What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[Anathaco]

2 hours ago, Samz707 said:

I've literally talked to Casper every single exploration sessions so far and I only know he's a fighter dude because I googled it, literally none of his dialogue has told me anything about him,

For one thing, it'd be even worse for the characters if they constantly shove their gimmick in your face- you did say you despised Raphael for basically that reason. But for another thing, Caspar is one of the characters you can tell the most about by his monastery dialogue IMO.

In Chapter 1 (i think) he's talking about how strong Jeritza is and how he could probably take Byleth, then when Byleth says that Caspar doesn't stand a chance  he basically says that he'll become strong enough one day.

In Chapter 2 he's literally training at the training grounds. He's also kind of being an idiot by 

In Chapter 3 not so much, but you can tell what kind of person he is by the way he dismisses Linhardt's claim that he'll choke if he eats too fast- he's brash, headstrong and overexcitable.

I'll give you chapter 4 and 5 though- 4 is him talking about his dad and 5 is him talking about the lance being stolen (apparently if you haven't recruited him by Chapter 5 he literally says "I'm gonna keep training until I can beat you!", but yeah).

 

Anyway, generally speaking I think 3H does a decent job with character development, but most of said development hinges around Byleth, so I can definitely see how people would dislike that. The only characters I can think of that don't rely solely on Byleth for development are Ignatz, Marianne and I guess arguably someone like Ferdinand. I'm not the biggest fan of this, but I can stomach it, because I do feel it makes sense, even if it makes me feel like the game is trying too hard to pander to me.

[Jotari]

3 hours ago, Sooks1016 said:

Me too! And it’s my favorite game.

 

I don't think I could say it's my favourite game in the series as the issues are pretty big problems. Then again I do have some issue with basically every game in the series, so I don't think any of them I could call my out and out favourite.

[Shrimpica]

8 hours ago, Samz707 said:

plus the game literally time-skips past the initial teaching stuff all the way up to the mock battle

Because if there's anything the game needs more of, it's more time in class!

Do you want the game to tell you what happens in every class in detail

7 hours ago, Samz707 said:

I do like X game at times but it's by no means "best game in the series!" like some like to claim.

every game ever

Edited October 30, 2020 by Shrimperor

[Samz707]

59 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Because if there's anything the game needs more of, it's more time in class!

Do you want the game to tell you what happens in every class in detail

every game ever

My point is, the one potentially interesting bit with the classes, the students realizing and dealing with the fact their teacher is a awkward blank stared Mercenary is literally skipped over in favour of jumping right into when it's boring routine and they have seemingly gotten used to it.

I don't need to see everything but at least Bernadette should have been visibly cowering in the corner during class instead of just using the same animations as everyone else.

They skipped over/avoided anything that would have actually been interesting to see in the classes, which is why the classes are so boring.

Edited October 30, 2020 by Samz707

[Shrimpica]

39 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

the students realizing and dealing with the fact their teacher is a awkward blank stared Mercenary is literally skipped over in favour of jumping right into when it's boring routine and they have seemingly gotten used to it.

not really though

literally at the beginning they mock and make fun of him ''our age'' ''creepy'' etc

[Samz707]

5 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

not really though

literally at the beginning they mock and make fun of him ''our age'' ''creepy'' etc

Yeah, then bam TIME SKIP and it's practically gone.

Plus they A: don't know Byleth is going to be their teacher yet and B: again, one quick time skip and its' gone.

The game presents us them not really caring about Byleth, then suddenly skips to them liking it, there's no gradual shift, it's all done away with in a lazy time skip to the point where again, the game is asking me if I'm friends with characters I know basically nothing about, that's really not good writing at all.

Edited October 30, 2020 by Samz707

[Etrurian emperor]

8 hours ago, Ottservia said:

honestly "avatar worship" is probably one of the most empty criticisms you can give towards a story because 9 times out of 10 it's not really even a thing. Why? because usually there is some sort of explanation for it be it thematic or otherwise. Robin, Byleth, and even Corrin(I haven't played new mystery so I can't comment on Kris) all have some sort of explanation for being generally liked by people. Robin helped save a town when he didn't need to, Corrin's can be explained away through sibling relations being complicated as well as trust and loyalty playing a huge part in fates's overall themes, and with Byleth it's because they're a strong professor who people respect for their skill. Again there usually is an explanation. Even if it is player pandering I don't really see much of a problem with it so long as it doesn't take away from the story's overall thematic message which it usually doesn't. Another thing about it is that you can kinda call anything involving the avatar player pandering when you really think about it. It's the same reason I don't like "contrived" as a criticism cause you can call anything in a story contrived if you look at it hard enough.

I don't think that's quite the case. Avatar worship isn't really about a character merely being ''liked'' but if he receives excessive adoration that his character never really earned, and if the plot bends over backwards trying to make him look good. 

I think Corrin in particular get so muck flack about this because he's the best example of a character not really deserving so much praise, and the plot twisting itself in all sorts of corners to avoid having to make him do anything bad. Despite all the praise Corrin repeatedly gets he's pretty helpless for a main character. Throughout the stories he makes all sorts of mistakes, naively walks into all sorts of traps and generally needs his siblings to hold his hand. He's never challenged to grow out of this, and despite needing babysitting so often everyone still keeps going on about what a natural leader Corrin is. In Revelation its even explicitly shot down that he needs to overcome his flaws with his siblings insisting those flaws are charming and that they'll forever bail him out if he gets in trouble. Even if the praise was deserved then Ryoma admitting he was deeply jealous of Corrin for being such a great leader when Corrin was just four years old is really pushing it. 

And the writing seems very afraid of showing Corrin as anything else then perfect. Why did Kotaro and Corrin turn on each other for no reason? Because Corrin must be perfect and so he can't ally with such a shady individual. I suspect half the reason team Garon is so cartoonishly evil is to make it undeniable that they, not Corrin deserve all the blame for trampling over Hoshido. Its also never really called out how Corrin costs Nohr an ally for absolutely no reason. Even Garon who executes people just for being in the same room as him thinks its just fine. When Ike let his anger jeopardize a vital alliance with Begnion the team gently, but firmly made it clear he had made a gigantic mistake, when Lyn shuns the help of a racist lord everyone is in agreement but its also made clear that this has cost their cause. When Corrin randomly picks a fight with their ally everyone in the story just agrees and thinks its great.  

[Shrimpica]

20 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Yeah, then bam TIME SKIP and it's practically gone.

not really. They don't trust him fully until ch7.

They don't tell him ''you're good'' before battle, but after it.

20 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

don't know Byleth is going to be their teacher yet

By that time they do

[Axie]

fire emblem as a franchise has progressed past the need for avatars; i truly believe an avatarless fire emblem would be accepted just fine by now, even if it was a big help in making awakening what it was

(we all agree casual mode is the cornerstone of fire emblem's current success, right? if that's there, IS can probably try whatever)

[Alastor15243]

9 minutes ago, Axie said:

(we all agree casual mode is the cornerstone of fire emblem's current success, right? if that's there, IS can probably try whatever)

My blood fucking freezes at the idea that there's a huge enough number of people who will buy any Fire Emblem game as long as they can't ever lose.

[Axie]

4 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

My blood fucking freezes at the idea that there's a huge enough number of people who will buy any Fire Emblem game as long as they can't ever lose.

i have never touched casual mode because i am a good old masochist like the rest of us, but as i understand it, the lord dying is still a game over, no?

people just don't like permanent death (and i mean, me included - i always reset when someone dies even if it's someone i don't ever plan on using lol). kaga wasn't the absolute smartest when he came up with the concept of "look at these characters with their own faces, backgrounds and personalities... if some of them die it's fine you are not supposed to feel anything about it ignore their sad death quote LALALA"

Edited October 30, 2020 by Axie

[Alastor15243]

20 minutes ago, Axie said:

i have never touched casual mode because i am a good old masochist like the rest of us, but as i understand it, the lord dying is still a game over, no?

Not anymore from what I understand. Starting from Fates they made it so if there isn't a defend or timed arrive objective, you need a total party wipe to lose on casual mode, an event that the series was never balanced around making even remotely realistic to happen. As a result, there's functionally no difference between casual mode and phoenix mode in practice.

Edited October 30, 2020 by Alastor15243

[Samz707]

2 hours ago, Axie said:

i have never touched casual mode because i am a good old masochist like the rest of us, but as i understand it, the lord dying is still a game over, no?

people just don't like permanent death (and i mean, me included - i always reset when someone dies even if it's someone i don't ever plan on using lol). kaga wasn't the absolute smartest when he came up with the concept of "look at these characters with their own faces, backgrounds and personalities... if some of them die it's fine you are not supposed to feel anything about it ignore their sad death quote LALALA"

Nope, total party death is the only way to game over nowadays, that thing FE is not designed to do.

Nah, I'd say Kaga was the smartest, because they have personalities and such, you actually care for them, as opposed to other Perma death games. (Such as Rainbow Six and the OG Ghost Recon) where your units really aren't valuable at all and even ones where death somewhat matters, like OG X-com, due to starts/not easily replaceable, you're still more mourning the stats of that unit mostly, rather than the actual unit, FE meanwhile (when well-written anyways or at least not outright infuriating)  has units that I want to care about/feel sad if they die, even if they had absolutely trash stats, I literally got Fiora telling Florina how she'll protect her against the men in her C Support, only for her to get shot  down soon after by a really bad strategy I did, I hardly used her and in any other strategy game I wouldn't care at all but this actually made me feel bad a bit.

In addition to FE allowing you somewhat able to consistently keep everyone alive if you don't make a mistake (In theory, screw ambush spawns or giving generic enemies the ability to crit consistently.)  means that you feel actually responsible as opposed to Ghost Recon 1 where a random guy with a regular rifle pulled off a sniper shot just barely in the game's draw distance hitting your actual sniper in the head, then the guy next to him in literally the next second. 

Them having personalities actually adds emotional weight when they die if you screw up.

 

Edited October 30, 2020 by Samz707

[Axie]

9 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Nah, I'd say Kaga was the smartest, because they have personalities and such, you actually care for them, as opposed to other Perma death games. (Such as Rainbow Six and the OG Ghost Recon) where your units really aren't valuable at all and even ones where death somewhat matters, like OG X-com, due to starts/not easily replaceable, you're still more mourning the stats of that unit mostly, rather than the actual unit, FE meanwhile (when well-written anyways or at least not outright infuriating)  has units that I want to care about/feel sad if they die, even if they had absolutely trash stats, I literally got Fiora telling Florina how she'll protect her against the men in her C Support, only for her to get shot  down soon after by a really bad strategy I did, I hardly used her and in any other strategy game I wouldn't care at all but this actually made me feel bad a bit.

In addition to FE allowing you somewhat able to consistently keep everyone alive if you don't make a mistake (In theory, screw ambush spawns or giving generic enemies the ability to crit consistently.)  means that you feel actually responsible as opposed to Ghost Recon 1 where a random guy pulled off a sniper shot just barely in the game's draw distance hitting your actual sniper in the head.

Them having personalities actually adds emotional weight when they die if you screw up.

 

yes, exactly. their personalities and backgrounds add emotional weight if they die, which is why it doesn't work for kaga to say "you are meant to let some of them die, that's why we keep throwing new people at you lol". you just made me like them, you silly. i'm not just gonna lose them like this. i will reset and you can't stop me, sir. and once we start doing it for a few people, it becomes a habit to do it every time, because when anyone dies, we feel like a failure. kaga didn't really think this through, ended up with the absolute opposite outcome of what he intended, and that's the reason we have casual mode now, and probably the smaller rosters have something to do with that (and marriage) too. i think fe16 has like ~30 playable characters total? i miss huge rosters even if i never used like half of them ever.

Edited October 30, 2020 by Axie

[joevar]

2 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

My blood fucking freezes at the idea that there's a huge enough number of people who will buy any Fire Emblem game as long as they can't ever lose.

if anything, mainstream media keep emphasizes the ease of entering into Fire emblem since casual introduced and FEH... yes, FEH matter. and im sure you dont even have to play it to know its casual oriented, and theres many talk of "i dont play fire emblem, but i play FEH".

ofc take that report with big grain of salt

14 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Nope, total party death is the only way to game over nowadays, that thing FE is not designed to do.

theres still a way to make you game over in that situation without party wipe, which is "forced" game over by objective. altho still not found within modern FE games

[Axie]

total party wipe as the only way to game over in casual mode sounds a bit excessive and too much coddling, but whatever. i'm not playing it anyway. just keep classic mode in every future game and you can make casual mode a permanent fe7 lyn normal mode for all i care. let people have their fun, as i have mine. my fun is in fear and loathing as i reset for a 15th time. 😌

[Sooks]

17 minutes ago, Axie said:

yes, exactly. their personalities and backgrounds add emotional weight if they die, which is why it doesn't work for kaga to say "you are meant to let some of them die, that's why we keep throwing new people at you lol". you just made me like them, you silly. i'm not just gonna lose them like this. i will reset and you can't stop me, sir. and once we start doing it for a few people, it becomes a habit to do it every time, because when anyone dies, we feel like a failure. kaga didn't really think this through, ended up with the absolute opposite outcome of what he intended

You really think he never accounted for people resetting when they die? The people at IS said they themselves reset when people die! It’s not about leaving them dead, it’s about the feeling that every choice in battle matters. Kaga absolutely thought things through, the system does its job regardless of if you reset or not. Those new guys are just for people who don’t.

17 minutes ago, Axie said:

 and that's the reason we have casual mode now, and probably the smaller rosters have something to do with that (and marriage) too. i think fe16 has like ~30 playable characters total? i miss huge rosters even if i never used like half of them ever.

Just for fun I’m gonna count Three Houses’ playable roster in my head... 8 for each house, times 3 per house is 24 characters, plus the 6 dlc characters (if you count Jeritza) is 30, plus the 10 of the church is 40 playable characters!

[joevar]

3 minutes ago, Sooks1016 said:

You really think he never accounted for people resetting when they die? The people at IS said they themselves reset when people die! It’s not about leaving them dead, it’s about the feeling that every choice in battle matters. Kaga absolutely thought things through, the system does its job regardless of if you reset or not. Those new guys are just for people who don’t.

Just for fun I’m gonna count Three Houses’ playable roster in my head... 8 for each house, times 3 per house is 24 characters, plus the 6 dlc characters (if you count Jeritza) is 30, plus the 10 of the church is 40 playable characters!

thats the total count of playable character, the problem is thats not actual amount character you get to use which is roughly around less than 20 to 24 (especially in first playthru)

Edited October 30, 2020 by joevar

[Ottservia]

6 minutes ago, Sooks1016 said:

You really think he never accounted for people resetting when they die? The people at IS said they themselves reset when people die! It’s not about leaving them dead, it’s about the feeling that every choice in battle matters. Kaga absolutely thought things through, the system does its job regardless of if you reset or not. Those new guys are just for people who don’t.

Actually that’s somewhat incorrect. Kaga, himself, has gone on record to say that players shouldn’t care if their characters die(well obviously you should care emotionally) but he designed permadeath with the idea that a unit can be replaced.

[Sooks]

3 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Actually that’s somewhat incorrect. Kaga, himself, has gone on record to say that players shouldn’t care if their characters die(well obviously you should care emotionally) but he designed permadeath with the idea that a unit can be replaced.

But I don’t see how he couldn’t have accounted for people just resetting.

[Ottservia]

Just now, Sooks1016 said:

But I don’t see how he couldn’t have accounted for people just resetting.

He might’ve but that was not his intention in regards to how he originally designed it

[joevar]

Kaga is overrated and the man himself overrated his own capability. add that to unpopular opinion

[Axie]

26 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

He might’ve but that was not his intention in regards to how he originally designed it

yes, that's why i said he wasn't the smartest lol. his intentions are entirely at odds with how it was executed, and the series benefitted in popularity when IS acknowledged it (a gazillion years later).

and yeah, i don't count DLC as actual characters since awakening, so even without accounting for the fact you never get all of them, it's still closer to 30 than to 40 in fe16

[Sooks]

1 minute ago, joevar said:

Kaga is overrated and the man himself overrated his own capability. add that to unpopular opinion

I mean the result of his company can show you how popular that opinion is 😛

27 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

He might’ve but that was not his intention in regards to how he originally designed it

Well at least that’s how the mechanic ended up being. At least in my opinion.

[Sooks]

1 minute ago, Axie said:

and yeah, i don't count DLC as actual characters since awakening, so even without accounting for the fact you never get all of them, it's still closer to 30 than to 40 in fe16

Oh right, I didn’t count exclusive characters. Well the most playable characters is on Azure Moon then, with 36.