How would you describe Fire Emblem's overall writing quality?

[Shadow Mir]

1 hour ago, Otts486 said:

And I personally would like some elaboration on that. I mean I’ve only played like half of sacred stones but so far Lyon is not that bad as you appear to be making him out to be.

The thing is, Eirika's route tries to sell one aspect of Lyon, and Ephraim's route tries to sell another aspect. I find it incredibly hard to look at either of them and go "okay, I buy this". And I'd say the lack of effort Sacred Stones put into its writing is to blame for that. Well, that, and the fact that he's frequently in the shadow of the Grado generals, most of whom are abysmal. Making things worse is the over-reliance on flashbacks for Lyon's character.

1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I don't really see Duessel and Glen as villains. Duessel never really does anything villainous on screen and openly criticizes the villains actions of his country before defecting. Glen also never does anything and dies upon finding out he's working for baddies. Now that I think about it I recall having argued Caelach not being evil for evil's sake but evil for his own desires sake.  But I never had a problem with evil for the sake of evil as long as it works. Valter is an insane maniac and definitely a rapist but being Grado's mad attack dog is his role and that's fine by me. Rief likewise is just supposed to be a Gharnef and manages to be exactly that which is also fine, if a little bit boring. Its only when evil for the sake of evil do active damage like Garon when it starts becoming a problem. 

And that's the point - the only respectable villains are the ones that don't really qualify for the term. Caellach felt like a proto-Hans, considering that he kills for no real reason (Case in point: Aias); the only one that did have a reason was Ismaire. Not exactly setting the bar very high there. Riev didn't do much of anything before getting killed off, unlike Gharnef (about the only thing he does in the game was attack the heroes at night after they arrive at Rausten; at least Gharnef taunts Marth about having Falchion and his sister, in addition to pretty much everything bad happening in the Archanea saga being traced back to him in one fashion or another). Nor does he have much of a motive that's explained (again, Gharnef did - he was snubbed by Gotoh). Valter feels more like Kefka without everything that made him a good, memorable villain.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Shadow Mir

[Ottservia]

28 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:

The thing is, Eirika's route tries to sell one aspect of Lyon, and Ephraim's route tries to sell another aspect. I find it incredibly hard to look at either of them and go "okay, I buy this". And I'd say the lack of effort Sacred Stones put into its writing is to blame for that. Well, that, and the fact that he's frequently in the shadow of the Grado generals, most of whom are abysmal.

so it's inconsistency then okay I get that. Looks like I got a game to finish to truly understand what you mean.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Otts486

[Integrity]

love the games as i do, fe's writing is largely pretty bad. personal relations vary pretty well from game to game (fe9 and fe4 standing out as quite good ones, but most are fine, with fates coming out worst at 'inconsistent'), but the General Main Plot Writing in fire emblems varies from 'okay' to 'awful'. the story is absolutely a wrapper for character delivery and gameplay, at least for me.

[Erureido]

It may not be my favorite video game franchise when it comes to story-telling, but the stories the Fire Emblem games I've played have been decent. They've done a good job keeping me immersed with what's going on, with memorable events going on throughout the story that stick with me either in good or bad ways. The only FE stories I've encountered so far that come across as unengaging are Heroes and Warriors because they felt quite bare bones, but then again, them being spinoffs may be the reason. FE does a pretty good job with writing quality for many of its characters in the playable casts. In fact, a lot of my favorite fictional characters come from that series (namely for reasons like relatability, personalities that resonate with me, or interesting backstories). Reading a character's dialogue through supports or how they contribute to the story is pretty much my favorite aspect about FE's writing.

The world-building can be hit or miss sometimes though. You've got some stellar ones like Valentia in SoV that make you feel like you're part of a big adventure on an interesting continent, but then you have lackluster ones like in Fates and Sacred Stones where we don't learn much about their continents.

I can also say this hit-or-miss deal also applies to Fire Emblem's villain writing. There are villains that stuck with me in a good way like Gangrel, Walhart, Grieth, Zola, Laegjarn, Helbindi, and most of Sacred Stones' villains, whether it be because of the personal, antagonistic rivalries they developed with the main character that felt quite compelling, sympathetic traits for a villain, or they just felt the right kind of detestable villains I like , but then there are villains that just grind my gears because they either come across as too cartoonishly evil for my liking (the Gharnef archetypes, Slayde, Garon, Iago, and Hans) or inconsequential with a mix of completely unsympathetic traits (Fernand and Berkut).

My personal rankings for the FE stories I've personally experienced (spinoffs included):

Sacred Stones > Shadows of Valentia >>>> Awakening >> Birthright >>>>>>>>>>>>> Warriors = Book II Heroes >> Book 1 Heroes >>>>>>> Revelation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Conquest

Birthright is pretty much the middle point for me in regards to stories I liked and disliked. An odd choice that I have it ranked this high compared to where most rank it, but that's because it felt like a very basic for an FE story. Despite its moments of bad writing, nothing about the story made me angry, but it's still not a story I can say was "awesome" either.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Erureido

[DragonFlames]

15 hours ago, Armagon said:

I might agree with you if FE stories were different enough but at the end of the day, most are pretty much the same premise. "Prince(ss) gets kicked out of the kingdom by the bad evil empire, has to take it back. Either that, or the evil empire is invading and the prince(ess) has to fight back and it's usualyl after the bad evil empire has occupied most of the good kingdom. Shadow Dragon, Shadows of Valentia, Mystery of the Emblem, second half of Genealogy, Thracia 776, Sacred Stones, Path of Radiance, Part 1 of Radiant Dawn, second act of Awakening and all of Birthright do that. Even Warriors and Heroes do that. Though credit where credit is due, Path of Radiance did a spin on it by making it so that the protagonist wasn't of royal of blood. And in the case of Genealogy, Radiant Dawn and Awakening, it's not the whole story. But regardless, the premises are too similar. In fact, notice how it's almost always an empire that is villainized. Dolhr Empire in Shadow Dragon, Rigel Empire in SoV, Archanea Empire in Mystery, Granvelle Empire in the second half of FE4 and all of Thracia, Grado Empire in Sacred Stones, Daein Empire in PoR (pretty sure it's an empire), Begnion Empire in Part 1 of Radiant Dawn and the Valmese Empire in Awakening. 

Oh and don't forget that a dragon is usually the final boss. And if there isn't, there is at least draconic presence.

See what i mean? The premises in most games are too similar right down to who's the good guys and who's the bad guy and it doesn't really do much to differentiate. It doesn't stop most of the games from being good enough stories but it's for this reason that i see the story writing to be worse than the character writing.

I will say that i value characters over story and i believe if the characters are good enough, they can salvage a bad story. Not all the time and sometimes stories are so bad they can't be saved but i do think that because FE has generally good characters, the series writing as a whole gets a pass from me. Even Fates. The characters don't salvage Revelation's plot but i do like to think they are enough to salvage the plots of Birthright and Conquest.

Okay, fair point.
I too value characters over story, and while I agree that the premises are pretty much the same every time, I can forgive that if the execution is at least done well. With bad characters, they just leave a bad taste in my mouth, no matter what. FE has its fair share of fantastic characters don't get me wrong, but in each game, there just has to be one or two characters that seem specifically designed to get on my nerves (I know they aren't, it's just a figure of speech), which may or may not have something to do with IS reusing the same basic character templates over and over as well.

15 hours ago, Armagon said:

See, Fates' character writing is weird because when it comes to story important characters, there's essentially two versions: the story versions and the support versions. Like, story!Azura, for example, is pretty bad. Support!Azura, on the other hand, is actually pretty good. Same goes for Corrin. Corrin in the story is ultimate player pandering but Corrin in Supports is actually alright.

There's really only one character i can say i truly hated in Fates and that's Peri. But like, she's my least favorite character in the whole series.

But like, even if i get really critical on Fates' plot, i can't really say it's a dumpster fire when i've seen games with worse writing *cough* Kingdom Hearts series *cough*

Haven't played Kingdom Hearts, so I wouldn't know. I do know how infamously convoluted the plot is though...

Here's the thing with me: the whole "but they're good in their supports!" argument - while true in some cases (I still hate Ryoma, Takumi, Xander and Azura, even with their supports taken into account) - actually just reinforces my stance that the characters in Fates are horrible, as is the way they are written, because it either makes them come across as giant hypocrites, or makes the characters seem schizophrenic. Which in turn only serves as further proof for how inconsistent the writing in Fates is. And if there is one thing I, as an aspiring writer myself, have been self-taught to loathe like a 3-week-under-the-blazing-sun glass of milk's smell, it's inconsistency, especially when it comes to characters.
I also have a hard time separating their "support-selves" from their "story-selves", and I frankly have no intention to do so, because they're still the same character.

[Armagon]

37 minutes ago, DragonFlames said:

FE has its fair share of fantastic characters don't get me wrong, but in each game, there just has to be one or two characters that seem specifically designed to get on my nerves (I know they aren't, it's just a figure of speech), which may or may not have something to do with IS reusing the same basic character templates over and over as well.

Yeah, that's another issue with FE's writing. When you're able to make a wiki page with all the archetypes, it's pretty clear that Intelligent Systems is just using a template. Some archetypes, like the Gharnefs, are actual copy-paste but thankfully, characters within the archetypes manage to differentiate themselves enough. 

I think the reason they use a template is due to the sheer amount of characters. It's easier to write Supports when you have a template. SoV has a really small cast and that game has the best Supports in the series. That game has archetypes just like any other game in the series but the small cast meant that they were able to focus on the quality of the writing so it doesn't feel that the characters follow a template.

Basically, i think FE needs to reduce the number of characters if they want truly good character writing instead of just relying on the same template over and over. Because here's the thing, there's no such thing as an original character or story. It's impossible to make one in this age. It all depends on how you do it and with what intention. I like the characters in FE but it's pretty clear that they are following a template, right down to their backstory.

Similar backstories and personalities and roles across multiple games is fine if you reimagine it each time but i don't think FE does that.

1 hour ago, DragonFlames said:

Here's the thing with me: the whole "but they're good in their supports!" argument - while true in some cases (I still hate Ryoma, Takumi, Xander and Azura, even with their supports taken into account) - actually just reinforces my stance that the characters in Fates are horrible, as is the way they are written, because it either makes them come across as giant hypocrites, or makes the characters seem schizophrenic. Which in turn only serves as further proof for how inconsistent the writing in Fates is. And if there is one thing I, as an aspiring writer myself, have been self-taught to loathe like a 3-week-under-the-blazing-sun glass of milk's smell, it's inconsistency, especially when it comes to characters.

The writing is definietly inconsistent, you have a valid point. It's just that there's genuinely decent Supports in their that i can't really hate most of the character.

I think it also has to do with the fact that Corrin, Azura and the royals are just infinitely better written in the spin-offs.

[Icelerate]

17 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Part 3 is where the failures begin but this is also the part where they go through the effort of having every mayor battle be proceeded by a strategy meeting. Radiant Dawn has many flaws but it does so much right that the balance leans towards the positive end of the spectrum. 

I think you're both giving part 3 too much credit and not enough credit. The failure in writing only begin in chapter 3-12 meaning chapters 3P-3-11 have pretty good writing. Also, parts 1-2 also had strategy briefings, less so in part 2 but I do recall Lucia being a pretty competent strategist, and I think they were executed better compared to the second half of part 3 where the perspective switch meant we can't see both sides plan at the same time. As a result, there's a lot of vague stuff in the second half of part 3 and can make you question the logic of the other side. Some of it can be hand waived but some of it is problematic. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Icelerate

[DragonFlames]

1 hour ago, Armagon said:

Yeah, that's another issue with FE's writing. When you're able to make a wiki page with all the archetypes, it's pretty clear that Intelligent Systems is just using a template. Some archetypes, like the Gharnefs, are actual copy-paste but thankfully, characters within the archetypes manage to differentiate themselves enough. 

I think the reason they use a template is due to the sheer amount of characters. It's easier to write Supports when you have a template. SoV has a really small cast and that game has the best Supports in the series. That game has archetypes just like any other game in the series but the small cast meant that they were able to focus on the quality of the writing so it doesn't feel that the characters follow a template.

Basically, i think FE needs to reduce the number of characters if they want truly good character writing instead of just relying on the same template over and over. Because here's the thing, there's no such thing as an original character or story. It's impossible to make one in this age. It all depends on how you do it and with what intention. I like the characters in FE but it's pretty clear that they are following a template, right down to their backstory.

Similar backstories and personalities and roles across multiple games is fine if you reimagine it each time but i don't think FE does that.

The writing is definietly inconsistent, you have a valid point. It's just that there's genuinely decent Supports in their that i can't really hate most of the character.

I think it also has to do with the fact that Corrin, Azura and the royals are just infinitely better written in the spin-offs.

I can't argue with that. Hell, Fire Emblem Warriors actually almost - ALMOST - achieved the miracle of making me *gulp* like Xander and Takumi. Still can't stand Azura, though, and Warriors Hinoka is just... just great, especially her voice.

Side note / Rant: Whatever did the director tell poor Cindy Robinson to do there? I mean, her voice works WONDERS for Minerva's character, so what happened to Hinoka to get such a nails-on-a-chalkboard voice? I mean, there is definitely worse when it comes to voices that make you want to throw your eardrums away - for example: Toad, that horrid nightmare that is Xiaoqiao in Warriors Orochi 3 (she probably sounds like that in the DW games as well... makes me happy DW8XL has English voice over, honestly), and the less we say about Alisa from Trails of Cold Steel, the better - but Warriors!Hinoka is up there, definitely.

Definitely agreed on the cast size, both in terms of character quality and game balance as a whole. Sure, a smaller cast makes for less replayability in a way, but IntSys never once managed to get the balance of the units right, so you're discouraged from using different units anyhow, especially on harder modes. I never quite understood the need for 60+ playable characters when only like 20 of them are actually viable (Easy modes notwithstanding, of course). And you can only bring so many units to battles anyway, so what's really the point?
Games with smaller casts also tend to have the overall better characters as a whole in terms of memorability (with Sacred Stones being the very notable exception). I probably couldn't list every available character in FE6, Shadow Dragon or New Mystery, that's for sure. I think Radiant Dawn had the best idea for its admittedly bloated cast: different parts that force you to use different units, which is an approach I wouldn't mind seeing again in the future. If it was executed the best is a point for contention, for sure, but it was still a good concept. Heck, SoV did it right, so why not a future game?

Edited November 21, 2018 by DragonFlames

[Armagon]

2 hours ago, DragonFlames said:

I never quite understood the need for 60+ playable characters when only like 20 of them are actually viable (Easy modes notwithstanding, of course). And you can only bring so many units to battles anyway, so what's really the point?

Because permadeath is a thing. What happens if you suck at the game and you lose too many units and quite literally can't progress due to having too little units. This actually happened to me on my very first playthrough of Awakening. It was my first Fire Emblem game and i played on Classic and i didn't think soft-reseting was a thing. I had to start all over.

Then again, SoV shows that you can have permadeath with a smaller cast. But then again, SoV is structured differently. 

2 hours ago, DragonFlames said:

Side note / Rant: Whatever did the director tell poor Cindy Robinson to do there? I mean, her voice works WONDERS for Minerva's character, so what happened to Hinoka to get such a nails-on-a-chalkboard voice?

I had to actually verify that because i was unaware that Minerva and Hinoka had the same voice actress in Warriors. I guess Cindy Robinson was trying to replicate E.G Daily's voice for Hinoka but it....didn't work. Sometimes that happens whenever a character's voice actor changes but they wanna keep the consitancy. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. As non-FE related recent example, Viridi's new voice in Smash Ultimate is really off. It's clear that it's a new voice actress doing the job and is trying to replicate Viridi's original English voice but many are displeased.

2 hours ago, DragonFlames said:

I mean, there is definitely worse when it comes to voices that make you want to throw your eardrums away - for example: Toad, that horrid nightmare that is Xiaoqiao in Warriors Orochi 3 (she probably sounds like that in the DW games as well... makes me happy DW8XL has English voice over, honestly), and the less we say about Alisa from Trails of Cold Steel, the better

One of these is not like the others. Even if i didn't like Alisa, i wouldn't say her voice is bad. It's quite good actually. Cold Steel has pretty good voice acting. But if you wanna discuss that, we can do it in the General Trails thread so we don't derail this thread.

Also let's be real, Toad's voice is so bad it's good.

 

[Ottservia]

4 hours ago, Armagon said:

SoV has a really small cast and that game has the best Supports in the series.

you see now this is where you and I have to disagree because I think the exact opposite. To me Sov's supports are probably some of the most boring supports I've read. Like nothing of note happens in them, it's just two characters dicking around for like two conversations and MAYBE something substantial will happen in the A support. There are a few diamonds in the rough but to me those are way too few and far between

[Slumber]

18 minutes ago, Otts486 said:

you see now this is where you and I have to disagree because I think the exact opposite. To me Sov's supports are probably some of the most boring supports I've read. Like nothing of note happens in them, it's just two characters dicking around for like two conversations and MAYBE something substantial will happen in the A support. There are a few diamonds in the rough but to me those are way too few and far between

This is where I think we're going to start seeing fundamental differences with the new crowd of FE fans and how they feel about non-Awakening/Fates supports. 

Support conversations can't be two people talking and just acting like normal people. If there isn't something crazy happening in the supports or they aren't building up to anything, I don't think the newer fans are going to be as invested, which I really find to be a shame. 

Except for Faye's supports. Those are just bad, and there is no shame in not enjoying those. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Slumber

[Ottservia]

1 hour ago, Slumber said:

This is where I think we're going to start seeing fundamental differences with the new crowd of FE fans and how they feel about non-Awakening/Fates supports. 

Support conversations can't be two people talking and just acting like normal people. If there isn't something crazy happening in the supports or they aren't building up to anything, I don't think the newer fans are going to be as invested, which I really find to be a shame. 

Except for Faye's supports. Those are just bad, and there is no shame in not enjoying those. 

There doesn't have to to be any whacky hijinks or anything happening in a support for me to consider it "good". I just want something interesting to happen in them not just "oh hey you like that character" to which the other character responds "Yeah I do". Like that's literally all the Tobin and Gray support amounts to and it's sooooooooo boooooring!! Nothing happens. We don't get any insight into either character. Neither of them of grow or learn anything and it's not even funny. There's no nuance or depth to be found which just begs the question "what's the point?". Like why include a conversation between two characters if it's gonna be this uninteresting and have really no purpose. If it's not interesting why include it? Also it's not just that support. literally every support involving the ram village kids are like this and again they're boring or just downright terrible(*cough* Faye and Silque *Cough*).  Supports are a window into who these characters are and a way to develop them without disrupting the flow of the main story. Supports like that do not do anything. All they serve to do is waste my goddamn time. If the game does not give me a reason to care about the characters and their supports, then why should I care?

One of my favorite supports in SoV is Python and Clive. Why? because it's ACTUALLY INTERESTING. The two have a pretty deep discussion on the nature of social status and how it can play into the relationship each of them has with the rest of the army. It's good stuff and highlights one of the major themes of the game. That is the kind of stuff I look for in a good support conversation. Does it have to be that good? not necessarily but it does need to be more than just small talk. Now I'm not gonna pretend that awakening had the best supports in the series cause obviously it did not but overall, at least to me, they were more interesting than a majority of the supports in SoV.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Otts486

[Etrurian emperor]

I personally really liked the support between Alm and Claire. It makes them very likable since its just two teens goofing off with each other and getting along. It also really helps make Claire stand out among the other Catria's because she's the only one shown to process her crush in a healthy manner. She doesn't hyperventilate, doesn't avoid her crush entirely and isn't Faye, instead she just goes on to have a very tight friendship with her former crush. 

[Slumber]

21 minutes ago, Otts486 said:

There doesn't have to to be any whacky hijinks or anything happening in a support for me to consider it "good". I just want something interesting to happen in them not just "oh hey you like that character" to which the other character responds "Yeah I do". Like that's literally all the Tobin and Gray support amounts to and it's sooooooooo boooooring!! Nothing happens. We don't get any insight into either character. Neither of them of grow or learn anything and it's not even funny. There's no nuance or depth to be found which just begs the question "what's the point?". Like why include a conversation between two characters if it's gonna be this uninteresting and have really no purpose.

Are you serious with the Tobin/Gray support?

That whole support chain shows them just being friends, and both of them accepting that if either of them gets with Claire, they'll still be best friends and there'll be no hard feelings. Tobin reaffirms that Gray's friendship means more to him than getting with Claire when it's clear that Claire prefers Gray.

That's not a crazy nuanced support, but I find it to be waaaaaay more substantive for both of their characters than a lot of the supports we got with in Fates/Awakening(And the Faye supports. No defending those). It's a support chain that'd break a ton of peoples' hearts if they get the ending where either of them dies(As hard as SoV makes that), considering how hard each of them take losing their best friend.

Actually seeing their conversations where they just shoot the shit and talk like friends means so much more to me than something where two characters uncharacteristically trade sob stories or crack jokes that never amount to anything at one another.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Slumber

[Armagon]

3 hours ago, Otts486 said:

you see now this is where you and I have to disagree because I think the exact opposite. To me Sov's supports are probably some of the most boring supports I've read. Like nothing of note happens in them, it's just two characters dicking around for like two conversations and MAYBE something substantial will happen in the A support. There are a few diamonds in the rough but to me those are way too few and far between

1 hour ago, Otts486 said:

There doesn't have to to be any whacky hijinks or anything happening in a support for me to consider it "good". I just want something interesting to happen in them not just "oh hey you like that character" to which the other character responds "Yeah I do". Like that's literally all the Tobin and Gray support amounts to and it's sooooooooo boooooring!!

This makes me bring up the point that i feel that people are too obsessed with whether or not something is "interesting" nowadays. Obviously, you want something to hook you in but i've seen many people expect like 7 dimensional layers of "interesting" and "deep, complex characters".

As for SoV Supports, i pretty much agree with what Slumber said (though i'm one of the 4 people that doesn't find Faye to be awful). The cool thing about the SoV cast is that most of them already know each other so a lot of the Supports is them talking like friends would do in real life. It's a nice, down-to-earth, change of pace that was needed after the bizarre, gimmicky Supports of Awakening and Fates. Don't get me wrong, those games had good Supports too but there were also lots of bad ones because IS wanted everyone to be able to Support with everyone and this resulted in several Supports between characters that have absolutely no chemistry and it comes off as bad and awkward. Or there are times when characters should have had a decent Support but they didn't put in the effort, likely because they've exhausted themselves in writing like 200 of them. And that's not getting into the S-Supports, in which most of them are awful. Four conversations is not enough to develop into a romantic relationship. S-Supports hardly have any buildup to them and the really bad ones are the ones that would result in a pretty bad relationship when you think about it. It's very clear that the writers had "quantity over quality" in mind when writing the Supports in Awakening and Fates.

[Ottservia]

24 minutes ago, Slumber said:

That whole support chain shows them just being friends, and both of them accepting that if either of them gets with Claire, they'll still be best friends and there'll be no hard feelings. Tobin reaffirms that Gray's friendship means more to him than getting with Claire when it's clear that Claire prefers Gray.

And that’s my issue with it. It’s just two dudes being bros and while that is realistic it’s uninteresting. There’s no conflict, no plot, no depth, or any intrigue at all. That is bad writing. There’s no reason for me to care. If I recorded a conversation of me and one of my friends just being bros would you watch that? No you wouldn’t because it’s boring. Ok well to be fair there is conflict in this support but it’s never brought to the forefront and is just sort of glossed over. If you wanna support to showcase the characters’ friendship, there are far more interesting ways to go about it. For example: 

Maybe Have the two reminiscing about old times when they were kids.

or maybe have one take a hit for the other(they are on a battlefield after all) 

or maybe make the clair thing more of a plot point which tests their friendship.

Also the problem with the Faye supports isn’t because she’s a b*tch. It’s because she’s a b*tch for no understandable reason. There’s nothing wrong with a character who’s an asshole just so long as there’s an understandable reason behind it.

 

[Slumber]

20 minutes ago, Otts486 said:

And that’s my issue with it. It’s just two dudes being bros and while that is realistic it’s uninteresting. There’s no conflict, no plot, no depth, or any intrigue at all. That is bad writing. There’s no reason for me to care. If I recorded a conversation of me and one of my friends just being bros would you watch that? No you wouldn’t because it’s boring. Ok well to be fair there is conflict in this support but it’s never brought to the forefront and is just sort of glossed over. If you wanna support to showcase the characters’ friendship, there are far more interesting ways to go about it. For example: 

Maybe Have the two reminiscing about old times when they were kids.

or maybe have one take a hit for the other(they are on a battlefield after all) 

or maybe make the clair thing more of a plot point which tests their friendship.

Also the problem with the Faye supports isn’t because she’s a b*tch. It’s because she’s a b*tch for no understandable reason. There’s nothing wrong with a character who’s an asshole just so long as there’s an understandable reason behind it.

 

In my opinion, there are a few big problems I'm seeing with your approach:

The first is that Tobin is a country bumpkin. And while Gray has seen more of the world, he's still just a Ram kid. Claire, a noble, entering their lives and both of them falling head over heels for her is probably the biggest strain to their friendship, and it's something that has happened since the original Gaiden. I find it a pretty logical focal point of their supports.

The second is that "Oh, remember those times when we were kids?!" supports are almost universally bad. In fact, I'll go right ahead and say "Oh, remember those times when we were kids?!" conversations are universally bad in all of fiction. It's an act of telling and not showing, and every single use of it I can think of has felt lazy and forced. This is especially so in Fire Emblem, which has been criticized for telling and not showing. The Gray/Tobin supports is one of the few chains of supports in the series that actually shows two people who are supposed to already be friends being friends, and your suggestion is that you want the game to tell you that they're friends instead.

The third is that while the Claire could test their friendship more, I don't see the point of doing something like that. What would we get out of that? They'd get two supports arguing and a final support where they come back to being friends? The end result wouldn't be any different than what we got, and instead we'd lose two solid, pretty sincere friendship supports. It'd also be a bit weird with the narrative of the game where Gray and Tobin are Alm's right and left hands respectively.

I don't know why you're continuing with Faye when I agree she's terrible and her supports suck.

Edited November 22, 2018 by Slumber

[DragonFlames]

12 hours ago, Armagon said:

Because permadeath is a thing. What happens if you suck at the game and you lose too many units and quite literally can't progress due to having too little units. This actually happened to me on my very first playthrough of Awakening. It was my first Fire Emblem game and i played on Classic and i didn't think soft-reseting was a thing. I had to start all over.

Then again, SoV shows that you can have permadeath with a smaller cast. But then again, SoV is structured differently.

Okay, true enough. I actually had that same thing happen to me on my first playthrough of Path of Radiance. I couldn't make it past Chapter 8, which is a defend the gate map, because only Ike, Mia and Titania were still alive.

Though if SoV can do it with Mila's Turnwheel (which is one of the best gameplay innovations yet, in my opinion), I don't see why future Fire Emblem games can't do the same.
Heck, I can even imagine the permadeath thing to spice up the gameplay even more with smaller casts, because it would make every single unit count. No replacements, no nothing. If someone dies, that's your burden to bear and one more force lost. It would mean the death has more impact than it already has. In games with larger casts, you can always say "meh, I'll use this other unit instead".  Here? Not so much. I'd love that, actually, now that we're talking about it.

I also believe Stella Glow shows us that you can make a strategy game interesting and fun without any permadeath whatsoever. And have it have enough replayability even with a "measly" 14 playable characters.

12 hours ago, Armagon said:

I had to actually verify that because i was unaware that Minerva and Hinoka had the same voice actress in Warriors. I guess Cindy Robinson was trying to replicate E.G Daily's voice for Hinoka but it....didn't work. Sometimes that happens whenever a character's voice actor changes but they wanna keep the consitancy. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. As non-FE related recent example, Viridi's new voice in Smash Ultimate is really off. It's clear that it's a new voice actress doing the job and is trying to replicate Viridi's original English voice but many are displeased.

That speaks to the quality of Cindy Robinson's acting that you couldn't recognize her at first. I played many games where she was in, so I recognize her voice almost immediately when I hear it (I am strangely good at recognizing voices. I don't know why). She is a really good voice actress in my opinion, so I really did wonder why Hinoka sounded so... off. I mean, she used a similar tone for Sakuya from Stella Glow, but it didn't sound nearly as bad as Hinoka did. The opposite, actually. Trying to replace the original voice could be a possible explanation for it, though.

12 hours ago, Armagon said:

One of these is not like the others. Even if i didn't like Alisa, i wouldn't say her voice is bad. It's quite good actually. Cold Steel has pretty good voice acting. But if you wanna discuss that, we can do it in the General Trails thread so we don't derail this thread.

Also let's be real, Toad's voice is so bad it's good.

True, true. One thing, though, then I'll stop (I promise, mods!): I wasn't talking about her acting, actually, but more about her voice itself. The actress did a really good job of portraying the character, it's just that her voice itself didn't really do it for me. Perhaps I should have worded that differently, because I don't HATE her voice nearly as much as I made it sound like in my original statement (I actually dislike the prior example (Xiaoqiao) more). It's just that it's one small blemish on what I believe is a nearly perfect game, especially in its voice acting department. Maybe that's why it sticks out more to me, I dunno.

So bad it's good may be true, but that still doesn't stop it from being incredibly annoying.

[Ottservia]

15 hours ago, Armagon said:

This makes me bring up the point that i feel that people are too obsessed with whether or not something is "interesting" nowadays. Obviously, you want something to hook you in but i've seen many people expect like 7 dimensional layers of "interesting" and "deep, complex characters".

I mean I'm not asking for much here. I'm not expecting zuko levels of character depth/writing. All I ask is just a little more than two bros having some small talk with an extremely mild disagreement. Again if I filmed myself and a friend talking to each other about how good friends we are and presented that as a movie, would you watch that? of course you wouldn't cause that would be boring to you. That is exactly my problem with this support.

Like I have no problem with a support where two characters just act like friends.  However it doesn't work here for one simple reason. I don't care. I don't care about their friendship cause I don't care about the characters. The game hasn't given me a reason to care. I mean it kind of has for tobin but again it's glossed over without really dwelling on it as much as it should. Now replace one of them with Alm or something then there ya go it's fixed. Why? because I actually legit give damn about him.

 

14 hours ago, Slumber said:

In my opinion, there are a few big problems I'm seeing with your approach:

The first is that Tobin is a country bumpkin. And while Gray has seen more of the world, he's still just a Ram kid. Claire, a noble, entering their lives and both of them falling head over heels for her is probably the biggest strain to their friendship, and it's something that has happened since the original Gaiden. I find it a pretty logical focal point of their supports.

The second is that "Oh, remember those times when we were kids?!" supports are almost universally bad. In fact, I'll go right ahead and say "Oh, remember those times when we were kids?!" conversations are universally bad in all of fiction. It's an act of telling and not showing, and every single use of it I can think of has felt lazy and forced. This is especially so in Fire Emblem, which has been criticized for telling and not showing. The Gray/Tobin supports is one of the few chains of supports in the series that actually shows two people who are supposed to already be friends being friends, and your suggestion is that you want the game to tell you that they're friends instead.

The third is that while the Claire could test their friendship more, I don't see the point of doing something like that. What would we get out of that? They'd get two supports arguing and a final support where they come back to being friends? The end result wouldn't be any different than what we got, and instead we'd lose two solid, pretty sincere friendship supports. It'd also be a bit weird with the narrative of the game where Gray and Tobin are Alm's right and left hands respectively.

okay those are fair points. Though to be fair, I came up with those like off the top of my head so they're not all that well thought out. Though one thing on that first and last point. I feel like the support could've been better if the clair thing was given a tad more emphasis. Doesn't have to be much just make it a bit more of a focus instead of like a 4 lines. Hell maybe combine the clair thing and the reminising idea to make it so maybe that had sort of a fight like this in the past. Again it doesn't have to much just something a little more. Anyway I think we should agree to disagree on this one. It's clear neither of us are gonna back down here.

14 hours ago, Slumber said:

I don't know why you're continuing with Faye when I agree she's terrible and her supports suck.

I bring up Faye because I believe there's a disconnect as to why we agree. Like we think her supports are bad for different reasons. I think her supports are bad for very similar reasons I think gray and tobin's is bad. The supports lack any depth, nuance, or anything of interest. In other words I find them to be boring. However, I do think it's worse than the gray and Tobin support because of how static it is. I mean at least the tobin and gray support was generally inoffensive and the conflict, what little there was of it, was solved in a generally organic and natural way. Faye and Silque on the other hand doesn't do that. The main point of contention I have with that support is that the conflict has no leg to stand on.  The main conflict of this support is that Faye is mean to Silque because she's "not alm" which is just stupid because to me that's no good reason to be a dick to someone. I don't understand why Faye is like this which is my issue here. The support would be 1000 times better if we knew why Faye liked alm so much. Again it's a matter of nuance. If Faye had an understandable reason to like Alm as much as she does, she honestly could be one of my favorite characters but as it stands she does not. Also the way this supports conflict is resolved is just forced and unnatural because Faye just seems to apologize out of no where plus the fact that again this conflict had no leg to stand on in the first place. 

Now this is just my assumption here so take this with a grain of salt and feel free to correct me if I am wrong. However, to me it seems like you think Faye is "bad"/poorly written character because she's an asshole which I can't help but disagree with. I mean like that's a fair reason to dislike a character but I do not see how that equates to bad writing. Again that's just my assumption so take it with a grain of salt. I mean no offense when I say this.

Edited November 22, 2018 by Otts486

[Armagon]

8 hours ago, DragonFlames said:

Though if SoV can do it with Mila's Turnwheel (which is one of the best gameplay innovations yet, in my opinion), I don't see why future Fire Emblem games can't do the same.

Mila's Turnwheel was stupidly broken. It should definitely come back but you shouldn't be able to use it 12 times max.

Although it's not like SoV is a difficult game, even on Hard mode, so that may have something to do with it. Future FEs can have a Turnwheel and permadeath but the former needs to be nerfed.

2 hours ago, Otts486 said:

Again if I filmed myself and a friend talking to each other about how good friends we are and presented that as a movie, would you watch that? of course you wouldn't cause that would be boring to you.

This is a bad example because it involves no context. If you film yourself just talking to a friend, of course it would be boring. In the case of Gray and Tobin, we have context and they are also characters that have established roles in the story. Their Supports are just down time. You can't plop me into a conversation without introducing any of the characters and providing no context.

2 hours ago, Otts486 said:

The main conflict of this support is that Faye is mean to Silque because she's "not alm" which is just stupid because to me that's no good reason to be a dick to someone. I don't understand why Faye is like this which is my issue here. The support would be 1000 times better if we knew why Faye liked alm so much. Again it's a matter of nuance. If Faye had an understandable reason to like Alm as much as she does, she honestly could be one of my favorite characters but as it stands she does not.

It's not really explained and it's mostly just theorizing on my end but it seems to me that Faye always liked Alm but then became incredibly infatuated with him after he saved her from Slayde. This is what i got from the prologue and her Base Conversation after rescuing Clair. Her slightly-yandere tendencies also seem to be a result of the war psychologically affecting her (she goes from "no Alm, don't go, it's too dangerous" to "i'll gladly kill in your name"). Again, this is just theorizing. I personally don't think she's that bad, she's a hell of a lot better than Tharja and Peri (but everyone is better than Peri). What Faye really needed was a Support convo with one of the Ram kids+Celica (given that she can be recruited there). Same goes for Kliff, he needed more than just a Support with Tobin. That's actually one problem i have with SoV's Supports, while i appreciate IS going for a more "quality over quantity" approach, some characters just got shafted. Genny, for example, can only Support with Sonya and if you don't recruit Sonya, then too bad. The lack of cross-route Supports is also a shame because we could've gotten some really interesting stuff between Zeke and the Pegasus Sisters.

Faye's better written in Heroes somehow. 

I can't believe IS uses the spin-offs as a way to fix characters.

Edited November 22, 2018 by Armagon

[Ottservia]

4 minutes ago, Armagon said:

This is a bad example because it involves no context. If you film yourself just talking to a friend, of course it would be boring. In the case of Gray and Tobin, we have context and they are also characters that have established roles in the story. Their Supports are just down time. You can't plop me into a conversation without introducing any of the characters and providing no context.

I suppose. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't care for Tobin or gray because well the game doesn't really give me much of a reason to care. These two characters don't really stand out at all to me. They just sort of exist. Hell early on in the game I thought Tobin was Gray and Gray was Tobin. That's just how unmemorable they were to me. They have "struggles"(or at least tobin does anyway) but none of those struggles are really brought to the forefront and are noticeable in any real capacity. I can barely tell you anything about them beyond what is stated about them in their initial introduction. A support is only as good as the characters in it and well Tobin and Gray, at least in my opinion, aren't interesting at all. They're kind of boring. They don't have any charm or anything of note. They're just alm's friends and that's pretty boring.

[NekoKnight]

As others have said, Fire Emblem writing isn't the best but I'd say they were at worst serviceable until Fates wrote a comprehensive guide on how to do everything wrong in a story. Character writing is often stronger than story writing. My opinions on each entry I've played closely match what @Etrurian emperor posted earlier, but to add on to that:

Fates main failing (to be as succinct as possible, because we've all done this song and dance before) was a story that felt largely hollow, with extreme player worship damning what was a brilliant story premise. Birthright was by the numbers, Conquest was infuriating in its bias and hypocrisy, and Revelation was just nothing.

SoV is an interesting beast in that it had some excellent themes, presentation and world-building but it still had the relic of a plot from an NES title. Rudolf's plot doesn't make sense, Celica's actions in Act 4 (and even earlier when she reunites with Alm) don't make sense, Alm undermines the themes of the game and Berkut is largely wasted in the plot. I'd say the game is overall middling on the scale of writing quality, some very bad elements balancing out the very good.

I do hope that Three Houses will have the same kind of care that Tellius put into its world and that its values aren't undermined to serve some agenda like player worship.

----

Regarding some other topics brought up in this thread,
-I appreciate the cast of SoV not being as tropey as Fateswakening, but I don't really think it can be praised much for the support conversations. Many of the supports are basic and short, likely to save money on the voice acting. Some characters barely have any, like poor Silque who gets her only conversation with Faye, who tells her to piss off for not being Alm.

-I'd say Sacred Stones has an excellent villain cast for being so varied. You have Orson who lost his mind to despair, Selena who fights for love, Valter who fights to satiate his depraved hunger, Caellach who fights for power, and Riev who fights to revive the Demon King. At the top is Lyon, a tragic villain who fought with his self-doubt, his unrequited love for Eirika, his rivalry with Ephraim, his inability to handle his father's death and then his failure to control the Demon King and save Grado from disaster. Some of these characters are simply written but they serve the story well. Their personal connection with members of the playable cast, notably Joshua, Duessel, Cormag, Ephraim and Eirika make the story intriguing even when the plot and world-building are lackluster.

[Slumber]

10 hours ago, Otts486 said:

I suppose. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't care for Tobin or gray because well the game doesn't really give me much of a reason to care. These two characters don't really stand out at all to me. They just sort of exist. Hell early on in the game I thought Tobin was Gray and Gray was Tobin. That's just how unmemorable they were to me. They have "struggles"(or at least tobin does anyway) but none of those struggles are really brought to the forefront and are noticeable in any real capacity. I can barely tell you anything about them beyond what is stated about them in their initial introduction. A support is only as good as the characters in it and well Tobin and Gray, at least in my opinion, aren't interesting at all. They're kind of boring. They don't have any charm or anything of note. They're just alm's friends and that's pretty boring.

At this point, though, I think you should bring up the problem that you just don't like these characters vs. saying their support is bad.

Because, while I know this is anecdotal evidence, most people do seem to like Gray and Tobin quite a lot.

I like them because each of the Ram boys besides Alm are all pretty eager to display their talents and skills out in the world, and they each do it through their own means. Gray displays this through playful cockiness, Tobin displays this through a genuinely eager, competitive demeanor, and Kliff displays it through a somewhat cold arrogance. It showcases why Gray and Tobin get along so well, while Tobin has a really tough time getting through to Kliff, even though all of them are childhood friends. And it's probably why the plot was developed in such a way that Kliff isn't as helpful as Gray and Tobin are, and why he's optional while Gray and Tobin jump at the opportunity to leave with Alm.

Edited November 23, 2018 by Slumber

[Ottservia]

6 hours ago, Slumber said:

At this point, though, I think you should bring up the problem that you just don't like these characters vs. saying their support is bad.

Because, while I know this is anecdotal evidence, most people do seem to like Gray and Tobin quite a lot.

I like them because each of the Ram boys besides Alm are all pretty eager to display their talents and skills out in the world, and they each do it through their own means. Gray displays this through playful cockiness, Tobin displays this through a genuinely eager, competitive demeanor, and Kliff displays it through a somewhat cold arrogance. It showcases why Gray and Tobin get along so well, while Tobin has a really tough time getting through to Kliff, even though all of them are childhood friends. And it's probably why the plot was developed in such a way that Kliff isn't as helpful as Gray and Tobin are, and why he's optional while Gray and Tobin jump at the opportunity to leave with Alm.

Probably though it’s not like I dislike Tobin or Gray that would imply I have any kind of strong opinion on them which I don’t. I just don’t care for them. They’re just boring and unmemorable to me. As I said before the characters in question are likable and are generally “inoffensive” as far as characterization and personality goes but the problem is they lack any kind of real nuance or defining character trait at least as far as I can see. Also to me the support is still rather uninteresting and boring. Honestly try reading it without the voice acting and then tell me if it is as “interesting” without it as it is with. A support is only as good as the characters in it. If the characters lack nuance the support most likely will as well.

[Shadow Mir]

10 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

I'd say Sacred Stones has an excellent villain cast for being so varied. You have Orson who lost his mind to despair, Selena who fights for love, Valter who fights to satiate his depraved hunger, Caellach who fights for power, and Riev who fights to revive the Demon King. At the top is Lyon, a tragic villain who fought with his self-doubt, his unrequited love for Eirika, his rivalry with Ephraim, his inability to handle his father's death and then his failure to control the Demon King and save Grado from disaster. Some of these characters are simply written but they serve the story well. Their personal connection with members of the playable cast, notably Joshua, Duessel, Cormag, Ephraim and Eirika make the story intriguing even when the plot and world-building are lackluster.

I hope that if SS gets remade, they actually do something to improve the villains, because most of them are just bad, and I mean really damn bad. Especially CRV, who are all the same despite different reasons for fighting - flat chaotic evil killbots who might as well be generic Saturday morning cartoon villains. And I'd actually want Orson to look sympathetic, because as is, the writing just isn't there to make him look it.