I still don't get the praise of this game...

[shadowofchaos]

Because it's logical that means it can't be tragic? Emmeryn's ultimate demise is the direct result of poor decisions and actions that she brought upon herself. During her fall, she says "No reaction... was I wrong, then?". That's the realization that her actions and demise are her fault. She fits the definition of a tragic character.

...I feel so out of place here since I still see the holes in the entire story... but with a different script due to localization.

[IceBrand]

...I feel so out of place here since I still see the holes in the entire story... but with a different script due to localization.

Hipster?

[shadowofchaos]

Hipster?

What I mean is, what Emm says on the cliff are strictly English only.

[IceBrand]

Ahh. I see. I thought you meant you pointed out the flaws before it was cool and everyone was doing it.

[arvilino]

No, it's just frustrating watching her make decisions are bad on paper and turn to be just as bad in reality. Jumping off the cliff was the only right decision she made but it was the only real decision she could have made in that situation other than just accepting death. A tragic character who dies has to make you feel bad that they died despite making the right decisions. I only felt relieved when Emmeryn died.

They were decisions which make sense based on her ideology though and they most be strongly held(as shown in game) that it's set to be the main reason the people of Ylisse don't hate the royal family.

She'd be out of character to have made the right decisions and have more flexible ideology(which also would have rendered what she said during chapter 9 a bit insincere and the reaction to her death kind of strange if she did something like engage the war herself during chapter 5).

Edited June 13, 2014 by arvilino

[RJWalker]

Well yeah, her character is awful. Absolute pacism is stupid. She would have sacrificed Maribelle to keep her peace if Ricken hadn't intervened.

[Roivann]

Wouldn't sacrificing Maribelle to keep the peace be the correct decision? Give one life to potentially save many lives of Ylissean citizens?

[arvilino]

Wouldn't sacrificing Maribelle to keep the peace be the correct decision? Give one life to potentially save many lives of Ylissean citizens?

Gangrel was instigating the conflict, he'd just keep hiring more bandits and kidnapping more people.(Initiating the war was the "right" decision in the end as a peaceful society can't be maintained with an unchecked despotic one neighboring it).

Well yeah, her character is awful. Absolute pacism is stupid. She would have sacrificed Maribelle to keep her peace if Ricken hadn't intervened.

Oh so your issue is that she isn't genre savvy? Eh I'm not a fan of characters who essentially adjust their established personality on the fly. Though her viewpoint isn't absolute pacifism, it's just the closest she can get while still being able to protect Ylisse.

Edited June 13, 2014 by arvilino

[Jackos]

Well yeah, her character is awful. Absolute pacism is stupid. She would have sacrificed Maribelle to keep her peace if Ricken hadn't intervened.

Technically it was Gangrel who made that option moot when he ordered his soldiers to attack anyways, Chrom killed them, battle starts and only when it was already all out war Ricken intervened. Point still stands though but there wasn't really a choice since it's clear Gangrel just wanted to declare war right there regardless of what happened.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Jackos

[Czar_Yoshi]

Well, those are not canon though. In the factual events there is nothing I'd call a hole.

Aside from all of the supposedly optional support conversation plot holes (which do count because the devs intended you to be able to see them), the one that really gets me is the whole Basilio/Grima's resurrection deal. Basilio has apparently already swapped out the Stones before the Shepherds went to Cht.23, but Grima comes back anyway, implying that he didn't need them to resurrect. But Grima seems to already know this, as after the stones are revealed to be fakes anyway, he still thinks Avatar could have been Awakened if he wanted to be. If it's known that they aren't needed, though, Grima could have just revived anytime... Which is a plot hole.

On the same concept, Validar had the Emblem, was at the table, and was kind of just hanging out waiting for Chrom's army to come mow him down to revive Grima. That makes no sense, because he had everything he needed to revive Grima already, including a vessel.

Still on the topic of Cht.23, Basilio. Avatar is a self-insert, but apparently plans with Basilio behind the player's back to do something, and self-inserts coming up with plans behind the player's back imply that they're trying to dupe themselves, which is... Another plothole.

Additionally, Basilio claims he got away with the switch because Validar wasn't watching him. Validar was, however, watching Avatar (who he plotted with), and Chrom (who wears the Emblem on his sleeve 24/7), and Basilio couldn't have slipped by him unnoticed.

Those enough plot holes for you?

I'm not going to pretend it has the deepest or best characterization but it has enough to set my imagination rolling and get me interested. To stay on topic, the characters in this game have 10x the dialogue but I ended up hating most of them for one reason or another. Back to SD, great world building. And a god tier localization. As for the bad, I'm sure you've heard of it enough.

If I might add to these...

The soundtrack is pretty good, especially the player phase themes. There's no Canto and maps are tight enough that Cavalry don't completely dominate the game (though Caeda is still pretty good). The touchscreen is used. While the story ingame is sparse, it also never gets intrusive (bar a couple times where Malladus stops you to tell you about completely random things for no reason). However, that's also a large amount of world-building done outside the game through dev interviews, Mystery and whatnot, and I prefer that to cramming it all into one package. Still, Marth gets to make a handful of cool speeches. The enemy range function isn't quite as advanced as Awakening's, but it's still there and a huge help.

On the downside, Warp is completely broken, Paralogue requirements are incredibly stupid, and the artstyle is a bit hit-or-miss.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Czar_Yoshi

[Jackos]

Man I had forgotten how much of a mess Chapter 23 is plot-wise, why the heck couldn't they just have someone else plan the Basilio ruse/asspull/whatever? Though about the Grima thing, isn't the Grima that appears in the Dragon's Table the one from Lucina's future that followed them and recovered his energy or something like that? I always assumed that but they do a terrible job at explaining the whole timetraveling Grima thing (and would that mean that if the Avatar that we used actually became Grima we would have 2 mountain-sized dragons wrecking stuff?).

[Czar_Yoshi]

Deus ex Machinas have a tendency to leave huge messes behind. It's part of why they're frowned on so much.

That Grima seems to think Avatar could have awakened anyway even after Basilio's jig is exposed. Anyway, I always interpreted him as embracing the fact that he's Grima, but without the giant dragon to back it up- essentially just as powerful as Avatar could be normally except evil.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Czar_Yoshi

[Kokone Kirino]

The first one you mentioned does indeed sound strange, that might be a hole.

The second one was Validar being stupid, not exactly a hole.

Regarding the third, no, just no. Sure, the Avatar isa self-inseet for the most part, but you can't call something a plot hole bbecause he had a hidden plan for once. At most that showed character inconsistency.

Regarding the fourth, was it stated that Validar watched them 24/7? Perhaps he didn't always check, which would be impossible anyway. Not a hole.

Support convo plots don't count. They might take place in individual playthroughs, but never in every single playthrough. Romances aren't canon here, so neither are the created holes.

[Jotari]

I think Validar had to do something with the Emblem at the table. Isn't there some kind of comment about Aversa holding them off and she would only flee if Validar was ready? Meaning they got there just in time for whatever the hell was supposed to happen.

[Czar_Yoshi]

The first one you mentioned does indeed sound strange, that might be a hole.

The second one was Validar being stupid, not exactly a hole. Not Validar being stupid, Grima. Grima was right there and knew he had everything needed to revive, and not doing so contradicts everything we know about him and is therefore a plot hole.

Regarding the third, no, just no. Sure, the Avatar isa self-inseet for the most part, but you can't call something a plot hole bbecause he had a hidden plan for once. At most that showed character inconsistency. Normal characters are allowed to have hidden plans. A self-insert, however, is meant to be an extension of the player, and by definition that means the player must know the same things as them. By changing roles there, Avatar is breaking canon- the canon of being a self-insert- and breaking canon is a plot hole.

Regarding the fourth, was it stated that Validar watched them 24/7? Perhaps he didn't always check, which would be impossible anyway. Not a hole.

Support convo plots don't count. They might take place in individual playthroughs, but never in every single playthrough. Romances aren't canon here, so neither are the created holes.

Validar:

I've had your merry little band watched since Carrion Isle. Your every move!

So yeah, it was stated.

Yes, support convos do count, because they're intended features of the game. If I skip all the cutscenes with Start and don't see any of them, does that mean they aren't canon because they didn't happen on this particular playthrough?

If you want another pile of plot holes, go look at Tiki and Valm, though I'm sure there are others out there who are far more qualified to rant about them than I.

[RJWalker]

Plot hole is the wrong word but Valm is just messed up. The locations make no sense. Compare the locations and the original map of Valentia from Gaiden. The iconic landmarks are in different places. Mila's Temple seems to have moved across the fucking continent to the northernmost area. Duma's remains, which should be in Duma's Tower (which is now Mila Shrine Ruins for some reason) are now in what used to be the capital of Zofia. Oh and there's a volcano there. There's a lot more inconsistencies.

Plate tectonics cannot explain them. The volcano, sure but locations don't move around randomly despite the general shape of the continent remaining the same. They can't get their own damn lore right.

Then there's Chon'sin and Rosanne. Two mysterious locations that are there, somewhere on Valm but we're never told where. Someone said it a different thread. The characters talk about ancient Valm but what they talk about and what we're actually told in Gaiden do not match up all.

There's also the case of Yen'fay being incredibly stupid. He's being blackmailed into fighting for Walhart by Excellus or he'll have Say'ri killed. Alright, good enough. Except Say'ri is already fighting for the rebels which means she's in constant danger of being killed by Walhart's forces anyway. Say'ri would be safer if Yen'fay fought with her. But no, not only will he continue to fight for Walhart but he'll also fight her himself instead of siding with her. Compare that to Zeke from Gaiden. As soon as he learns that Teeta is safe with Alm's army, he immediately sides with Alm.

[Interceptor]

They can't get their own damn lore right.

They can change whatever they want. It's their lore. The stuff that they changed, isn't even important.

There's also the case of Yen'fay being incredibly stupid. He's being blackmailed into fighting for Walhart by Excellus or he'll have Say'ri killed. Alright, good enough. Except Say'ri is already fighting for the rebels which means she's in constant danger of being killed by Walhart's forces anyway.

There is a huge difference between 1) being in danger, and 2) having assassins after your head.

[arvilino]

Aside from all of the supposedly optional support conversation plot holes (which do count because the devs intended you to be able to see them), the one that really gets me is the whole Basilio/Grima's resurrection deal. Basilio has apparently already swapped out the Stones before the Shepherds went to Cht.23, but Grima comes back anyway, implying that he didn't need them to resurrect. But Grima seems to already know this, as after the stones are revealed to be fakes anyway, he still thinks Avatar could have been Awakened if he wanted to be. If it's known that they aren't needed, though, Grima could have just revived anytime... Which is a plot hole.

On the same concept, Validar had the Emblem, was at the table, and was kind of just hanging out waiting for Chrom's army to come mow him down to revive Grima. That makes no sense, because he had everything he needed to revive Grima already, including a vessel.

.

Grima and Validar specifically wanted to avoid throwing history/destiny off it's track, they worked to try and ensure all the events followed as closely as before future Avatar went back in time. Validar himself thinks all the events were pre-determined, what reason would he have to revive Grima early? Insurance? Genre Savviness?

Note Grima was revived at the latest possible point when there was no chance that the present Avatar would actually revive the dragon themself.

Edited June 14, 2014 by arvilino

[Jotari]

Plot hole is the wrong word but Valm is just messed up. The locations make no sense. Compare the locations and the original map of Valentia from Gaiden. The iconic landmarks are in different places. Mila's Temple seems to have moved across the fucking continent to the northernmost area. Duma's remains, which should be in Duma's Tower (which is now Mila Shrine Ruins for some reason) are now in what used to be the capital of Zofia. Oh and there's a volcano there. There's a lot more inconsistencies.

Plate tectonics cannot explain them. The volcano, sure but locations don't move around randomly despite the general shape of the continent remaining the same. They can't get their own damn lore right.

Then there's Chon'sin and Rosanne. Two mysterious locations that are there, somewhere on Valm but we're never told where. Someone said it a different thread. The characters talk about ancient Valm but what they talk about and what we're actually told in Gaiden do not match up all.

There's also the case of Yen'fay being incredibly stupid. He's being blackmailed into fighting for Walhart by Excellus or he'll have Say'ri killed. Alright, good enough. Except Say'ri is already fighting for the rebels which means she's in constant danger of being killed by Walhart's forces anyway. Say'ri would be safer if Yen'fay fought with her. But no, not only will he continue to fight for Walhart but he'll also fight her himself instead of siding with her. Compare that to Zeke from Gaiden. As soon as he learns that Teeta is safe with Alm's army, he immediately sides with Alm.

Two thousands years have passed on the continent. Consider what our world was like two thousand years ago. Specifically look at the continents of America and Australia which are populated by a completely different race of people. Two thousand years is a hell of a lot of time. The world is a changing place and Gaiden ended with the theme of change coming about from what I know. It's more surprising there is still is a Temple of Mila. There's only a handful of buildings that are two thousand years old today and they really don't look too pretty. The temple easily could have been destroyed or just fell into ruin and another temple was either built or a temple somewhere else was promoted so to speak. Also Doma didn't even die in Gaiden, he was sealed, so Doma's Remains only make sense if he was released and killed regardless of the location of his remains.

[RJWalker]

They can change whatever they want. It's their lore. The stuff that they changed, isn't even important.

Sure they can. Doesn't change that it's stupid to not stay consistent with your own lore.

There is a huge difference between 1) being in danger, and 2) having assassins after your head.

Not much of a difference when you're active fighter in the resistance constantly risking her life. What would change if she had assassins after after her? Nothing.

[arvilino]

Sure they can. Doesn't change that it's stupid to not stay consistent with your own lore.

Not much of a difference when you're active fighter in the resistance constantly risking her life. What would change if she had assassins after after her? Nothing.

Based on the Yen'Fay you recruit she'd have definitely died.

[RJWalker]

She seems to have died without having met up with Chrom and his army, probably before the time the Valm arc happened in the alternate future. Anyway, he doesn't have foresight. The most sensible decision would to protect her himself, not fight her. Even his own death wouldn't have kept her safe. Excellus would have no reason to hold true to his word, nevermind that he's already actively trying to kill her anyway.

[Interceptor]

Sure they can. Doesn't change that it's stupid to not stay consistent with your own lore.

It was never "stupid" to begin with. Why be handcuffed by the past? Who is to say that the old way was even better in the first place? It's doubly nonsense because the things you're complaining about are basically superficial anyway.

Not much of a difference when you're active fighter in the resistance constantly risking her life. What would change if she had assassins after after her? Nothing.

This is an extraordinarily naive viewpoint.

[RJWalker]

It was never "stupid" to begin with. Why be handcuffed by the past? Who is to say that the old way was even better in the first place? It's doubly nonsense because the things you're complaining about are basically superficial anyway.

It's not 'handcuffed' to the past. Whether it's better or not is not the question but changing it just for the sake of changing it and not even doing anything with it is stupid. All the references it makes are ultimately meaningless to the plot. So why reference them at all if you can't even get the reference right?

This is an extraordinarily naive viewpoint.

Does Yen'fay fighting for Walhart change the fact that Excellus trying to have Say'ri killed anyway? No. The first chapter on Valm, we see Say'ri in a situation that would definitely resulted in her death had it not been for the Shepherds. Yen'fay is an idiot.

[arvilino]

It's not 'handcuffed' to the past. Whether it's better or not is not the question but changing it just for the sake of changing it and not even doing anything with it is stupid. All the references it makes are ultimately meaningless to the plot. So why reference them at all if you can't even get the reference right?

Does Yen'fay fighting for Walhart change the fact that Excellus trying to have Say'ri killed anyway?

Yes, because if he was seriously trying to have her killed and succeeded Yen'Fay would have no reason to not have all the Chon'sin forces rebel and join with the resistance. (Even if she reaches 0 HP in chapter 15 she doesn't die and hides away until the end of the chapter)

Excellus

No, I'm telling the truth, which I admit is a rare treat, so you best shut up and enjoy it. Before you met these Ylisseans, I could have had your head with a word. In Chon'sin, at Valm Harbor... Did you really think yourself so elusive? You were my leverage for Yen'fay. Unwitting and unbound, but a hostage all the same. I let you live; he fought for us. That was our deal. And he kept his end, right TO his end!

Edited June 14, 2014 by arvilino