What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[Sooks]

2 hours ago, Samz707 said:

so now I'm wondering if Byleth actually canonically abuses Divine Pulse considering their seeming inability to avoid dying whenever a cutscene is running, I could legit see Cutscene-Byleth using Divine Pulse in pretty much every battle, probably mostly for themselves honestly..)

I’m not sure if this is a genuine question or not since plot spoilers, but you’ve seemed pretty given up on the story, so I’ll just spoiler tag it.

Spoiler

Yes, at one point Byleth does use divine pulse in a cutscene. Although it only happens the one time and it makes me wonder why they don’t use it every time something bad happens in the story, I would have rather them just left it m gameplay only.

 

[Jotari]

11 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Well I never said it was a sin to disagree with me. I mean like whatever if you like Alm fine. I don’t care. All I really care about is if you are going to try and debate with me on the subject you actually back up what you say with proper reasoning and arguments. Just don’t make claims you can’t back up

You say that, but arguing with you always boils down to you claiming your arguments are objectively true and ignoring all counter points. It's a rodeo I've seen many times by now.

7 hours ago, Seazas said:

It is when Kris is undeservingly elevated for it when Kris acts no different from Cain, Draug and others and you don't see Marth treating them like he does Kris despite knowing them longer.

Robin by comparison acts as an actual character and actually highlights the oddity of him being relied on and by doing so, strengthened his bond with Chrom. 

So Kris gets undeservedly elevated above characters Marth has known longer, and Robin gets elevated above characters Chrom has known longer, but it's okay in Robin's case because you just like Robin better.

Edited October 4, 2020 by Jotari

[AnonymousSpeed]

Why aren't there bull riders in Fire Emblem? There should be.

[Acacia Sgt]

3 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Why aren't there bull riders in Fire Emblem? There should be.

There better appear in a Spanish/Colonial-LA themed country or else.

[AnonymousSpeed]

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

There better appear in a Spanish/Colonial-LA themed country or else.

We should get a Matador Lord.

[Lightcosmo]

17 minutes ago, Jotari said:

You say that, but arguing with you always boils down to you claiming your arguments are objectively true and ignoring all counter points. It's a rodeo I've seen many times by now.

Sorry, but I have to agree with this. There is such a thing as seeing it from the other side of the table, y'know.

[Interdimensional Observer]

Just now, AnonymousSpeed said:

We should get a Matador Lord.

I think Sigurd could be recast as one.:

Or is it just me that the pose has the finesse I'd associate with a bullfighter?

[Ottservia]

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

You say that, but arguing with you always boils down to you claiming your arguments are objectively true and ignoring all counter points. It's a rodeo I've seen many times by now.

 

 

 

Just now, lightcosmo said:

Sorry, but I have to agree with this. There is such a thing as seeing it from the other side of the table, y'know.

Simply because people make claims they can’t really back up. Like here’s the thing. If you’re gonna make an argument with actual facts and evidence. It would you do you well to get your facts straight and not cherry pick information to fit your narrative. Like saying SoV’s story does not try to present Alm as flawed when it clearly does try to do that multiple times but it doesn’t work at least to me anyway. Or like saying Corrin isn’t a flawed character when they very clearly are and that the narrative presents them as such. I only say my argument is objectively right when I think it’s sound. I am always open to discussion so long as your respectful about it and you don’t say stupid shit

[Lightcosmo]

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Simply because people make claims they can’t really back up. Like here’s the thing. If you’re gonna make an argument with actual facts and evidence. It would you do you well to get your facts straight and not cherry pick information to fit your narrative. Like saying SoV’s story does not try to present Alm as flawed when it clearly does try to do that multiple times but it doesn’t work at least to me anyway. Or like saying Corrin isn’t a flawed character when they very clearly are and that the narrative presents them as such. I only say my argument is objectively right when I think it’s sound. I am always open to discussion so long as your respectful about it and you don’t say stupid shit

If you're the one arguing something, it's only because you think it's right. Why would you do it otherwise? 

You make it sound like your always right, when that isnt the case.

I wouldn't really say your open to discussion, rather tearing apart what others feel about something piece by piece because you arent happy with their opinions. 

That's not exactly a pleasant conversation.

[Ottservia]

36 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

I wouldn't really say your open to discussion, rather tearing apart what others feel about something piece by piece because you arent happy with their opinions. 

When have I ever said I am unhappy with someone else’s opinion. No I’m more so concerned with the justification for that opinion. Like I’ve said a million times by now. It’s fine to have an opinion but the minute you try to justify with actual facts and evidence it becomes more than an opinion because then you can say things that simply are not true as reasons for your opinion. Think about it logically. I don’t like SoV. That’s an opinion. I think SoV is poorly written because Celica is an idiot. That’s more than an opinion that’s an argument which while true is kind of the point of her character so it’s not really a criticism because again that’s kinda the point. It’s kinda like criticizing Xander for being a hypocrite. Yeah he is one but it’s more or less intentional when you think about it. I’m getting off track. Regardless my primary point is that having an opinion is not wrong it’s when that opinion is mired in cherry picked and falsified information then there’s a problem.

At the end of the day I just want better discourse alright. That’s not gonna happen if people constantly parrot the same dumb arguments that are very easily debunked. It’s fine to think Celica is dumb but to say she’s a poorly written character because of that is more or less missing the point. Really, I just hate people being dissmissive like that. Like people keep making the argument of plot points being contrived and unrealistic when storytelling is inherently contrived and unrealistic. It’s fine to not like something until you try to justify that dislike with reasoning that is simply illogical and not true. Like if I think you said something dumb then I’m gonna call you out for saying something dumb

Edited October 4, 2020 by Ottservia

[NaotoUzumaki]

Another unpopular opinion I have is the recycled avatar worship and that the world or parts of it can’t function without Them. I’m mean you avatar in Awakening is the Evil God. In fate is Dragon Hercules with Corrin with their Evil Dad Anankos and Three Houses is you the Vessal of the Good Goddess Sothis and Becomes the Second Coming of Her. I mean Intys if you’re unable to make a world without the Avatar that’s fine but is it necessary to that they exist. I mean if you have a character that can Fulfill their avatar role as actual existing cast why put them in there in first time place? Don’t get Wrong for the people who like them but they can’t keep recycling the avatar ideas in everything and not expect their writing to become Fanfiction Tier. How about an Avatar who is quiet shy one and is banished in a similar event to Lyoid Irving where their friends and them are banish trying to do go but paint a target on their own birthplace. There are way to make the avatar follow the MC without poor Writing. I’m still irked at Byleth not taking over Jeralt mercenaries and saying no to the church.At least give a reason why they can’t say no to Rhea then we can’t Outrun the Knights.Is there a death sentence for the runaway or is there a you can’t leave the church one inside but the latter is bs since Jeritza and Seteth go to town for supplies so what the actual excuses that they can come up without saying plot 

[Seazas]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

You say that, but arguing with you always boils down to you claiming your arguments are objectively true and ignoring all counter points. It's a rodeo I've seen many times by now.

So Kris gets undeservedly elevated above characters Marth has known longer, and Robin gets elevated above characters Chrom has known longer, but it's okay in Robin's case because you just like Robin better.

That argument is terrible. Robin gets to know Chrom way more than Kris does with Marth and Kris butts in scenes with him being prioritized and credited for everything for no good reason. While Chrom goes a majority of his story without Robin being center face in it. Awakening accounted for the avatar far more than New Mystery did.

[Sooks]

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

It’s fine to think Celica is dumb but to say she’s a poorly written character because of that is more or less missing the point. Really, I just hate people being dissmissive like that.

Eh. It depends how her dumbness is written, if it’s not realistic at all or if it makes no sense then she is poorly written via being dumb. Granted, I don’t remember Echoes’ story really, I’m just saying that’s not inherently true. And you can’t say

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

Like people keep making the argument of plot points being contrived and unrealistic when storytelling is inherently contrived and unrealistic.

because, in my opinion, that’s no reason to just throw in the towel and be like “Alright. Stories are unrealistic. So after Celtics and Alm get married, Alm becomes a polygamist and also marries Clair, and they move to Hoshido to raise a family together, and raise many lovely kids, like Lyn of the Lorca, Will Smith, and Barney the Dinosaur.” /s

[joevar]

18 hours ago, Samz707 said:

Maybe it's just me but Three Houses is kinda worse about the false freedom

yes, it is the worst imo. whats with the game giving you option that 90% didnt matter at all, sounds like same option, mostly just a reactive answer not actively saying something, or the option just pop up when its not critical. it just doesnt add any nuance unless its intended for laugh (people deliberately ignoring the avatar suggestion just after asking him). wait, maybe Byleth is gag character all along

17 hours ago, Jotari said:

You say that as if a yes man is an inherently bad role for an avatar.

yes its bad. just ask people why they want avatar character. i doubt "become yes man" will be high on the list. i believe its the opposite since its just the trend in RPG these days to NOT do something they ask/want you to do.
"but its people opinion , so why it becomes *bad* ?? 😞 " because the false freedom that i mention above...

6 hours ago, Samz707 said:

the cutscenes just feel incredibly disjointed from the actual gameplay, almost to the point where I feel they need a complete re-work. (And the dude even pulls out a magic shield spell that seemingly only exists in the cutscene dimension.)

cutscene with dialogue box? if so i guess its the limitation of engine or programming for cutscene act to feel similar no matter the situation (be it peaceful or just after fight) . japanese rpg cutscene tend to be like that iirc, unless its pre-rendered cutscene/movie

6 hours ago, Samz707 said:

Anyone else get the implications that Byleth is actually a terrible mercenary?

😂

Edited October 4, 2020 by joevar

[Ottservia]

8 minutes ago, Sooks1016 said:

Eh. It depends how her dumbness is written, if it’s not realistic at all or if it makes no sense then she is poorly written via being dumb. Granted, I don’t remember Echoes’ story really, I’m just saying that’s not inherently true. And you can’t say

because, in my opinion, that’s no reason to just throw in the towel and be like “Alright. Stories are unrealistic. So after Celtics and Alm get married, Alm becomes a polygamist and also marries Clair, and they move to Hoshido to raise a family together, and raise many lovely kids, like Lyn of the Lorca, Will Smith, and Barney the Dinosaur.” /s

What I mean when I say storytelling is inherently contrived and unrealistic is that storytelling is inherently constructed and artificial. Nothing in a story ever happens “naturally” because everything in the story is constructed by the author to well tell a story. No story is ever truly realistic. No story can ever truly represent reality. To read stories merely by reality creates dissonance but it’s a dissonance that’s unavoidable when you realize that storytelling is by nature artificial.

If you need an example just look at dialogue. Real life conversation is a fucking mess with people stuttering, stammering, interrupting each other, forgetting what they were about to say, changing their minds or opinions, points being poorly formed but still understood due to familiarity both sides have with each other etc. Scripted dialogue made for the purposes of storytelling is not like this. Scripted dialogue is meant to be clear and understandable with denser and layered meanings. It’s set at a literacy well above two people talking to each other. The only times the above stuff happens in scripted dialogue is when it’s implemented purposefully by the author for the sake of characterization or creating tension/conflict or whatever other reason the author has in mind. If you think about it that way, any story with dialogue meant to convey greater meaning is contrived and unrealistic by definition.

so yeah. Storytelling is inherently contrived and unrealistic 

[Sooks]

28 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

What I mean when I say storytelling is inherently contrived and unrealistic is that storytelling is inherently constructed and artificial. Nothing in a story ever happens “naturally” because everything in the story is constructed by the author to well tell a story. No story is ever truly realistic. No story can ever truly represent reality. To read stories merely by reality creates dissonance but it’s a dissonance that’s unavoidable when you realize that storytelling is by nature artificial.

This is flawed logic in my opinion because writing and stores are often marketed as realistic, because we have realistic fiction and narrative nonfiction. This is kind of hard to explain, so I’ll switch art forms. Drawings are just recreations of reality right? Pieced together through observations of the world around us, just like some writing. And these drawings end up looking incredibly realistic, like a mirror of reality. These are constructs, yes, but realistic all the same.

28 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

If you think about it that way, any story with dialogue meant to convey greater meaning is contrived and unrealistic by definition.

You can use this logic on that, however, just because something is unrealistic and contrived by definition doesn’t mean it ends up that way in execution, as I would find with a lot of stories.

28 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

If you need an example just look at dialogue. Real life conversation is a fucking mess with people stuttering, stammering, interrupting each other, forgetting what they were about to say, changing their minds or opinions, points being poorly formed but still understood due to familiarity both sides have with each other etc. Scripted dialogue made for the purposes of storytelling is not like this. Scripted dialogue is meant to be clear and understandable with denser and layered meanings. It’s set at a literacy well above two people talking to each other. The only times the above stuff happens in scripted dialogue is when it’s implemented purposefully by the author for the sake of characterization or creating tension/conflict or whatever other reason the author has in mind.

It all depends on the characters who are talking. If this was the story the author wanted to tell, then they would do so, but just because people talk like that in real life doesn’t mean that not doing so is unrealistic, when that is also done. Even if you think it is contrived and unrealistic, that doesn’t stop those same things from wing valid criticisms of a story. We want our stories to make sense, because otherwise they would oftentimes end up dull with logic thrown out the window. Even if everything is inherently contrived and unrealistic, I can believe that characters would talk the way they do in well written dialogue, but that doesn’t mean I would find an action of any given character believable. Stories are fake and made up, but yet they often touch close to reality for a lot of people. (Some) People specifically like characters they can relate to, and this is because stories or elements of them can touch close to reality, and so it is a valid criticism when someone says say the actions of a human being are unrealistic, because if something makes no sense while taking itself seriously, it’s just not entertaining or well done, in most people’s eyes.

And even if it wasn’t a valid criticism in your eyes, that doesn’t mean others should just be fine with it. It’s all a matter of taste, really.

Edited October 4, 2020 by Sooks1016

[Jotari]

3 hours ago, Ottservia said:

 

 

 

Simply because people make claims they can’t really back up. Like here’s the thing. If you’re gonna make an argument with actual facts and evidence. It would you do you well to get your facts straight and not cherry pick information to fit your narrative. Like saying SoV’s story does not try to present Alm as flawed when it clearly does try to do that multiple times but it doesn’t work at least to me anyway. Or like saying Corrin isn’t a flawed character when they very clearly are and that the narrative presents them as such. I only say my argument is objectively right when I think it’s sound. I am always open to discussion so long as your respectful about it and you don’t say stupid shit

People do. You just don't listen to them because you go into everything assuming you are incontrovertibly right. Not trying to attack you or anything. It's just that this keeps on happening between you a multiple different users. How many dozens of pages in this thread are you saying Fates is the best thing since sliced bread, Shadows of Valentia is hot garbage (exaggerated) and arguing over what constitutes objective? We've gone for 200 pages  on this thread and I'd reckon it's at least 20 pages, so in other words about 10% of this thread is you repeating the same points.

2 hours ago, Seazas said:

That argument is terrible. Robin gets to know Chrom way more than Kris does with Marth and Kris butts in scenes with him being prioritized and credited for everything for no good reason. While Chrom goes a majority of his story without Robin being center face in it. Awakening accounted for the avatar far more than New Mystery did.

Hey man it's your argument, not mine. I didn't claim it was a valid way of judging things at all.

Edited October 4, 2020 by Jotari

[Samz707]

7 hours ago, Sooks1016 said:

I’m not sure if this is a genuine question or not since plot spoilers, but you’ve seemed pretty given up on the story, so I’ll just spoiler tag it.

  Reveal hidden contents

Yes, at one point Byleth does use divine pulse in a cutscene. Although it only happens the one time and it makes me wonder why they don’t use it every time something bad happens in the story, I would have rather them just left it m gameplay only.

 

Honestly I kinda am at this point.

I don't like to just give up on the story but it legitmately feels like when a cutscene starts, suddenly I'm in a very similar but still very distinctly different alternate universe, Where Byleth is suddenly really bad at their job of killing dudes, the boss I just beat the crap of is now unhurt somehow, characters can suddenly become unarmed and there's entire magic spells that do not actually exist in-game.

I really can't tolerate when a game just blatantly bends it's own rules, same with other pieces of fiction but games tend to get free-passes in my experience just because it's a cutscene, like sure there's some stuff (Player characters getting knocked out to a blow to the head while able to tank  a good few in gameplay) but the magic system shouldn't just function with entirely different spells that aren't in gameplay, you really can't pull out a spell that defies how magic normally works and not expect me to question why it's only in a cutscene.

4 hours ago, joevar said:

 

 

cutscene with dialogue box? if so i guess its the limitation of engine or programming for cutscene act to feel similar no matter the situation (be it peaceful or just after fight) . japanese rpg cutscene tend to be like that iirc, unless its pre-rendered cutscene/movie

😂

I mean the pre-rendered cutscenes, Edelgard is suddenly axe-less in the prologue and the mage dude in the Tomb battle literally pulls out a shield spell that doesn't even exist in the game.

[joevar]

4 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Honestly I kinda am at this point.

I don't like to just give up on the story but it legitmately feels like when a cutscene starts, suddenly I'm in a very similar but still very distinctly different alternate universe, Where Byleth is suddenly really bad at their job of killing dudes, the boss I just beat the crap of is now unhurt somehow, characters can suddenly become unarmed and there's entire magic spells that do not actually exist in-game.

I really can't tolerate when a game just blatantly bends it's own rules, same with other pieces of fiction but games tend to get free-passes in my experience just because it's a cutscene, like sure there's some stuff (Player characters getting knocked out to a blow to the head while able to tank  a good few in gameplay) but the magic system shouldn't just function with entirely different spells that aren't in gameplay, you really can't pull out a spell that defies how magic normally works and not expect me to question why it's only in a cutscene.

I mean the pre-rendered cutscenes, Edelgard is suddenly axe-less in the prologue and the mage dude in the Tomb battle literally pulls out a shield spell that doesn't even exist in the game.

oh you're referring to that... which, im at loss too 🤔
here's hoping the studios responsible for next FE cutscene wouldnt make same mistake.
maybe the gameplay scene not ready yet on IS part so the animation studios can only guess, hence the disjointed scene. thats my best guess

[Jotari]

52 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Honestly I kinda am at this point.

I don't like to just give up on the story but it legitmately feels like when a cutscene starts, suddenly I'm in a very similar but still very distinctly different alternate universe, Where Byleth is suddenly really bad at their job of killing dudes, the boss I just beat the crap of is now unhurt somehow, characters can suddenly become unarmed and there's entire magic spells that do not actually exist in-game.

I really can't tolerate when a game just blatantly bends it's own rules, same with other pieces of fiction but games tend to get free-passes in my experience just because it's a cutscene, like sure there's some stuff (Player characters getting knocked out to a blow to the head while able to tank  a good few in gameplay) but the magic system shouldn't just function with entirely different spells that aren't in gameplay, you really can't pull out a spell that defies how magic normally works and not expect me to question why it's only in a cutscene.

I mean the pre-rendered cutscenes, Edelgard is suddenly axe-less in the prologue and the mage dude in the Tomb battle literally pulls out a shield spell that doesn't even exist in the game.

I wouldn't object to shield magic being a thing in gameplay all things considered.

[Samz707]

3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I wouldn't object to shield magic being a thing in gameplay all things considered.

Same but it's still nonsensical when an entire magic spell-type only exists in cutscenes and it's used by some random generic enemy mage and I'm apparently not supposed to question it.

I can tolerate mild inconsisnticies (I could probably write an essay on how many shooters often potray you with weapons that don't even exist on the level the cutscenes show you with, which is like an FE cutscene showing you with a Steel sword when you only have Iron versions by that point.) but it's really bad when magic spells that don't even exist in normal gameplay are a thing in cutscenes.

[Lightcosmo]

8 hours ago, Ottservia said:

When have I ever said I am unhappy with someone else’s opinion. No I’m more so concerned with the justification for that opinion. Like I’ve said a million times by now. It’s fine to have an opinion but the minute you try to justify with actual facts and evidence it becomes more than an opinion because then you can say things that simply are not true as reasons for your opinion. Think about it logically. I don’t like SoV. That’s an opinion. I think SoV is poorly written because Celica is an idiot. That’s more than an opinion that’s an argument which while true is kind of the point of her character so it’s not really a criticism because again that’s kinda the point. It’s kinda like criticizing Xander for being a hypocrite. Yeah he is one but it’s more or less intentional when you think about it. I’m getting off track. Regardless my primary point is that having an opinion is not wrong it’s when that opinion is mired in cherry picked and falsified information then there’s a problem.

At the end of the day I just want better discourse alright. That’s not gonna happen if people constantly parrot the same dumb arguments that are very easily debunked. It’s fine to think Celica is dumb but to say she’s a poorly written character because of that is more or less missing the point. Really, I just hate people being dissmissive like that. Like people keep making the argument of plot points being contrived and unrealistic when storytelling is inherently contrived and unrealistic. It’s fine to not like something until you try to justify that dislike with reasoning that is simply illogical and not true. Like if I think you said something dumb then I’m gonna call you out for saying something dumb

The question is, how do you know exactly how they intended to write characters? Are you a dev? If not, then what your saying isnt fact, either. That argument within itself can just be an infinite loop of "contrived and unrealistic" as you're argument. That way, you dont have to actually enter an argument, just hide behind the same reasoning all the time. It's like someone said:

5 hours ago, Jotari said:

People do. You just don't listen to them because you go into everything assuming you are incontrovertibly right. Not trying to attack you or anything. It's just that this keeps on happening between you a multiple different users. How many dozens of pages in this thread are you saying Fates is the best thing since sliced bread, Shadows of Valentia is hot garbage (exaggerated) and arguing over what constitutes objective? We've gone for 200 pages  on this thread and I'd reckon it's at least 20 pages, so in other words about 10% of this thread is you repeating the same points.

 

[Ottservia]

6 hours ago, Jotari said:

Not trying to attack you or anything

Really? Cause it sounds like you are

 

6 hours ago, Jotari said:

People do. You just don't listen to them because you go into everything assuming you are incontrovertibly right.

No people really don’t. If we’re talking fates and awakening specifically. I am tired of hearing the same stupid ass bullshit arguments. “Oh it’s too contrived”, “oh it’s unrealistic”, “Oh it’s too anime”, “Corrin is a mary sue”, “Robin and Corrin get too much avatar worship”, etc. I’m just tired of hearing it at this point especially when those criticisms really don’t mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. Hell one of those arguments is actually kind of racist but I digress. Like there is more to writing than just mechanics. Where are the thematic explorations or the character dissections? When people call Xander a bad character for being a hypocrite but have you ever stopped to consider that maybe that was the point. That he was intentionally written that way. It’s not like the narrative rewards him for being a hypocrite. He kills his sister and dies a martyr ultimately failing to protect anything. In that way, you could make the argument that he was intentionally written as a hypocrite. In that way, I believe he is a well written character. Like simply saying Xander is hypocrite and “hypocrisy bad therefore character bad” is dismissive of greater discussion. It’s the same problem I have with people who criticize Sylvain because all of their criticisms basically amount to “mysoginy bad” which is kinda missing the point of his character. Again it’s dismissive of greater discussion surrounding his character. Cause what if it’s intentional(it very clearly is). And again it’s not like he’s really rewarded for his behavior. It’s another case of people applying bullshit rules to something that never had any intention of following those rules. Like this weird idea that a character needs redeeming qualities to be “a good character” when that’s simply not true and is dismissive of all the millions of ways a character can be written. Again all I want is better discourse which ain’t gonna happen if people keep repeating the same tired old easily refutable arguments.

 

7 hours ago, Sooks1016 said:

This is flawed logic in my opinion because writing and stores are often marketed as realistic, because we have realistic fiction and narrative nonfiction. This is kind of hard to explain, so I’ll switch art forms. Drawings are just recreations of reality right? Pieced together through observations of the world around us, just like some writing. And these drawings end up looking incredibly realistic, like a mirror of reality. These are constructs, yes, but realistic all the same.

You can use this logic on that, however, just because something is unrealistic and contrived by definition doesn’t mean it ends up that way in execution, as I would find with a lot of stories.

It all depends on the characters who are talking. If this was the story the author wanted to tell, then they would do so, but just because people talk like that in real life doesn’t mean that not doing so is unrealistic, when that is also done. Even if you think it is contrived and unrealistic, that doesn’t stop those same things from wing valid criticisms of a story. We want our stories to make sense, because otherwise they would oftentimes end up dull with logic thrown out the window. Even if everything is inherently contrived and unrealistic, I can believe that characters would talk the way they do in well written dialogue, but that doesn’t mean I would find an action of any given character believable. Stories are fake and made up, but yet they often touch close to reality for a lot of people. (Some) People specifically like characters they can relate to, and this is because stories or elements of them can touch close to reality, and so it is a valid criticism when someone says say the actions of a human being are unrealistic, because if something makes no sense while taking itself seriously, it’s just not entertaining or well done, in most people’s eyes.

And even if it wasn’t a valid criticism in your eyes, that doesn’t mean others should just be fine with it. It’s all a matter of taste, really.

I’m just gonna leave this video here so that you can have a better idea of what I’m trying to say

 

[Lightcosmo]

3 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

No people really don’t. If we’re talking fates and awakening specifically. I am tired of hearing the same stupid ass bullshit arguments. “Oh it’s too contrived”, “oh it’s unrealistic”, “Oh it’s too anime”, “Corrin is a mary sue”, “Robin and Corrin get too much avatar worship”, etc.

Ive... never said any of this, actually. Again, maybe get your facts straight before judging someone?

[Ottservia]

3 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

Ive... never said any of this, actually. Again, maybe get your facts straight before judging someone?

I never said you did. I’m saying other people do