Emmeryn's Sacrifice

[Interceptor]

I doubt Awakening will ever get much praise from me unless the next game is somehow worse but in that case, Awakening will only get praise for not being as bad. Unless the next game is good. But we'll see when it actually becomes a thing.

I suspect that the only thing that's going to change in 2020 is that you'll be six years older. The future Awakening apologists are the ones who are playing it now, and enjoying it for what it is. Sort of like how the kids from my generation hold up Final Fantasy 7 as some pinnacle of greatness, because that was their first exposure to the franchise.

EDIT:

When you first see her in town. Chapter 2, I believe? She's glorified as the perfect symbol of peace.

In other words, you mean Chrom, Lissa, and Frederick giving unbiased background to an amnesiac who wouldn't know any better. I don't know about anyone else, but when I really want to get the pulse on someone, I ask their younger siblings and the f'n butler.

The game was not interested in letting you see how much of a dumbass she was [...]

This isn't true unless the game ejects the cartridge every time you get to the end of Chapter 7, which is a "yell at the movie screen" moment if there ever was one.

Awakening's (non-existent) narrative

This game doesn't have a narrative that exists? Feel free to walk that one back if you intend to be taken seriously.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Interceptor

[Dandragon]

As a contrast to that, I would like to remind you of Empress Sanaki. When she faced the survivor of the crimes of her people, she fell on her knees and begged in the name of her people for forgiveness for those actions. Emmeryn just orders them around and then kills herself, expecting that this would move everyone and make people like Mustafa think that she is the greatest person ever. Not that even he could point out what so great about her speech was.

Delving into this makes me think that Emmeryn had a second-agenda of some sort. Or perhaps she was just as twisted as the previous ruler. Or (just to try to be comical) after her speech when she didn't hear any cheering she thought to herself "what is this? No cheers? No love from the people? Fuck this, I don't wanna live anymore."

There could also be the fact that even if they did give over the Fire Emblem, Gangrel still would of had her killed her in a much more painful manner, or some shit. I don't know, I'm coming up with theories on the fly.

Maybe her survival of that fall was gods punishment for being an incompetent ruler and being incredibly lucky with everything else.

[Interceptor]

Maybe her survival of that fall was gods punishment for being an incompetent ruler and being incredibly lucky with everything else.

Obviously Miracle activated right as she hit the ground. And don't tell me she didn't have it; she just unequipped it before her Paralogue. She's not getting to A-rank Staves unless she spent some time as a Cleric.

[Moira]

People are bashing her way too hard. She was forced into being ruler at what 10? She was then rejected by the citizens and had stones thrown at her. Apparently she has no qualified advisors so she became completely pacifistic to show people she didn't want war. What happened when she became ruler has made her so pacfistic that she makes bad decisions in an attempt to keep the peace. She had no other goal than to not go to war, so please don't say she's some twisted person with a hidden agenda. Also please don't imply that she runs from her problems. It would be much better if she actually chose to flee at points when that was the best option. She is neither cowardly or selfish. And PLEASE don't say she deserved punishment when she never had a choice in becoming a ruler.

[Loki Laufeyson]

People are bashing her way too hard.

No. Emmeryn is legit a piece of stinking offal of a character. It is not an exaggeration. Shes so poorly written, i actually got mad at the game for a minute for insulting my intelligence the first time i played it. (making me sympathize with her) Seriously.

From what I could tell Emmeryn's been criticized as a character and leader, which I would agree with, but is not the point of this topic. The point here is that her death was not actually a sacrifice at all, and thus the characters in the game have no reason to think it's the greatest act a human's ever done.

You are correct. Her "sacrifice" was cowardice plain and simple. "Ill leap off this cliff to try to make a point to Plegia and my own people. But the truth is, im too fucking scared to actually fix the problem myself. So ill just make it look like its a noble sacrifice and cause these guys to rethink their position. To hell with my country, i have to make a statement with my honorless cowardice."

Seriously, fuck Emmeryn.

Awakening is too new, still. It's not the same sort of hipster, get off my lawn, this-new-shit-sucks sort of vibe unless there is a newer title to compare it to while sighing wistfully.

Dude, why are you defending a piece of shit writing so hard? All of your posts in this thread are really overly defensive. Plenty of people here like the game itself just fine. Its plot is crap and ive come to accept that. But its not going to stop me from pointing out how fucking shitty Emmeryn was as a character.

[Moira]

No. Emmeryn is legit a piece of stinking offal of a character. It is not an exaggeration. Shes so poorly written, i actually got mad at the game for a minute for insulting my intelligence the first time i played it. (making me sympathize with her) Seriously.

I think there's a difference between hating the character itself or just being completely angry with the writing.

edit: I also feel like people are going above and beyond to find every little problem they can create out of something she did, and assuming too much to find reasons not to like her. She has serious problems, but some of the points being brought up are I feel ridiculous

Edited July 17, 2014 by Fluorspar

[Czar_Yoshi]

In other words, you mean Chrom, Lissa, and Frederick giving unbiased background to an amnesiac who wouldn't know any better. I don't know about anyone else, but when I really want to get the pulse on someone, I ask their younger siblings and the f'n butler.

Fair enough. Let's ask someone else... Like one of the bad guys. How about Aversa?

Fun fact: throughout all of Cht.5, Aversa insults pretty much everyone except Emmeryn. Not even a single sarcastic compliment (though Gangrel has plenty of those). She doesn't bother in Cht.9 either. Make of that what you will.

[Interceptor]

Dude, why are you defending a piece of shit writing so hard?

Am I giving the impression of effort? This is as easy as falling off a log. Criticism of Awakening here is so over the top ridiculous, it can hardly be taken seriously. The hyperbole and naiveté (I LOVE people's opinions on suicide... cute as buttons, all of you!) would make for a delicious comedic omelet, if I thought that people were actually doing it on purpose. I mean, FFS, we just had someone say that Awakening has a "non-existent narrative"; somewhere in the world, a grade school literature teacher is sobbing uncontrollably and doesn't know why.

Its plot is crap and ive come to accept that. But its not going to stop me from pointing out how fucking shitty Emmeryn was as a character.

Oh heaven forbid, don't stop, please go on. I'd like I see how many synonyms for poop that you can cram into one post. So far, you're up to three.

Fair enough. Let's ask someone else... Like one of the bad guys. How about Aversa?

The essential point here: what people claim is "the game" doing various things, is actually more accurately described as certain characters saying stuff, which is another thing entirely. It's not as if we have some gravitas-dripping badass narrator here, like Radiant Dawn.

Fun fact: throughout all of Cht.5, Aversa insults pretty much everyone except Emmeryn. Not even a single sarcastic compliment (though Gangrel has plenty of those). She doesn't bother in Cht.9 either. Make of that what you will.

Maribelle, Ricken and... who else? Are we talking about a different Chapter 5? The only thing I can "make of" this factoid is that the arguments of Emmeryn being glorified are even weaker than I initially thought.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Interceptor

[Loki Laufeyson]

Im too busy defending a terrible plot and actually putting forth effort to snark but failing miserably. Im still continuing to make myself look like a shameless fanboy, however.

What? Sorry, you lost me.

Try actually answering my question.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Loki Laufeyson

[CyberNinja]

Again, the people that praise Emmeryn were people that were close to her and would likely want to see her death as something other than a waste.

Are you certain that the plegians weren't abandoning Gangrel because he was oh i don't know.... killing his own people by the dozen? We all remember the Aversa messenger scene right?

But interceptor is at least correct on one thing Emmeyn is shown by the game to be a failure (how see ended up on the damn cliff anyway) but is praised by the characters who were close to her (like Chrome and Lissa who idealized her before her death.)

[NoCashOtaku]

...That or the Perezians/Plegians are more dumb than we originally thought they were.

Wait... that's possible?

All jokes aside, the first time I did that level, she died. Again. For real this time.

Edited July 17, 2014 by NoCashOtaku

[Interceptor]

What? Sorry, you lost me.

Try actually answering my question.

I did answer your question. Just to refresh your memory: you asked me why I was defending Awakening "so hard". Firstly, I object to the premise: this is as easy for me as falling out of bed; count your blessings that I'm not putting forth any sort of real effort. Secondly, I only defend Awakening because the arguments people are making are silly and ridiculous; it's not that I like Emm as a character, but more that the commentary against her in this thread is incoherent.

I mean, there are good points to be made, here. But instead of any of those, we get "Awakening doesn't have a narrative", and "Emm's suicide is cowardice", and "jumping was not a sacrifice"... to say nothing of people who see no difference between "Chrom and Lissa idolizing their older sister" and "THE GAME FORCING YOU TO BELEEEEEEIVE".

I am in a batting cage, and people are lobbing softballs at me, underhand. Or, in your language, something like this:

[RJWalker]

Narrative isn't as simple at that. When the 'good guys' continue to prayer her every chance they get and the only people who ever criticise get are the'bad guys' the game is trying quite hard to send a message. Never mind that any criticisms against her in the band are completely irrelevant to the current events and are more resident to what her father did. You can't separate what the characters say and what the game is trying to say that easily. Nuh uh. That's bullshit. The words of the characters and the message or idea that a story conveys are deeply connected. The game can only ever say something through the characters and the characters continue to idolise and praise her before and after her suicide. Please do put in more effort because you're coming off as incredibly amateurish.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Moira]

Are you certain that the plegians weren't abandoning Gangrel because he was oh i don't know.... killing his own people by the dozen? We all remember the Aversa messenger scene right?

I remember specifically that as plegian soldiers deserted the battlefield, they chanted Emmeryn's name. The game made it very clear that her death was part of why the soldiers deserted en masse.

[Interceptor]

You can't separate what the characters say and what the game is trying to say that easily. Nuh uh. That's bullshit.

Because it's devastating to your case? Not my problem. The fact that these things are coming from characters, rather than some omniscient figure, is actually a pretty important distinction. For example, Gangrel says this during Chapter 9:

"Now, now, my boy-no one needs die today. Not you. Not the exalt. Not your friends. Just lay down your sword, and give me the Fire Emblem."

Does anyone interpret this as meaning that Chrom can surrender and everyone will be OK? No, because we know that Gangrel is a crazy, double-crossing MF'er. Someone should always view things like this through the prism of the motivations of the person who said them; that's why whenever you and your ilk refer to "the game" stating something, I just laugh and adjust my monocle.

When pressed for an example of this Emm idolatry, you ignored it, for reasons unknown. Others stepped up in your stead, but neither example given actually held up under scrutiny. Hyperbole exposed as hyperbolic... film at 11.

Please do put in more effort

In the words of the great, always-quotable Presea: "50% output should be sufficient."

amateurish

This is a really strange choice of adjective for an insult. Regardless of the definition of the word, the root here is "amateur". Amateurs are significantly more skilled in their trade than laypersons, and there aren't any professional Awakening debaters as far as I am aware. Thanks for the compliment!

[Ownagepuffs]

Dat feel when the only part of my post you focus on is the part that was meant to be a humorous remark.

[Interceptor]

Dat feel when the only part of my post you focus on is the part that was meant to be a humorous remark.

You might have missed the actual reply, since I did actually respond to pretty much everything you said.

[RJWalker]

No, no, you still can't separate the words of the characters from the the ideas the game is trying to convey. Especially a game which lacks a narrator or exposition from a neutral source. The words of characters are how the writers convey their ideas. Yes, their words carry bias but it is also the only way the game states anything. It's not' devastating to my case'. Especially since you didn't actually give a proper rebuttal that's not completely laughable.

When pressed for an example of this Emm idolatry, you ignored it, for reasons unknown. Others stepped up in your stead, but neither example given actually held up under scrutiny. Hyperbole exposed as hyperbolic... film at 11.

The examples are clear to anyone who can read. I won't quote every single mention of Emmeryn since we'd be here all day. But suffice to say, the characters keep praising her and the game allows for any discussion on why she's wrong. Anyone who disagrees with her is evil and petty and anyone who agrees with her is good. Because that's how writing works. The words the characters say are important. No matter how much you try to deny that their words don't carry any sort of message.

[Ownagepuffs]

In other words, you mean Chrom, Lissa, and Frederick giving unbiased background to an amnesiac who wouldn't know any better. I don't know about anyone else, but when I really want to get the pulse on someone, I ask their younger siblings and the f'n butler.

You'd have a point, except the game uses a visual cue to present the idea to the viewer that Emm is flawless.

Namely, this one (from the same scene in question)

For cryin' out loud the freaking sun is shining on her. This picture, accompanied by Chrom's praise gives the viewer a strong first impression.

This isn't true unless the game ejects the cartridge every time you get to the end of Chapter 7, which is a "yell at the movie screen" moment if there ever was one.

Lol, re-watch the scene. The music accompanying Emm's decision to return to the capital implies that the viewer was to feel sympathetic for her oh so selfless decision. The game did not try to show you how stupid her decision was. Rather, it glorified her choice. You've really got to provide some evidence that Awakening is clever enough to subtly present Emmeryn's flaws to the viewer when the rest of the story is a clusterfuck.

[CrimeanRoyalKnight]

Actually, IIRC, both the Kahns and Mustafa praise Emmeryn, and also the Grandpa who found her in her paralogue.

It's not farfetched to say the game glorifies her and wants to make us think she did nothing wrong.

If Awakening is spoonfeeding something, then it's spoonfeeding us that Emmeryn is, at the beginning, a brave victim of her father's heritage and of Gangrel's actions; then, later, she's a saint that stopped the war because she killed herself after a mini speech against war.

We must remember that Awakening is very straight-forward with its morals and narratives, and doesn't really force you to think much. It was made that way, to be a wild rollercoaster of emotions; It wants you to think with your heart, not your brain; it doesn't even want you to think much about it because the flow of the story is an emotional event after another.

However, those who are not affected by the game's cheesily emotional set up scenes, can easily see that Emmeryn is actually a bad ruler, among many other things, even if the game tells us otherwise.

I can't bring myself to deny one of the game's strongest "love at first sight, best game ever!!!1" points, the super emotional story, because it's so evident, so blantant: many cried at Emmeryn's death or were simply left sad by it, but after a second playthrough or some thought they clearly understood it was just another confused plot point.

The game doesn't acknowledge her inefficiency because it clearly doesn't, and doesn't want us to anyway.

I read Emmeryn's hotspring conversations, and IIRC she still is a saint that is praised for everything she has done.

If Awakening wanted us to think about its story and give us ambigue acts, then things would've been presented differently, especially in a series like Fire Emblem.

[Interceptor]

No, no, you still can't separate the words of the characters from the the ideas the game is trying to convey. Especially a game which lacks a narrator or exposition from a neutral source. The words of characters are how the writers convey their ideas. Yes, their words carry bias but it is also the only way the game states anything.

There's no evidence of such motivations on the part of the writers. Some stories do that, some don't. Sure, we can go on a whimsical Inference Fantasy Adventure and just make shit up as we go along, but that makes for a flimsy argument. There's no way to separate what actually happened, from what you want to believe happened.

Also, in-game events blow up your argument, but we'll get to that momentarily.

The examples are clear to anyone who can read. I won't quote every single mention of Emmeryn since we'd be here all day.

Or in other words, you ain't got shit. I asked for examples, and what's been given thus far has had all the structural integrity of a house of cards in a hurricane. If it's so clear, why are you having such difficulty? Surely you aren't just asserting something that isn't true!

But suffice to say, the characters keep praising her and the game allows for any discussion on why she's wrong. Anyone who disagrees with her is evil and petty and anyone who agrees with her is good. Because that's how writing works. The words the characters say are important. No matter how much you try to deny that their words don't carry any sort of message.

Anyone who disagrees with her is evil and petty, huh? I suppose that not only does the game disallow good people to disagree with Emm, but SURELY not someone who was otherwise on her side, right? Well...

Emmeryn

...... I love you, Chrom. Both you and Lissa are my everything. As for the peace I seek... You cannot see who it is for. I have to go. I'm sorryI truly am. Let us embrace again in Ylisstol when you arrive with Feroxi reinforcements. I know you will come.

Chrom

...This is a terrible plan.

Aaand this argument is over.

You'd have a point, except the game uses a visual cue to present the idea to the viewer that Emm is flawless.

Just to be clear, is a CG of a pretty girl on a sunny day with nice music the extent of your best evidence?

You've really got to provide some evidence that Awakening is clever enough to subtly present Emmeryn's flaws to the viewer when the rest of the story is a clusterfuck.

Who said Awakening was clever about it? There's no subtlety about Emm's flaws; you can measure the results of her pacifism by counting the bodies.

[CrimeanRoyalKnight]

Who said Awakening was clever about it? There's no subtlety about Emm's flaws; you can measure the results of her pacifism by counting the bodies.

I don't know, but I always have this feeling that the game never links the deaths of many to Emmeryn's idiocy, but to Gangrel's cruelty and war's horrors.

As I said, I feel that instead of giving us better views and dialogues on how those deaths were actually her fault, actually giving us characters that question her actions (like the player does), the script just portrays her as a loyal, heroic victim. Even in the dialogue you quoted, the game clearly tells us that she is doing all those reckless acts for the Plegians and their leader, and that even if it's a bad idea, it's something good-natured to the core and thus it must be done.

[RJWalker]

Still you continue with your laughable responses. I don't have to repeat examples of her being idolised because others have already done so. And your weak response (which consisted of deliberately ignoring context and altering the meaning, like you did with that pathetic response to the pic OwnagePuffs posted) did nothing to dilute the arguments made. You need to step it up. Everyone sees through your BS.

Anyone who disagrees with her is evil and petty, huh? I suppose that not only does the game disallow good people to disagree with Emm, but SURELY not someone who was otherwise on her side, right? Well...

Emmeryn
...... I love you, Chrom. Both you and Lissa are my everything. As for the peace I seek... You cannot see who it is for. I have to go. I'm sorryI truly am. Let us embrace again in Ylisstol when you arrive with Feroxi reinforcements. I know you will come.

Chrom
...This is a terrible plan.

Aaand this argument is over.

Oh please, he goes along with the plan within seconds. Nevermind that in this case, he's played up as being the one at fault for not agreeing with her. And as later dialogue shows, he eventually does agree with her decisions. People who disagree with her idealogy of absolute pacifism are immediate portrayed as evil. Gangrel and Walhart being prime examples. Chrom, who agrees with her idealogy (yet never actually follows it, being the hypocrite that he is) is well, the good guy.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Bloo]

Chrom claims to follow his sister's ideals of fighting evil in every form, yet he considerably corrupts that idea, launching a full-out invasion of a nation that had done nothing directly targeting Ylisse, and yet nobody ever picks up on the fact, with the Valmese being shown as evil throughout, even though Walhart is simply defending his lands.

The game isn't so much saying anyone who disagree's with Emmeryn's ideals is wrong, but instead anyone who disagrees with the protagonist is wrong. The fact that Chrom launches the offensive against Walhart is simply because the mapmakers wanted more space to play with, so the story writers used Emmeryn's ideals as a BS reason for Chrom to invade another country while unprovoked.

'The protagonist is always right' is not a good way of making a story.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Bloo

[RJWalker]

Okay, Chrom was did not attack unprovoked. And Walhart is not just defending his lands. Aside from that, you're right.