BrightBow

To be specific, the bad guys plot in FE4 resolved around getting a child that can serve as a vessel for a dark god. This requires that the blood of two inheritors of it's priest's bloodline crosses. This possibility is the reason that incest is forbidden in Jugdral as mentioned in chapter 4. Though considering Levin was also possessed, it seems like everyone inheriting Major Holy Blood can technically be possessed, making this rule kinda useless.

The whole "blame video games" routine is for all it's predictability still depressing but it's not like it ever leads to anything. And now that games are a lot more mainstream, those accusations will meet less and less approval anyway because people do not want to consider something they like to be evil or harmful and will go to great lengths to defend it. This time around I'm really more worried by the media's attempt to link the crime with Asperger Autism. For example the German tabloid newspaper and nothing short of the biggest newspaper in general "Bild" had an article online under the headline: "The crazy Amok-Killer from Newtown Cold as Ice. No Empathy. No Pity. Bild explains the Asperger-Syndrome" What was particular disheartening about that article was that the article itself wasn't even such a big pile of crap. Saying that there is no connection between Asperger and violence was essentially the first thing written in the article. Of course like all the other articles on the topic, they had no reliable source for the assumption that the killer had Asperger in the first place. I'm very disgusted that a group of people are being baseless accused of being potential killers when communication is the very thing they struggle with. I think that's kinda unfair.

Yeah, of course. They are infamous for stuff like that. They would have issues with even the tamest of words, religious symbols and stuff like that. But I think that it's entirely possible that they wouldn't have noticed the exact character relationships in the first place. Let's take the Neir family as an example: The game doesn't exactly beat you over the head with the fact that Lex kids are cousins of the Axe Bros. It's only mentioned briefly that Dannan is Langobalts son. You have to deduce it yourself and that requires you to be suspicious towards an entirely harmless looking sentence in the first place. I think the NoA morality police was way to superficial for that.

Well, when they eventually DID advertise Fire Emblem, they did a pretty bad job at it. I doubt they would have done better in the 90s. Oh great, now I kinda have to imagine Marth with a grin like Mega Man had on most of the old NoA covers... Anyway, whether it would have become a classic during the NES days would probably have been mostly based on luck. And they probably would have ended skipping Gaiden, similar how they skipped the missing Final Fantasy titles. Edit: Also, what is all the talk about Lachesis? Is there any mention of incest? Saying that she wants to marry a man like her brother probably isn't enough. Okay, AlessXNanna conversation in Endgame. Nevermind then. Still, I don't think they would change anything in regards of the cousins. I doubt they would pay enough attention to even notice that.

Man, I wish I could play this game properly so I could judge it properly. But what I can say is that the PseudoProtomans in Ryu's stage where just tedious. They were only vulnerable for such a short time that it got old very quick. And the lack of a save feature is unforgiving. After all, tow hard can it be? There are just a few variables to keep track of.

I guess they could go back to use Knives or Staffs then. Also, I would say that a MP system would be better then HP since the latter can be so easily restored. Then we could maybe have a few more special magic effects without breaking the game. Plus, such a system could also be used to allow physical units to perform special commands at the cost of this limited resource.

Well, at least my my PC keeps a reliable and consistent speed throughout. Said speed happens to be bullet time though. Driver update didn't help matters either. Just what do you need all those resources for an 8-bit style game? Also, not only does the game not seem to have an save feature, but you can't mute the music. Minimizing it, won't make it quiet either. So keeping I active on the side is quite a hassle.

Well, for me the direction keys are the first thing the game asks for. Maybe the UK/US versions are different besides the additional readmes for some reason? I use the UK one. Or maybe the setting is not supported for Gamepads? Granted, that wouldn't make much sense either.

Yes, they are. You have to be in the weapon selection screen though. The readme doesn't mention that, I think. Yes, it does say the Pause menu. Sorry. Oh and it's F2, btw. I still wonder what "switch device" means, though.

Btw, has nobody else played it yet? Looks pretty sweet to me but I can't find a save feature. Edit: Also, I can't get the game to run on a proper speed. Damn useless Gefore 8200M G onboard card. Oh well, at least beating it should be a breeze that way.

I don't think that those killers would be all that afraid of gun-wielding teachers. They probably don't expect to survive their crimes in the first place.

Hmmmm, just how do you define "interesting" as opposed to "best"... Best: Alvis (FE4) Worst: Pascal (FE7) Well for Alvis, the game really runs on subtleties with this guy. This gives you plenty of food for thought as you try to interpret things. Just to give an example, there is the scene where he confronts Diadora with Sigurd. Alvis wasn't a mustache-twirling bad guy in that scene. He was simply horribly afraid that Diadora would remember her husband so he wanted to confirm to herself that she really doesn't remember. But the game never speaks that this is why he brought them together. It's just the logical conclusion of his stated fear about Diadora's memories and his "for the greater good" attitude. It's difficult to choose the least interesting character since Fire Emblem has tons of 2-dimension characters. Heck, they have characters with no dimension at all since they don't get a single line. All those contenders make it a bit difficult to choose the least interesting character but I think I can make a case for Pascal. As a reminder: He is a former corrupt Noble who massacred his own people for the sake of being evil, then joined a group of people whose sole goal is to kill people like him. And for added insanity, he kept killing innocents while being employed with the Black Fang, yet the group whose much quoted "Law of the Fang" states that "failure means death" response towards those cruelties against the people they want to protect and the tarnishing of their name is... to simply lock him up. Characters with no characterization at least leave you wondering who they actually are. They might have some depth in theory. But Pascal mere existence defies logic so badly that he should not be able to exist at all. It makes it so obvious that the writers didn't care at all about him that it kills any theoretical belief of any hidden depth to his character.

While being a low level Knight in the Dawn Brigade is about as bad as you can get as a unit, I'm pretty sure I've seen Meg's looks being insulted far too often in order to consider her appearance a non-issue in regards to her lack popularity. Heck, Ilyana is bad in both game and as a a character she is as flat as it gets, being solely defined by her eating disorder which is played entirely for comedy. And yet she is still pretty popular.

-People die when they are killed. -Laws against incest exist for a reason. -Female knights will always choose mounts with less carrying capacity for some reason. -If a story doesn't seem to make any sense, it might be because the story doesn't make any sense. -American localizers will always prefer what they consider cool above what actually makes sense. -German localizers are painfully insistent to maintain past mistranslations despite being pretty darn good otherwise. Seriously: ElFire is ElfLight while the actual ElLight is still ElLightning in consistence with FE7's NoA trasnlation. The magic triangle is pretty messy here. -Given enough time, everything you like will eventually turn to crap. -Dual wielding Two-handed swords while riding a massive lion is the most badass thing ever. -Gaming discussions are a good reason to insult and degrade others. -High heels don't penetrate movement. -Japanese developers seem to focus exclusively on pandering to Otakus these days.

The "Path of Radiance" version. It won't be head until the ending but it contributes to the wonderful conclusion to what I consider the best Fire Emblem experience.

You are pretty presumptions with your conviction that you of all people knows which "games people actually want to play". And btw: "Misguided about the people who play Fire Emblem"? Of course I don't know about anyone else but... if I had a problem with a strategy RPG with permadeath, then I would simply play one without it and therefore wouldn't be here in the first place. And since it left unanswered so far: What is it that you play Fire Emblem for?

Ähmm, the Mega Man series itself made it a habit to make fun of that guy. For one thing, Bad Boxart Megaman was intended as a character in Megaman Universe. And in Mega Man ZX Advent, a sidequest revolved around obtaining a disc that featured the very dreaded cover that started it all. And that game was released in 2007, long before Inafune left.

How do "meaningful" elements somehow don't contribute to a good game? Do you want more random elements which serve no purpose? And the reason it gets easier is because people savescum their way to the end rather then accepting losses. Plus, once you are through the game once, you know all the secrets and where all the stuff is, so it gets even easier. It's too bad that harder difficulties ignore that when scaling enemies up. Sure you can do that. But you are again assuming that people are just gonna restart until they get the desired results. And I was pointing out that the mechanic didn't just exist. It wasn't a mistake. The games were all designed around it. Removing this mechanic would change Fire Emblem little less then how "Other M" changed Metroid. Sure, it might make for a better game but it wouldn't be recognizable as a Fire Emblem. At least, that's my take. But what is the cornerstone in your opinion then? What does a game named Fire Emblem need to be designed around in order to keep being a Fire Emblem game? I mean, you already said that the game has not much strategy. So what does this leave? What is it that you see in this series that you spend time on a fan forum?

Well, if it helps I do like her a lot. Mostly because I'm impressed by someone who won't let her insecurities stop her from protecting her friends. To me, she is still behind Dashie and Twilight though.

Honestly, Permadeath is pretty important in the series. All those games so far are designed around it. Those games would simply break. Without Permadeath, you are unbeatable because the enemy is frankly no match for you. This series is not like Advance Wars where the enemy is usually an even match. Here, the enemy be able to take down 2 or 3 allies at best. But you can still loose because in Fire Emblem it's not beating the battle that's difficult but winning the war. Everything you get can be used in the following battles. But that also means, that everything you do loose is lost for good. You get to the next map but you might not reach the end. That's how any game in the series so far has been. If it was removed, then all those games would need to be fundamentally redesigned. I think that the difference between those map designs should be clear for everyone who played Advance Wars. The maps would need to be redesigned so that you have an actual chance of loosing the map. That they can actually kill all your allies. A Fire Emblem without Permadeath would need to consist of maps that are more like the BS Fire Emblem scenario or the FE12 pseudo-DLC maps. And frankly, that would result in an entirely different game. It's kinda funny that you mention "Other M". As far as I can tell, the biggest complaint against that game is that it removed exploration and made the game entirely linear. In other words: they removed the series' cornerstone. And as far as I'm concerned, that's just what you advocate here.

Thats good to know. Thank you. And I apologize for the uncalled sarcasm in my first line of my first response.

Integrity, I still don't quite understand you. I initially assumed that your reaction was because I was breaking the Forum Rules in some way. Presumably by being off-topic. Admittedly that happens a lot to me. I write, rewrite, copy-paste and whatnot a lot before I send off a post. It would not be the first time that I completely lost track of what I wanted to say or what was the issue at hand. Maybe I overlook something but I don't see anything in your follow up post that indicates that I did this or something similar. What I can see from my perspective, is that I made a dumb post. But I have to say that this doesn't quite look to me like something that deserves such a strong, emotional and profane response. Is there more to this? Have I been offensive?

I get Legends 3 but why does Capcom need to apologize for the inclusion of Boxart Megaman? They did nothing wrong with that. The whole thing was just bad timing but nothing vile.

Thank you but which point do you mean? The original post asked if anybody else is watching the show so I wrote that I do as well as giving my take on it because just writing "Yes" seemed rather insufficient to me. The thread is full of people giving their take on the show. Why did you single out mine? What did I wrote that makes my post off-topic?

You might want to take a look at this site's page about localization changes. Also, I think that my point went also over your head as well. Which would be that situational is fine and all but making the skill percentage based means that you can't take advantage of it in the few opportunities where it might actually be useful and that it therefore is rendered useless. Anouleth brought up the PCC in the context of them being a overpowered gameplay mechanic then Masteries and that therefore the latter aren't broken. The quote in question: It had nothing to do with what I meant since I didn't mean "broken" in the sense of something being "more powerful". So I simply clarified that.