MessengerIris
-
Posts
44 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by MessengerIris
-
-
My favorite support in the GBA era was Joshua/Natasha, especially if you follow Eirika route.
SpoilerJoshua plays much bigger story relevance in that route.
Other good supports are: Ephraim/Tana or L'Arachel or Tana/Cormag, and Colm/Neimi (if you are for the childhood lovers).
-
2 hours ago, Ertrick36 said:
I'm gonna add that the first half for each house is homogenous. Chapters 1-11 for Blue Lions is basically the exact same as Chapters 1-11 for Black Eagles and Chapters 1-11 for Golden Deer. There are some slight differences, mainly in the discourse with the house leaders (Claude will be trying to dig into the history of Fodlan, Dimitri gradually divulges his history with Edelgard and the Tragedy of Duscar, and both Edelgard and Hubert will obviously have some... interesting things to say as well as some special interactions with some of the antagonists), but all the chapter battles are the same except the mock battles which have you fighting against different teams obviously.
The real tedium is in repeating those first dozen chapters three or four times. Even if you use NG+, it may still feel tedious - perhaps even moreso, because you'll just have more grinding tools at your disposal. Though it really depends on your playstyle - whether you're the type to grind or not. You may well just decide you want to get the first part over as quickly as possible, in which case NG+ will probably benefit you more than it'll hinder you.
A good way to get around this problem (and speed up a route), is to make an extra save for BE, right before the route split (end of Chapter 11). That way, you can put Church route on the backburner (by restarting and following this extra save), if you ever decide that you are up for it. It saves you the tedium of having to go through chapter 1-11 yet again for BE.
Regardless of which path you decide to follow in BE, make sure to always talk to Edelgard and go to that special event (Ch 11 explore). As long as you go to this event, you will activate the ability to choose between the route split.
-
I didn’t really follow pre-release information so what I knew going in was limited to just the lords. Most of my change in opinion happened after I saw the supports and story roles.
Black Eagles (least favorite house):
Went up: Ferdinand, Dorothea
Went down: Bernadetta, Lindhart, Caspar, Petra, Hubert, Edelgard, Jeritza
Edelgard: I thought she was going to be my favorite female lead yet. Now, she is probably the worst lord in the series for me (barring avatars). Alas, such a tumultuous relationship with her - her writing was just everywhere between the routes. In retrospect, I enjoyed her tragic villain portrayal in AM the most, despite how “evil” she is supposed to be. In combination with her controversial reception, both from the detractors and the fans, just the mention of her puts me off.
Blue Lions (favorite house)
Went up: Dimitri, Felix, Sylvain, Ashe, Mercedes, Annette, Ingrid, Gilbert
Went down: Dedue
I had low hopes for this house. Only reason I even picked it first was because I loved lance users. Surprisingly turned out to be my favorite. None of the characters really “went down” to be honest, it came down to availability more than anything.
Dimitri: Favorite lord in the series. Found his trauma to be the most relatable (sense of loss and guilt). Even if his “redemption” is abrupt, I liked how he doesn’t really ever try to justify and excuse himself to be righteous or good.
Golden Deer (meh)
Went up: Marianne, Hilda, Lorenz
Went down: Claude, Lysithea
No opinion before or after: Leonie, Ignatz, Raphael [This house had a lot of duds for me]
Claude: Such a pity, a bunch of wasted potential. Thought he would be the most engaging lord - felt like the greatest “scheme” he pulled on me was pulling the wool over my eyes before release. His route wasn’t bad; but his story engagement was minimal. His strongest trait, before and after TS, was his personality; but take that away and I don’t know much about him. I really wish IS either scraped Claude or made him have his own struggles, rather than shoehorn him into Church 2.0.
Church (meh. They just weren’t around a lot during the part 1 story.)
Went up: Rhea, Alois, Seteth, Hanneman
Went down: Flayn
No opinion before or after: Catherine, Shamir, Manuela, Cyril, Jeralt
Rock bottom: Byleth [garbage tier. There was nothing good about this character. Only reason they existed was to pander to the player. Actively hurt the story growth of all the lords by taking away the spotlight that should’ve been rightfully theirs, and replacing it with someone whose story presence is worse than a cardboard box.]
Rhea: Surprisingly deep. Probably one of the best written and consistent characters in the series. I’m not going to say she was justified or excuse her actions, but I found her growth and reflection to be very meaningful. She was a deeply flawed person. Towards the end, she saw the error in her ways and owned up to it (whether that be revamping the church or sacrificial death), rather than giving excuse after excuse to Seteth.
-
2 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:
Perhaps, but the fact that I am witnessing people making such incredibly ignorant and biased remarks, dismissing literally so many traits and actually trying to declare that Edelgard is nothing but a villain and her story is you being the bad guys, I'm sorry, but I have little patience for that. Especially since I expected better on this site.
When did this place become like reddit of all places?
If you have little patience, maybe remove yourself from the situation instead of acting like white knight and adding more fuel to the certain characters fans (whether that be Edelgard or Dimitri or Rhea or whatever) can be overbearing rhetoric that is becoming prevalent? It’s not the end of the world if people do not agree, and it’s not your job to “educate” others either...(which is what your post come off sounding).
-
Holy. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the sentiments being shared, there is clearly a better way of expressing it besides coming off so condescending and dismissive about other people’s takes on the events. Telling people to share their idea so you can tell them how wrong they are...And then calling all these people ignorant and not enlightened enough to share your views. I think it’s time for me to leave. It’s not even worth the discussion when it devolves into discussing with people with this sort of attitude.
-
14 minutes ago, Troykv said:
Oh wow, I shouldn't be surprised this conversation ended this way.
I personally Edelgard's backstory works nicely because it creates a motive for driving her motivation. It's hard for someone to see the evil of the world, specially if they're "privileged ones" unless the evil comes after you, and that happened when Aegir, Thales and co. did her horrible deeds.
Edelgard noticed because of this that the world needs to change, and the death of her family and even more people that had died and will die for similar reasons (basically Crest and Nobility related) drived her to create a future where this actions are never done again... And of course, a quite crazy dream needs an even crazier plan. She managed to make it work pretty well, despite how dangerous it would look in paper (She managed to defeat the Church and with managed to complete one of her main objectives: remove Rhea's influence from the world, and she can actually won the whole conflict if Byleth doesn't go against her, though, maybe he would have needed Byleth to deal with Thales).
From my understanding, OP and my qualm is more to do with TWSITD's involvement in Edelgard's backstory, moreso than her actual backstory. I think her backstory of torture is actually quite well done and puts her actions in a lot of context. But because TWSITD is such a badly written ultimate villain, it makes a lot of Edelgard's action seem misdirected against the church (since most people will end up falling on the argument that the church upholds some the crest/nobility system, which again, is open to interpretation. I personally don't think the church is great but some of Edelgard's blame is overexaggerated.). If Edelgard's backstory was more closely tied to her end goal (removal of the nobility/Crests), then it wouldn't seem so contradicatory and confusing.
Like I mentioned before, write out TWSITD completely. Now it becomes: Imperial nobility wants a unified Fodlan -> Insurrection of the Seven -> abducts Edelgard and siblings to create superpowered Emperor to achieve that goal -> Edelgard hates Crests and nobility. Now, rather than TWSITD is watching my every move so I must go remove the church?? logic, it would just be "lemme appease the Imperial nobles with conquest but use their resources to unify Fodlan screw them over by removing their power." Also, a lot of the CF endings should reflect more of a meritocratic society (yes, societies don't change overnight but seriously felt a lot of things didn't even change at the end of CF when people like Bernadetta/Caspar inherent their respective titles and positions).
-
16 minutes ago, Crysta said:
I'm all for more political intrigue over the generic evil cult, but I prefer the evil society with actual world building relevance than "but one day the humans turned on the dragons and slaughtered them all... somehow."
Nemesis alone is Batta the Beast.
I think Nemesis's motivation and backstory could have benefit a little bit from combining with TWSITD's backstory. Like maybe he too was a human who wants to push the limits of humanity and innovation to extend beyond the reliance of God's control. A lot of people in our own history started questioning religion once science and innovative thought was on the rise. It didn't have to be "one day humans wanted to rebel." Rhea could still be for Sothis because she saw what happens when innovation leads to genocide, and as result, clings onto the hope that religion is salvation. That setup seems like an idea that stems a lot from the debate between about humanity's willpower vs relying on holy intervention. But seriously, you don’t need some “hidden bad guy” to be responsible for literally all the bad stuff that happens in feudalistic society when a lot of that stuff can be pinned moreso on humanity’s and the social system’s inherent flaws. People can all make crappy and selfish decisions, all on their own accord, and removing TWSITD would allow ALL the protagonists to do that, instead of “TWSITD’s controlling and watching everything I do so let’s just go along with it.” TWSITD just felt like IS got cold feet on Edelgard and realized many people wouldn’t like a ruthless waifu. Maybe I am one of the few, but I wish she was less of a contraindication and stuck to her guns like she does in BL (where she admittedly continues her bloody path despite Arundel being out of the picture because she was so driven on unifying and creating a “better” Church-less world).
-
13 minutes ago, Crysta said:
Eh, the Slitherers aren't only relevant to her backstory. They're relevant to Dimitri because they were what triggered Tragedy of Duscur and they've been manipulating his kingdom behind the scenes just as readily as they were manipulating the Empire. They're relevant to Rhea because they backed and aided Nemesis, and what they and Nemesis did instructs what Rhea's plans because they're responsible for the death of her people and mother. They're not complex villains, but they are important to several important narratives.
Eh, how important is questionable.
Tragedy of Duscur/Kingdom -> It was orchestrated by the Kingdom nobility with a little shove from TWSITD. If we wrote TWSITD them out, the nobility can commit that tragedy all by themselves. It would reinforce the narrative that the nobility system is corrupt and needs to be removed.
Rhea -> Write out TWSITD and just leave Nemesis. What does that leave us? A guy, who like Edelgard, thinks that we don't need Gods and that humans should reign supreme. Not that farfetched of an idea. It would reinforce the idea that humanity's greed for power and control can lead them to do terrible things like genocide. Rhea could still make those concessions to keep the false peace between humans vs Nabateans, out of respect for her mother. Rhea's fanaticism with her mother and maintaining this false peace doesn't really need TWSITD - it would just highlight the idea that people with the best of intentions can be led astray.
Empire -> Feudalism is already a corrupt system. You can have the Empire's nobility pulling the strings with pushing for Crests and the Insurrection of the Seven, solely for the sake of power/prestige/money/influence (because it's not like it hasn't happened before in history), without Arundel shoving his way into Empire politics. It would also put into perspective the idea of centralized power vs being led by a group of corrupt nobles.
I feel like without TWSITD, the game itself would benefit from a more introspective examination at what can go wrong in feudalistic societies and the result of people's selfishness/arrogance. Maybe it is just me, but right now, it feels like "oh yeah a lot of bad things happen because some big bad is in the shadow pulling the strings, but jokes on you, they're taken care of in 2 chapters in VW and in the epilogue of CF."
-
4 hours ago, Jingle Jangle said:
Might be wrong here, but only on the Verdant Wind version of Gronder fields part 2. Dimitri doesn't have a mourning quote for Sylvain out of all the Blue Lions members. What he did to piss off Dimitri?
Dimitri does mourn Sylvain in CF chapter 17 map. Idk, the narrative decisions between Dimitri/Sylvain are so weird - like childhood friends by a lot interconnected history, yet only B support? Their support chain itself is silly and fun but doesn't seem as deep as Dimitri's supports with Ingrid/Felix/Dedue (which are all introspective about the Duscur tragedy or about the way the kingdom's chivalry philosophy is upheld to an unhealthy degree), despite Sylvain's clear disdain for crests/nobility.
-
I’ll give my 2 cents. I think the backstory is fine the way it is. It is ok for villains to have flaws like arrogance and ignorance, even if it sounds nonsensical from the other perspective - ultimately these flaws make her a relatable and flawed human. To her, what she does makes sense and allows her to justify the actions she does. I just think it gets ridiculous when people start arguing that she is some sort of savior because “well what she does makes sense from her mind and as a result, all her opponents are therefore wrong and should just roll over to allow her actions and conquest.” As if there isn’t an other side to her conquest. And then those same individuals will bend themselves backwards to make every other opponent (whether it be Claude/Dimitri/Rhea/etc) out looking like some sort of “bigger villain” who Edelgard had to put down/conquer/some nonsense like that. I think the game was a good reflection of how multifaceted war is because ultimately everyone thinks their cause is just and worthy of sacrifice. She is ruthless and Machiavellian in her actions, but not sadistic. Besides, nothing wrong with liking an aggressor.
I do think it is unfortunate that her character is diminished because she is too closely associated with the clearly irredeemable villains with insufficient story presence to make them as scary/powerful as she frames them to be, and those villains barely have any context to make their actions understandable (beyond death to dragons and evil for the sake of evil). If anything, I think I would rather write out the entire TWSITD plotline and have her motivation stem more directly from the nobility (ie the nobility tortured and experimented on her siblings etc). That way, there is a more direct correlation to her end goal, and CF would stop being "I am helpless against TWSITD's control and as a result must partner with them" and make her seem more like a conquerer with accountability and the agency to make morally questionable decisions for what she believes is a better society. I just often find people who defend Edelgard's actions as heroic and necessary often build TWSITD's threat and storytelling to be better than it actually is, which is quite barebone and open to interpretation.
-
39 minutes ago, Ertrick36 said:
Lyn and Lucina? They're obviously wooden characters people only like because waifus and one's a Marth cosplayer or whatever, while the hot-headed Hector is a badass bro and Marth has such a great coming of age story. Camilla and Tharja? Slutty women without an ounce of depth to them, yet Niles is a man with the depth of a bottomless pit. Celica and Micaiah? They make mistakes because they're dumb, but Xander makes mistakes because he's the very picture of the imperfect lord who recognizes the injustices in the world, and also all the story stuff is irrelevant because that's an entirely different character from supports!Xander because the writers were disjointed or some crap.
I’ll just point out that the difference with Edelgard vs Arvis is that unlike Arvis (who is clearly portrayed as the antagonist for the entire duration of the game), Edelgard is portrayed as the “in the right” protagonist for 1/4 routes and the clear antagonist in 3/4. It’s obvious she would be more controversial. I don’t see many fans saying “Arvis was right/justified to cause the chaos he did, screw the real protagonists of FE4/5.” (maybe I am wrong on this, who knows).
As for the female lords being generally more controversial, I do agree they get more flack, but it’s not as simple as saying it’s due to their gender. As an actual girl, I think I am more fair to the female lords (I love Celica, Micaiah and am ambivalent to “bros” like Marth and Hector). Eliwood gets a lot of flack for being “boring” like Lyn/Lucina does (not as much). Xander is basically indefensible by a lot of the fandom based on his actions in the story. I don’t recall ever seeing anyone defend how stupid he acts in Conquest. He’s only seen as “good” because of his supports, but storywise, he gets a lot of hate, like the other female lords, for what they do in their respective stories. Micaiah and Celica don’t have the quantity of supports like Xander does to flesh them out. Also, Micaiah is up against “established” and well-loved heroes, supporting the “villain” country from the previous game, I think the odds were stacked against her to begin with (female or not). Camilla/Tharja are polarizing, but they are clearly very popular for their sex appeal - IS did a really poor job writing those types of characters by reducing the majority of the supports/story involvement as being avatar-obsessed, moreso than how Niles acts. (a failing of the self-insert system catering towards a male-dominant demographic imo).
Long story short, while females are judged more harshly, I think a good portion is due to how IS writes them, moreso than their female gender.
I actually disagree with the sentiment that Edelgard gets MORE hate for being a female conquerer. I think if Dimitri/Edelgard’s roles were reversed, everyone would be jumping on the Edelgard train, and Dimitri would get so much hate.
-
12 minutes ago, Flere210 said:
What happen after Edelgard worthy successor dies? What happen in the future is not revealed to us. For example i doubt Fodlan can defend itself againist Dagda and Almyra whitout relics, but this is never brought up in any ending. As it's not brougth up how they deal whit unfought supporters of the enemy like Caspar's father or the slithers main force(they are not aan hive mind controlled by Thales) in BL. We are just told GoLdEn AgE. I in fact think no ending should logically lead into a golden Age for a number of reasons.
Agreed. All of the endings require suspension of belief, Edelgard’s probably requires the most, solely because a meritocratic society is good in theory...never been done in reality. It’s pretty much comparable to how communism plays out in theory vs in practice. Both systems downplay the effect of humanity’s selfishness.
It’s a “naive” government system because it often doesn’t account for (1) who determines what is considered “meritable” qualities (2) people with money/influence/connections can more easily get “merit” (i.e. paying for access to education). (3) some people are just born at a disadvantage, solely based on luck. No matter how much they try, they cannot rise up because of biological/societal/economic limitations placed on them. If anything, those people are probably more victimized with her new system of motivating the weak to become strong through merit.
While the other ends aren’t much more realistic, at least those government systems/transitions in power have historically occurred (probably not as easily or quickly as the endings make it sound), whereas Edelgard’s idealistic society has never actually been implemented in reality...either now or historically.
-
What’s your favourite map type or objective? (FOW, Desert, Protect Civilians, Seize, Rout, Defense, etc.) And which exact map of that type?
Include the games you’ve played.
Favourite Type: Defense
Favourite Map: Blood Contract in RD
Games played: FE6-now
-
5 minutes ago, Tarul said:
^^ Seconded. Just because a distasteful stance is widespread doesn't mean that the stance has any more legitimacy. We're talking about discrimination here, not food palettes or manners.
That said, we can still be sympathetic to the reasons for why a Korean person might have those viewpoints (given the anti-LGBT cultural normalization); BUT, we should NEVER condone such attitudes.
Also, gay Koreans exist lmao
I don’t agree with or condone any of it. Just putting it into context. There are people like that all over the world on the internet, even in Western countries.
However, I do think Edelgard’s actions is a touchy subject for a much bigger reason beyond just homophobia/sexism for Koreans.
-
1 minute ago, Hekselka said:
When I said offensive language that doesn’t just include the unification part about her character but also the LGBT part of her character.
But I feel like you are not putting yourself in the context of their culture. All the East Asian countries are conservative when it comes to things like LGBT.
Is it right? No. But this is a poll for Koreans so things like that are not going to go over well.
Besides, it sounds like from the translations, most of her criticism is due to the fact that she inspires a lot of negative feelings because of what she does in the game, moreso than her being LGBT, considering other LGBT girls like Mercedes/Dorothea do not come close to the amount of hate.
-
Not saying the offensive language is needed, but given what Edelgard represents to a country with a history like that...
A forceful unification...in a country with an active mandatory military service and a violent history of imperialism. I can’t say I blame their overzealous feelings, especially if they didn’t see it coming (with BE being most people’s first routes).
-
Ingrid x Sylvain (I am a sucker for childhood friends. Besides, Ingrid slowly got over her grief because she had to go yell at Sylvain lol)
Marianne x Dimitri (Two similar souls who were miserable with living were able to achieve enough happiness to say it was worth it in the end, their ending card really got to me)
Ashe’s in general. He had a rough upbringing but he still remained earnest in wanting to make the world a better place.
Probably others as well, but those are the standout ones for me.
-
1 hour ago, Crysta said:
Edelgard is a poor candidate for character growth because you get the impression she's already thought about all the moral conundrums before she commits to her plan.
If she suddenly started second guessing herself, after all she's already done, it'd feel weird and inorganic.
Agreed. I’d probably have less respect for her if she started second guessing herself especially since she started the whole mess. Her story is mainly about “let’s see the other side” and I kind of like how committed she was.
I just wouldn’t personally advocate for a lot of crap she does after seeing the other routes, just like how I wouldn’t try to justify a lot of things the other characters do either just because their life/reasoning is sympathetic.
-
2 hours ago, Crysta said:
Edelgard fans seem intent on vilifying Rhea more than they have to and Dimitri fans seem to intent on vilifying Edelgard more than they have to in order to justify why their fav is less morally suspect than the others. And they get mad when the other camp attempts to justify the behavior of the bad guy in their respective routes. As a Claude fan who doesn't have any particular emotional attachment to either, it's fascinating to watch unfold lol
Dimitri is a better person because the game does make it obvious he's so far gone after the time skip but his route throws him a poorly executed redemption arc, while with Edelgard it seems they're more intent on humanizing what starts as a villainous character (the game literally opens with an assassination attempt she orchestrated). Can't make the judgment call on which route does their aim better because I've only played through one and I'm skimming through another (class is starting soon and I don't think I can drop in another 50 hours in gameplay), but I don't think you can expect their stories to be handled the same way and have a viable morally gray route.
Then again I could see people choosing the blatant Darth Vader route just for the funsies. You're probably not going to get the same "they did nothing wrong!" arguments, though.
This is why I feel like discussions like these get way out of hand and get us nowhere. People should like who they like, but there is no need to involve other characters (only reason I even brought up Dimitri is because there was the idea that liking one = dishonest hypocrite to hate the other). I didn’t even vilifying her, I just said that I didn’t really like how at the end of the day, she didn’t really change (not the point of her story) = naturally, a lot of people will have a problem with her when they play the other routes and see how misguided, but good intentioned, she was, since it wasn’t dealt with on her own route.
People mainly run into pushback when they go around justifying their faves actions with blinders on.
None of these people were completely in the right, and just because someone else is slightly more right/wrong than the other, doesn’t automatically make their faves justified and right as a result.
-
2 hours ago, CyberNinja said:
1. This is an odd comparison because if you switched things around it would be that Edelgard is vengeful against Dimitry (read Rhea) for the explicit purpose of saving Faergus (Fodlan) while Dimitry is invading the other kingdoms (read: getting revenge on Edelgard) to sate his bloodlust. with motivation in mind Dimitry looks bad regardless, Edelgard at least is hoping for a better future and thus the story reflects that (and we lack the context to see she is wrong.)
As for joining her, I agree, most players like to choose what's best or they think is best for the future (they like golden endings) and thus are unlikely to join her. I'm in the minority in that I've always been more clannish, I got mine, others can hang. As for Byleth, consistent trait (we have no choice here) are that they are protective of their students and default to this over most responses, they are also apprehensive about killing Edelgard (BE puts it down to 50/50, GD has both responses as "I don't want to kill" or "can't we walk the same path?")
My conclusion? Ironically (barring BL, I don't know there) Black Eagles route is the closest Byleth comes to being willing to kill Edelgard (since the player gets to choose that) and yet its also the route where Byleth will be closest to her, know her story and see her vulnerable side. So for myself (it was my first route, I had no context) I defaulted to got mine, fuck Rhea, and this is a perfectly in-character response for Byleth. So there is a real reason for Byleth to join Edelgard, just know it is entirely selfish, even going against her can be seen as more a response to putting your students in danger, and being the cause of your father's death, than for it being for the good of Fodlan.
2. Given the real world political situation, strong men being willing to break convention and rules to "get it done" are popular right now and fiction has followed that trend. Edelgard plays right into that sentiment, its not a surprise she has fervent supporters.
1. I am only pointing out the fact that liking one but hating the other is NOT considered hypocritical. Both were wrong, in their misguided motivations and their actions. Neither whose actions can be justified by their past, but in BL, this concept is EXPLORED but NOT done so in CF to the same capacity.
If Dimitri’s route became “revenge fantasy, lets get her head -> yay, we won and coincidentally unintentionally also stopped the war”, people would have a problem with his route too. If that was the case, I’ll say Edelgard is better solely because she started off with good intent (vs Dimitri’s revenge), but that clearly isn’t the case if you play BL.
BL’s main purpose is to show you what happens during war and how it makes everyone monsters (when you get to it, listen to Randolph/Dimitri discussion, it was a self-aware reflection on how insane people get during war). No one is more “justified” to kill for war because (1) killing is not a personal sacrifice, you are making other people sacrifice for your goals (2) everyone thinks they are fighting for the “right” thing, as misguided as their reasoning may be. Ontop of that, Dimitri feels remorse and would change his actions if he could do it all over again. Can you say the same for Edelgard? She mainly regrets not trying harder and doing things better during the war because it dragged out and caused more lives that she did not anticipate.
2. I’ll agree with the sentiment that it is on trend, but whether or not doing anything “to get things done” is justified is a matter of opinion, so people are literally talking in circles for discussions like these.
-
1 hour ago, timon said:
It's your opinion, but I absolutely don't get it. Let's say for a moment that they're on the same level, doing something while knowing it's wrong is much worse than doing it because you think it's right. And that doesn't even take into consideration that one is doing it completely out of revenge while the other does it (or think she does it, that's another discussion point) for a good purpose.
On the "make sense to follow who", tbh I see it the opposite way. I presume everyone has seen or at least heard what Rhea did and what she became, I think more people should not be able to be recruited if you side with a mad dragon than with an idealistic conqueror. Also the fact that Hilda is not recruitable in that route is one of the worst and least sensible decisions in this game, it literally doesn't make any sense that you can't get Hilda (in the route that already restricts recruitment the most) when you can get someone like Ingrid (who despises the empire) or Shamir (who works personally for Rhea).
It IS an opinion, and I don't think you have to subscribe by it. This is a concept a lot of people have a hard time accepting - these perceptions of characters are OPINIONS and you won't get a unanimous agreeement because everyone's worldview is different (some people think the ends do justify the means, vice versa), so people should stop trying so hard. I'm just shedding light on why a lot of people have problems with Edelgard. Even if Dimitri and others did not exist, I'd still have a problem with Edelgard. It's not hypocritical to like one and not the other because their stories are written differently, with a different purpose. I condone neither of their actions. I can even appreciate Edelgard for having the balls to get shit done, but her logic and methods? Those leave a lot to be desired, just like how I don't go around defending Dimitri for how he acts either.
People can like characters INSPITE of their actions. For me, Dimitri grew up and gained insight to realize he was wrong and would not repeat the same actions if he could go back. I don't think the same of Edelgard (again, agree or not, that's your choice)
At the time you choose to side with Edelgard, she doesn't give you much reason to. You don't know much besides she is the Flame Emperor here to commit a crime (rob the tomb) and will kill anyone who gets in her way. I don't think Hilda was the best choice, clearly other people should've been non-recruitable. Honestly, they should’ve just severely limited the recruitment for all routes just to make it really hurt during the war.
-
12 minutes ago, Hekselka said:
1. I disagree. I'm not really charmed by someone that gives up on his duties as a king and instead decides to become some crazy hobo. You can't make me believe that if you make a FE lord character act like a murderer that everyone is going to be fine with him. Just saying that it's not ok is not good enough. People should have left him when they saw what he had turned into. Hell, he's so obsessed that without Byleth he dies along with most of his friends very early on and pretty much dooms the kingdom by the chapter "Blood of the Eagle and Lion" in the GD route.
2. Well yeah I don't doubt that. Rooting for a certain outcome and defending the actions of a character isn't the same thing. People could still like Thanos for what he did and think he might have been in the right while also enjoying Endgame. Hell, a good story would have this kind of storytelling.
He didn't really give up his duties by choice in BL, he became exiled and the isolation drove him crazy. Even when crazy, people act like he is wrong. Yet, for Edelgard, I'm supposed to believe people like Ingrid/Mercedes/Marianne/Ignatz/Raphael/etc believe in fighting for her conquest? He does do his kingly duty in BE-E, and he isn't nearly as crazy. He doesn't go "my soldiers are my tools for revenge" and disapproves of Dedue and them becoming beasts. Is he still driven by revenge? Probably. But when you kill him, he is understandably pretty upset at losing his men to horrific transformations and in his opinion, senseless conquest and deaths, and he still doesn't know anything from Edelgard's perspective because she doesn't bother to even try explaining.
That's my point, you can like who you like, no one cares. The whole argument on Edelgard is a non definitive argument since there is no clear cut answer - people need to stop trying to shove her into a "right" or "wrong" category and push that OPINION down other people's throat. People's acceptance of her is based solely on personal philsophy on whether the ends justified the means.
-
29 minutes ago, Hekselka said:
1. You can't really compare the two though. No matter the route Edelgard moves forward with her goals to make the world a better place after the timeskip. The first thing Dimitri does post timeskip is to become a serial killer hobo who's only interaction with other people for 4 chapters or so is to act like a deranged individual. Honestly, the BL route would've made more sense if they had someone else step in for a while. It feels super weird to see people follow this guy. You can't apply that logic because Dimitri never wanted to kill Edelgard for the betterment of Fodlan, he wanted her dead for revenge.
2. Even as someone that hasn't watched Infinity War, I have difficulty believing this. People LOVE Thanos and I have seen people defend his actions saying it makes sense and some even saying that he's the good guy in the story. I even remember getting vids recommended to me after the movie came out with titles like "Thanos was right" or "Thanos is the hero".
1. I said the game doesn’t try to sell you the fact that Dimitri is after Edelgard to save his country, and that is why he is more tolerable. You get what you see with him, and the story actively reinforces that this is not ok behavior. I mainly brought up the Dimitri perspective because someone else argued that you are a hypocrite for liking Dimitri but hating Edelgard, since both do a lot of killing.
In my opinion, it made no sense for a lot of people to follow Edelgard too, Byleth included, at the time of the decision. Made even less sense for some people to follow her post-time skip and fight their own countries and countrymen. Honestly, more people should've been non-recruitable in BE-E, like Hilda.
2. I never said they don’t exist. But compare Thanos fans to the remaining fans of MCU, majority of people would root for the outcome of Endgame.
-
Just now, CyberNinja said:
Basically my contention with others is that they simplify it to her being evil. This is false, she's ruthless, not a sadist.
Agreed. I think no one is truly “muhahaha evil” in this game. It is too reductive to view any of them as that. They were all selfish to a degree, but they all think they were “right.” But just because they think they were right, it doesn’t make it morally right in the grand context of things.
Whether their actions were the right course of action and justifiable? I think that’s where the point of contention comes from. No one gets as many people defending their actions as Edelgard does.
Why Edelgard von Hresvelg is the most hated girl?
in Fire Emblem: Three Houses
Posted · Edited by MessengerIris
1. She is not the most hated girl in FE. She is the most controversial, just like Camillia.
2. Female Byleth is not more well-beloved, as shown in CYL. Despite having the personality of wet cardboard, Female Byleth is mainly popular because she is so shippable with the lords. Despite having the same lines/story role, Male Byleth is nowhere near Female Byleth’s “popularity”, so it’s just not about their characterization.
3. You are entitled to like who you like, just as other people can dislike who they want. Don’t let others get to you. While I personally have a lot of issues with her, there are plenty who like her. Everyone’s preferences can be justified; the difference in people’s reception of Edelgard is dependent on their values and worldview. Going into the specifics of her actions just opens a can of worms that will inevitably lead you to be more stressed. If you really want to know, just look up the millions of posts about hating/loving Edelgard.
Examples of debates: Does her actions reflect ones of a revolutionary or those of a tyrant? Does her fight ultimately reflect a fight for human freedom or militaristic conquest and rule? Did the ends justify the means in her war? Could she have done more to avoid the war? Was she justified to side with the indisputable villains of the game (TWSITD), whilst her primary target in the CF campaign is someone who can either been seen as a victim of circumstance or a perpetuator of societal stagnancy (Rhea)? Was her dreams of meritocracy good or just a gateway to nepotism?
Despite what some fans/haters will debate until their faces are blue - all of these debates are open to contention, and there is no one right answer. Besides, there are 4 different endings - some people will see her war as a means to an end, whereas others will look at the other endings and argue it as avoidable. Edelgard’s portrayal in CF isn’t even like that of the other routes either; she acts differently with Byleth around.
You aren’t wrong to like her, just like others aren’t wrong to dislike/disagree with her.