Anyone hope IF's characters will be less shallow?

[Faye]

I did enjoy FE:A's characters, they were interesting in their own way, even with the gimmicks per character. I'm hoping this game will be even more memorable.

[raz0r]

I hope the characters aren't as shallow. The only meaningful support convo was Henry+Olivia and MU+Nah. Everyone else talks about pie and barely scratches the surface of anything meaningful to develop a loving relationship.

[Shadow Knight]

I didn't consider Awakening's characters overall to be shallow. Just that some were better than others. On the surface a lot of them are basically tropes. Lon'qu the silent assassin with a hidden past, Frederick the butler, Cordelia the Catria of the group, Gaius the candy lover. But if you dig deeper they are much more complex. Why does Lon'qu hate women and avoid ppl? He was a street orchin who befriended a girl but failed to save her when she was killed. Thus he carries a fear that any women who gets close to him will die. Why is Cordelia always so curt and afraid of being called genius? Inside she feels guilty bc of her fellow pegasus knights sacrifice. She has survivor's guilt. Why is she the Catria? Because Chrom is a chick magnet. Eventually she gets over him and falls for whoever she actually spends time with. Is Gaius just a candy loving criminal? No he is actually much nicer for example saving Mariabelle in the past, helping Chrom learn to relax a bit, repaying bubbles for keeping his secret. Is Tharja just a typical stalker? No she is actually a child-abuser who plays mix and match curses on her daughter yet still loves her (sort of)

Then of course there is Mariabelle and Kellam who are incredibly shallow imo except for a laugh when you go to sell Kellam's stuff.

But I wouldn't call Awakening's characters shallow and tbh shallow characters have always been a part of FE anyways. Not every single character can have an extensive background detailing their entire lifestory. Otherwise they wouldn't be side characters, they would be main characters.

[Augestein]

I know this sounds weird, but am I the only person that thought that *some* of Awakenings supports were pretty good when they weren't opposite sex? Seriously, Olivia? I'm not going to lie, that support with Maribelle had me legitimately laughing. Gaius and Chrom or Fred and Chrom are pretty amusing in their own rights. Heck, Gaius doesn't even bother with the whole candy thing in his support mainly. It's primarily about Chrom not knowing how the common man lives despite his rather rough and tumble demeanor. Tiki and Tharja's is pretty good too, and I don't even like Tharja too much.

The issue with Awakenings supports is the marriage ones. Most of them have characters shipped together that have no business really talking to each other so it comes across as kinda stupid for them to talk because it's just cranking their initial defining feature up 20 levels and going to town with it, and then BAM marriage. You don't get any of the crazy marriages like Matthew x Serra where you're like "haha they ended up together!?" Instead you get ones like Frederick and Cordelia where you kinda want to punch Cordelia and console Fred for falling in love with someone that acts like a complete harpy in the support (I feel bad for anyone that got this pairing first like I did because it put a bad stain on the character that I still can't really get over).

[MitoRequiem]

As someone who cares about gameplay above anything else, I couldn't care less about this.

You do know that there's a child mechanic in Awakening, right? And that the child gets different classes and skills based on who their father is?

This so much, gameplay is the most important thing to me everything else is secondary, As long as the gameplay is good I'll generally enjoy the game, It is a videogame after all not a movie!!! but I can see why a lot are worried about how the characters will be, at a certain point I just stopped caring cause I felt like it'd only disappoint me.

[Book Bro]

Then of course there is Mariabelle and Kellam who are incredibly shallow imo except for a laugh when you go to sell Kellam's stuff.

Nuuuuu! Don't bunch Maribelle with Kellam! :c She has some excellent supports like with Libra and Gaius.

Like I said I feel many of the characters in Awakening do have a fair amount of depth to them but it makes less of an impression because of all the support clutter and the abundance of one-liners.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Owain Dark

[Thane]

This so much, gameplay is the most important thing to me everything else is secondary, As long as the gameplay is good I'll generally enjoy the game, It is a videogame after all not a movie!!! but I can see why a lot are worried about how the characters will be, at a certain point I just stopped caring cause I felt like it'd only disappoint me.

I'll never understand this agument. With both books and movies, you invest yourself in a (usually) fictional scenario by following the plot, and if all goes well you become emotionally attached to the characters and hope they achieve their goals; video games, at least those with a focus on story, are no different. One could argue that it would be even easier to care more about the story in a video game due to its interactive nature, and thus you're in control of how the story develops, and it usually lasts far longer than movies.

[Book of Ereshkigal]

The it's just a video game is a dangerous argument, at least in my opinion, you're giving developers an excuse to produce a lower quality product, why, exactly?

[HF Makalov Fanboy Kai]

The it's just a video game is a dangerous argument, at least in my opinion, you're giving developers an excuse to produce a lower quality product, why, exactly?

it kinda remind me of something.

"a good children's show shouldn't be insulting to the children's intelligence just because its directed towards them."

Edited April 14, 2015 by HF Makalov Fanboy Kai

[NoirCore]

Anyone who's a fan of FE would obviously hope for less shallow characters (:P), but in my opinion, Awakening wasn't so bad. They had gimmicky characters, sure, but they put in a lot of effort in inserting supports and DLC conversations for all recruitable characters, giving them plenty of depth, something past FEs have not given as much as to all characters, especially in Radiant Dawn, where support conversations didn't even happen, harming most of the new characters' depth.

[Baldrick]

Some games are all about that gameplay, but I don't think Fire Emblem is one of them. Compared to chess, (a gameplay-orientated SRPG) your units are unique, have personalities and their permanent death is tragic and avoidable, so you're meant to become attached to them. The plot may not be the Iliad, but it makes you try to feel something so it's not there just to justify the gameplay.

The characters having more depth would allow the suspension of disbelief to kick in, so I'm all for it.

[Dandy Druid]

I didn't think Kellam had depth. IMO he seemed the most shallow. His whole gimmick was that nobody noticed him, so he was always "OMG nobody noticed ME... again" *cue pout*. He always seemed to focus on himself. Not that I blame him for wanting attention, but the writers really emphasized it a lot. The only support he wasn't all "nobody notices ME" was with Stahl. (from my experience, can't confirm, of course, so many supports in one game.)

Edited April 15, 2015 by Dandy Druid

[Book of Ereshkigal]

Kellam's support with Tharja was about writing letters home to family, if I recall correctly.

[Cinnamon Bun]

Definitely hoping for some well written characters. I want to actually feel something for both sides!

I love Awakening a lot, but whenever I make a new file and marry somebody new I'm usually disappointed at how boring most of my options turn out to be.

On that same note, seeing as how IF is shaping up to be a touch more serious, I would like to see properly developed support convos, even if they have to cut down the amount. FEA has sooo many support conversations that feel so shallow and meaningless to me.. Only a few of them really touched my heart.

I want my family members to make me WANT to protect and keep them safe, y'know??

Edited April 15, 2015 by Cinnamon Bun

[Wayward Alchemist]

The only Awakening characters that had real depth were the children, but they don't count because it's the same depth, which is "I act like this but I'm actually like this and I act like this because the future sukt", but I still love Owain and, Henry is da BEST! But yeah, I hope If's characters aren't just one-trick ponies like Awakening, e.g. Gerome being all "UGGH MY PARENTS ARE DEEEAAAD IM SO DARK AND MYSTERIOUS JUST LIKE MY PAST" and Kellam being all "Sempai notice me!!!" except more whiny. And Emmeryn was just Captain Kirk with amnesia. And Cordelia was jus "OMG Chrom notice me!!!", kinda like Kellam but with more sighing... I'm gonna stop before I get shot.

Edited April 15, 2015 by JothTheConqueror

[Sroy]

The only Awakening characters that had real depth were the children, but they don't count because it's the same depth, which is "I act like this but I'm actually like this and I act like this because the future sukt", but I still love Owain and, Henry is da BEST! But yeah, I hope If's characters aren't just one-trick ponies like Awakening, e.g. Gerome being all "UGGH MY PARENTS ARE DEEEAAAD IM SO DARK AND MYSTERIOUS JUST LIKE MY PAST" and Kellam being all "Sempai notice me!!!" except more whiny. And Emmeryn was just Captain Kirk with amnesia. And Cordelia was jus "OMG Chrom notice me!!!", kinda like Kellam but with more sighing... I'm gonna stop before I get shot.

Gerome was literally batman.

I can agree with you here, when the majority of their supports are about their gimmicks as characters it gets repetitive and annoying.

However, I feel it was worth it just to find that one cool support that actually added REAL, GENUINE DEPTH to a character, and I hope all or most of the supports in IF are like that.

[TheCaptain]

I want to see more supports like FE7 DartxRebecca or FE8 AmeliaxDuessel. They were non-romantuc, yet added great depth and/or back story. Not just us learning about their families and pasts, but having them DISCOVERING things about them within the supports.

[Magical CC]

Does anyone who plays a game think, "Gee, I wish these characters were more shallow"?

Dont be surprised.

[HF Makalov Fanboy Kai]

Dont be surprised.

i've seen it, rarely, but i've heard people saying like "i don't like characters in game A because they aren't as buddy buddy as the group in Game V" needless to say, Game A has the more complex characters.

didn't name the games cause i don't wanna lead it off topic, but i can provide that if people really desire it. (and the hints exist in the letters i gave them)

[Jaedrik]

A character

The depths of their cheese unattainable

In mind, if not life

A masterwork of the impossible.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Jaedrik

[Respite&Nepenthe]

A character

The depths of their cheese unattainable

In mind, if not life

A masterwork of the impossible.

That is oddly beautiful.

[TKHikaru13]

I personally, liked the supports in Awakening. While I will agree the fact that some supports contradicted each other (Looking at you Panne), I genuinely liked the units in Awakening. They all had a defining 'quirk' that was often blown out of proportion, but you still saw some supports where the quirk didn't even come into play (Gauis and Cherche for example). Still, I do agree that some characters could have used some more depth to them.

I think both versions of IF having a potentially smaller cast, plus an accomplished writer is going to give us more character depth. Yes we are still going to have characters with a gimmick, but the gimmick is going to be a facet to a character rather than said character's entire being.

[BlueLore]

Overall I actually liked the kinda gimmicky approach of Awakening where almost everyone had some gimmick that made them stand out.
The gimmick is a nice way to make the character stand out a bit from the get go,which is important because you usually don't get that much insight into a character when you recruit them.

However that shouldn't mean that the character doesn't mean he/she can't have any depht or that said gimmick should be the only thing you need to know about that character.

[TheCaptain]

I'm fine with the characters having gimmicks, but why should that be the only real part of their personality? I again point out the GBA supports. Plenty of characters had a gimmick, but that doesn't mean all their supports have to revolve around them. Characters should interact with some characters in a completely different way than they do with other characters. Take Wallace for example. His gimmick was constantly getting lost. That doesn't mean almost all his supports have to be him losing his way and discussing it with someone. He actually has some very deep supports with characters like Lyn and Renault.

[BlueLore]

I'm fine with the characters having gimmicks, but why should that be the only real part of their personality? I again point out the GBA supports. Plenty of characters had a gimmick, but that doesn't mean all their supports have to revolve around them. Characters should interact with some characters in a completely different way than they do with other characters. Take Wallace for example. His gimmick was constantly getting lost. That doesn't mean almost all his supports have to be him losing his way and discussing it with someone. He actually has some very deep supports with characters like Lyn and Renault.

I dunno if I'd call that a gimmick.As far as i remember Wallace got lost one time and it was mentioned never again...