Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The DanMan said:

I only saw combat arts, which are likely just what we got in SoV (wouldn't be surprised if one inspire the other). If there's a specific point where she's prompted to use magic, then okay.

Her combat menu was

  • Attack
  • Magic
  • Combat Arts
  • Formation
  • Equip
  • Items
  • Wait

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Frenzify said:

Do I even want to engage in this?

There was a YA book I read years ago, where the one gay character was the female main character's best friend, super into fashion, and incredibly flamboyant. That is forced diversity. It's representation, sure, but it's written poorly, and included just for the sake of being diverse. Pandering. If you're going to be diverse do it because it makes sense, write it so it's not so obviously a token character, don't be stereotypical and forced, which is often how things go if you're being diverse just for the sake of it, or to quiet the people who cry for more diversity. Being diverse just for the sake of it and doing it poorly is more of an issue than if you didn't include that character in the first place. If not wanting shitty characters who are included just to fill a quota, rather than to be written well makes me a bigot, then oh well.

I'm just curious as to why having every character or so able to marry anyone they want any different than to have M/F marriages all across the board ? Barring a few characters fixed into a specific sexuality by the story, having characters not explicitly anything and making them anything we want them to be sounds great to me. They're just people who happen to date people of the same sex, or not. To me it doesn't have to be more complicated than that. It's an acknowledgement that we exist, and that we don't need to have specific characteristics to be. We're just as badass of a warrior as anyone on the field, except we are tied to a character of the same sex.

... unless this is what you were trying to say in case I misread something. 

Edited by ExaltedViolinist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edelgard looks like to be the next Jagen/Oifey. She's got six movement for infantry. Unpromoted lords from the previous 3 games all had 5 movement

Edited by silveraura25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, silveraura25 said:

Edelgard looks like to be the next Jagen/Oifey. She's got six movement. Unpromoted lords from the previous 3 games all had 5 movement

Or infantry could just have higher movement across the board, like in Tellius.

Share this post


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

Well they said spring so its most probably going to be a treehouse thing.

 

Kill me.

I really, really, really, really, really, really, really hope it is not them.

1 hour ago, Tamanoir said:

Well, they couldn't make a new Advance Wars games, so they implemented it on FE. I'm totally fine with this.

I hope the success of this series would give them enough confidence to bring back Advance Wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The DanMan said:

Or infantry could just have higher movement across the board, like in Tellius.

Could be. We did move onto a new console

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, silveraura25 said:

Could be. We did move onto a new console

I wonder if with higher movement they will have larger maps. I'm not saying they should have Fe4 sized maps, but ones that are larger than what we saw in the previous games would be neat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This game will be the moment of ascension for Fire Emblem. It will be a critical moment, where Fire Emblem will have the potential to rise beyond what it has done before.

Awakening saved the franchise, Fates and SoV consolidated it, Heroes and Warriors brought it to new horizons, and Three Houses...Will bring it to godhood.

The moment of truth approaches. Spring 2019.

Edited by sumerian99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, thedman975 said:

This artstyle scares me. It's too slender an unappealing

Definite step up from Kozaki's stuff for me, but it still feels a little too busy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, XRay said:

Kill me.

I really, really, really, really, really, really, really hope it is not them.

Noooooooooooo PLS NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO treehouse the Echoes guys are more than fine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, bufkus said:

WTF is this bullshit? Sake of pandering? Who are you to decide what is pandering and what is not? And only bigots oppose diversity in any form, including "forced" diversity.

Tone it down.  Pandering is an actual problem.

24 minutes ago, SuperNova125 said:

So am I the only one that liked the game?

Yes.  You're the only person that likes the game.  You're also the only person that posts in this topic.  No, ignore the pages of posters behind you, because they all hated it.  Every.  Last.  one.

Look, before saying things like, this read the topic.  Otherwise, your sentiment looks foolish.

18 minutes ago, Slumber said:

Yeah, but the option for Magic was there for Edelgard, which seems like there might be a possibility of physical units using magic.

"Combat Arts" could be stuff like Echoes skills.

Share this post


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

I'm wondering if the "magic" action is really related to magic as we know it. Anyway, here's what I could gather:

- Fighting enemies with friendly portraits, 2 sides conflict?

Three side conflict wouldn't be surprising at all. One lord for each house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, bufkus said:

Claude's more likely to be gay than a womanizer lol

WTF is this bullshit? Sake of pandering? Who are you to decide what is pandering and what is not? And only bigots oppose diversity in any form, including "forced" diversity.

I think you should take your own advice and "Relax" instead of calling someone a "bigot" and calling out someone else's opinion as "bullshit" simply because you don't agree with their opinion.

No one decides what is or what isn't pandering, but one can certainly feel that something is pandering, and I definitely feel that about the inclusion of the ability of being able to marry Rhajat and Niles with the same sex as well as the person you are angered by. If you're going to include same-sex S-supports, at least do it properly, not the half-ass bone throwing attempt that is in Fates. Splitting the Rhajat in Birthright and Niles in Conquest, one that doesn't even come until you've paired Hayato with someone. Let's also not forget the fact they straight up removed two child units if you married them instead of writing around adoption. Not having both options on both paths and missing units is just begging for criticism and outright poorly done.

The problem doesn't solely exist in and end at Fates though. In SoV, forced pandering is gone even further with Leon being essentially the "HI I'M GAY XD" character, there is no substance in him other than him constantly trying to get together with Valbar when his family was literally murdered not too long before they met. Would this character be acceptable if he was straight? Wouldn't he come off as a creepy rather? Let's not discuss what they did to Niles' character in Warriors...

Diversity is great, but it can be rather down right terrible if done badly, which FE has done so twice in a row. So tell me in your perspective, why "forced diversity" isn't a bad thing.

EDIT: Also "more likely to be gay", judging someone by their appearance, I thought this was a bad practice?

Edited by thanny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'm wondering if they will implement from SoV is the ability to deploy all of your units at once. I am wondering this since the Switch can probably hold a whole unit's army plus all of the unit's backup troops, and the shear numbers will emphasize the scale of the war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually like the idea of mooks being in the game. It makes the battle chapters look like actual battles than just skirmishes of a few dozen fighters. Past chapters being advertised as some big battle only to be met with like 20 units on the field has always irked me, and I welcome this surprise move to finally mend that. 

 

However, I will say that not every chapter needs mooks as not every chapter is going to be set in a big battlefield. Furthermore, castle chapters could use fewer mooks. 

Edited by ElectiveToast

Share this post


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

suffering.PNG

Why are we still here? Just to suffer?

Hehe, thanks for the quick chuckle. That facial expression is definitely me when I watched the trailer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thing looks pretty good imho, even though I liked art in the previous games. The on foot exploration stuff, and the dialogues are fine, or I don't know. I look forward to it, but they might be kinda lame... The title is good. Like really, it is good. I like short, on the point titles, and Three Houses is exactly like that. I wonder what will the whole story be? Overall, either I was being too hyped, and that's why I like the game, or it really is good. Will see when we learn more about it.

Just now, Collindew16 said:

One thing I'm wondering if they will implement from SoV is the ability to deploy all of your units at once. I am wondering this since the Switch can probably hold a whole unit's army plus all of the unit's backup troops, and the shear numbers will emphasize the scale of the war. 

I think they will, at least it would make sense to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been mulling over it, and honestly, aside from the portraits and some artwork shown, the art is still really bland, boring, and tasteless; especially the cutscenes. I know its supposed to be an edgy war drama, but I wonder if the art director has ever heard of color? Its fine to use muted palette but it looks sooo yuck in this case. And I don't know why they can't just have nice, smooth cutscenes. Awakening and Fates did it. I don't see why its such a difficult feat to accomplish for a Switch game. 

I hope once they show more I'll be proven wrong; that this all was just an outlier and the game looks fantastic. I really love FE and I really want this game to succeed. I'll be picking this up regardless of how the visuals are and definitely giving it a chance. I hope getting all these complaints out now will help me go into the game with a cool head. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ExaltedViolinist said:

[I haven't seen your previous responses to this matter so I might be off target here]. I'm just curious as to why having every character or so able to marry anyone they want any different than to have M/F marriages all across the board ? Barring a few characters fixed into a specific sexuality by the story, having characters not explicitly anything and making them anything we want them to be sounds great to me. They're just people who happen to date people of the same sex, or not. To me it doesn't have to be more complicated than that. It's an acknowledgement that we exist, and that we don't need to have specific characteristics to be. We're just as badass of a warrior as anyone on the field, except we ared tied to a character of the same sex.

Of course they don't need to have specific traits or characteristics that say "Hey, btw I'm gay," but making every character a same sex option would honestly feel like overkill. It's just like I wouldn't need half of the characters to be black just so I could feel like I'm represented. I said it before, but a few characters would be fine, and the only reason I can see for having every character a same sex option is pandering. I can understand that there won't be as many options if you're gay, so I'd be fine with more than just the one option for each game that Fates offered, but I don't think making every character potentially bi is the way to go. Because although I can't think of any right now, what if characters showed some kind of romantic or sexual interest before the S support?

I don't know. Maybe in practice it wouldn't be an issue, but I just don't like when things look like clear pandering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having concerns about characters having squads of other soldiers on the map with them. I'm fine with it as it cuts to the battle scenes where it looks great but on the map, they just seem to clog the whole thing and it seems like it makes for a Fire Emblem where you control much less actual units. 

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Imagine you're going out on a blind date.  You know a few things about the guy (about your age, some similar interests), but the date is two months away.  Meanwhile, you really REALLY want this relationship to work, despite only knowing a bit about the guy.  So. . .you start to daydream.  Think about what he's like.  Maybe let your mind wander into "happily ever after" territory.

Once you get an idealized version of the guy in your mind, you actually meet him.  Since he's human, and most likely not a perfect match for the ideal you built up for yourself, he's probably going to seem disappointing in comparison.

That's what happens when people read too much into a short release trailer.  The reactions don't surprise me at all.

Fair enough not to judge a book by its cover but this isn’t some random 28 year old guy/gal, it’s Fire Emblem. With a series that is almost three decades old at this point there will inevitably be certain expectations in terms story and gameplay. Whether Three Houses lives up to those standards or not is yet to be seen.    

On a side note, I think that the rather bland looking art style in my opinion reeks more of generic JRPG #1,238,698,556 instead of the resplendent war epic series I know and love. Again we’ll wait and see.

My hope is that the story will be good. After spending the last year being spoiled by the stories of famous Western fantasy writers (Howard, Moorcock, Leiber, Tolkien, Wagner, Spakowsi) I’ve come to realize just how boring and unimaginative the plots of many JRPGs really are. I hope that Three Heroes’ plot with be inspiring instead of being derivative. Less Sword Art Online more Swords of Lankhmar please.

Edited by Wraith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still wondering if stuff like main cut-scenes, supports and other similar things will be voiced acted. There was no voice acting when there was the choice to work on axes or swords, but this might be to minor of an activity to warrant voice acting, like how there was no voice acting for for stuff like shops and blacksmiths in SoV. It is also possible that the voice lines have not been recorded for those parts, as we see a crit happen and it seemed to be missing dialogue.

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...