Jump to content
BlackSymphony

What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, joevar said:
 

a small correction, i want straight up bad ending, not just bittersweet ending. since i believe theres already some of it either literally or just implied. but your example perfectly in line with what i said.

awfully specific yes. the only game i can remember to pull it off is Suikoden since the first installment. the penultimate/second last boss we defeat before entering the final boss area can be recruited if we want.

another little example would be: Guy from FE7, his bad ending could be " after the war, Guy went to challenge a master swordman he met during the war. but he overestimate his capabilities & limit and die a miserable death." the swordman in question will obviously be Karel. and his dumb decision happen because he didnt have A support with certain someone. Or if thats too complicated, just use Hector, and said he meet a bloody end (in FE6) like the armads original user.

Well we do have the whole Canas randomly died in a blizzard ending in Blazing Blade for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I would be cool with playable characters who "retreat" from battle, rather than dying, getting a bad ending. Like in Echoes - Saber's main ending could stay the same, but if he's defeated in battle (and thereby relegated to a story-only existence), then his ending has him die in a drunken barfight. Instead of just saying "oh he retreated from battle that one time", and nothing more.

Honestly even for just deaths, I wish FE had narrations about it.

Like if Dorcas dies, it's mentioned how Eliwood made sure Natalie got enough money for her surgery, but she was clearly a broken person without her husband.

Even just a small bit about how they're dead now like Fallout New Vegas does for it's companions would be cool enough.

Like the narration mentioning how Fiora went to avenge her fallen comrades but only joined them instead. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I would be cool with playable characters who "retreat" from battle, rather than dying, getting a bad ending. Like in Echoes - Saber's main ending could stay the same, but if he's defeated in battle (and thereby relegated to a story-only existence), then his ending has him die in a drunken barfight. Instead of just saying "oh he retreated from battle that one time", and nothing more.

oh i forgot about that kind of thing too. they retreat, they still appear in story, but then ending slideshow said they died at specific chapter.. what gives?? implementing your idea would be fun, basically they survive the war but got bad/unsatisfactory life ending.

40 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Honestly even for just deaths, I wish FE had narrations about it.

Like if Dorcas dies, it's mentioned how Eliwood made sure Natalie got enough money for her surgery, but she was clearly a broken person without her husband.

Even just a small bit about how they're dead now like Fallout New Vegas does for it's companions would be cool enough.

Like the narration mentioning how Fiora went to avenge her fallen comrades but only joined them instead. 
 

 

same as above more or less. another reason to push on even tho our units die. because the fallen are not forgotten.

otherwise its loading save state for me. since you only suffer in gameplay aspect with single line of "X died in chapter XX" of ending for that trouble

7 hours ago, Jotari said:

Well we do have the whole Canas randomly died in a blizzard ending in Blazing Blade for that.

poor canas, XD. maybe hugh need to have bad ending too since not only he attack us but also demand absurd payment for switching side. even tho its partly his own fault for picking the wrong side.

Edited by joevar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it came up in my mind, might as well say it. 

Can the stupid idea of Gaiden Alm and Echoes Alm being separate characters fully die off already? Every day on some social media I keep finding claims that Gaiden Alm is this super different character that Echoes Alm didn't follow through on. 

Awakening isn't Gaiden. It gets so aggravating seeing the remake get blamed for stuff it isn't at fault of, just be like other people and don't like the character at all rather than trying to push some divide that never existed. No there was no huge confrontation between Mycen and Alm, no there wasn't a scene of Alm failing or being put in the wrong, no Alm was never meant to resemble Duma in personality or Kaga would've made Alm way less chill than he actually is. 

Edited by Seazas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2021 at 4:35 AM, joevar said:

2. Character Ending slideshow of FE become increasingly boring lately. theres apparently improvement in FE writing, be it the amount of letter written literally or its depth. but still ultimately leads to: A be happy with B or C or D etc... Remind me if im mistaken. but theres barely, if any, bad ending for character. iirc bittersweet is as close we get.

My related unpopular opinion is that Fire Emblem should just get rid of the epilogue slideshows entirely. They served a useful purpose in older games where they fleshed out what was otherwise very thin characterisation and storytelling, but those days are now gone. I don't feel that everything needs to be wrapped up in a bow and completely resolved, and I would prefer if there were some dangling threads left unanswered that I could fill in from my imagination. Let me imagine whatever ending I want for a character, whether that's marriage, untimely death, adopting dozens of cats, or starting a business selling artisanal pickles. The amount of story added on the epilogue cards is too paltry for me to find it interesting or satisfying. Instead, I find them restricting. The world and the characters feel so much smaller to me when all the possibilities have been closed off from canon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lenticular said:

My related unpopular opinion is that Fire Emblem should just get rid of the epilogue slideshows entirely. They served a useful purpose in older games where they fleshed out what was otherwise very thin characterisation and storytelling, but those days are now gone. I don't feel that everything needs to be wrapped up in a bow and completely resolved, and I would prefer if there were some dangling threads left unanswered that I could fill in from my imagination. Let me imagine whatever ending I want for a character, whether that's marriage, untimely death, adopting dozens of cats, or starting a business selling artisanal pickles. The amount of story added on the epilogue cards is too paltry for me to find it interesting or satisfying. Instead, I find them restricting. The world and the characters feel so much smaller to me when all the possibilities have been closed off from canon.

Would you prefer something like what Path of Radiance does? That is, having each character, within associated groups, tell their immediate plans to the main lord. That way, we aren't totally left hanging - but we still have relative freedom in imagining a future for those characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Would you prefer something like what Path of Radiance does? That is, having each character, within associated groups, tell their immediate plans to the main lord. That way, we aren't totally left hanging - but we still have relative freedom in imagining a future for those characters.

I don't know if I like that more, sounds like a pain to do and not that fun to read through. Just monologue after monologue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Would you prefer something like what Path of Radiance does? That is, having each character, within associated groups, tell their immediate plans to the main lord. That way, we aren't totally left hanging - but we still have relative freedom in imagining a future for those characters.

(With the caveat that my memory is garbage and I don't remember the Path of Radiance epilogue all that well even though I replayed it as recently as last year.) Yes, I would definitely prefer something like that. Partly because it's short-term and only covers their immediate plans, but also because it's told by the characters in their own voice, rather than being presented to us by an omniscient narrator. If something is said in character-voice, then it's easy to imagine that they changed their mind, their plan didn't work out, or even that they were lying. If something is in narrator-voice, then there's no real way to say "no, that's not actually what happened" without explicitly going against canon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Seazas said:

I don't know if I like that more, sounds like a pain to do and not that fun to read through. Just monologue after monologue. 

It's not like the actual ending pages are all that different in that regard. At least the Path of Radiance ending featured dialogue as Ike could ask the characters questions and stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Would you prefer something like what Path of Radiance does? That is, having each character, within associated groups, tell their immediate plans to the main lord. That way, we aren't totally left hanging - but we still have relative freedom in imagining a future for those characters.

I've never thought too much about the "where did they go after this" parts of the epilogue, but I actually really liked that in Path of Radiance simply because it was the characters  acknowledging their journey and what they plan to do. Plus, it made a lot of sense that Ike would ask everyone what they plan to do now that the Mad King's War is over.

Interestingly, if I recall correctly, Radiant Dawn did something of a mix between the two: it used the epilogue slideshow, but with conversations between certain characters in between some of the slides. I liked that as well because it was probably a better way to handle the huge cast than either just the slides or just the conversations, and it allowed for different, "What will you do now" conversations to happen in different places, unlike Path of Radiance.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that it all depends on the game for me, but I would like to see Fire Emblem bring back epilogue scenes of characters discussing their immediate plans for the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Seazas said:

I don't know if I like that more, sounds like a pain to do and not that fun to read through. Just monologue after monologue. 

 

26 minutes ago, Jotari said:

It's not like the actual ending pages are all that different in that regard. At least the Path of Radiance ending featured dialogue as Ike could ask the characters questions and stuff.

Yeah, it's more conversational than a series of monologues. Like, Ike would talk to the Gallia crowd, and they'd discuss their plans. Then the bird tribes. And so on, with each character getting something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2021 at 12:05 AM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Yeah, it's more conversational than a series of monologues. Like, Ike would talk to the Gallia crowd, and they'd discuss their plans. Then the bird tribes. And so on, with each character getting something. 

i thought it was going to be one on one interview. that would be a slog. but if its group convo with similar background grouped together discussing where do they go after that in short conversation, that would be great. i dont mind it being all good ending in that case if done right

On 5/27/2021 at 3:02 PM, lenticular said:

My related unpopular opinion is that Fire Emblem should just get rid of the epilogue slideshows entirely. They served a useful purpose in older games where they fleshed out what was otherwise very thin characterisation and storytelling, but those days are now gone. I don't feel that everything needs to be wrapped up in a bow and completely resolved, and I would prefer if there were some dangling threads left unanswered that I could fill in from my imagination. Let me imagine whatever ending I want for a character, whether that's marriage, untimely death, adopting dozens of cats, or starting a business selling artisanal pickles. The amount of story added on the epilogue cards is too paltry for me to find it interesting or satisfying. Instead, I find them restricting. The world and the characters feel so much smaller to me when all the possibilities have been closed off from canon.

while i dislike it, i dont know if i want it removed since its tied closely with support (and support not going anywhere i believe at this point). but if removed then changed like above suggestion that would be okay-ish. doing actual ending scene would be too costly afterall very small chance it will happen

or just make it ending slideshow and support not 100% dependent, like in some older games where theres only one or two fixed paired ending. so support will be support, not life relationship goals

Edited by joevar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone on Reddit brought up the idea of combining FE 4 and FE 5 into one game, but having the second part split into dual paths like Alm and Celica in FE 2/15 - Seliph's story would be one route, and Leif's story be the other. While I personally think this is a brilliant idea*, the top commenter said something along the lines of "If I wanted to play Thracia 776, I'd take it out and put it in my SNES and do so." That annoyed me for a couple of reasons, but the main one forms the basis of my unpopular opinion today: 

1. Those who have the luxury of saying "I have the original system to play XYZ game on, so I don't want this new thing" when talking about remakes or remasters are incredibly privileged (or or maybe more selfish than anything), and their comment saying so should hold no weight in the conversation. 

Ironically - or rather, hypocritically - enough, I've been on both sides of the argument in the exact same conversation. When the rumors of a Tellius duology were flying earlier this year, I was upset. I don't want a Tellius remake at this time. I have my GameCube and Wii, and I have both games from launch.** I neither want nor need a remake at this time. Instead, I wanted a remake of FE 4 or FE 6 (or FE 5!), the games I don't currently already own. But my argument of "I have this so I'm good" shouldn't matter. Because I have it, it shouldn't matter. I should be thinking about those who want to experience the Tellius duology but can't because they can't find and/or afford a copy of the games. (And/or don't trust downloading online versions.) For them, I should be considerate of the idea of a Tellius remake, and what changes that may or may not have. 

All of that said, I still don't want a Tellus duology remake at this time, but that's more because of my personal dislike of Radiant Dawn. I have the GBA version of Sacred Stones, and I'm hunting around for the GBA version of FE7 (I sold my original copy years ago, despite me keeping the box...), but I wouldn't mind a remake of either of those games. Granted, I'd still prefer a game I don't officially own to be remade first, but to deny personal taste leaves out a pretty big factor. 

Now, as a Pokemon fan, the hypocrisy is back. I don't like the look or feel of the Gen 4 remakes. Not because I don't think the style is cute, or that there isn't a place for it, but because it's not up to standards with Sun/Moon or even Sword/Shield (which is a pretty low bar, if you ask me). In many ways, this feels like the inversion of these two arguments - I have Diamond and Pearl, and if I wanted to play something that looks just like original games, I would get my copies of the original games! Besides, I should want those who haven't played the game to get the fullest experience...but that's where things get tricky - will these new remakes be the ultimate experience of Gen 4, or will they be sad remakes of older games? The same can be argued for Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire as well, but at least those looked and felt like the latest generation. I didn't want the Gen 4 remakes to just be remakes of Diamond/Pearl/Platinum. I wanted them to fit into the Gen 7 and beyond world. I wanted to see Sinnoh Variants, and to have mini-games like the above two games did. Granted, the remakes still may do those things, but it's far less likely at this time...

Back to Fire Emblem, if FE 4 and 5 were combined, are fans upset because it's ruining the idea of an experience they already had and want a graphically improved version of? Or because they don't like the idea of the new experience it can create? Why should some fans owning the game mean that other fans who don't own the game and are looking for a different type of experience be denied that type of experience? 

 

 

 

*That being said, I'm not unaware of the logistical nightmare this would be in terms of gameplay. It'd feel like for every castle or chapter of Seliph's story you complete, you may need to complete 5-9 of Leif's just to catch up. That doesn't feel like good game design. There may be ways around it, but that might involve either lengthening Seliph's story, or abridging Leif's, and neither seem like the best choices to me. I'm sure there's a fix though...I'm sure of it...

**Admittedly, I can't find my Radiant Dawn disc. I think I have the  case somewhere, and I'm practically looking at my old guidebook, but I can't find the game. I may have lent it to my best friend, but he has since moved states and doesn't remember either...oh well. 

Edited by Use the Falchion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Use the Falchion said:

Someone on Reddit brought up the idea of combining FE 4 and FE 5 into one game, but having the second part split into dual paths like Alm and Celica in FE 2/15 - Seliph's story would be one route, and Leif's story be the other. While I personally think this is a brilliant idea*, the top commenter said something along the lines of "If I wanted to play Thracia 776, I'd take it out and put it in my SNES and do so." That annoyed me for a couple of reasons, but the main one forms the basis of my unpopular opinion today: 

Honestly that commenter's point is a ridiculous one, because Thracia 776 is A) only playable in Japanese, and thereby relatively inaccessible to an international audience; B) limited to an archaic system that relatively few people still own, and C) a product of an awkward release process, requiring the "download" of the game onto a blank cartridge, near the end of the Super Famicom's life cycle. Thracia 776 might just be the least accessible mainline game in the series at this point. ...Which makes me wonder if that comment was sarcastic in nature.

38 minutes ago, Use the Falchion said:

Back to Fire Emblem, if FE 4 and 5 were combined, are fans upset because it's ruining the idea of an experience they already had and want a graphically improved version of? Or because they don't like the idea of the new experience it can create? Why should some fans owning the game mean that other fans who don't own the game and are looking for a different type of experience be denied that type of experience? 

The counter-point is that new fans may want an experience that hews closely to the design of the original game - but with modern amenities, and on a current system. By changing the game too much, fans new and old alike miss out on that possibility. And by leaving the original game unlocalized, and unavailable in non-Japanese markets, the ability to enjoy the original game is absent as well. I'm generally open to a remake changing some things, but when it comes to FE4, I'd like to see them preserve most of the "weirdness", rather than reshaping the game to fit series standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire Emblem 4 and 5 are very different games. It would never work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

The counter-point is that new fans may want an experience that hews closely to the design of the original game - but with modern amenities, and on a current system. By changing the game too much, fans new and old alike miss out on that possibility. And by leaving the original game unlocalized, and unavailable in non-Japanese markets, the ability to enjoy the original game is absent as well.

I feel like the key solution here is to let the remake be itself, along with any of the new amenities and storylines needed to make it a great addition to the franchise in question, and then release the original version localized. I think, now that FE 1 has been localized, there are slightly higher chances for that. 

That said, I don't disagree with the point, but I also think there's a way to accomplish both. I don't think adding in FE 5 to an FE 4 remake, if done well, thoughtfully, and respectfully for both games (either by a successful implementation of the Alm/Celica split idea, or just by having both games available in the same game, like Kingdom Hearts 1.5 and 2.5 collections, or Mass Effect: Legendary Edition) diminishes the experience and soul of either game. 

 

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I'm generally open to a remake changing some things, but when it comes to FE4, I'd like to see them preserve most of the "weirdness", rather than reshaping the game to fit series standards.

Again, I think there's a comfortable compromise. It may not be a happy one, because both sides will have to give things up, but it will be comfortable. Although to be fair, when it comes to remakes, I lean more towards updating things to be what they need to become instead of keeping them as they have been understood. When it comes to FE 4 though, that's a whole discussion we can have on the remake discussion thread though. 

 

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Honestly that commenter's point is a ridiculous one, because Thracia 776 is A) only playable in Japanese, and thereby relatively inaccessible to an international audience; B) limited to an archaic system that relatively few people still own, and C) a product of an awkward release process, requiring the "download" of the game onto a blank cartridge, near the end of the Super Famicom's life cycle. Thracia 776 might just be the least accessible mainline game in the series at this point. ...Which makes me wonder if that comment was sarcastic in nature.

That's a fair point I really hadn't considered, so thanks for bringing it up! But the meaning behind the sarcasm still stand true to me. People want remakes of things they love, and dismiss any potential changes to the remake because it somehow warps the original product. I firmly disagree with that stance, even if I completely understand it. Pokemon Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee doesn't ruin Red/Blue/Green/Yellow or Fire Red/Leaf Green, nor does it taint my experiences with the latter. Like so, someone who has played FE 4 and can continue to do so shouldn't feel as if the remake is going to ruin their original experiences with the game, or ruin the game itself. It may make one fearful of the future and less likely to play the remake, but that could have happened with any game, not just the one we may get. 

And I get it, I do - people want remakes of games to be like how they imagine the original game being like. They want to feel like they did with the original game with the modern amenities of the new stuff. But just because it looks modern doesn't mean that it will play any better. That's part of why I'm more willing to change things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2021 at 10:39 AM, Use the Falchion said:

I feel like the key solution here is to let the remake be itself, along with any of the new amenities and storylines needed to make it a great addition to the franchise in question, and then release the original version localized. I think, now that FE 1 has been localized, there are slightly higher chances for that. 

+1 to that. I mean, I've played Link's Awakening as my first Zelda experience, and while I enjoyed it, I actually beyond not being fussed about this particular remake being faithful. In fact, I actually don't see the point in getting the new remake when the story and characters weren't "modernised" or made more elaborate with rounded-out characters or an expanded lore like the most of recent Zelda games. Especially not when the remakes cost $60. There's already the VC version anyway.

As for Genealogy of the Holy War, I have a slightly different opinion. I don't want something too faithful, because you might as well just ask Nintendo to have it released on the VC, but I do want some acknowledgement of the unique mechanics, now that I know better about the some of the design decisions and basic narrative behind the game. I now know that army groups historically had to look after their own equipment, and win their own loot, so I'd like the individualized inventory to stay, but with a couple of modifications. I'd like purchasing items off each other directly be an option under certain conditions (maybe units from the same faction, or those that have support levels). Married couples should be able to trade freely, as a bonus to further push the whole marriage point for GoHW. Existing family members (parent-child or brother-sister) that are in the player's army should also be able to trade freely (or at least give a discount in buying off stuff), because they're, well, family, duh. Battalions were implied within the units in the SNES version, and now we actually have battallions in Three Houses, it should also be a thing too in the GoHW Switch remake to give a sense of the army and battle scale. As for the story, we might as well add on to the script that is already complete, and add more conversations for the non-Lord characters to further elaborate the characters and the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • I could never get into the Tellius games. The story never grabbed me personally, and the gameplay lacked any challenge outside of testing your patience. Waiting for an enemy phase to finish was the real challenge. 
  • Mystery of the Emblem is Kaga's best FE game, Not Genealogy or Thracia 
  • Shadow Dragon is one of the better games in the series
  • FE7 is a boring game
  • I like using Wolt 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here are my unpopular opinions:

  1. I don't see the point in Harmonized heroes, I think that Duo heroes are better.
  2. I'm not sure if this one is exactly unpopular,  but avatars are boring and I prefer main Lords/Ladies.
  3. I dislike Ike's design in RD.
  4. Eliwood>Hector>Lyn.
  5. I wouldn't like a FE game set in a modern era.
  6. I absolutely hate oversexualized designs/characters, for example: Camilla.

(Please don't hang me if these opinions somehow offend you)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Zavakar said:

Well, here are my unpopular opinions:

  1. I don't see the point in Harmonized heroes, I think that Duo heroes are better.
  2. I'm not sure if this one is exactly unpopular,  but avatars are boring and I prefer main Lords/Ladies.
  3. I dislike Ike's design in RD.
  4. Eliwood>Hector>Lyn.
  5. I wouldn't like a FE game set in a modern era.
  6. I absolutely hate oversexualized designs/characters, for example: Camilla.

(Please don't hang me if these opinions somehow offend you)

I still don't see the point of Duo units. I think the AOE mechanic they have would be much better suited to some regular characters who do stuff like that already in their own games.

Edited by Jotari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I still don't see the point of Duo units. I think the AOE mechanic they have would be much better suited to some regular characters who do stuff like that already in their own games.

What I like about Duo heroes is the interaction between two directly related characters (with directly related I mean that are from the same game and have something that "connects" them) like Halloween Hector with young Lilina, who are a father and daughter. Furthermore, I love Duo units' artworks, they look awesome. However, in Harmonized heroes' case, this isn't that impressive, at least for me. I don't really think that Harmonized heroes are bad, I only think that there's no point in having them when we already have Duo units that fulfill the same role and even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-I didn't really like the presentation of 3H's supports tbh. I don't mean the dialogue or the character interactions because those were great (although, there were some blunders tbh), I mean the production values in them. The characters having the same 4 or 5 animations made it kinda awkward when they tried to convey something important at times, and the backgrounds were just... yeah. I honestly hope they improve the supports' (and the story cutscenes as well tbh) presentation for the next game.

-I think future games should do away with the multiple route structure. I mean, I get that it's great incentive to replay the game, but after Fates and 3H, it seems IntSys constantly bites more than they can chew with this type of story development.

-Honestly, as long as it's possible in the game (and I mean game proper, not spin-offs like Heroes and the such) and the support's a romantic one as opposed to simply platonic, ship whoever you like; we all have our preferences and ways of interpreting stuff, and if the game made it possible then it was cause the devs clearly thought it was a possible/valid outcome for a reason, just don't be a d*** to other people's own preferred pairings.

-Now, this might be either a popular opinion or my most controversial take, but... I honestly kinda want the pairings children mechanic to come back. Look, I understand it doesn't make much sense, and it was completely ridiculous in Fates, but I personally thought it was pretty fun, and I really do think they can do something great with them if they use it correctly. They don't even have to include any kind of magic shenanigans for it to work, just do it the same way they did it in Genealogy; pairings the first part, and then the children come after a timeskip in the second part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Cosmic_Dragon said:

-I didn't really like the presentation of 3H's supports tbh. I don't mean the dialogue or the character interactions because those were great (although, there were some blunders tbh), I mean the production values in them. The characters having the same 4 or 5 animations made it kinda awkward when they tried to convey something important at times, and the backgrounds were just... yeah. I honestly hope they improve the supports' (and the story cutscenes as well tbh) presentation for the next game.

maybe you're used to seeing newer triple A games? since those games used mo-cap actor for movement animation, so almost no same movement for each char except repeated animation for said character only. This become apparent in 3H since every dialogue are 3D now. (i mean, 3H considered a smaller cast for FE, but very big for JRPG) resulting in very noticeable repeat animation

55 minutes ago, Cosmic_Dragon said:

-Honestly, as long as it's possible in the game (and I mean game proper, not spin-offs like Heroes and the such) and the support's a romantic one as opposed to simply platonic, ship whoever you like; we all have our preferences and ways of interpreting stuff, and if the game made it possible then it was cause the devs clearly thought it was a possible/valid outcome for a reason, just don't be a d*** to other people's own preferred pairings.

-Now, this might be either a popular opinion or my most controversial take, but... I honestly kinda want the pairings children mechanic to come back. Look, I understand it doesn't make much sense, and it was completely ridiculous in Fates, but I personally thought it was pretty fun, and I really do think they can do something great with them if they use it correctly. They don't even have to include any kind of magic shenanigans for it to work, just do it the same way they did it in Genealogy; pairings the first part, and then the children come after a timeskip in the second part.

 

hmm.. honestly who doesnt love child-making pairing mechanic.

but, but...

Spoiler

imagine the uncomfortable-ness if: theres an old guy in roster, then theres an underaged girl with support with each other..  then apply awakening and fates (iirc) "having support means pair-able" logic...
just. no.

avoiding that would mean back into post-awakening "relatively same age roster". also disappointing (not necessarily bad) imo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, joevar said:

hmm.. honestly who doesnt love child-making pairing mechanic.

but, but...

  Reveal hidden contents

imagine the uncomfortable-ness if: theres an old guy in roster, then theres an underaged girl with support with each other..  then apply awakening and fates (iirc) "having support means pair-able" logic...
just. no.

avoiding that would mean back into post-awakening "relatively same age roster". also disappointing (not necessarily bad) imo.

 

I mean tbh, Sakura could get married to Azama and Elise could get married to Arthur and if that ain't weird 💀 That wasn't even the worst part of Fates' choice of possible supports too LOL.

 

1 hour ago, Cosmic_Dragon said:

-Now, this might be either a popular opinion or my most controversial take, but... I honestly kinda want the pairings children mechanic to come back. Look, I understand it doesn't make much sense, and it was completely ridiculous in Fates, but I personally thought it was pretty fun, and I really do think they can do something great with them if they use it correctly. They don't even have to include any kind of magic shenanigans for it to work, just do it the same way they did it in Genealogy; pairings the first part, and then the children come after a timeskip in the second part.

Honestly, I would enjoy having child/2nd gen units again as long as they're able to be woven into the story well like in Awakening. Yeah Fates' child system story-wise was stupid af, but I did enjoy them as characters and as units so I wouldn't mind them coming back (but I can also confidently say I wouldn't mind them not coming back either). It'd just be nice if they were able to have same-sex supports result in children too (ie. Niles+M!Corrin, Rhajat+F!Corrin). Like when you look at bond units, you were able to "have a baby" with 2 same-gendered Corrins by having the bond unit ~~*🌱sprout from the earth🌱*~~ so idk why they didn't use that "logic" for the actual units as well.

Edited by LJ_Tenma

Share this post


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

maybe you're used to seeing newer triple A games? since those games used mo-cap actor for movement animation, so almost no same movement for each char except repeated animation for said character only. This become apparent in 3H since every dialogue are 3D now. (i mean, 3H considered a smaller cast for FE, but very big for JRPG) resulting in very noticeable repeat animation

Nah, I'm pretty used to AA games and the such. As a matter of fact, I think I play more AA than AAA actually, since AAA gaming has kinda gotten a bit stale to me. I just really wish the characters had more dynamic animations to better convey what they wanted to say or do. And the backgrounds also should've been better rendered imo.

1 hour ago, joevar said:

hmm.. honestly who doesnt love child-making pairing mechanic.

but, but...

  Reveal hidden contents

imagine the uncomfortable-ness if: theres an old guy in roster, then theres an underaged girl with support with each other..  then apply awakening and fates (iirc) "having support means pair-able" logic...
just. no.

avoiding that would mean back into post-awakening "relatively same age roster". also disappointing (not necessarily bad) imo.

 

Then people are welcome to just, you know, not do that? It's not like it even has to be romantic since some characters' paired endings can be platonic instead; case in point, if you pair Lysithea and Hanneman in Three Houses their ending card is completely platonic. I'm pretty sure that in Fates, Elise can't have kids with say, Ryoma. And again, if anyone feels uncomfortable with the sole concept of pairing them, they're welcome to just not go for it and pair the characters with someone else.

1 hour ago, LJ_Tenma said:

Honestly, I would enjoy having child/2nd gen units again as long as they're able to be woven into the story well like in Awakening. Yeah Fates' child system story-wise was stupid af, but I did enjoy them as characters and as units so I wouldn't mind them coming back (but I can also confidently say I wouldn't mind them not coming back either). It'd just be nice if they were able to have same-sex supports result in children too (ie. Niles+M!Corrin, Rhajat+F!Corrin). Like when you look at bond units, you were able to "have a baby" with 2 same-gendered Corrins by having the bond unit ~~*🌱sprout from the earth🌱*~~ so idk why they didn't use that "logic" for the actual units as well.

Maybe cause they were aware that the whole Deeprealms concept was already pretty ridiculous, so they decided to not introduce even more magic shenanigans into the mix? I mean, there's only so many times one can go "it's magic, I ain't gotta explain anything" before it gets completely outlandish (nevermind the fact that magical creation isn't the same as conceiving, unless maybe if some of the 1st gen unit's DNA was somehow involved there I guess). And tbh, I think that if they were to bring back the child units, I'd prefer them to do so in the most logical, non-magic including way possible so that they can legitimately feel like a part of the story and not just something thrown in there for the sake of matchmaking.

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...