Echoes (Such as the weapon arts so far being way more boring.) maybe you can set forest tiles on fire with fire spells so they actually damage units inside them and other stuff. (TH in general doesn't really feel like a console game.)

 

 

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Samz707

[Ottservia]

29 minutes ago, Wraith said:

Overcoming the mistakes of the past with the children of the previous generation is basically the entire plot of the second half of FE 4.

There are still a few key differences though. The largest of which being time travel. In awakening the kids could not do what their parents couldn’t. It was quite literally impossible to save their world because they couldn’t perform the awakening. They simply couldn’t do it which is why they had to time travel in the first place. It was their only option because they essentially failed. Seliph’s generation didn’t need to do that as they had the capability to do what their parents could not. Let me put it this way. One story is more so growing into and embracing the legacy your parents left behind(at least based on my limited knowledge in regards to FE 4’s story) while the other is more so about the childrens’ parents having a second chance to fix the mistakes they made in the past so that their kids didn’t have to suffer anymore. Overcoming the regret of failure pretty much.

 

29 minutes ago, Wraith said:

Also Robin didn’t accept his fate of being Grima’s vessel so much as it was forced on him by saving Chrom from Validar’s last attack in the original timeline. Without Lucina’s intervention in Awakening Robin and Chrom would have failed again in the their timeline just like the original.

Ehhh his future past dialogue tells something of a different story. In the bad ending Robin says:

”I am Grima! There is nothing human about me!”

which seems to imply that Robin accepted that he and Grima are one and the same. It’s the very thing he’s so adamant to deny in the final chapters of awakening. Which is to suggest that Robin from the original timeline probably thought similarly in that he couldn’t change his fate. Hell Grima confirms this himself in like chapter 25(I think?) when he’s explaining everything. He says:

“I told you, I'm Robin. The Robin that murdered you and became the fell dragon, Grima. When this "Marth" of yours decided to come back in time...I came with her.”

“I can be so daft sometimes... It's really quite simple. I am you. Our only difference is the decisions we've made... Those vivid dreams you have—those are my memories. We share those memories because we share the same heart... Grima's heart.”

The implication being that Robin willingly accepted being Grima’s vessal at least to an extent because Grima, himself, could be exaggerating parts of that. Also you’re right Lucina’s intervention allowed them to not make the same mistake which is exactly what she represents in this story. She is a living breathing reminder that Chrom and Robin failed. But the fact that she’s here in the first place is representative that things can be changed. Without her they would not have succeeded which in turn means that without knowing and understanding the failures of your past you can’t truly correct them. That’s what the kids represent in this story. They help their parents what went wrong so that they can correct it. 

[Topaz Light]

Once more I return to this thread with another unpopular opinion (I think?):

I really like the Archanea games' map design mentality. I realize that not every specific map is a winner (FE3/12 Chapter 3 comes to mind), but I really appreciate how the maps feel very... "point-of-interest"-centric? And this applies both to the layout of the terrain and to enemy formations. At least I really get a tangible sense that each map was constructed deliberately out of pieces that were chosen to create an interesting play experience.

Like, take Chapter 4 of FE1/11 for example:

Spoiler

You have...

• Matthis' Cavalier platoon, who start to advance on you as soon as the map begins, but who are positioned a few turns away, giving you time to brace for them however you see fit. Matthis' placement among them also makes a player interested in recruiting him tackle the Cavaliers more cautiously to avoid accidentally killing him off along with them.
• The choke point guarded by a Knight and two Archers. It's dangerous to play too aggressively here, because you might provoke the Horsemen to rush in and help the Archers beat up whoever you have kill the Knight if you're too reckless. At the same time, this Knight is placed in Merric's immediate range, as soon as you recruit him, so you can test out the efficacy of magic against physically-hardy foes right away, if you'd like.
• The Horsemen themselves are actually their own point of interest here, and you have a few ways of dealing with them, depending on if you wanna try beating them at their own (2-range combat) game and pick them off from across the river, or lure them over to where your melee fighters can take them out without fear of counterattacks. The placement of the aforementioned guarded choke point, as well as the river, provide a lot of things to consider in terms of how you want to tackle them.
• The band of Fighters and the accompanying Hunter who flank you, making you consider whether you want to let them come up behind you or send a few units back there to deal with them.
• The Thief in the center south who you'll wanna take out fast, because they could easily beat you to Merric's village, otherwise.
• The Thief in the northeast, who's guarded by two Hunters, making it risky to just send Caeda up there by herself to deal with them.
• The boss Bentheon with his Ridersbane, which makes it dangerous to challenge with your own cavalry and encourages you to keep your other units hustling to take him on in their place. Plus, once you take him out, you get the Ridersbane! What a fun little Mega Man-esque bit of game design!

This is something I whipped up on the spot as a sorta vague description of what I'm talking about, but there are also things like Chapter 8's passage through the mountains to the boss, with the two valleys to the north from which enemies will advance, Chapter 7 and 11's little valley villages that are each guarded dedicated enemy groups and that you kinda have to go out of your way to go to, etc. I just think the Archanea games have a really nice sorta design philosophy behind their map design that I like a lot, or at the very least a lot more than I like maps with enemies and defensive terrain just kinda strewn about haphazardly, with the boss positioned vaguely opposite your starting position on the map.

EDIT: I think a good way of putting it would be that Archanea FE's maps feel like they're designed around specific situations you're put in, and they often deliberately give you multiple ways to approach the problems they present with the resources you have available to you. They also employ secondary objectives pretty well and work them into the overall chapter design in ways that impact how that chapter is played considerably.

Chapter 6 of FE1, for example, is actually extremely easy to just complete if you're not in any particular hurry, but there are all those cool goodies in the treasure chests that you'll miss out on if you don't beat the Thieves to them!
Similarly, in Chapter 10, you can actually just skip the central fortress entirely and go around the southwestern path to Zharov, but doing so means foregoing just about everything cool you can get in the chapter. You'll lose out on a Physic staff, a Levin Sword, a Silver Bow, and the first promotion item in the game, as well as a grand total of five recruitable characters, counting the Whitewings you need Minerva to recruit later. Even though there is a "path of least resistance" to be taken if all you're interested in is just making it to the end, you're heavily incentivized to opt for the harder route and its considerable rewards.

It's just a really cool way of designing Fire Emblem chapters, I feel.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Topaz Light

[Sidereal Wraith]

20 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

There are still a few key differences though. The largest of which being time travel. In awakening the kids could not do what their parents couldn’t. It was quite literally impossible to save their world because they couldn’t perform the awakening. They simply couldn’t do it which is why they had to time travel in the first place. It was their only option because they essentially failed. Seliph’s generation didn’t need to do that as they had the capability to do what their parents could not. Let me put it this way. One story is more so growing into and embracing the legacy your parents left behind(at least based on my limited knowledge in regards to FE 4’s story) while the other is more so about the childrens’ parents having a second chance to fix the mistakes they made in the past so that their kids didn’t have to suffer anymore. Overcoming the regret of failure pretty much.

 

Ehhh his future past dialogue tells something of a different story. In the bad ending Robin says:

”I am Grima! There is nothing human about me!”

which seems to imply that Robin accepted that he and Grima are one and the same. It’s the very thing he’s so adamant to deny in the final chapters of awakening. Which is to suggest that Robin from the original timeline probably thought similarly in that he couldn’t change his fate. Hell Grima confirms this himself in like chapter 25(I think?) when he’s explaining everything. He says:

“I told you, I'm Robin. The Robin that murdered you and became the fell dragon, Grima. When this "Marth" of yours decided to come back in time...I came with her.”

“I can be so daft sometimes... It's really quite simple. I am you. Our only difference is the decisions we've made... Those vivid dreams you have—those are my memories. We share those memories because we share the same heart... Grima's heart.”

The implication being that Robin willingly accepted being Grima’s vessal at least to an extent because Grima, himself, could be exaggerating parts of that. Also you’re right Lucina’s intervention allowed them to not make the same mistake which is exactly what she represents in this story. She is a living breathing reminder that Chrom and Robin failed. But the fact that she’s here in the first place is representative that things can be changed. Without her they would not have succeeded which in turn means that without knowing and understanding the failures of your past you can’t truly correct them. That’s what the kids represent in this story. They help their parents what went wrong so that they can correct it. 

When Robin was taken over over by Grima, Grima took over his personality as well. The real Robin does resurface in the bad ending of The Future Past as you say, but for the most part when Robin possessed by Grima is talking, it’s Grima not Robin. They took this plot point from FE 4 because the player never got a change to know the real Julius because in the game it is Loptous speaking through Julius, not Julius himself. And even if Robin of the original timeline ‘accepted’ being Grima it was after he saved Chrom’s life and it was forced upon him/her, which wasn’t their choice to begin with.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Wraith

[Ottservia]

20 minutes ago, Wraith said:

When Robin was taken over over by Grima, Grima took over his personality as well. The real Robin does resurface in the bad ending of The Future Past as you say, but for the most part when Robin possessed by Grima is talking, it’s Grima not Robin. They took this plot point from FE 4 because the player never got a change to know the real Julius because in the game it is Loptous speaking through Julius, not Julius himself. And even if Robin of the original timeline ‘accepted’ being Grima it was after he saved Chrom’s life and it was forced upon him/her, which wasn’t their choice to begin with.

Yeah he didn’t have a choice in the matter because it was his fate to become Grima and he lacked the strength to overcome that fate. That’s the point, he was forced to accept it because he failed to overcome it. He failed to believe in the bonds he had forged at least based on his future past dialogue. he believes he can’t have a happy life because of his fate in that way he’s already accepted it. He failed to deny fate til the very end which is something he does within the game’s present timeline which is why he succeeds there and not in the original timeline

[Jotari]

6 hours ago, Wraith said:

Awakening seems to be put on a pedestal while Fates seems to be burned in effigy every night by most FE fans based on the comments I've seen. 

In the same breath? I'm sure some people think that, but in my experience the complaints towards Awakening and Fates are both frequent and largely the same.

Another unpopular opinion time. If any game is put on an undue pedestal it's Blazing Blade. Not a terrible game, but it's the weakest of the Gameboy titles.

[Sidereal Wraith]

41 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Yeah he didn’t have a choice in the matter because it was his fate to become Grima and he lacked the strength to overcome that fate. That’s the point, he was forced to accept it because he failed to overcome it. He failed to believe in the bonds he had forged at least based on his future past dialogue. he believes he can’t have a happy life because of his fate in that way he’s already accepted it. He failed to deny fate til the very end which is something he does within the game’s present timeline which is why he succeeds there and not in the original timeline

I’m pretty sure at the time when Chrom and Robin fought Validar they believed in their bonds, which ultimately didn’t amount to much. By the time the Future Past happened, Grima had been in control of Robin for years and destroyed most of the world in the process. I can understand Robin being crestfallen at this point as a result of this. Also, I’m sure that Sigurd and his army did believe in the bonds that they had forged in the crucible of war by the time of the Battle of Belhalla as well. It still really didn’t help Sigurd with the whole getting burned alive thing or the fact that the majority of his army got slaughtered by meteors. Oh well, I guess they just didn’t believe hard enough in the power of their bonds of friendship.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Wraith

[null]

27 minutes ago, Jotari said:

If any game is put on an undue pedestal it's Blazing Blade. Not a terrible game, but it's the weakest of the Gameboy titles.

When Binding Blade exists, I personally couldn't say that Blazing Blade is the weakest. FE6 is plagued by awful hit rates, an abundance of weak units, and ambush spawns. FE7 is not a perfect or even excellent game by any means, but weakest is a bit much in my mind. I understand if you see it differently though. However, I do agree that it tends to be overrated.

Edited July 18, 2020 by twilitfalchion

[Ottservia]

12 minutes ago, Wraith said:

I’m pretty sure at the time when Chrom and Robin fought Validar they believed in their bonds, which ultimately didn’t amount to much. By the time the Future Past happened, Grima had been in control of Robin for years and destroyed most of the world in the process. I can understand Robin being crestfallen at this point as a result of this. Also, I’m sure that Sigurd and his army did believe in the bonds that they had forged in the crucible of war by the time of the Battle of Belhalla as well. It still really didn’t help Sigurd with the whole getting burned alive thing or the fact that the majority of his army got slaughtered by meteors. Oh well, I guess they just didn’t believe hard enough in the power of their bonds of friendship.

Y’know what I think I’m done shouting at a brick wall. You believe what you wanna believe all right. I for one will choose to judge stories on their own merits without comparing them and complaining about pointless things like unoriginality.  Like why do you all feel the need to compare shit. Each story is different and each story has its own ways of conveying its ideas and it bothers me when people say one way is better than another. God it just bothers me when people talk down the power of friendship because whenever people do it’s usually cause they don’t understand what it means or it’s place in the narrative. Not every story is gonna use it in the same way like with any idea or trope.The bolded portion in particular just angers me because it sounds condescending.

I can’t speak for FE 4 but I doubt it uses the power of friendship the same way awakening does. Based on interviews with Kaga the reason Sigurd died in the first place was because he was being narratively punished for being too naive and trusting which is why it works. Robin in contrast fails due to lack of trust and belief. Come on people it’s just a matter of nuance

[null]

12 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Y’know what I think I’m done shouting at a brick wall. You believe what you wanna believe all right. I for one will choose to judge stories on their own merits without comparing them and complaining about pointless things like unoriginality.  Like why do you all feel the need to compare shit. Each story is different and each story has its own ways of conveying its ideas and it bothers me when people say one way is better than another. God it just bothers me when people talk down the power of friendship because whenever people do it’s usually cause they don’t understand what it means or it’s place in the narrative. Not every story is gonna use it in the same way like with any idea or trope.The bolded portion in particular just angers me because it sounds condescending.

Tbh, getting angry about someone else's thoughts and insulting them is completely unreasonable and unnecessary. If someone wants to compare two games in the same series, then they're perfectly entitled to do so, regardless of whether or not they're condescending about it. I don't have a problem if you disagree. That's fine. But don't be so intolerant of other people's ideas and how they present them. This isn't my discussion, but having an attitude like that isn't conducive for healthy debate.