Most hated character

[Chiki]

Why are you making up some abitrary bullshit division between Fe9 and Fe10 Ike? They're both the same character. You have to be pretty ignorant to pretend they're not.

One can think Harry Potter in Order of the Phoenix is badly written, but the same person can also think that Harry Potter is well written in Philosopher's Stone.

I think Ike is badly written in FE10, and well written in FE9. Is this simple enough?

To see the plain inanity of considering a character as one, ignoring that there can be singular contexts, consider a case in which that there is a different author taking over FE10. How can they be considered together when writing styles can vary between contexts?

Edited May 19, 2013 by Olwen

[Happy_Dingo]

Stopping by just to remind myself of who I have the most hate for

Begnion Senators.

All of them, barring Hetzel

They can go rot in a pool of rancid butter for all I care

That's the feeling you're supposed to get, silly.

I don't really hate any of them, but Micaiah annoyed me a little. Blindly following orders and getting a lot of innocent people killed for it is kinda dumb. I guess she redeemed herself though.

[Ϲharlie]

I mean, life is unfair and all that, and I'm all for giving sympathy to those who genuinely have changed their ways, but the fact that it's almost painfully obvious that in this instance it's because Michalis is pretty while Hardin... isn't

I'm not a big fan of Michalis being recruitable in New Mystery either, but this seems an overly simplistic view on the matter. Hardin's "betrayal" of Marth, the ensuing war, and Marth's inability to save his former friend was a huge part of the game's story. Bullshitting a way for Hardin to survive would have been a huge change to the story, and not for the better in my opinion.

Michalis is just a bit player. He does a few important things in the story, but is otherwise a nonentity. Changing his role does not have the same impact on the overall story that changing Hadin's role would have had. It's also important to remember that you do not have to recruit Michalis. You can just take the Starlight tome and leave him to die like in the original Mystery of the Emblem.

Edited May 19, 2013 by Hyde

[Constable Reggie]

One can think Harry Potter in Order of the Phoenix is badly written, but the same person can also think that Harry Potter is well written in Philosopher's Stone.

I think Ike is badly written in FE10, and well written in FE9. Is this simple enough?

To see the plain inanity of considering a character as one, ignoring that there can be singular contexts, consider a case in which that there is a different author taking over FE10. How can they be considered together when writing styles can vary between contexts?

Are you really trying to argue that, even if said character has the same personality/likeness, just because the lead writer might be different, they can't be considered the same character?

Again, why are you abitrarily splitting Ike into two characters. No one argues that Order of Phoenix Harry is less depthful than Philosopher's Harry, because they're the same character.

[Rehab]

Ike in fe10 can still be a continuation of his fe9 self, even if written by a different writer, because the former game's plot is assumed to have happened word for word as fe10 begins. RD doesn't take place in an alternate universe where PoR didn't happen

Attempting to break this down:

In fe9, Ike starts not necessarily dumb or completely unskilled, but inexperienced. He makes mistakes, but still displays enough competence to be awarded the command of an army backed by Begnion.

Ike was given that chance partially because the Greil Mercs had stayed alive against odds long enough to that point to imply at least some level of capability, partially because they succeeded in doing Sanaki a favor (one might call that passing a test), and partially because circumstance disallowed Begnion from sending somebody under their own flag (say, Zelgius) who would've been a more perfect bet.

When Ike gets his army, without going back to the text to actually look how it's portrayed, he does an objectively pretty good job of commanding it, which is all the more impressive for his age etc. He defeats the armies of a militarized nation on even terms, more or less, in many different kinds of battles, learning as he goes, and basically conquers Daein and beats a king raised and fixated on war at his own game. At this point, he's already a pretty dang competent commander.

Fast-forward some years, and Ike has obviously not been slacking off since the war- he's had time to bulk up, obviously, and to reflect on the conflict, slightly less obviously, and has been continuing to run the Greil mercs all that time. So he almost definitely hasn't gotten worse at fighting since then, and there's a good chance he has in fact gotten better.

I mean it's one thing to say he never makes any mistakes at all in fe10, unlike in fe9, and is therefore made less believable, but like

how many fuckups can anybody reasonably expect this guy to make

[Chiki]

Are you really trying to argue that, even if said character has the same personality/likeness, just because the lead writer might be different, they can't be considered the same character?

Again, why are you abitrarily splitting Ike into two characters. No one argues that Order of Phoenix Harry is less depthful than Philosopher's Harry, because they're the same character.

They are the same character. You just consider an individual context.

[Constable Reggie]

I see nothing in Fe10 that negates or contradicts his character development from Fe9. Why is already being established as great (or even better), due to the events from Fe9, a negative aspect?

Edited May 19, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Chiki]

No one's saying anything about contradicting his character development. All I am saying is that he is too perfect when you consider FE10 alone; that is, ignoring FE9.

Edited May 19, 2013 by Olwen

[secondworld]

But why ignore FE9 in the first place when FE10 is a direct sequel?

[Chiki]

Okay, let's say your best friend was Hitler. 10 years ago, you two were the best of friends even though he knew that you're a Jew. He had no hatred for Jews at the time.

10 years later, he stopped being your friend, and after becoming the Fuhrer of Nazi Germany, he had you killed in a gas chamber.

"But why ignore Hitler's past self when his future self is directly after him!" That doesn't work here. He was a good friend 10 years ago, but no longer one after 10 years. You have to consider the individual contexts to make a decision. Contexts change and so do personalities.

Edited May 19, 2013 by Olwen

[RJWalker]

Godwin's Law welp. :\

[Constable Reggie]

Godwin's Law welp. :\

Yep. Argument lost.

[Topaz Light]

I don't recall ever suggesting that Hardin should have lived. (Although I understand where one would get that idea)

I was just pointing out how the disproportionate nature of his fate compared to Michalis', considering each of their past actions, was somewhat frustrating to me. Of course Hardin should stay dead; his tragic fate is a key element of the story and it wouldn't be nearly as impactful were he to survive.

...Regardless, I do always recruit Michalis, since I am a completionist as far as character recruitment/survival goes. He still irks me, though.

[Nintendan]

Godwin's Law welp. :\

lol

Vaike is really annoying to me. He's just so... stoopid. He has such an annoying attitude. He's always saying how he's so strong but he's really clumsy. Moment I saw him, I was like "yep. He's a douche" and just instantly dismiss him from my team.

[Thor Odinson]

Vaike is one of the few characters I can't even warm up to after reading supports and the DLC convos, and I've changed my opinions about several characters this way. I wouldn't say I hate him because he hasn't really done anything that's completely against my principles, but he's the kind of person I would never be able to get along with irl.

[-Cynthia-]

Does Ike really make any 'mistakes' or questionable moral decisions in FE9 either?

Seems like that game goes out of its way to make Ike appear "correct" and like a better person than his companions whenever possible. Some examples include helping the refugees after Talrega when Soren encourages pressing on (there are no noticeable consequences of this) or the Geoffrey situation in C24 (he saves Geoffrey, making Lucia and Bastian look like idiots). I guess he stupidly charges the Black Knight a few times, but there don't seem to be any significant negative consequences of this.

Edited May 19, 2013 by -Cynthia-

[Chiki]

Does Ike really make any 'mistakes' or questionable moral decisions in FE9 either?

Seems like that game goes out of its way to make Ike appear "correct" and like a better person than his companions whenever possible. Some examples include helping the refugees after Talrega when Soren encourages pressing on (there are no noticeable consequences of this) or the Geoffrey situation in C24 (he saves Geoffrey, making Lucia and Bastian look like idiots). I guess he stupidly charges the Black Knight a few times, but there don't seem to be any significant negative consequences of this.

Eh, I guess he's somewhat of a Mary Sue there too. Charging into Goldoa is one though. It was luck that saved him.

[-Cynthia-]

Eh, I guess he's somewhat of a Mary Sue there too. Charging into Goldoa is one though. It was luck that saved him.

Well in FE9 the ship just runs aground near Goldoa, nothing to do with Ike really. In FE10, Skrimir says he found the way out and Ike follows him- which really looks like more of an error on Skrimir's part.

FE9 does demonstrate Ike's weakness against the Black Knight (for a while anyway) and the fact that people don't respect his leadership (Shinon and Gatrie leaving, although they come back). I don't really count his bluntness with Sanaki as a flaw, since it has no consequences and outspokeness is often a positive trait anyway.

[Baldrick]

I don't really count his bluntness with Sanaki as a flaw, since it has no consequences and outspokeness is often a positive trait anyway.

I would say it's still basically political suicide, and shows at best the inability to understand social strategy, at worst the willingness to doom his country and Elincia for the sake of satisfying himself. At that point, Sanaki appeared to be a spoilt brat, and being told off like that would do nothing but make her withdraw Begnion's support out of spite. Ike could not possibly have known she was merely messing with them.

It's like Ephraim charging the Grado army with two men. Just because he somehow turns up in chapter 8 still a free man, it doesn't mean it was a sound tactic and Ephraim is a pragmatic, sensible commander.

[FrostyFireMage]

lol

Vaike is really annoying to me. He's just so... stoopid. He has such an annoying attitude. He's always saying how he's so strong but he's really clumsy. Moment I saw him, I was like "yep. He's a douche" and just instantly dismiss him from my team.

What gets me is his support with Chrom. Vaike is all "FIGHT MEH CHROM" and Chrom is all like "can this wait i'm the leader of this army i have important stuff to do" but Vaike responds with "WE HAVE TO FIGHT RITE NAO CUZ WE'RE DESTINED RIVALS!!!1!!1!".

After reading his supports with other characters I don't dislike Vaike as much as I used to but that support just ruffles my tweed.

[eclipse]

I don't recall ever suggesting that Hardin should have lived. (Although I understand where one would get that idea) I was just pointing out how the disproportionate nature of his fate compared to Michalis', considering each of their past actions, was somewhat frustrating to me. Of course Hardin should stay dead; his tragic fate is a key element of the story and it wouldn't be nearly as impactful were he to survive. ...Regardless, I do always recruit Michalis, since I am a completionist as far as character recruitment/survival goes. He still irks me, though.

I recruit Michalis so Gharnef can kill him properly

If Hardin survived, he'd have a hell of a mess to clean up. I think it's better that he died. As for Michalis, I think that most of the Macedonian royal family got the writing shaft - he could've played his part as the bad guy who gets around to redeeming himself instead of joining, and Minerva's ending makes very little sense in my mind.

[MacLovin]

Vaike reminds me of Boyd :/

[Anouleth]

I would say it's still basically political suicide, and shows at best the inability to understand social strategy, at worst the willingness to doom his country and Elincia for the sake of satisfying himself. At that point, Sanaki appeared to be a spoilt brat, and being told off like that would do nothing but make her withdraw Begnion's support out of spite. Ike could not possibly have known she was merely messing with them.

If Ike made a mistake, he wasn't punished for it and nothing bad actually came of it. In fact, Elincia and Sanaki both praised him for it. And Sanaki liked him enough to permit him to become the commander of the Crimean Army.

[Catt]

I really dislike Sanaki. I felt the game was manipulating me into going "oh she's alright after all" when she still acts like a spoiled brat with a superiority complex. That scene in the Serenes Forest still makes me shudder:

Sigrun: Apostle! You can't bend your knee to another! (me: *cringe* god, why would Sigrun care about something like that anyway, except to show how gosh-darned noble Sanaki is)

Ike: Peace! Let her speak her mind! (me: *cringe* who speaks like that anyway? Least of all, Ike)

Sanaki: I'm so sorry blah blah blah (me: *cringe* oh, this is so sappy)

Ike: That was well done. (me: *cringe* Ike, you're still speaking like an idiot)

[mai]

I would say it's still basically political suicide, and shows at best the inability to understand social strategy, at worst the willingness to doom his country and Elincia for the sake of satisfying himself. At that point, Sanaki appeared to be a spoilt brat, and being told off like that would do nothing but make her withdraw Begnion's support out of spite. Ike could not possibly have known she was merely messing with them.

It's like Ephraim charging the Grado army with two men. Just because he somehow turns up in chapter 8 still a free man, it doesn't mean it was a sound tactic and Ephraim is a pragmatic, sensible commander.

The problem is, there's no real negative consequences to Ike's "blunders". If I remember correctly, Sanaki herself even praises him for his outspokenness. Sure, Ike does a couple stupid things, but everything always turns fine for him and most of the time he even gets praised for them (and this is only in FE9; in FE10 he's always 100% perfect and in the right and everyone loves him, while pretty much every character who isn't part of the Dawn Brigade thinks poorly of Micaiah and her choices), so can you really call those flaws?