What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[Lightcosmo]

I also believe RD is far better than PoR. The overall quality is just much higher, to me personally.

[Strullemia]

On 5/28/2020 at 9:39 PM, Silver-Haired Maiden said:

Here's one I'm fairly sure will be unpopular. PoR is inferior to RD in just about everything except learning about the characters. RD has better animation, better game play, better map design, better conflict, and I just plainly enjoy RD more than it's predecessor. Of course this isn't me saying PoR is a bad game, PoR is great... RD is just better.

+1

Even though PoR is one of my favorite FE games it doesn't really take enough risks.

[Shrimpica]

I really really don't think that's an unpopular opinion. Almost any poll pre Three houses puts RD at the top, and even after 3H it's still comfortably at number 2 spot after 3H.

[Alastor15243]

4 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

I really really don't think that's an unpopular opinion. Almost any poll pre Three houses puts RD at the top, and even after 3H it's still comfortably at number 2 spot after 3H.

My impression was that RD has always been a pretty dang controversial game, honestly. Poor unit balance, Micaiah generally being one of the least popular lords, a hard mode that needlessly removes convenience features and things like the weapon triangle, inferior characterization of Ike, those are all complaints I heard pretty regularly about RD over the years.

Edited May 30, 2020 by Alastor15243

[Eltosian Kadath]

2 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

My impression was that RD has always been a pretty dang controversial game, honestly. Poor unit balance, Micaiah generally being one of the least popular lords, a hard mode that needlessly removes convenience features and things like the weapon triangle, inferior characterization of Ike, those are all complaints I heard pretty regularly about RD over the years.

I was curious about that claim as well, and did a bit of digging, and as far as I can tell this is only accurate if you look at the reddit community. Other fire emblem related communities (this one included) don't rate RD as highly in polls. Of particular note in the recent Famitsu poll about the series in which RD didn't even reach the top 5.

[Icelerate]

4 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

My impression was that RD has always been a pretty dang controversial game, honestly. Poor unit balance, Micaiah generally being one of the least popular lords, a hard mode that needlessly removes convenience features and things like the weapon triangle, inferior characterization of Ike, those are all complaints I heard pretty regularly about RD over the years.

Isn't that more because RD is one of the lesser played games as opposed to RD being controversial. 

1 hour ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

I was curious about that claim as well, and did a bit of digging, and as far as I can tell this is only accurate if you look at the reddit community. Other fire emblem related communities (this one included) don't rate RD as highly in polls. Of particular note in the recent Famitsu poll about the series in which RD didn't even reach the top 5.

I do agree that those are Reddit demographics and not FE fans in general but SF is a rather small community and the polls here don't have over hundred voters, generally speaking so they are even less representative than Reddit. Same question about Famitsu, that poll is only a representative of the Famitsu demographics. Oddly enough I think CYL are the best polls despite them being tailored towards Heroes fans than FE fans in general as well as other problems such as the potential for vote rigging as well as the fact people might vote for characters that are not properly represented as opposed to their favourite. 

[Alastor15243]

Just now, Icelerate said:

Isn't that more because RD is one of the lesser played games as opposed to RD being controversial. 

It's not that few people liked her, it's that a lot of people hated her.

[Boomhauer007]

5 hours ago, Shrimperor said:

I really really don't think that's an unpopular opinion. Almost any poll pre Three houses puts RD at the top, and even after 3H it's still comfortably at number 2 spot after 3H.

I would like to see something back this assertion up, especially on a game that sold truly terribly.

[Shrimpica]

9 minutes ago, Boomhauer007 said:

I would like to see something back this assertion up, especially on a game that sold truly terribly.

https://www.reddit.com/r/fireemblem/comments/g4z034/a_survey_for_the_members_of_rfireemblem_results/

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeCZecmyLlVD3QhLnWEnkFTRx82B1MBZvXGbNFvLqt-XPvFeA/viewanalytics

https://www.reddit.com/r/fireemblem/comments/dszkw4/fire_emblem_postthree_houses_survey_results_and/

and an older one https://www.reddit.com/r/fireemblem/comments/6ulbzz/reviewing_the_results_of_the_fire_emblem_survey/ (approval rating, fav.: played Ratio also puts RD on Top)

pretty much every poll puts RD on top (or after 3H), and usually Jugdral and Tellius games (+ now Fodlan) top every poll.

 

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by Shrimperor

[Etrurian emperor]

I definitely recall Radiant Dawn and Michy both being rather controversial at the time of release so its not a completely unpopular opinion. However I do think that everyone's view on Radiant Dawn significantly improved over time. 

[Jotari]

6 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

It's not that few people liked her, it's that a lot of people hated her.

NO you must be talking about Shadow Dragon. Wait, that's Awakening. No, no, it sounds like Fates. Seriousy, it's hard to find a Fire Emblem since a western community was established that didn't have a sizeable hate reaction. I was about to say New Mystery of the Emblem is pretty well liked from among those that played it, but no, because a shit tonne of people complain about  Kris. At least that's just a single element though. If it had got released in the west people probably would have come up with more complaints. I guess Shadows of Valentia has a negative reaction, but mostly from people who actually liked it. Three Houses doesn't seem to have that negative a reaction en mass just yet, but I think that might just be a matter of time as it has a lot of problems that people are noticing.

Edited May 31, 2020 by Jotari

[Icelerate]

19 minutes ago, Jotari said:

NO you must be talking about Shadow Dragon. Wait, that's Awakening. No, no, it sounds like Fates. Seriousy, it's hard to find a Fire Emblem since a western community was established that didn't have a sizeable hate reaction. I was about to say New Mystery of the Emblem is pretty well liked from among those that played it, but no, because a shit tonne of people complain about  Kris. At least that's just a single element though. If it had got released in the west people probably would have come up with more complaints. I guess Shadows of Valentia has a negative reaction, but mostly from people who actually liked it. Three Houses doesn't seem to have that negative a reaction en mass just yet, but I think that might just be a matter of time as it has a lot of problems that people are noticing.

PoR is the last FE game that was received almost universally positively. 

[Boomhauer007]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Three Houses doesn't seem to have that negative a reaction en mass just yet, but I think that might just be a matter of time as it has a lot of problems that people are noticing.

The more time that passes the less I like it. I respect that it was somewhat ambitious but it's such an absolute chore to replay that I find it falling farther down my personal rankings every month. 

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Icelerate said:

PoR is the last FE game that was received almost universally positively. 

And that's probably more down to the community being a hella of a lot smaller fifteen years ago than it is now. Though as a game it does play things very safely in both the story and gameplay.

[Lightcosmo]

19 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

My impression was that RD has always been a pretty dang controversial game, honestly. Poor unit balance, Micaiah generally being one of the least popular lords, a hard mode that needlessly removes convenience features and things like the weapon triangle, inferior characterization of Ike, those are all complaints I heard pretty regularly about RD over the years.

When people use poor balance as an argument, do they realise all FE games are like that? Sometimes I wonder how people can be so oblivious to that fact.

Hard Mode is up to personal tastes, but it doesn't particularly bother me.

[Alastor15243]

33 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

When people use poor balance as an argument, do they realise all FE games are like that? Sometimes I wonder how people can be so oblivious to that fact.

Hard Mode is up to personal tastes, but it doesn't particularly bother me.

Not all games are equally poorly balanced. A lot of them are better than others. FE6 for example, while having inconsistent unit balance, has enemies who make a wide variety of classes and stat spreads useful. Meanwhile there are games where all you need to win is passable defense and 1-2 range, and the bar for that is so low that it comes down to who can do it with the highest mov.

The complaint in RD's case is that a lot of units are borderline unusable due to low availability and low level, far below the series norms.

Edited May 31, 2020 by Alastor15243

[Lightcosmo]

56 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Not all games are equally poorly balanced. A lot of them are better than others. FE6 for example, while having inconsistent unit balance, has enemies who make a wide variety of classes and stat spreads useful. Meanwhile there are games where all you need to win is passable defense and 1-2 range, and the bar for that is so low that it comes down to who can do it with the highest mov.

The complaint in RD's case is that a lot of units are borderline unusable due to low availability and low level, far below the series norms.

Well, when you compare a unit like Barth to a unit like Rutger, I think its obvious that from just one example, that unit balance is awful. FE6 has plenty of useless characters, your main character being one of them.

The game being too easy really has no relevance in unit balance. Like, sure, even Amelia could walk through FE8 easy mode, but that doesnt mean Seth doesnt dominate still. 

[Alastor15243]

58 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

Well, when you compare a unit like Barth to a unit like Rutger, I think its obvious that from just one example, that unit balance is awful. FE6 has plenty of useless characters, your main character being one of them..

I already said that FE6's unit balance is poor. My point is that in spite of that, it still has a wide variety of roles for units to fill, such that once you get rid of the trash at the bottom, there's a wide variety of things that units are good at at the top. Rutger is a top tier unit precisely because this game consistently has uses for his high speed and dps, which few games do. It's not just hard mode bonuses that make Rutger one of the best swordmasters in FE history. It's the fact that usually the things swordmasters gain in exchange for losing 1-2 range (speed, accuracy and crit rate) are almost never necessary to kill things like they often are in FE6. Thus I argue FE6 actually has some pretty great balance when it comes to general unit archetypes, even if not when it comes to individual instances of them.

Edited May 31, 2020 by Alastor15243

[Lightcosmo]

44 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

I already said that FE6's unit balance is poor. My point is that in spite of that, it still has a wide variety of roles for units to fill, such that once you get rid of the trash at the bottom, there's a wide variety of things that units are good at at the top. Rutger is a top tier unit precisely because this game consistently has uses for his high speed and dps, which few games do. It's not just hard mode bonuses that make Rutger one of the best swordmasters in FE history. It's the fact that usually the things swordmasters gain in exchange for losing 1-2 range (speed, accuracy and crit rate) are almost never necessary to kill things like they often are in FE6. Thus I argue FE6 actually has some pretty great balance when it comes to general unit archetypes, even if not when it comes to individual instances of them.

Well, considering the individual is important for balance, you cant just ignore it. If you "get rid of" certain units, that just says that it's not well designed. That shouldnt be an option, they should all have uses somewhere.

[Alastor15243]

15 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

Well, considering the individual is important for balance, you cant just ignore it. If you "get rid of" certain units, that just says that it's not well designed. That shouldnt be an option, they should all have uses somewhere.

Remember, my point wasn't that some FE games are well-balanced, I'm saying that some are better than others. And that was to combat your original point, which seemed to be that complaints about RD's balance are invalid because every FE game is imbalanced. Can you not conceive of a game being more noticeably imbalanced than usual? Are degrees of imbalance completely unnoticeable as long as some imbalance exists?

Edited May 31, 2020 by Alastor15243

[Lightcosmo]

6 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Remember, my point wasn't that some FE games are well-balanced, I'm saying that some are better than others. And that was to combat your original point, which seemed to be that complaints about RD's balance are invalid because every FE game is imbalanced. Can you not conceive of a game being more noticeably imbalanced than usual? Are degrees of imbalance completely unnoticeable as long as some imbalance exists?

I didn't mean to say they are invalid, just that if that's someone's only reason for hating RD, then that's kind of sad. If that's someone's logic, then wouldnt they hate every FE game? Sure, some are worse balance wise than others, but that doesnt mean that's it's okay to just overlook bad balance elsewhere. Class balance, weapon balance, unit balance, no FE has achieved close to this, and probably never will.

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, lightcosmo said:

I didn't mean to say they are invalid, just that if that's someone's only reason for hating RD, then that's kind of sad. If that's someone's logic, then wouldnt they hate every FE game? Sure, some are worse balance wise than others, but that doesnt mean that's it's okay to just overlook bad balance elsewhere. Class balance, weapon balance, unit balance, no FE has achieved close to this, and probably never will.

Yes, but RD's unit balance issues are just so obvious, and also ruin characters that people already loved from the previous game. Tormod and Muarim in particular are basically ruined because you inexplicably don't get to use them after their introduction until they've become vastly obsolete. There's just too many characters spread too thin among too many different groups, and there are so many that get horribly left behind, even by bad Fire Emblem unit standards.

[Lightcosmo]

6 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Yes, but RD's unit balance issues are just so obvious, and also ruin characters that people already loved from the previous game. Tormod and Muarim in particular are basically ruined because you inexplicably don't get to use them after their introduction until they've become vastly obsolete. There's just too many characters spread too thin among too many different groups, and there are so many that get horribly left behind, even by bad Fire Emblem unit standards.

I guess that's fair. I guess I just dont let that ruin my view of the game, as i can accept that every FE game is going to have poor balance, somewhere. 

[samthedigital]

I think that balance is overrated. As long as the game gives me enough tools and options to make the game fun then I don't think that balance is important.

Quote

Poor unit balance, Micaiah generally being one of the least popular lords, a hard mode that needlessly removes convenience features and things like the weapon triangle, inferior characterization of Ike, those are all complaints I heard pretty regularly about RD over the years.

The game's structure alone was controversial as soon as it came out from what I remember.

[Lightcosmo]

2 hours ago, samthedigital said:

I think that balance is overrated. As long as the game gives me enough tools and options to make the game fun then I don't think that balance is important.

This depends on the style of game for me, but in the instance of FE, I dont mind it. In a competitive scene, it's kinda important, though.