Jump to content

What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?


Recommended Posts

Is... Is it always this aggressive on here?

Either way, my unpopular opinion is that Radiant Dawn is a really really bad Fire Emblem game and is by far my least favorite.

Again, 100% opinion and preference though.

I'm an incredibly character driven person, and I just don't like the way characters are presented in RD or PoR really. I don't like how outmatched a lot of characters are either, I always felt like a character was either always worse than someone else, or were incredibly overpowered.

My favorite game is Thracia 776, which I also think is just preference, but I do think it's a legitimately good game.

Though characters don't have much dialogue, I think what is given is really interesting and has a lot of potential. I also enjoy how you can really make any character viable, and while there are certain OP ones, I think it's overall really cool to not really have necessarily "bad" characters that require insane levels of babying.

Because of this I also find Thracia characters to fill up most of my favorites. I really like their fairly realistic and grounded designs, and I think that the darker, non-bright colors help it feel much more interesting and BA. I love the potential of characters like Hicks, Fred, Kain, Robert, Carrion, and Glade. There are so many other interesting characters too, but to address all of the ones I think look cool AND the reasons why would take forever.

Overall I just really love Thracia, how you can forge your own playthrough uniquely every time, how the character designs are just grounded and realistic, and how the story is great and has amazing potential if expanded upon. I especially love the first one, there are so many ways to solve problems and it's really fantastic, my run is completely different from your run. No one can convince me that Kain doesn't canonically have Wrath, or how Fred doesn't canonically have Sol. It's just so cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 minute ago, CH0D said:

Is... Is it always this aggressive on here?

Either way, my unpopular opinion is that Radiant Dawn is a really really bad Fire Emblem game and is by far my least favorite.

Again, 100% opinion and preference though.

I'm an incredibly character driven person, and I just don't like the way characters are presented in RD or PoR really. I don't like how outmatched a lot of characters are either, I always felt like a character was either always worse than someone else, or were incredibly overpowered.

My favorite game is Thracia 776, which I also think is just preference, but I do think it's a legitimately good game.

Though characters don't have much dialogue, I think what is given is really interesting and has a lot of potential. I also enjoy how you can really make any character viable, and while there are certain OP ones, I think it's overall really cool to not really have necessarily "bad" characters that require insane levels of babying.

Because of this I also find Thracia characters to fill up most of my favorites. I really like their fairly realistic and grounded designs, and I think that the darker, non-bright colors help it feel much more interesting and BA. I love the potential of characters like Hicks, Fred, Kain, Robert, Carrion, and Glade. There are so many other interesting characters too, but to address all of the ones I think look cool AND the reasons why would take forever.

Overall I just really love Thracia, how you can forge your own playthrough uniquely every time, how the character designs are just grounded and realistic, and how the story is great and has amazing potential if expanded upon. I especially love the first one, there are so many ways to solve problems and it's really fantastic, my run is completely different from your run. No one can convince me that Kain doesn't canonically have Wrath, or how Fred doesn't canonically have Sol. It's just so cool.

No I just don’t take kindly to complete hypocrisy in debates on the Internet. Specially in ones I didn’t start. I nearly said I like mad kings over the copy paste motivations of the red emperors. For someone reason that triggers Edelgard stans. Into denying she is one lol. It’s like saying Dimitri is sane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Julian Solo said:

No I just don’t take kindly to complete hypocrisy in debates on the Internet. Specially in ones I didn’t start. I nearly said I like mad kings over the copy paste motivations of the red emperors. For someone reason that triggers Edelgard stans. Into denying she is one lol. It’s like saying Dimitri is sane.

Oh, I wasn't triggered, who knows about Omega, I just wanted to have an understanding about something I believe isn't correct... It's all about semantics after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Troykv said:

Oh, I wasn't triggered, who knows about Omega, I just wanted to have an understanding about something I believe isn't correct... It's all about semantics after all.

Not you, you didn’t attack my character.

Edited by Julian Solo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Julian Solo said:

Not you, you didn’t attack my character.

Understood, I hope my original point that started this whole discussion was understood Julian, I actually kind of like having this kind of discussions, but this went too far of what I initially intented, so... That's it.

Have a good day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2019 at 11:46 PM, NekoKnight said:

Another way to spin this would be the Begnion Senate threatening Daein with a second invasion that would end with their total annihilation if they don't help fight the Laguz. Daein was only able to barely defeat an occupation army, and vs the full army of Begnion, they wouldn't stand a chance.  With their sovereignty on the line and the nation already very pro-human in the conflict, Micaiah is forced to swallow the poison and accept that this is the only way for Daein to have a future.

In theory, this could work too. A more cunning and knowledgeable ruler than Pelleas might call their bluff, noting that Begnion's Central Army is tied up fighting the Laguz Alliance (and thereby, can't afford to mount an invasion of Daein), and fortify their border while maintaining neutrality. But given Pelleas's character, he almost certainly wouldn't be bold enough to defy Lekain's threats, and would meekly acquiesce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, that alternate take about Daein reminded me of another idea I had, which I also brought up on a different thread a long time ago.

Basically, Begnion tries to bully Daein to join, they fight back... but when it comes down to it, the Daein forces also start attacking the Laguz Alliance as well. So basically, a three-way war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Well if that’s contrived then pretty much every battle shounen like MHA, Naruto, One Piece, and Bleach are stories entirely built on contrivance because that’s one of the biggest corner stones of those stories. The mid-battle power up where a character unlocks a new power in response to being beaten down by the villain and under going character growth. Those stories hinge on those kinds of moments to develop their characters and hit on their emotional beats. I honestly would not say that’s contrived so long as there’s at least a thematic reason behind it. If an explanation exists even retroactively then I don’t really see much of an issue. 

That is the absolutely vital difference. If it's a response from character growth, then it's not out of nowhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2019 at 12:43 AM, Icelerate said:

If Kaga wrote Radiant Dawn, I think people would be saying just how great of a writer Kaga is. Want proof? Look at people praise Kaga for the writing of FE4. 

I guess we'll know if Berwick Saga ever gets translated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2019 at 6:43 AM, Icelerate said:

If Kaga wrote Radiant Dawn, I think people would be saying just how great of a writer Kaga is. Want proof? Look at people praise Kaga for the writing of FE4. 

People praise the story of FE4, but I don't think I've really seen anyone praise the writing. Maybe people say characters like Travant are well written, but the line to line dialogue of the game can be hilariously bad. And that's coming form a veritable Jugdral fanboy. The story is pretty great though. But story and writing are different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Jotari said:

People praise the story of FE4, but I don't think I've really seen anyone praise the writing. Maybe people say characters like Travant are well written, but the line to line dialogue of the game can be hilariously bad. And that's coming form a veritable Jugdral fanboy. The story is pretty great though. But story and writing are different things.

Now that's just semantics. I meant story writing not dialogue writing. I consider story to be a combination of plot, characters, world building and theme in that order of importance. FE4's story being great doesn't mean it is the greatest. Not saying it isn't the best, but I'm saying such a claim has never been proven to my knowledge in spite of it being thrown around. I recently played FE4 expecting a story even better than RD, because that's what I heard and what I got was a good story that didn't live up to my expectations. Nor have I read any arguments that objectively prove such a thing. As a result, it is a claim with no basis. Also my point was that due to Kaga being the original FE director who many people believe got unfairly kicked out, I have a hunch that people do have a pro Kaga bias and are more inclined to rate his games slightly higher than if he didn't design them. 

I haven't played Fates but I was reading your discussion with Ottservia and I found it pretty interesting. From my understanding, you claimed the crystal ball breaking is bad writing because it is a contrivance. Now most people including myself believe contrivance to be bad but under what basis can we assume it to be bad? How can one prove that contrivance is indeed bad writing? 

Edited by Icelerate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the characters are what make FE4 interesting. The sad tales that accompany a lot of them makes them more loveable, too. The story is flawed, like any other, for sure though.

Edited by lightcosmo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2019 at 12:43 AM, Icelerate said:

If Kaga wrote Radiant Dawn, I think people would be saying just how great of a writer Kaga is. Want proof? Look at people praise Kaga for the writing of FE4. 

I don't think Kaga has ever been really known as a great writer. He's definitely a guy that had interesting ideas but aside from 4 and maybe 5 I don't think his Fire Emblem's ever really exelled in the story department. Lore, backstory and interesting ideas...sure, but his scene to scene stuff has always been very basic. 

 

 

Edited by Etrurian emperor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Etrurian emperor said:

I don't think Kaga has ever been really known as a great writer. He's definitely a guy that had interesting ideas but aside from 4 and maybe 5 I don't think his Fire Emblem's ever really exelled in the story department. 

 

 

I don't know about his more recent non FE games such as Berwick and Tearing Saga so perhaps Kaga improves over time which is why the Jugdral games are much better, generally speaking, than the first three. 

 

10 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

I think the characters are what make FE4 interesting. The sad tales that accompany a lot of them makes them more loveable, too. The story is flawed, like any other, for sure though.

I'd say the characters are pretty decent overall but lack the same development and character traits that the cast gets with supports and the plot is the best thing about FE4's story. The world building is pretty good too. Don't know about themes and don't care too much about them though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

I don't know about his more recent non FE games such as Berwick and Tearing Saga so perhaps Kaga improves over time which is why the Jugdral games are much better, generally speaking, than the first three. 

I've gone through TRS (and are waiting for the Berwick translation to be finished).

TearRing Saga has its own narrative problems, though yet again Kaga does well with the backstory and lore. The plot overall is FEs 1-4 put into a blender. Though I do think the Gerxel Cult is handled a little better than the Loptous Cult that inspired it (except Gwenchaos got Gharnef's Imhullu by another name). As for characters, not bad, not necessarily great either, no supports. And, Holmes is highly unusual for a lord, he predates Hector and is very much a jock and a jerk. I wouldn't call him bitter like Shinon though.

 

And I've seen Jugdral lovers who hate Tellius, and in response to their meanness to me despite me not being particularly mean to them or attacking their favorites, I did quietly punch back by posting the picture of THAT Linde once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

TearRing Saga has its own narrative problems, though yet again Kaga does well with the backstory and lore. The plot overall is FEs 1-4 put into a blender. Though I do think the Gerxel Cult is handled a little better than the Loptous Cult that inspired it (except Gwenchaos got Gharnef's Imhullu by another name). As for characters, not bad, not necessarily great either, no supports. And, Holmes is highly unusual for a lord, he predates Hector and is very much a jock and a jerk. I wouldn't call him bitter like Shinon though.

Deltre said Holmes is even better than Hector, what do you think? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Icelerate said:

Deltre said Holmes is even better than Hector, what do you think? 

I think I prefer Hector myself. Hector has more sensitivity than Holmes almost ever does, and although I might simply be forgetting some of Hector's jerkiness, Holmes came as being the bigger one.

Hector does brashly kill the one soldier in his Eliwood mode introduction, he shouts at Jaffar before Nino too, and he gets angry at Oswin for hiding the truth, and he lovers' quarrels with Lyn as well.

Holmes though has no reason to be so mean to Katri, he picks on her a lot. Not to call Katri bright or herself a great character, she maybe a little bit of an airhead, but the quantity of Holmes's jerkiness to her is such that it can be unbelievable that in the end the two fall mutually in love. LynxHector, while forced not to my liking, is not as bad than HolmesxKatri. And it isn't just Katri that Holmes is a jerk to, I could list them all that I remember if you so wanted me to.

Holmes can show kindness, loose manners, and respect, like when for Katri's sake he tells her father to have Lionheart inherit the throne of Salia instead of passing the burden to his daughter. And, Shigen and Runan- Holmes's Eliwood- do have good relationships with him. But, Hector has his good side too, and I felt he developed more than Holmes did, Hector is more capable of being kind to others I'd say. 

Holmes is refreshing to me in light of all the goody-two-shoes lords, but I can't quite say I love him either for all the jerk he has. I'm mixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

though yet again Kaga does well with the backstory and lore. The plot overall is FEs 1-4 put into a blender.

I think that can sum up Kaga’s problems as a writer pretty well. He’s really good at world building and making it feel like a living breathing place filled to the brim with its own history, lore, and culture. Everything else? He could definitely stand to do better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Hector does brashly kill the one soldier in his Eliwood mode introduction, he shouts at Jaffar before Nino too, and he gets angry at Oswin for hiding the truth, and he lovers' quarrels with Lyn as well.

Does he actually kill the soldier though? I always perceived it as Hector knowing him out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Icelerate said:

Now that's just semantics. I meant story writing not dialogue writing. I consider story to be a combination of plot, characters, world building and theme in that order of importance. FE4's story being great doesn't mean it is the greatest. Not saying it isn't the best, but I'm saying such a claim has never been proven to my knowledge in spite of it being thrown around. I recently played FE4 expecting a story even better than RD, because that's what I heard and what I got was a good story that didn't live up to my expectations. Nor have I read any arguments that objectively prove such a thing. As a result, it is a claim with no basis. Also my point was that due to Kaga being the original FE director who many people believe got unfairly kicked out, I have a hunch that people do have a pro Kaga bias and are more inclined to rate his games slightly higher than if he didn't design them. 

Sounds like you were just over hyped. Which can happen with anything. Try it again in a few years time when your expectations are more mellow and you're opinion might be different. Primarily I like Holy War because it has more teeth than most games in the series. It's willing to be more daring and dangerous with its world and I think that works for it. I Kaga did write Radiant Dawn people probably would praise him for it. Radiant Dawn does have a pretty decent story and Tellius overall gets very high praise for its good world building. As it happens though, there's no singular personality that can be attributed to making Radiant Dawn. At least none that has emerged. Kaga is the not only the creator of the series, but we have loads of interviews of him talking about the story and extra ideas and stuff we can latch on to. So he's an actual personality that can be praised (or criticized). No such personality has emerged for any of the other games. Now that given, I don't think people really are inclined to rate his games higher. Mystery of the Emblem and Jugdral get rated highly (and I honestly don't think Mystery of the Emblem is that great, it;s like 90% lore), but I don't see anyone praising the original Dark Dragon and Sword of Light or Gaiden (well aside from myself on Gaiden). Before Shadows of Valentia people barely even remembered Gaiden existed. And just take a look at how few of us have actually played Tear Ring Saga. If Kaga was the be all and end all then Tear Ring would be fully integrated into the community which it isn't, it's treated like a satellite.

3 hours ago, Icelerate said:

I haven't played Fates but I was reading your discussion with Ottservia and I found it pretty interesting. From my understanding, you claimed the crystal ball breaking is bad writing because it is a contrivance. Now most people including myself believe contrivance to be bad but under what basis can we assume it to be bad? How can one prove that contrivance is indeed bad writing? 

How can one prove anything in writing? How can we prove character development is good? How can we prove world building is good? How can we prove plot holes are bad? How can we prove proper grammar is a necessity? We can't prove anything, it's an art, not a science. And at the end of the day stuff like Finnegans Wake exist defying any convention you can possibly set as law. Best I can do is say contrivances subvert audience expectations (in, uh, the bad way, because it can be good to subvert expectations too. I guess I mean by this it reinforced an idea that anything could potentially happen no matter what the story establishes has feasible previously. As in we can't trust A to maintain being A when something like B can come out of nowhere and change A into C with no warning) and breaks suspension of disbelief by unveiling the hand of the author. And just generally feel lazy and as if the writer just wasn't smart enough to think of a more integrated way of doing something (course how can we prove an integrated plot that flows naturally and logically from one point to another is good either?).

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Icelerate said:

I haven't played Fates but I was reading your discussion with Ottservia and I found it pretty interesting. From my understanding, you claimed the crystal ball breaking is bad writing because it is a contrivance. Now most people including myself believe contrivance to be bad but under what basis can we assume it to be bad? How can one prove that contrivance is indeed bad writing? 

A good story is a story that works. I know that sounds like a vague statement and honestly it kind of is but that’s the only good universal metric on how to judge the objective quality of a story or at least as far as I can tell. Stories are nothing more than a conveyance of ideas found in reality through characters and the journeys they go through. The job of an author is to get people to understand those ideas through the tools they have(plot, characters, world, etc.). In that sense there is no absolute rule in regards to storytelling cause those rules have been broken and it’s proven to work. 
 

My issue with the use of contrivance as a criticism is that most of the time people use it in a way that hinges on suspension of disbelief which is a subjective argument. You can’t argue it any further because what breaks my suspension of disbelief will not break another’s. In that way I can say anything is contrived cause it’s all subjective. Personally, I don’t care if I can “see the hand of the author” cause that’s what I’m trying to do in regards to analysis. I want to know why an author made the decisions that they did when writing the story so I can accurately asses whether it was a good decision or not. In that sense contrivance isn’t necessarily a bad thing because it’s inherent to story telling. A plot contrivance to me is when a plot element is introduced out of no where, randomly that has absolutely nothing to do with what was established previously and yanks the story in a direction that doesn’t make any sense for its themes or ideas(or at the very least contradicts those things). 
 

It’s all about the ideas a story wants to explore and how it goes about exploring those ideas. I can name a number of stories that “show the hand of the author” by the definition other people give but still work as stories. For example, the meta reason Kishimoto gave for giving the RasenShuriken the drawbacks he did was because he didn’t want Naruto spamming it due to how overpowered it was at that point in the story. Though from a thematic angle, it can be seen as Naruto not being rewarded narratively for rejecting his friends help in a failed attempt to understand Sasuke. He gains a powerful new technique but it comes with unforeseen consequences. You can view the crystal ball breaking in the same manner. It’s a crystal ball that reveals the truth but breaks after a single use. The meta reason being that it’s to withhold information from other characters. That on its own is fine but what separates it from the Naruto example is that it brings up inconsistencies in Azura’s character both thematically and in terms of characterization because she’s withholding information from characters for no good reason that would make sense for what has been established about her character. If the crystal ball breaks, then there’s an explanation. It broke there’s not much else she can do about that. Any time before that point is fair game though which is what makes the whole thing contrived.

Again, it’s all about the ideas a story wants to explore and how they explore those ideas. Judge a story by its own rules not by the rules you set for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even think Genealogy has a good story actually(but then i believe in the Sturgeon Law). A great moment and a couple good characters is not enought for me when everything else is barren and uninteresting. 

Kaga is like Takahashini in that he is always too ambitious for his own good and attempt at doing things that are not possible whit the limitations he is working whit. He tries to write logh in a 12 episode season. I don't rate original ideas because, quite frankly, most of them are OK to great, it's the execution that makes or break things. And genealogy's execution is often mediocre and makes plot and gameplay hinder each other (sure, it's cool that overlapping the chapters you get a map of Jugdral, but it's not worth dealing whit the map design of fe4).

Edited by Flere210
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/21/2019 at 11:14 PM, Icelerate said:

Now that's just semantics. I meant story writing not dialogue writing. I consider story to be a combination of plot, characters, world building and theme in that order of importance. FE4's story being great doesn't mean it is the greatest. Not saying it isn't the best, but I'm saying such a claim has never been proven to my knowledge in spite of it being thrown around. I recently played FE4 expecting a story even better than RD, because that's what I heard and what I got was a good story that didn't live up to my expectations. Nor have I read any arguments that objectively prove such a thing. As a result, it is a claim with no basis. Also my point was that due to Kaga being the original FE director who many people believe got unfairly kicked out, I have a hunch that people do have a pro Kaga bias and are more inclined to rate his games slightly higher than if he didn't design them. 

I haven't played Fates but I was reading your discussion with Ottservia and I found it pretty interesting. From my understanding, you claimed the crystal ball breaking is bad writing because it is a contrivance. Now most people including myself believe contrivance to be bad but under what basis can we assume it to be bad? How can one prove that contrivance is indeed bad writing? 

Actually thinking on it I can come up with an example of a contrivence that I actually do consider good writing. No More Heroes establishes a pattern of a boss at the end of each stage of the game. That is basically the entire plot. Go kill ten bosses. But half way through the game you go out to fight a boss with a giant ass dooms day machine. They built up the fight as the machine powers up and then, completely out of nowhere, a character never seen or referenced before drops from the sky and kills the boss, killing him before you get a chance to do so. Said new character only shows up once more in the game and we get no explanation for why he did what he did. He just insults you and leaves. It's contrived, no way about it. But it's bloody brilliant because it makes Travis pissed and you, the player, get the feeling of being cheated out of your boss fight too. I guess maybe the best way to phrase it is that the intention of art is to invoke emotion from the audience. And usually a contrivance will evoke a groan when the author really just wants to pull a fast one. In No More Heroes the audience reaction is likely to be similar to the protagonist's, it's self aware. Which is pretty much the entire hat of No More Heroes.

On 12/22/2019 at 2:57 AM, Ottservia said:

A good story is a story that works. I know that sounds like a vague statement and honestly it kind of is but that’s the only good universal metric on how to judge the objective quality of a story or at least as far as I can tell. Stories are nothing more than a conveyance of ideas found in reality through characters and the journeys they go through. The job of an author is to get people to understand those ideas through the tools they have(plot, characters, world, etc.). In that sense there is no absolute rule in regards to storytelling cause those rules have been broken and it’s proven to work. 
 

My issue with the use of contrivance as a criticism is that most of the time people use it in a way that hinges on suspension of disbelief which is a subjective argument. You can’t argue it any further because what breaks my suspension of disbelief will not break another’s. In that way I can say anything is contrived cause it’s all subjective. Personally, I don’t care if I can “see the hand of the author” cause that’s what I’m trying to do in regards to analysis. I want to know why an author made the decisions that they did when writing the story so I can accurately asses whether it was a good decision or not. In that sense contrivance isn’t necessarily a bad thing because it’s inherent to story telling. A plot contrivance to me is when a plot element is introduced out of no where, randomly that has absolutely nothing to do with what was established previously and yanks the story in a direction that doesn’t make any sense for its themes or ideas(or at the very least contradicts those things). 
 

It’s all about the ideas a story wants to explore and how it goes about exploring those ideas. I can name a number of stories that “show the hand of the author” by the definition other people give but still work as stories. For example, the meta reason Kishimoto gave for giving the RasenShuriken the drawbacks he did was because he didn’t want Naruto spamming it due to how overpowered it was at that point in the story. Though from a thematic angle, it can be seen as Naruto not being rewarded narratively for rejecting his friends help in a failed attempt to understand Sasuke. He gains a powerful new technique but it comes with unforeseen consequences. You can view the crystal ball breaking in the same manner. It’s a crystal ball that reveals the truth but breaks after a single use. The meta reason being that it’s to withhold information from other characters. That on its own is fine but what separates it from the Naruto example is that it brings up inconsistencies in Azura’s character both thematically and in terms of characterization because she’s withholding information from characters for no good reason that would make sense for what has been established about her character. If the crystal ball breaks, then there’s an explanation. It broke there’s not much else she can do about that. Any time before that point is fair game though which is what makes the whole thing contrived.

Again, it’s all about the ideas a story wants to explore and how they explore those ideas. Judge a story by its own rules not by the rules you set for it.

Using that metric can you point to a story that you think is actually bad? Because not only does that sound vague, it sounds universally applicable. I could even categorize that one moment in Code Geas we talked about earlier as good writing as it fulfills this criteria. Hell even My Immortal could fit into that, for as bad as people say it is, the author's opinions are always very clear.

On 12/22/2019 at 3:08 AM, Flere210 said:

I don't even think Genealogy has a good story actually(but then i believe in the Sturgeon Law). A great moment and a couple good characters is not enought for me when everything else is barren and uninteresting. 

Kaga is like Takahashini in that he is always too ambitious for his own good and attempt at doing things that are not possible whit the limitations he is working whit. He tries to write logh in a 12 episode season. I don't rate original ideas because, quite frankly, most of them are OK to great, it's the execution that makes or break things. And genealogy's execution is often mediocre and makes plot and gameplay hinder each other (sure, it's cool that overlapping the chapters you get a map of Jugdral, but it's not worth dealing whit the map design of fe4).

Honestly, much as I love Legend of the Galactic Heroes, I think the same story could have been told in half the length (granted that's still like 50 something episodes). That anime could move at a pretty glacial pace at times.

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Honestly, much as I love Legend of the Galactic Heroes, I think the same story could have been told in half the length (granted that's still like 50 something episodes). That anime could move at a pretty glacial pace at times.

Wich is what Die Neue These is trying to do. We shall see how it hold up a few years from now. I don't think you are wrong but still, 12 episodes won't be enought.

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...