Why have more FEs not used the "style" of story FE7 uses?

[deuxhero]

Early parts where you are just fighting bandits/occupation troops excluded of course.

FE7 is the only FE to avoid a full "war". The only time you face a state's actual military to my memory is chapter 8, 9, 10 and 14, and that is only one small part of a federation that isn't a big military power when united. You face bandits (as in any FE), one minor noble's mercenary guard, the Black Fang grunts (They never did explain where all their combatants come from, but let's say "decently trained gang"), and morphs.

It makes a lot more sense with FE's mechanics of battles being fought by a small number of highly skilled combatants to NOT set the game in a full scale war, plus it is pretty refreshing as far as plot goes to see games that don't go for epic full world engagements and do something more toned down.

9 makes the player's team into a vanguard being supported by a full (mostly off screen) army which also answers why so few men are fighting, but only really does so for the player's side (why does this important border wall have so few people defending it?). There aren't really any missions like FE5 where you have to do a task and get out (The floodgate chapter is something a vanguard would be given, but design wise it is still designed so you just go up and kill everything between you and the gate.

Edited March 8, 2012 by deuxhero

[Balcerzak]

This is the very reason why FE7 remains my favorite Fire Emblem, actually, and also why I am especially enamoured with Lyn Mode in particular. A bigger conflict is not always better. Just a small succession dispute can be more than enough to drive a powerful story.

[Onmi]

Before we start, lets just get out of the way that I don't care how much you personally liked FE7, You can of course tell me how much you fellate the game that got you into Fire Emblem just know that I give no shits.

---

Because it lacks scale. A problem I felt FE7 had, I could never truly get into what was going on because the supposed conflict just substituted 'X' Army for 'thousands upon thousands of 'Assassins' who make up the regiments of a regular army.'

Something to always consider is that the gameplay and story must merge in order to create the enviroment, FE5 and FE4 are great examples of Small scale vs Large scale gameplay + story integration. In FE5 you're literally playing the shit on the empires heels, your broke for most of the game, you get your equipment through stealing it, You have the most random selection of yahoos this side of Jugdrall, it feels like a rebellion, run by a run away prince, scraping by on the scraps they can get. Conversly in FE4 you're playing as the descendants of War Heroes conquoring entire countries and wrecking everyones shit like a boss. The maps are large, the sheer power at your disposable is laughable. It feels grand.

FE7 fails to capture the small scale conflict feel, because while stating it's a small scale conflict it doesn't convey it in any way, the enemy has limitless numbers of warm bodies to throw at you, And all that really happens is the plot spluttering and dying whenever it's getting interesting. "Oh look a rebellion in Lycia! and it's over before it begins, Oh look tensions in Bern! lets just ignore than and move on then shall we?" We get to the mid game of "Oh shit Nergals trying to dummon a dragon! oh he failed..." The spaghetti falls out of FE7's pockets and it goes "Right well then, here's a whole bunch of shit while we work up to the same damn climax"

Also, really what do you get out of such a small scale conflict? the only reason FE7 did it was "Well FE6 said that there's been peace for a good while so we can't have an open conflict"

Looking outside the FE franchise reveals another game that gets it's small scale conflict well, Final Fantasy Tactics. Because really the whole 'War of the Lions' thing has shit all to do with what's actually going on behind the scenes, but the thing is it works in contrast with what's going on. There's this big battle and everyones so focused on it that one one see's the story going on in the background.

I dunno, that's just how I see it, it can be done right and it can be done well, but that wasn't FE7. Much like Golden Sun, FE7 was a mess.

[deuxhero]

If FE7 executed it well isn't really relevant given the question is more on if it can be done well.

Edited March 8, 2012 by deuxhero

[Othin]

Comparing Golden Sun to FE7? Now that's just uncalled for.

Unless you mean Dark Dawn. Feel free to hate on that one as much as you wish.

[Onmi]

If FE7 executed it well isn't really relevant given the question is more on if it can be done well.

Of course it can be done well, you just need the right setting for it. Awakening looks to be doing something proactive "You know on second thought instead of waiting around for the bad guy to invade and destroy my country, why don't I try to stop them pre-emptivly"

What you need is a hook, something to keep the players interest, then you need appropriate enemies and maps, Then you need to consider story progression, chracter arcs, and giving the players a sense of accomplishment.

It's of course, just not as simple as saying "There's the evil country, go kick there ass"

And sorry Othin, FE7 didn't deserve to be lumped with Golden Sun in the "So poorly written my god damn eyeballs bled the moment I started thinking about it" category. Just in the "Enough faffing about to make Assassins Creed proud" category

http://lparchive.org/Golden-Sun/ A nice summation of my dislike for Golden Sun, considering I loved the games as a kid this was an eyeopener.

[OrangeCrush980]

Comparing Golden Sun to FE7? Now that's just uncalled for.

I agree. FE7 is one of the greatest strategy games ever, while Golden Sun is a generic RPG.

Edited March 8, 2012 by OrangeCrush

[Othin]

Decided to skip to the last update. He points out some legitimate problems (most of which I was well aware of) as well as a whole lot of idiocy. This is no place to go into detail, so I'll just say that I'm left with the impression that the LP demonstrates absolutely nothing of any value.

I'd offer to argue this elsewhere, but I have better things to do with my time, like actually playing the games. And with that, I take my leave of this discussion.

[Popo]

Also, really what do you get out of such a small scale conflict? the only reason FE7 did it was "Well FE6 said that there's been peace for a good while so we can't have an open conflict"

I felt that the small conflicts allowed greater focus on the main cast. I love FE7, but I agree that the plot doesn't always flow as it should. At the same time, I think it was one of the best games in terms of characterization, partially because so much of the plot was focused on family relations as opposed to conquering your neighbor. Lyn's inheritance dispute and Eliwood's quest for his father were relatively insignificant in the major scope of things, but I feel more inclined to help the lords in this game than, say, FE8 or FE9, which is pretty important to me considering how often you have to see the main characters. XD Anyways, my minor point is that a smaller-scale conflict can lend itself positively to other aspects of the game, and I personally think that FE7 accomplished this.

[BBM]

Most Nintendo RPGs are long-winded and have the faults that the writer of that article attributed to GS, including Fire Emblem. In fact, it seemed to me that he was just taking the game many consider to be the best (for the GBA) of its kind, and saying "Hey, it's not actually all that great." I've never played Fire Emblem 5, or even read a script of it, so I can't comment on that game, but the fact that FE4 is not exceptionally long-winded is a point in its favour, not a detriment to FE7, because most of the other FE games also "faff about enough to make Assassin's Creed proud" (never played that game either)

[The_Purple_Knight]

I loathe practically everything about fe7 , 6 and the entire continent of elbie . I hate 90 percent of the playable cast of both games I greatly greatly greatly disliked the story and I hated how most of the game play mechanics were excuted . The heavy ass steel weapons, again the retard playable characters , the stupid black fangs , The tutorial in lyn mode, the lack of skills , the ridiculous high avoid players have, lyns heavy divine weapon .Why is everything is so freakin heavy in that game . I was with zephiel the entire time that world needed a nice dooms day . I thank god none of the story elements of that game have ever . reappeared think I would have aneurysm. It was so stupid nergal opening up a portal to steal power from dragons thats just stupid. All that build up for what startling conclusion nergal getting the shit kicked out of him by the player how shocking . The thrill, the suspense. He wasn't even good villain , he was so stereotypical it was sickening. Oh and the black fang just silly the whole thing silly he could reed not notice everyone being replaced with morphs for fuck sake the look the same . I'd like to see any of you go to school every day and not notice everyones replaced by disturbingly similar people. And who says everyone likes small I like big conflicts it's one of my favorite things about the other fire emblem games . God I hate that game I have no idea how I actually finshed it .

[General Banzai]

Mostly because FE7 isn't any good.

We can dig up the QUINTESSENCE thread from the grave, if thou so desirest.

[Anouleth]

Well, in FE10 it fits quite well, too. In the GM chapters, you rarely fight entire armies on your own: usually, the GMs are sent for missions that require a smaller but highly skilled force: such as burning the supplies in 3-4 or opening the gate in 3-1. When you do take part in major battles, it's usually alongside a large number of NPC troops. Another good example is Lucia's espionage mission in Part 2, or 1-7 where the Dawn Brigade sneak into the camp to release prisoners (while the major battle goes on outside).

FE7 doesn't really make a whole lot of sense, since fighting against a guild of assassins makes no more sense than fighting against a huge army. For assassins, the Black Fang seem very crude, favouring huge numbers of troops over being sneaky or careful. The most egregious case of this is Battle Before Dawn where Jaffar and Nino infiltrate Zephiel's manse to kill him: makes enough sense, I suppose. But then, when the mission fails, it turns out that the Black Fang have about 20000 soldiers and mercenaries waiting outside anyway!

Edited March 8, 2012 by Anouleth

[Rehab]

For me, that begs the question of what it would have been like if the Black Fang's fighters actually were far less numerous and far more skilled. I wonder what would it have been like if they kept the number of playable units the same, but gave us something like a fourth or fifth of the enemies, and made all of them boss-worthy and/or had them require a team of units to down. Or if they similarly shrunk the enemy and again the player's ranks.

My guess is that it would definitely feel different from the usual feel of a Fire Emblem title. A larger scale than the average game comes to mind when I think about Fire Emblem as a whole, obviously. I remember Fire Emblem 7's characters most vividly, but that might as easily have been because of their supports and frequent dialogue than because of their number, which I don't remember being particularly unusual, or because of the rest of the plot.

I also wonder what it would be like if we got a Fire Emblem where the average chapter were inflated to the life-size shape of the battle cutscenes of Radiant Dawn. That seems to me like it would also be a break from the usual FE title's feel; I usually see the baseline FE game as putting the player in charge of a number of people in the couple of double digits, and maybe not characterizing them as much as a six-man-band traditional RPG, but still giving an honest shot at lending each of those units identifiable character. If a Fire Emblem game were made where we immediately had control of dozens, even into the hundreds of units, how would their characterization be changed?

Edited March 8, 2012 by Rehab

[Anouleth]

oh and btw I tried to play Golden Sun once but then it was super boring and I stopped playing

[Onmi]

I would definitely be all for enhancing the size and feel of the battlefield in the regular games to let it feel more like war, the best part of FE4 was being able to deploy all 24 units. No you probably wont deploy all of them, but the option is amazing.

I think SRW sort of has the answer to "I have 40 dudes sitting on their ass while a battle is going on" with the 'Squad' system, for the uninformed, a squad in SRW is 1-4 units (depending on game) who essentially occupy the same tile, and the lead can be swapped around at will. So using FE7 as an example, Raven, Lucius and Priscilla all in one squad. if someone needed healing You just switch the leader to Pris and go about your healing. Need light magic? switch to Lucius and Lightning someone, need a physical front line defender? Raven's up.

Of course in SRW the enemy came in squads as well, which means they have the same tactical advantage, if there's one thing I want FE to crib from SRW (well this and the attack animations, since they are already taking Support Attack/Defense) it's the Squad system. Lets you deploy more units, while not taking up more space on the battlefield, while giving the feel that there's more going on. since each unit counts as 3 not 1. It can also let you built supports naturally, and it can be a way to move low mov units further (Marcus is the leader while moving, then you swap leaders to say Oswin to attack with.)

Although yes the big problem with the Black Fang was how ridiculously unbelievable they were because the game kept trying to hammer in that they were 'Assassins' when it would have been easier to go with 'Mercenary Guild' This is also a big problem with Hacks about the Black Fang because "Well we need to give the player the usual FE units to use, even if those units wouldn't make sense for an assassin guild" from there you can see how words can affect just how believable your story was. I mean the story for FE7 would still have the problem of having the same climax at mid-game as it had in the end-game, but a simple change of 'Assassin' to 'Mercenary' or 'Vigilante' makes it much easier to swallow the enemy forces.

[deranger]

The Black Fang were a Vigilante force....

I like the smaller scale because I don't feel like the attempts at your units constituting an army didn't seem real. I kept wondering where all those other soldiers were. And I like the squad system because the game can be balanced so you only use units you like. Although having infinite selection slots might not be bad, as long as it doesn't fuck up the game's balance. More choice with the same balance=good.

Edited March 9, 2012 by deranger

[Onmi]

I know they were a vigilante force, but they called themselves an Assassin Guild. Once you choose to take that name, I freaking expect you to make SENSE as an assassins guild, if you call yourself a Knighthood, I don't expect Fighters, Pirates, Bandits and Thieves to be rocking up for the occasion, just like if you call yourself a band of pirates, I expect there to actually be pirates, not 6 Armor Knights, 3 Cavaliers and a Bishop. Do you recall how many ACTUAL assassins were in the supposed 'Assassination' Guild?

Two. Legault was a Thief so he doesn't count. Hell the Four Fangs, the 'Greatest assassins in the guild'

Swordmaster, Hero, Valkyrie and a single Assassin. Of those classes, MAYBE Swordmaster would pass, certainly not a Hero or Valkyrie.

"But Onmi, if you just fought Assassins or stealthy, speedy classes the game would get very boring, very quickly"

Which is exactly why an ASSASSINS GUILD should never be the primary antagonist group that you fight in a TBS game. The Black Fang are Assassins in name only. And you're going "Well that's just the story" Look, it's very simple, go through and replace "Assassin" with "Mercenary" and you literally fix a gaping problem in the story. It's especially hilarious to consider that before Jaffar came along, there was only one Assassin in the Assassins Guild run by a Warrior, his Swordmaster and Hero sons, and that staffed literally EVERYONE under the sun.

The story and gameplay in a game must coexist, they must work of one another to create a working product, if one contradicts the other I am catapulted so far out of the experience I smash face first into WTF Lane. FE7 is not, by any stretch, the worst game ever, but it is certainly NOT a good example of doing a small scale story. You could change the Black Fang to a Royal Army and I wouldn't be able to tell you the difference.

EDIT: The point of this post is to explain how gameplay elements and story elements need to work together, otherwise the experience is lost. Not to say that a small scale "This is not a war" story will not work. Only that it needs to carefully pick out it's elements or it will FAIL

Edited March 9, 2012 by Onmi

[deranger]

Really? Them using the word 'assassin' instead of 'vigilante' pissed you off that much? In a game that was translated from another language?

And the fact that every other FE says you're leading or facing Army (RD 2-2 says you're facing thousands of soldiers, of whom, well less than 5% appear) doesn't bother you as much as an assassin and/or vigilante force with units who aren't like the assassin CLASS and have numbers well in the thousan---oh hundreds?

Because I have to disagree. FE7 is not only a good way to conduct a small scale story but a good way to conduct fire emblems.

Edited March 9, 2012 by deranger

[Onmi]

Really? Them using the word 'assassin' instead of 'vigilante' pissed you off that much? In a game that was translated from another language?

And the fact that every other FE says you're leading or facing Army (RD 2-2 says you're facing thousands of soldiers, of whom, well less than 5% appear) doesn't bother you as much as an assassin and/or vigilante force with units who aren't like the assassin CLASS and have numbers well in the thousan---oh hundreds?

Because I have to disagree. FE7 is not only a good way to conduct a small scale story but a good way to conduct fire emblems.

Yes, yes it does, thank you for understanding. Using Radiant Dawn as an example of good story telling is laughable because Radiant Dawn has a bad story, What bothers me is they are just a regular army, pretending to be an Assassins guild, legion upon legions of troops, of all different classes, what makes them different from any other enemy faced in the series? Oh that's right, nothing.

And if that's your position deranger that's fine, but how about some, ya know, points to back up that position "It's my favorite" does not cut the cheese. FE6 is my favorite but it does not have the best story, the best gameplay, or the best anything of ANY Fire Emblem, and I would not ever attempt to say otherwise. In FE7 you face a large force of enemies, literally the same armies you've fought in every other Fire Emblem, they go by different names but they are the same damn forces. It has the exact same climax happen in the middle of the game that happens at the end of the game, the only difference being you get to smack around the Dragon at the end of the game, the entire second half is a literal repeat of the first half just replacing 'Lycia' with 'Bern'

As CHARACTERS the Black Fang are uninteresting, useless meat slab, angry dude, calm dude, teenage murderer, and the psychotic morphs, who really only start getting 'inhuman' when you get to things like Denning (literally created for a single purpose and message) or Limstella and Kishuna. For beings that supposedly lack emotion this doesn't stop them from acting just like regular dudes, and a good number of them are convinced they are human. Combine that with the worst pair of final bosses the series has thrown at us. Literally this time, not even joking.

The story elements do not gel with the gameplay elements, the story elements are poorly paced, poorly designed, and leave me so far out of the experience that I would have to drink heavily to be thrown back in.

I don't drink.

So here's my brilliant theory, you like it the most because it was your first. You ignore the flaws, because you like it as much as you do. And no matter what I say, do, or present, you will clutch to that bias until the sun dies. I like FE7 as a game, I think it polished a lot of the formula that was changed for the handheld titles, I have several favorite characters in FE7, but I'm not about to start pretending this game was ever a good example of a small scale story, or that it's well written.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Onmi

[Baldrick]

You're confusing Assassin the class with assassin the job. You don't need the Silencer skill to be capable of murder.

Anyway:

Leila:

The Black Fang is a guild of assassins founded about ten years ago by Brendan Reed. They're based in Bern. Their arms reached quickly in several other countries. Originally, they targeted only nobles who abused their positions. The masses saw them as chivalrous, defenders of the common man. Their activities found wide support.

Then about a year ago, Brendan got married again. Black Fang's operations have slowly changed since then. Now, they'll take on any target, no matter how difficult, as long as they're paid. And they're no longer killing only criminals; anyone is a fair target.

It sounds like a viligante turned mercenary group. Possibly they chose the word assassin because it's more thematically appropriate to a generic European medieval fantasy world, or vigilante brings up different connotations.

I actually thought FE7's scale was done well. It was not dissimilar in size to other non-FE4 games, but while they are a lot smaller than what the story suggests, FE7's seems closer to parity. There was less large battles between two armies as opposed two guilds brawling with each other. The only two chapters against Blank Fang that were more epic was the last stands of Lloyd/Linus' squad and the morphs respectively. Only Battle Before Dawn didn't really make sense from the story's presceptive.

[Onmi]

Again, I know they are Vigilantes, I never said they weren't vigilantes, I said they claim to be assassins, when really they could use a much better word to describe it. I am not saying that they needed to have Assassins, the class, but they needed to have classes that are thematically appropriate for a group that self-describes as being assassins. This does not mean they are limited TOO Assassins, but more focused on the classes that fit within the theme of the group. That my friends is what we call "Integrating Story and Gameplay" it means that when I look at a group of enemies, I instantly pick out who they are meant to be I.E. Dragon Knights in Jugdrall, I know they are Thracians, That doesn't mean they have to EXCLUSIVELY be Dragon Knights, but I know they are from Thracia because their ranks are composed of units that match the themes of Thracia. Again my example of a Pirate group comprised of AKs, Cavs and a Bishop, when you think 'Pirate' those classes don't come to mind, both as the Sea-farring kind and the looting kind.

The problem with having literal armies of people who self-identify as Assassins, is that... well there are literal armies of people who self-identify as assassins. Here's an example of a good point in FE7's story where they used a class appropriately, in 'A New Journey' an Armor Knight is leading the assassination in Ostia, but hang on, didn't I just say an Armor Knight was inappropriate for an Assassin? Yes. However this is specifically in Ostia a place KNOWN for Armor Knights, thus an assassin taking the guise of one is not at all hard to believe at all. See how the story has been integrated with the gameplay? This is what games need to strive to do, the two together must make sense, otherwise the whole story falls to pieces.

Now there are obviously things you can hand-wave away by "It wouldn't be very fun otherwise" but at that point the problem isn't "What's wrong with the Gameplay" but "What's wrong with the story?"

Take Battle Before Dawn, it obviously makes no sense because they literally have an army of 'Assassins' in the wings prepped to kill Jaffar, Nino and Zephiel. This does not work from a story perspective, because they have no reason to suspect Jaffar would fail, or that Ursula would need an army. So here's just a suggestion of a better way to do it. You STAGE an attack upon the castle (already shown to be lightly defended in preparation) and kill Zephiel in the Hustle and the Bustle. And then you pin it on a rogue group of bandits/mercenaries/it doesn't matter because they are scapegoats the people will latch onto.

So now we have proper justification for having an army at the map, but what about Jaffar and Nino? They could still have been sent ahead to kill Zephiel and not be told of the real orders, for the same reason as stated in game "Because we need someone to blame" while this doesn't exactly gel with the suggested above, it's still an easy way to get rid of tools you don't need. Which is what Nino and Jaffar were seen as (for... some reason? well Jaffar anyway, I thought only Nino knew he failed) but anyway that doesn't matter, since if it makes no sense for Jaffar to be sent, you can just send Nino on her lonesome, and have Jaffar make the conscious decision to save her life by going on ahead. This of course doesn't half the problem of "They aren't really an assassination guild when they deploy an army" But we've already covered how to fix that simply by not referring to them AS an assassination guild.

Seriously, here's your new description of the Black Fang "The Black Fang is a clandestine guild based in Bern who specialized in making lives harder for corrupt nobles,, either through theft or bloodshed, the people saw them as heroes. And the about a year ago however the Fang expanded their targets, attacking anyone or anything for the right price, their operations came out into the open more, with larger and larger forces. Now they are no different from any other mercenary group, albeit one with powerful followers"

The implication of assassination is still there with the 'clandestine' description, however they are referred to as just a guild, and exposit that the guilds make up has changed as well as their actions. But these are minor changes your thinking, but they really aren't

A strength of a story told in a game has to rely not only on it's words, but it's gameplay, that is the unique elements that games have that movies and books can not achieve.

Then again this DOESN'T change the problem that the entire second half of the main story is "Just the first half with different bells and whistles" and again, I don't think this means that the first half of the main story should have ended on Valor, but that the game takes you there, says "Here's a dragon" then goes "Oh shit you're not ready for that and we have chapters left" so it pulls you back, makes you do a very similar plot, and then you get to fight the dragon.

It's poorly paced, Eliwood should never have set foot on Valor or learned about the dragons that way, the first part of the game should still have ended with the defeat of Darin (and possible Ephidal the Unfought) and THEN left a hook to the bigger overall plot.

I used this as an example before but I'll use it again. In Super Robot Wars OG1, you finish the first part of the game, defeating Bian/Maier, and the in-game characters think that is is, they've fought a rather difficult and hard battle, then the Aerogaters appear and all SHIT breaks loose on earth, and both the characters and the player realize "Oh we are far from done with this"

Now I'm not saying the Morphs, Nergal etc. had to appear out of nowhere, only that the second half of the game shouldn't have been "Do the exact plot in the first part with different motivations"

EDIT: Also I would list Cog of Destiny as another chapter that just got it so damn wrong. And only seems to exist so they can go "Hey remember Chapter 21 in FE6? here's another one just like it"

EDIT2: I also do not think that EVERY FE game besides FE7 has gotten there scale right. the only two I feel got it perfect all the way through was 4 and 5, I mentioned why earlier in the thread

Edited March 9, 2012 by Onmi

[Anouleth]

It was also kind of weird how in FE7 HHM, suddenly bandits have wyverns and pegasi and all sorts working for them. Or all the monks that serve in Eubans' mercenary company. FE6 is really really particular about when you fight certain enemy types: for instance, you never fight pegasi outside of Ilia. You never fight Nomads outside of Sacae. Usually when wyverns show up, they point it out because all the wyverns are from Bern. FE8 does it as well on occasion (for instance you fight pegasi in Chapter 13 Eph., miles from Carcino and Frelia), but generally keeps a tighter handle on it than FE7 does.

Really? Them using the word 'assassin' instead of 'vigilante' pissed you off that much? In a game that was translated from another language?

And the fact that every other FE says you're leading or facing Army (RD 2-2 says you're facing thousands of soldiers, of whom, well less than 5% appear) doesn't bother you as much as an assassin and/or vigilante force with units who aren't like the assassin CLASS and have numbers well in the thousan---oh hundreds?

Well, it's a convention, isn't it? When you play Age of Empires, obviously all the armies of England won't actually add up to about 100 soldiers. When you play Civilisation 4, the game is pretty explicit that each "Warrior" actually represents about 10,000 soldiers. Most strategy games do stuff like this: even the ones on a really grand scale like Supreme Commander will only let you have about 2000 units max.

Whereas Age of Empires doesn't let you build tanks. Civilisation 4 doesn't let your units climb aboard pegasi. Supreme Commander doesn't have warriors wielding swords and axes. It's not really a convention that a unit represents something different, while it is a frequently used convention that a unit represents many more of the same type.

[General Banzai]

FE7 also has a lot of filler, where the main reason why the chapter is happening is "Eliwood and friends were going somewhere. Then, assassins attacked!" In most FE games, it's the opposite--the main character is going somewhere they specifically know has enemies. It makes the game more goal-oriented, whereas a lot of FE7 feels like merchants on holiday.

[Aizenberg]

FE7 also has a lot of filler

you cant say much. fe10 has so much pointless filler its unbearable