Would you play a 4th Evil Route?

[Pretty_Handsome]

Where you slaughter both sides and the such for your..... Spoilers!

Would be interesting if it was a true hard mode with limited characters (As you are evil), crazy maps and the such.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Pretty_Handsome

[capmalachi]

I'd play it yeah. I'd even pay for it as DLC at the same price as the other routes (as long as it is a full route of course). I get why it isn't likely to happen though.

[Soledai]

This topic title made me laugh for some reason, but sure, yeah. I wouldn't mind being the "villain/evil doer" for a change of pace.

I honestly thought that's what the third route was gonna be... just with less evil.

[Pretty_Handsome]

Third route is mostly sunshine and rainbows so thus would be cool in my opinion.

Though I wonder what one's roster would look like as most characters wouldn't side with evil and they wouldn't make too many new characters for a dlc route.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Pretty_Handsome

[Darros]

Of course. It's a Fire Emblem board, most people here are probably gonna play whatever they can get their hands on.

[Thane]

No, Conquest already counts as that to me. No matter what Kamui used to justify their actions, they invade a peaceful country knowing full well that a literal inhuman, evil being who executes people or lets someone else do it left and right. Kamui also personally slaughters a lot of people and is indirectly responsible for many, many more deaths - and they do a lot of more stupid shit like pretending they're going to execute Hinoka for no reason.

It could be argued that it's a stupid path rather than an evil one, but I honestly felt disgusted, not because I was being the bad guy, but because Kamui considered themselves - and was considered - a good person who was in the right.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Thane

[derekai]

If its free.

[Water Mage]

No, it would beat the purpose of game, of deciding which side is more important to you, or if love both equally, besides, dark edgy stories are kinda overrated in my opinion.

[NeonZ]

No, Conquest already counts as that to me. No matter what Kamui used to justify their actions, they invade a peaceful country knowing full well that a literal inhuman, evil being who executes people or lets someone else do it left and right. Kamui also personally slaughters a lot of people and is indirectly responsible for many, many more deaths - and they do a lot of more stupid shit like pretending they're going to execute Hinoka for no reason.

It could be argued that it's a stupid path rather than an evil one, but I honestly felt disgusted, not because I was being the bad guy, but because Kamui considered themselves - and was considered - a good person who was in the right.

"Peaceful country"? Hoshido spends most of the Nohr route making incursions into Norh or helping rebellions against them, all based on the mistaken idea that it was Nohr that killed their queen.

Before revealing his identity, they couldn't turn against Garon without basically starting a civil war within Nohr. But I guess Nohr's people and soldiers somehow don't count because they're from the "evil nation"? This is the impression I'm getting from that kind of post.

Edited July 6, 2015 by NeonZ

[Iron Griffin]

No, Conquest already counts as that to me. No matter what Kamui used to justify their actions, they invade a peaceful country knowing full well that a literal inhuman, evil being who executes people or lets someone else do it left and right. Kamui also personally slaughters a lot of people and is indirectly responsible for many, many more deaths - and they do a lot of more stupid shit like pretending they're going to execute Hinoka for no reason.

It could be argued that it's a stupid path rather than an evil one, but I honestly felt disgusted, not because I was being the bad guy, but because Kamui considered themselves - and was considered - a good person who was in the right.

I always felt that Villains/Anti-Villain/Anti-Heroes who commit such acts under the belief they are right are much more engaging than those who do it just cause "Hey I am an evil twit!". I havent played this route yet so I didnt get the full experience you did but it sounds like it possibly borders on the trope of Stupid Evil instrad. I think IS was trying to go for a moral gray zone with Conquest but from the way it sounds that might have been a misfire on their part. But as I said I'll have to play it for myself.

For the sake of the poll I'm going with NO. Besides the fact it goes against the point of Fates. I also prefer moral ambiguity in most narratives instead of just it being Black and White because the dynamics of the characters are little more complex than straight up Good vs. Evil like it was in Awakening.

[Pretty_Handsome]

No, Conquest already counts as that to me. No matter what Kamui used to justify their actions, they invade a peaceful country knowing full well that a literal inhuman, evil being who executes people or lets someone else do it left and right. Kamui also personally slaughters a lot of people and is indirectly responsible for many, many more deaths - and they do a lot of more stupid shit like pretending they're going to execute Hinoka for no reason.

It could be argued that it's a stupid path rather than an evil one, but I honestly felt disgusted, not because I was being the bad guy, but because Kamui considered themselves - and was considered - a good person who was in the right.

Conquest isn't evil, just poorly done.

[Yunanuy]

I heard there's a sidestory-DLC where you play a few maps as Garon

jk this is a total lie please don't kill me

[Thane]

"Peaceful country"? Hoshido spends most of the Nohr route making incursions into Norh or helping rebellions against them, all based on the mistaken idea that it was Nohr that killed their queen.

Yes, after Nohr invades Hoshido, which is after the sword Garon gave Kamui exploded. Now, that was obviously a ploy, but the real invasion that occurs afterward is not. You also don't have Hoshidian characters executing innocent Nohrians in Birthright, whereas that happens at at least three points in Conquest. In fact, they often spare the lives of the common soldiers, like when defeating Ganz.

Trying to say Hoshido is not peaceful goes against not only what is said about the country, but also what is shown throughout the game.

I always felt that Villains/Anti-Villain/Anti-Heroes who commit such acts under the belief they are right are much more engaging than those who do it just cause "Hey I am an evil twit!". I havent played this route yet so I didnt get the full experience you did but it sounds like it possibly borders on the trope of Stupid Evil instrad. I think IS was trying to go for a moral gray zone with Conquest but from the way it sounds that might have been a misfire on their part. But as I said I'll have to play it for myself.

For the sake of the poll I'm going with NO. Besides the fact it goes against the point of Fates. I also prefer moral ambiguity in most narratives instead of just it being Black and White because the dynamics of the characters are little more complex than straight up Good vs. Evil like it was in Awakening.

Oh believe me, I do as well. My favorite video game characer of all time is Kreia from Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords, despite not being a big Star Wars fan, and her "deal" is that she's very morally ambigious - hell, she's cruel and manipulative, but she comes across as more sympathetic than Kamui. Kamui is so stupid that it actually almost hurts to read their lines, and the way their supposed ideals and plans are approached by other characters is pathetic. The moral gray zone that was presented to us in the beginning with the choice is nowhere to be seen towards the end. You're straight up committing evil deeds because of a poor plan, and you're not saving innocents because you're afraid of being executed or something.

If Garon had been defeated early on through questionable means, and if Garon had had at least some kind of reedming qualities, then we could've talked about morally gray. However, that didn't happen, and there's nothing ambiguous with Conquest's ending.

[Tamanoir]

I heard there's a sidestory-DLC where you play a few maps as Garon

jk this is a total lie please don't kill me

That would be freaking awesome.

Hell, a Map when you plays the Final Boss against all the heroes would be freaking great

(Awakening could have done this perfectly. Another missed opportunity...)

Yeah, I'm totally stealing the idea for one of my favourite RPG.

Live a Live, if you're wondering.

Go play it if you haven't already, you won't regret it!

Edited July 6, 2015 by Tamanoir

[Yunanuy]

snip

Pretty sure I saw a Let's Play on that before, but it didn't really catch my attention. I think the gameplay put me off a bit, but I'll look into it again if you're vouching for it!

Getting back on track, a 4th route where you basically took over the Nohr throne would be cool though (not because you think Garon is mean, but because you think he's not mean enough). Ganz and the other baddies could pledge their allegiance to you and overthrow Garon or something. It will never happen, but a man can hope...

[NeonZ]

Yes, after Nohr invades Hoshido, which is after the sword Garon gave Kamui exploded. Now, that was obviously a ploy, but the real invasion that occurs afterward is not. You also don't have Hoshidian characters executing innocent Nohrians in Birthright, whereas that happens at at least three points in Conquest. In fact, they often spare the lives of the common soldiers, like when defeating Ganz.

Trying to say Hoshido is not peaceful goes against not only what is said about the country, but also what is shown throughout the game.

Except that early invasion is just to recover Kamui and they leave right afterwards. And the sword explodes due to someone who's a complete stranger and who isn't actually part of Nohr. The "real invasion" happens much later after Hoshido spends almost the entire campaign attacking Nohr.

Hoshido spares the lives of captured soldiers, while in Nohr you sometimes have Iago and Gunz appearing to order executions, but they're still killing innocent Nohr soldiers in battle and helping rebellions while moving under a completely mistaken pretext. But, like I said, that isn't the point. If Kamui didn't go along when he did it basically means starting a civil war within Nohr, which would just lead to more deaths in Nohr's side. It's pretty obvious Marx wouldn't turn against Garon until it's basically shown that it's not Garon at all.

Trying to say that Nohr Kamui is stupid and ineffective, and maybe outright evil goes directly against what the game says, but you apparently have no problem doing it either.

Edited July 6, 2015 by NeonZ

[Mackc2]

It would be more fire emblem how could i refuse

[Thane]

Except that early invasion is just to recover Kamui and they leave right afterwards. And the sword explodes due to someone who's a complete stranger and who isn't actually part of Nohr. The "real invasion" happens much later after Hoshido spends almost the entire campaign attacking Nohr.

Hoshido spares the lives of captured soldiers, while in Nohr you sometimes have Iago and Gunz appearing to order executions, but they're still killing innocent Nohr soldiers in battle and helping rebellions while moving under a completely mistaken pretext. But, like I said, that isn't the point. If Kamui didn't go along when he did it basically means starting a civil war within Nohr, which would just lead to more deaths in Nohr's side.

Trying to say that Nohr Kamui is stupid and ineffective, and maybe outright evil goes directly against what the game says, but you apparently have no problem doing it either.

Except that early invasion is just to recover Kamui and they leave right afterwards. And the sword explodes due to someone who's a complete stranger and who isn't actually part of Nohr. The "real invasion" happens much later after Hoshido spends almost the entire campaign attacking Nohr.

Hoshido spares the lives of captured soldiers, while in Nohr you sometimes have Iago and Gunz appearing to order executions, but they're still killing innocent Nohr soldiers in battle and helping rebellions while moving under a completely mistaken pretext. But, like I said, that isn't the point. If Kamui didn't go along when he did it basically means starting a civil war within Nohr, which would just lead to more deaths in Nohr's side.

Trying to say that Nohr Kamui is stupid and ineffective, and maybe outright evil goes directly against what the game says, but you apparently have no problem doing it either.

You do realize that bringing an entire army to another country is usually seen as an invasion, right? Responding to that knd of aggression is not what I would call evil, especially not since Garon is actively planning on invading Hoshido - the developers even flat out stated that what you're doing in Birthright is repelling invaders just like in a traditional Fire Emblem game. Besides, I even said that the sword was a ploy, but it was still given to him by Garon - the entire deal with the two original paths is that you're falling for the manipulations of the Invisible Kingdom, so I don't know why you brought that up. The third path is obviously set up as the canon route, so comparing it to any of the original versions in terms of story is futile.

I never said that Kamui was outright evil, I said that the path felt evil and that I felt disgusted because Kamui considered themselves, and was considered, a good person in the right in spite of all the horrible things he did and let happen. Nohr Kamui is stupid and ineffective, something that's even highlighted by Leon when he asks why Kamui didn't even bother telling them about Garon being a slime monster.

If think that the two paths are comparable because they help out rebels and deserters in Birthright, then that's your right, but I'll remain unconvinced as long as your arguments are as weak as they are.

[NoNameAtAll]

Killing everyone sounds more like the typical Shin Megami Tensei neutral path (Fuck both Chaos and Law, I do what I want!).

...I'd buy.

[NeonZ]

You do realize that bringing an entire army to another country is usually seen as an invasion, right? Responding to that knd of aggression is not what I would call evil, especially not since Garon is actively planning on invading Hoshido - the developers even flat out stated that what you're doing in Birthright is repelling invaders just like in a traditional Fire Emblem game. Besides, I even said that the sword was a ploy, but it was still given to him by Garon - the entire deal with the two original paths is that you're falling for the manipulations of the Invisible Kingdom, so I don't know why you brought that up. The third path is obviously set up as the canon route, so comparing it to any of the original versions in terms of story is futile.

I never said that Kamui was outright evil, I said that the path felt evil and that I felt disgusted because Kamui considered themselves, and was considered, a good person in the right in spite of all the horrible things he did and let happen. Nohr Kamui is stupid and ineffective, something that's even highlighted by Leon when he asks why Kamui didn't even bother telling them about Garon being a slime monster.

If think that the two paths are comparable because they help out rebels and deserters in Birthright, then that's your right, but I'll remain unconvinced as long as your arguments are as weak as they are.

I'm not talking about Hoshido's actions in the Hoshido story, I'm talking about Hoshido's actions in the Nohr story. The Nohr army retreats after Kamui returns, and yet you've got Hoshido during many chapters afterwards starting invasions, helping rebellions against Nohr, and even sending assassins to kill Kamui (Kamui's support with Aqua/Azura). I'm bringing up the man that triggers the sword because Hoshido in Nohr is the one actively on the offensive during most of the story and that incident is their main motivation behind it. The third path is irrelevant here. Obviously blob Garon and his plans are evil. I'm just saying that Hoshido's military, you know, the people and their allies that are actually executed a couple of times in the Nohr campaign, also have blood on their hands and for a completely mistaken reason.

Also, you just said it again. You feel like Nohr Kamui being considered good is "disgusting". How is that not saying that you think he's evil?

It's true that most siblings probably would have followed Kamui even without the actual physical reveal of his nature, but there's still Marx, and he's the most important one. Turning against Garon earlier would have resulted in a Nohr civil war and Nohr people dying. Kamui's route in Nohr causes more losses for Hoshido, but it spares Nohr from that.

Going directly Garon might be a simpler and seemingly more direct choice, but it's not necessarily the best for everyone. Look at what happens to the Ice Tribe in Hoshido's story for the most obvious example since it wasn't Kamui the one who stopped their rebellion against Nohr there, unlike in the Nohr route.

Edited July 6, 2015 by NeonZ

[B.Leu]

God forbid that you kill people in time of war... Sigh.

About this 4th path, I'll buy it, they'll probably screw this up again, but killing all those self-righteous dumbass is just so good. to pass it up.

[Thane]

I'm not talking about Hoshido's actions in the Hoshido story, I'm talking about Hoshido's actions in the Nohr story. The Nohr army retreats after Kamui returns, and yet you've got Hoshido during many chapters afterwards starting invasions, helping rebellions against Nohr, and even sending assassins to kill Kamui (Kamui's support with Aqua/Asura). I'm bringing up the sword because Hoshido in Nohr is the one actively on the offensive during most of the story. The third path is irrelevant here. Obviously blob Garon and his plans are evil. I'm just saying that Hoshido's military, you know, the people and their allies that are actually executed a couple of times in the Nohr campaign, also have blood on their hands.

Also, you just said it again. You feel like Kamui being considered good is "disgusting". How is that not saying that you think he's evil?

It's true that most siblings probably would have followed Kamui even without the actual physical reveal of his nature, but there's still Marx, and he's the most important one. Turning against Garon earlier would have resulted in a Nohr civil war and Nohr people dying. Kamui's route in Nohr causes more losses for Hoshido, but it spares Nohr from that.

Turning against Garon might be a simpler and seemingly more direct choice, but it's not necessarily the best for everyone. Look at what happens to the Ice Tribe in Hoshido's story for the most obvious example since it wasn't Kamui the one who stopped their rebellion there.

But the war had already been started by Nohr, so I don't see any problem nor anything dark with funding rebels. Besides, those people are rebelling against an evil impersonator who kills people left and right. I do not understand how you could think this is in any way comparable to what the Nohrians do throughout the story - the only thing I can see that comes close is Ryouma refusing to let Kamui get medicine that Elise needs unless he returns to Hoshido.

If memory serves, Nohr isn't just on the defensive until chapter 21, you're just not part of the invasion itself. However, I might have missed something due to my poor Japanese.

There's a big difference between Kamui being evil and Kamui not being in the right. Kamui throughout the entire Nohr campaign is, as I mentioned previously, ineffcient, stupid, even more naïve than in Birthright and he even suffers from character regression since he doesn't oppose Garon as he did in the very beginning of the game - even if that makes a certain degree of sense, it's still awful storytelling that just isn't fun or interesting. However, in spite of all that, he's never evil - the closest he gets is when he pretends to execute Hinoka, but that just comes across more as distasteful rather than evil. But, the fact that he's forgiven by all of his family, both the living and the dead in the dead people pep montage, even though he has done absolutely nothing to deserve their sympathy, is just bad writing.

Xander still decides to trust Kamui without proof right before they open the door though. True, he's the quickest to accuse Kamui of betraying them (which is stupid, but Xander is the dumbest person in Birthright, so I sort of expected a reaction like that), but he listens to "reason" if you can call it that and, like I said, trusts him. The fact that they could have mentioned this at any point after Aqua took her quick little trip to another dimension that's never elaborated upon is one of the reasons why this route feels both uninspired and rushed - not to mention that it feels as if entire chunks of content have been removed far too late into development. Anyway, the point is that the siblings do listen to Kamui and Aqua - I'm honestly surprised that they even object in the first place considering how much they all seem to hate Garon.

See, that would make for a more interesting story that would've been closer to what was promised us. It was marketed as the more complex route, and instead you're Garon's pet until right before the very end; that's just not an interesting story.

I suppose this is all a moot point though, since the third path will be canon and solve everything. So much for having a choice when we've got two de facto wrong ones and one that gives us everything the other two lacked.

[NeonZ]

It's not the "Nohrians" though, that's my issue with it. You're acting like the Nohrians are a mass of evil and extension of Garon, rather than actual people. Garon, Gunz and McBeth are evil, but by turning against them through military action you're still killing many people that had nothing to do with that. The executions done by those three, overruling Kamui's attempts to spare his foes as far as I remember are always against the enemy soldiers themselves too. So, it's not like Kamui is standing while watching non-fighting civilians being killed. He's watching an invading army and their allies being killed.

Marx's whole dilemma right before the reveal is to go against a minor order like opening a room that was supposed to stay closed. You really can't take that and act like it's proof that he'd turn against Garon with military force.

Kamui returns to Nohr under accusations of having returned under Hoshido orders to kill Garon, which is why he first needs to prove himself loyal, and so never acts against direct orders. Having to work under an evil ruler and making the best out of it, without immediately resorting to rebellion is pretty interesting storytelling to me considering how it's a rather unusual path for a protagonist, not even just in FE itself but in general. Now, I think various other elements could have been handled better, especially the cheap plot device reveal of Garon's identity, but I don't see how just making the Nohr route into a "create a rebel Nohr faction and turn against Norh empire" story would have been interesting at all. In fact, I guess I might be biased for Nohr just because that, which was my worst fear for the route, didn't really happen.

Edited July 6, 2015 by NeonZ

[Jedi]

It's not the "Nohrians" though, that's my issue with it. You're acting like the Nohrians are a mass of evil and extension of Garon, rather than actual people. Garon, Gunz and McBeth are evil, but by turning against them through military action you're still killing many people that had nothing to do with that. The executions done by those three, overruling Kamui, as far as I remember are always against the enemy soldiers themselves too.

Marx's whole dilemma right before the reveal is to go against a minor order like opening a room that was supposed to stay closed. You really can't take that and act like it's proof that he'd turn against Garon with military force.

Kamui returns to Nohr under accusations of having returned under Hoshido orders to kill Garon, which is why he first needs to prove himself loyal, and so never acts against direct orders. Having to work under an evil ruler and making the best out of it, without immediately resorting to rebellion is pretty interesting storytelling to me considering how it's a rather unusual path for a protagonist, not even just in FE itself but in general. Now, I think various other elements could have been handled better, especially the cheap plot device reveal of Garon's identity, but I don't see how just making the Nohr route into a "create a rebel Nohr faction and turn against Norh empire" story would have been interesting at all. In fact, I guess I might be biased for Nohr just because that, which was my worst fear for the route, didn't really happen.

Sorry to jump in, but this was how they advertised Nohr originally, it would have been very interesting imo if you had to gain Garon's loyalty back while planning against him with your siblings, what we got instead sounds like a Kamui who is a class A idiot who doesn't know how to oppose an obviously sinister ruler and makes mistake after mistake after mistake, like Leif kinda but Leif had actual motivation and actual flaws as opposed to Kamui who seems to be idealistic to the point of insanity even on the darker and edgier path where he/she SHOULD have rebelled. "

[Luninareph]

I would play as many paths as Fates chose to give us, more than likely :D