Jump to content
BlackSymphony

What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Because Alm is still better than them. It isn’t like Naruto vs Neji where Neji is just a blatent hypocrite making him wrong regardless(and even then Naruto was never about hard work vs natural talent to begin with). Again Gray and Tobin explicitly state Alm is better than them in every way. He always was because he’s Royalty which kinda goes against the whole point of how it doesn’t matter how you were born it’s your ideals that make you fit to be a leader. Y’know the ladder part of that statement is fine but it’s the former part that doesn’t make sense. No where in the story itself is a commoner placed in a position of leadership. That never happens. Alm was made leader of the deliverance because he was a commoner which is to prove Fernand wrong that even a commoner can be a good leader if his ideals are right. This gets thrown out the window the minute you learn that Alm is royalty and he’s better than everyone else because of it. 

So? He's still wrong. His point of commoners never amounting more than being commoners still becomes contested and disproven. Gray and Tobin might not be better than Alm, but that didn't stop them from rising from commoner-hood, getting to be knighted (which is basically minor nobility), then for Tobin to get his own nobility title and fiefdom.

Also, Saber, Jessie, and Kamui's nation. There you go, commoners who becomes rulers.

Edited by Acacia Sgt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

So? He's still wrong. His point of commoners never amounting more than being commoners still becomes contested and disproven. Gray and Tobin might not be better than Alm, but that didn't stop them from rising from commoner-hood, getting to be knighted (which is basically minor nobility), then for Tobin to get his own nobility title and fiefdom.

that still doesn't change the fact that it's thematically inconsistent. Even so, Fernand is only really proven wrong at the end during character epilogues which imo is too little too late. Again Alm is made leader because he's a commoner and can relate to them. Except he's not a commoner and and he's explicitly stated to be better than everyone because he's not a commoner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, the point that the hierarchical structure isn't as rigid that no one can ever be outside their position is still proven wrong. And it goes both ways.

Just like how we got commoners rising, so we had nobles falling. Lima IV is the best example how being born into nobility doesn't guarantee you'll stay there if you squander it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cmiiw, it looks like to me a part of complaint towards Alm arise because people dont quite understand the appeal/never see first-hand a people of importance (blueblood noble, government, etc) that can blend in and gets dirty with common folk is easier to gain favor (even if that act is just an act) to legitimize their ruling. they are advertised as both "noble" and "commoner" at the same time. it doesnt matter if it sound contradicting, or inconsistent. the end result is they can accommodate both type of people

that thing been used as political move in some country you know..

maybe if you strictly imagine FE as medieval europe story, then maybe its preposterous for noble to claim as commoner who turns out to be royalty

Edited by joevar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's somewhat of a double standards between the genders in Fire Emblem. Roles that are considered acceptable for one gender tends to get a lot of flack in another gender. 

Ashe is generally well liked but you have a subset of people who consider him boring since he's just cute and wholesome all the time without being terribly interesting. However in the same house you have Annette who's in the exact same boat, but for who its never addressed as a problem. 

Ricken and Hayato were hated for their whole ''I am not a kid!'' gimmick, but as soon as that archetype was used for a girl it suddenly became cute and endearing.

And you have the Corrin's. Both are controversial but I strongly suspect the male one gets dismissed as a wimp because them being sensitive and naive is considered more acceptable for a girl then it is for a guy. I think the likes of Ignatz and Siegbert are in the same boat where their softness and anxiety gets scoffed at while its celebrated in the likes of Marianne. 

 

Edited by Etrurian emperor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Ashe is generally well liked but you have a subset of people who consider him boring since he's just cute and wholesome all the time without being terribly interesting. However in the same house you have Annette who's in the exact same boat, but for who its never addressed as a problem. 

Funnily enough I’m actually the opposite. I like Ashe more than Annette because he’s an actually interesting character. Annette is just kind of one dimensional to me. Really all she has going for her is that she’s a clusmy moe try hard along the lines of Cynthia but at least Cynthia had emotional range to her character other than cute clumsy moe girl(the slight Chuunibiyo angle helps as well in regards to more fleshed out characterization). I know Annette has daddy issues and all but those those two aspects of her character don’t really work well together. It just kinda feels tacked on if you ask me.

Edited by Ottservia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I think there's somewhat of a double standards between the genders in Fire Emblem. Roles that are considered acceptable for one gender tends to get a lot of flack in another gender. 

Ashe is generally well liked but you have a subset of people who consider him boring since he's just cute and wholesome all the time without being terribly interesting. However in the same house you have Annette who's in the exact same boat, but for who its never addressed as a problem. 

Ricken and Hayato were hated for their whole ''I am not a kid!'' gimmick, but as soon as that archetype was used for a girl it suddenly became cute and endearing.

And you have the Corrin's. Both are controversial but I strongly suspect the male one gets dismissed as a wimp because them being sensitive and naive is considered more acceptable for a girl then it is for a guy. I think the likes of Ignatz and Siegbert are in the same boat where their softness and anxiety gets scoffed at while its celebrated in the likes of Marianne. 

I thought this was always really fucking obvious and everyone knew it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd think there's certainly a Double Standard in play. Since the opposite case doesn't tend to happen as often, from what I remember.

Edited by Acacia Sgt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sunwoo said:

I thought this was always really fucking obvious and everyone knew it.

not that obvious considering he's talking about fandom reception to characters - were it obvious these characters would be received differently 😜

he is super right though. some tropes are seemingly only accepted for one gender or another, time after time. it's been like this in the west ever since BlaBla came out and hector instantly was buckets more popular than eliwood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Axie said:

not that obvious considering he's talking about fandom reception to characters - were it obvious these characters would be received differently 😜

he is super right though. some tropes are seemingly only accepted for one gender or another, time after time. it's been like this in the west ever since BlaBla came out and hector instantly was buckets more popular than eliwood.

No, that's what I meant. I thought it was incredibly obvious that the fandom is biased and the only ones who can't see it are so far stuck in their own gender biases or waifuism and don't see the irony. (Which is hopefully less people than I think.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sunwoo said:

No, that's what I meant. I thought it was incredibly obvious that the fandom is biased and the only ones who can't see it are so far stuck in their own gender biases or waifuism and don't see the irony. (Which is hopefully less people than I think.)

oh okay lol

sadly i think that's a good amount of the fandom though. not on this board, thankfully, but elsewhere it's always been like that even before awakening made the series popular. things seem to have improved though, i remember when merely mentioning ike/soren as a couple immediately derailed whichever was the topic at hand because so many people couldn't deal with the thought of two dudes being shipped together (not even people saying it was canon or anything).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I think there's somewhat of a double standards between the genders in Fire Emblem. Roles that are considered acceptable for one gender tends to get a lot of flack in another gender. 

Ashe is generally well liked but you have a subset of people who consider him boring since he's just cute and wholesome all the time without being terribly interesting. However in the same house you have Annette who's in the exact same boat, but for who its never addressed as a problem. 

Ricken and Hayato were hated for their whole ''I am not a kid!'' gimmick, but as soon as that archetype was used for a girl it suddenly became cute and endearing.

And you have the Corrin's. Both are controversial but I strongly suspect the male one gets dismissed as a wimp because them being sensitive and naive is considered more acceptable for a girl then it is for a guy. I think the likes of Ignatz and Siegbert are in the same boat where their softness and anxiety gets scoffed at while its celebrated in the likes of Marianne. 

 

hot take, but i dont mind and actually support that double standard only in this specific case. hard to explain without triggering someone, but in simpler terms, i never expect boy and girl to behave the same way each time, but having same mindset and goals maybe. so i dont expect both genders to act tough (for example) at the same time and same situation, if so then whats the point of gender.

so in that sense i actually would complaint why male corrin and female corrin act the same way in both gender and in every route, and i consider it as lame/lazy for MC part writing than when we have multiple protagonist in both gender

about which one is harsher and which one is more lenient is proportionate to how many male and female play FE and how many actually comment on it

if we want absolute equality in standard might as well make every character an androgynous slime so theres unified fix standard when reviewing a character if you dont want differentiation in genders

Edited by joevar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joevar said:

if we want absolute equality in standard might as well make every character an androgynous slime so theres unified fix standard when reviewing a character if you dont want differentiation in genders

oh, but there is a difference between what you're saying (which is not in itself wrong) and assigning characters (or real people) negative traits they don't have because of a perceived lack of adherence to gender expectations. such as calling eliwood a wimp because he's not a boor like hector. all the examples in the post you quoted apply too (probably - haven't played 3H).

Edited by Axie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of an odd one, but if they keep adding Garreg Mach-style stuff into FE, they oughta add some GOOD, fun, minigames for interactions with characters. I lowkey want karaoke in the next FE if it follows a similar model to Three Houses with a base you explore.

'Cause I'm not inherently against bases that you spend a lot of time in...but I'd like for it to be interesting in a variety of ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Benice said:

Bit of an odd one, but if they keep adding Garreg Mach-style stuff into FE, they oughta add some GOOD, fun, minigames for interactions with characters. I lowkey want karaoke in the next FE if it follows a similar model to Three Houses with a base you explore.

'Cause I'm not inherently against bases that you spend a lot of time in...but I'd like for it to be interesting in a variety of ways.

Or at least go the full mile, When I ask Rinea if she likes mighty weapons, I should actually get to see her response rather than the generic thing we get.

 

8 hours ago, Axie said:

not that obvious considering he's talking about fandom reception to characters - were it obvious these characters would be received differently 😜

he is super right though. some tropes are seemingly only accepted for one gender or another, time after time. it's been like this in the west ever since BlaBla came out and hector instantly was buckets more popular than eliwood.

Yeah Hectors more powerful but don't people still like Eliwood?

At least for me part of it is how Blazing takes a character we never had time to care for in Binding but then makes them a fully fleshed out character, retroactively making his death scene sad to the player as well as Roy.

Like knowing more about Eliwood is good but it's not as impactful as with Hector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Axie said:

oh, but there is a difference between what you're saying (which is not in itself wrong) and assigning characters (or real people) negative traits they don't have because of a perceived lack of adherence to gender expectations. such as calling eliwood a wimp because he's not a boor like hector. all the examples in the post you quoted apply too (probably - haven't played 3H).

maybe im too tired rn, but i honestly dont catch your point in relation to my post.

or maybe my previous post actually dont quite match with topic in the post that i quote or in other words im quoting wrong quote? 🤔

-------------------------

3H example also lost on me since i play 3H strictly in 2nd person view aka via lets stream.. kek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kris didn't deserve that recent alt, give me another Camilla or anyone else and I still wouldn't be as tilted.

Edited by Seazas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Benice said:

Bit of an odd one, but if they keep adding Garreg Mach-style stuff into FE, they oughta add some GOOD, fun, minigames for interactions with characters. I lowkey want karaoke in the next FE if it follows a similar model to Three Houses with a base you explore.

'Cause I'm not inherently against bases that you spend a lot of time in...but I'd like for it to be interesting in a variety of ways.

karaoke in FE?! thats .. nice i guess. i mean, we have TMS, so we already got some songs to sing already lol

i doubt people actually hate bases. more like they want more and more stuff in it, proportionate to the size of base itself and the amount of time forced to spent there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I think there's somewhat of a double standards between the genders in Fire Emblem. Roles that are considered acceptable for one gender tends to get a lot of flack in another gender. 

Ashe is generally well liked but you have a subset of people who consider him boring since he's just cute and wholesome all the time without being terribly interesting. However in the same house you have Annette who's in the exact same boat, but for who its never addressed as a problem. 

Ricken and Hayato were hated for their whole ''I am not a kid!'' gimmick, but as soon as that archetype was used for a girl it suddenly became cute and endearing.

And you have the Corrin's. Both are controversial but I strongly suspect the male one gets dismissed as a wimp because them being sensitive and naive is considered more acceptable for a girl then it is for a guy. I think the likes of Ignatz and Siegbert are in the same boat where their softness and anxiety gets scoffed at while its celebrated in the likes of Marianne. 

 

Given how you've just given numerous examples of the roles being played by both genders for these various tropes, isn't that pretty solid evidence that Fire Emblem in fact doesn't have a double standard? Like fans might have latent bias for or against certain gender roles, but Fire Emblem can't really be blamed for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jotari said:

Given how you've just given numerous examples of the roles being played by both genders for these various tropes, isn't that pretty solid evidence that Fire Emblem in fact doesn't have a double standard? Like fans might have latent bias for or against certain gender roles, but Fire Emblem can't really be blamed for that.

he said "fire emblem" but i think it's clear his point was about the fandom lol. it happens.

i sure would like if gender locked classes were not a thing again though, speaking of things fire emblem the game does. fire emblem fates: definitive to-do guide in gameplay, definitive don't-ever-do-again guide in writing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't support gender locked classes...except for Pegasus Knight (and by extension, it's promotions). The idea that only females can ride pegasi is one of the few interesting and distinctive aspects of Fire Emblem settings. It's not a part of the series identity in the way permadeath is, but I still kinda like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

I don't support gender locked classes...except for Pegasus Knight (and by extension, it's promotions). The idea that only females can ride pegasi is one of the few interesting and distinctive aspects of Fire Emblem settings. It's not a part of the series identity in the way permadeath is, but I still kinda like it.

i only support this notion if there is a nearly equivalent male exclusive flying class for gameplay purposes. gameplay comes first, and males having to go wyvern if they want to fly is limiting in most games that allow reclassing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Axie said:

i only support this notion if there is a nearly equivalent male exclusive flying class for gameplay purposes. gameplay comes first, and males having to go wyvern if they want to fly is limiting in most games that allow reclassing.

I must disagree.

Firstly, there are many options for male units to reclass into that don't fly. Depending on what specific reclassing system you look at, most units can't become fliers anyway.

Secondly, a near identical male equivalent, then this neat little lore tidbit becomes something of a useless complication. Females have "Class X" and males have "Class X but Y." It also takes away the opportunity to have a more distinct male-exclusive or flying class instead. Gameplay comes first, after all.

Thirdly, there's nothing wrong with limitations. They're usually pretty good for games, actually.

Edited by AnonymousSpeed

Share this post


Link to post
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...