Sakurai commenting about "extra features"

[NeptuniasBeard]

false. pair up is optional; you can do hard mode just fine without it. you can't do lunatic mode, but lunatic mode is optional.

Let me rephrase, it's not optional like amie where it can just be ignored and nothing is affected. It's a critical part of the gameplay mechanics. If it was too horribly balanced, then it is detrimental to the game.

Obviously, you can not pair up.

[Thor Odinson]

yeah so i suppose my point is that when some users make the point "dev resources could've been better spent elsewhere," they're aware of the fact that development is divided into separate teams, and so what they really mean is that the team charged with developing my castle could've been developing a totally different thing.

That would mean that the devs (or higher ups telling the devs, most likely tbh, although I dunno how rigid IS's structure for lower level devs to propose features to their higher ups since I don't work for them in particular) would have to like, actually have something else in their planner of what to develop though which

I mean, sometimes they just don't think of things

But I'm mostly talking about the kind of people who accuse developers of spending too much time making fancy live2d models when developers aren't even the people making those models, etc

You'd be surprised at how many people actually have no idea of separation of roles and teams and shit work

[Irysa]

In Awakening, Robin is explicitly the only one who can size up an enemy so well that they know how the flow of battle will go. Now notice how if you put it on auto, your characters become no better than the enemies AI. This pretty much confirms that Robin is constantly giving the army orders. You can argue that it's not possible, but gameplay mechanics work independent of real world logic. Or are you gonna say how it's totally possible to have one soldier wipe out your enemies without even a scratch?

Feel free to explain all the previous titles in the series then. Basic systems like this are retroactively modified by narrative implications anyway, there's no evidence Marth commands every single unit in FE1, and there's no reason to intuitively assume as such. Yet, you can pick mass assault in Gaiden (I haven't actually played FE1 on NES so idk if that's there) and it is basically the same as autobattle, just for one turn, and again, that has no implication other than "you don't have to manually select and move everything this turn because our maps suck lol"

If you really want to argue that Robin is the only person who can do any sort of strategy in FE13 at all, then fine, accept it, but you're only chalking up more negative attributes towards the game itself as a whole if you do so. There are some unelegant realities to the changing nature of FE as a series, but again, there is no real sustainable comparison between "choosing where a character moves is not giving them a choice in battle when you're the tactician undermines their agency" and "getting to grope and fuck your barely-legal-technically-not-sisters undermines their agency". The former has at least has reasonable justification unless the tactician is a fucking asshole and suicides their units repeatedly, which is not productive in any strategical sense, and the vast majority of players intuitively see this as a bad thing and get frustrated at themselves (or the game) if it happens. Heck, this is why we have casual and phoenix mode. It's a non-argument, we intuitively recognise that letting units die is undesirable and should be avoided, and if we make tactical errors and someone dies, then a mechanical metaphor would be that that is in fact what happens in war sometimes. The game won't accomodate for units refusing to suicide themselves because as an option it only exists to be a state of failure. Groping minigames are a reward.

I dunno bro, reading through your comments, you seem to be making the amie feature into way more than it actually is. I can understand how it being in can affect what you think of the game, but don't turn it into the pedophile that lives next door. It's a silly little feature put in so people can rub their favorite characters and build up affinity points. That is literally it. It has nothing to do with "character agency" and it sure as hell isn't weaved into the narrative. If you don't want to use it, if you you truly feel like it's a humiliating feature, then don't use it. That way, they never have to suffer. You can argue that it's there, and that's all that matters, but why not complain about everything else you can do that's way worse? You can use children at meatshields, you can hook a small girl up with the local middle aged sadists, you can kill your wife and force the child you had together to watch, or better yet, just have said child do it herself, the sky is the limit.

Please explain how it does not have anything to do with what I've outlined. How exactly does it not highlight how manufactured and non-geninue these characters are? I have said repeatedly though that, by itself, it doesn't really mean as much, because I could hypothetically insert a similar feature into many games, dislike it, but it would not neccessarily highlight or carry the same larger implications that it does for this title. Instead it would be bizzare and simply not fit. However the point is it fits all too damn well into this game.

As for the latter points, I don't like the sound of those either, but I don't make it a perogative to look into all details regarding this game's plot, and I'm not obcessive enough to go scour supports and translated scripts. Additionally I'd need more context to make a judgement about them anyway, wheras this is much easier to talk about broadly without even getting into the nitty gritty of the main story. In fact, I must admit, that a combination of "I don't even want to know" and "there will probably come a day when this game is really cheap that someone convinces me I need to play it so I can write about how I felt about it" are preventing me from looking too much into it, but know those days are not coming anytime soon.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Irysa

[Dark Sage]

In paragraph 2, sure, his points are valid, the amie and supports are at odds with the story, but they still don't affect the story, so what does it matter? All of it is still fluff. Resident evil, silent hill, and others have silly little costumes to unlock that are still seperate from the story. Paragraph 3 is just more Sakurai bashing. Sakurai puts a shitload into his games, he goes above and beyond 95% of other devs in making games rich with content and longevity, to call him a failure just because he messed with your precious melee is asinine.

He didn't talk about melee positively, he used it as an excuse to attack Sakurai's character with bullshit accusations.

I just fucking said in that paragraph how it affects the story. Actually, you said it yourself, it's at odds with the story. How is that not a valid complaint? Most of the examples you gave of extra costumes to unlock are almost entirely postgame fluff and they don't affect the story in any way. This stuff actually does.

I am allowed to think that Sakurai is incompetent because he has done shit to make me believe he is incompetent. Just because you're butthurt over the fact that I insulted your idol Sakurai doesn't negate any legitimate points I made.

And on topic, it's on a case by case basis. Something like amie can be safetly ignored, as it does nothing you can't do in other ways. Something like the pair up feature can't be disregarded as optional because it directly effects the balance of the game. If the game is built to where it is too easy if you pair up, but nearly impossible if you don't, that's a problem.

Not all features are created equal, is what I'm trying to say. I don't enjoy Smash Run, but it doesn't sour me on the game one bit, and I don't miss out on much. But if the online was still a laggy mess, I'd be pissed.

This is the closest you've gotten to actually addressing my points. It's true that there's different levels of optionality but they still exist in the game and they're still open to criticism and their existence still affects the game in some manner. It's asinine to deny this.

I find it rather telling that the meat of the responses I've gotten are "lol salty melee fan" and "how DARE you insult Sakurai-sama" instead of actually attempting to address any of the points I made regarding atmosphere, design cohesion, interconnectivity, etc. Honestly, I get why Irysa doesn't make as many posts about this these days, people don't seem to care that much about actually having a discussion.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Dark Sage

[dondon151]

Let me rephrase, it's not optional like amie where it can just be ignored and nothing is affected. It's a critical part of the gameplay mechanics. If it was too horribly balanced, then it is detrimental to the game.

Obviously, you can not pair up.

you can't just ignore amie and have nothing be affected. people's impressions of the game are affected. the atmosphere is affected.

[NeonZ]

Edit: For some reason, I had to repost this many times before it entered.

Bolded: this is not implict anywhere. It is only stated that Robin gives orders a lot, not that those orders neccessraily happen during combat. Irrespective of that though, if you acknowledge the fact there's a significant difference and one is sort of neccessary whilst the other isn't, what's the point of the comparison? That they both reduce intitatve? Sure, so by all means, get rid of the Avatar. But it's certainly a lot less compelling to argue about letting all characters autopilot all the time when AI in videogames is so consistently terrible.

The dialogue is given during the player phase itself, after the battle starts, rather than during the pre-chapter conversations and such. It's obvious they're talking about battle orders when they start talking about Robin being tired by giving orders and being able to leave decisions for themselves right in the beginning of the player's turn.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that skinship isn't a pandering feature, I'm arguing that the lack of initiative of the characters there has no effect on any other element from the game, which is the similarity between the skinship feature and that piece of dialogue.

If we are only talking about a product that happens to have "extras" within it as default, then I'm still not sure where you're going with this. I've already said that in the cases applicable, I'm not seeing how they're not immune to criticism if they cause detractions on the overall work, and I would critique them for it in those situations. If they are new additions to later revisions, then rather than hold it against the original, you'd hold it against the new release.

I'm pointing out that even if the extras are problematic, they don't damage the core story, and that's the comparison I'm making here. The existence of skinship or not clearly has no effect on the interaction and personality seen elsewhere. The issue that you point out as consequence of it in other aspects of the game (avatar worshiping), like you've said yourself, existed even before skinship, so it's not really a consequence of skinship.

Epilogues can be very much detached from the main narrative of the story, to the point of not really referencing anything and just being pleasant happy ever afters or similar nonsense. The player's own narrative is of less concern to me than the overall meta nature of the game's design and implications of that design.

They're still part of the narrative though, not optional content. Just because they might involve a time skip or might take a different tone doesn't change how they're just another chapter closing the story. Fates itself has "epilogues", like usual for FE, and they're included in the main story, rather than some optional My Castle feature. Equating an optional feature with epilogues just doesn't work.

The logical consequence of everything you seem to be saying is that the characters with most initiative and character in Fates would be the Amiibo and recruitable enemies, since they aren't "degraded" by skinship or supports with the avatar. Their lack of features somehow becoming a positive rather than just... a lack of features.

You simply have to consider such things in your evaluation of a product, and doing otherwise is pretty severe cognitive dissonance. It's even fine to say "everything is fine aside from that", but to disregard it as being relevant altogether due to its status as optional is another thing entirely.

If an optional part of a product is bad, it's perfectly fine to ignore it, rather than diminish the product for it. The way you're talking about, it sounds like it being optional itself is completely irrelevant which I'm sure we can agree isn't right. If skinship were obligatory or you had to go out of your way to avoid it, you'd see a much stronger rejection of it.

Edited August 7, 2015 by NeonZ

[Irysa]

The dialogue is given during the player phase itself, after the battle starts, rather than during the pre-chapter conversations and such. It's obvious they're talking about battle orders when they start talking about Robin being tired by giving orders and being able to leave decisions for themselves right in the beginning of the player's turn.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that skinship isn't a pandering feature, I'm arguing that the lack of initiative of the characters there has no effect on any other element from the game, which is the similarity between the skinship feature and that piece of dialogue.

There are no pre chapter prep screens for maps before Chapter 3, and everyone is surprised by the fact there are Risen in this current location. Additionally, everyone is grouped together so Robin can lay out a general strategy to everyone.

As for the second point, it doesn't because it's neccessary for it to be an SRPG. Additionally, characters have to sign up and agree to fighting and being ordered around in the first place to even get a place in a goddamn army. It's part of their initiative to do as they're told in battle, it is not in someone's initiative to genuflect and adore the self insert.

I'm pointing out that even if the extras are problematic, they don't damage the core story, and that's the comparison I'm making here. The existence of skinship or not clearly has no effect on the interaction and personality seen elsewhere. The issue that you point out as consequence of it in other aspects of the game (avatar worshiping), like you've said yourself, existed even before skinship, so it's not really a consequence of skinship.

Who's talking about the core story though? I'm talking about the game as a whole, and for like, the umpteenth time, I've conceded that specifically this feature is not the single problem, it's a symptom of a larger one. However it's easy to point at and get angry about because of how acutely it emphasises a problem.

They're still part of the narrative though, not optional content. Just because they might involve a time skip or might take a different tone doesn't change how they're just another chapter closing the story. Fates itself has "epilogues", like usual for FE, and they're included in the main story, rather than some optional My Castle feature. Equating an optional feature with epilogues just doesn't work.

The logical consequence of everything you seem to be saying is that the characters with most initiative and character in Fates would be the Amiibo and recruitable enemies, since they aren't "degraded" by skinship or supports with the avatar. Their lack of features somehow becoming a positive rather than just... a lack of features.

What defines whether the epilogue is optional content or not? Please, elaborate, because I have definitely read plenty of epilogues that don't even look at the actual characters within the story at all and examine the lives of a bystander who views the world as it is after everything has occured. How is that not optional content? I can choose not to read it, by definition it must be optional.

As to the latter, that's misrepresentative. They're lacking purpose in the first place, to me this is not a scale that goes into negatives, it's simply binary. There are some human qualities to the cast in this game, the point is that they're grossly overshadowed due to the nature the title.

If an optional part of a product is bad, it's perfectly fine to ignore it, rather than diminish the product for it. The way you're talking about, it sounds like it being optional itself is completely irrelevant which I'm sure we can agree isn't right. If skinship were obligatory, you'd see a much stronger rejection of it.

I said no such thing. All I said was that when taking an entire work into account, everything must be reasonably accounted for. If we are less objective then everything that is relevant to the individual taking the work into account. And, surprise surprise, people who have no interest in ever using this feature are going to take it into account beacuse of the larger effects it has on what the game IS. A player's experience of a game is not limited solely to exactly what they do or experience within the game. There was a user earlier who talked about how they only cared about the in battle gameplay and nothing else concerned them. Obviously it follows that such things to do with character debasing don't bother them, but if you do care about what I've been talking about, you cannot just ignore something that regressively destroys it.

Honestly, I get why Irysa doesn't make as many posts about this these days, people don't seem to care that much about actually having a discussion.

I wouldn't really go that far, a lot of is simply I'm trying to just get the fuck over it. I'm not interested in going on a crusade against games I don't like just because I don't like them, but this particular article really irked me because of how ridiculous it is, and how people somehow use fucking Sakurai as Word Of God.

I mean I said this the other day, but this game really doesn't care about being geninue or doing any of what I think the franchise used to at least try to reach for. It's like getting mad about trash like Agarest Senki, there's just no fucking point, I'm only mad because it's Fire Emblem and I love Fire Emblem.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Irysa

[arvilino]

People take Sakurai's opinions on game design seriously? The man is incompetent, this is a guy who introduced tripping for no good reason and who routinely goes out of his way to fuck over Melee players and advanced players for more casual fans, even though casual fans never had a problem with Melee.

I think it's interesting that when stuff like SD Gaidens or GBA supports or whatever comes up, there is rarely the "it's optional!!!" defense coming up but when you have stuff like the Avatar being able to molest his troops in his room for no reason, suddenly you get a brigade of people who go "well it's optional so you can't criticize it."

It is truly optional though. Don't use the amie feature and you can still get S-ranks for Corrin through other means, he/she is the first unit you get, they'll likely reach S-Rank with someone through normal gameplay alone if you wish. It's optional because alternative methods are available to build supports and unlock all the same bonuses and support conversations without having to use the feature.

Try getting GBA supports(excluding Pent and Louise) without having your units wait near each other for turns. You can't you're forced through the single method the game requires and it's a terrible method, imagine if it had an additional alternative method to build supports it would become optional and an added benefit is that you could unlock supports through you preferred method or any combination of them, a 2nd method might have actually been enjoyable for more players.

A problem I see is that Fates is being viewed through blinkered sights for a lot of people, the hottest topics and way certain things are getting focused on it feels like this mechanic is being treated as a far bigger part of the game than it actually is. Don't like the mechanic? You can still achieve the same results easily enough with the normal gameplay. Although the current main method of building supports arguably the best them experimenting with alternatives while keeping the current method isn't a bad thing, they might find something that works better or complements it or maybe they won't but the chance of the former makes it worth having.

Edited August 8, 2015 by arvilino

[Augestein]

It is truly optional though. Don't use the amie feaure and you can still get S-ranks for Corrin through other means, he/she is the first unit you get, thy'll likely reach S-Rank with someone through normal gameplay alone if you wish. It's optional because alternative methods are available to build supports and unlock all the same bonuses and support conversations without having to use the feature.

Try getting GBA supports(excluding Pent and Louise) without having your units wait near each other for turns. You can't you're forced through the single method the game requires and it's a terrible method, imagine if it had an additional alternative method to build supports it would become optional and an added benefit is that you could unlock supports through you preferred method or any combination of them.

A problem I see is that Fates is being viewed through blinkered sights for a lot of people, the hottest topics and way certain things are getting focused on it feels like this mechanic is being treated as a far bigger part of the game than it actually is.

I kinda agree with this.

However, on the last part... I think people are kind of looking at it in the wrong way. The issue is dev time versus player enjoyment. Most things that are added in a game nowadays are optional content, but the issue is if they are worth keeping the optional content based on how much people seem to enjoy the features versus the time that it takes to implement. It's clear based on supports that these things are highly sought after by players, and it doesn't take a terrible amount of time for the devs to work with-- and even allows them to have an excuse to make new features, so the devs continue to work with this and seem to integrate supports more and more into the gameplay as you can see with Awakening making supports EVERYTHING-- despite being optional, they are more encouraged than I can think than any other Fire Emblem to date. People aren't getting tunnel vision for it, they just don't think it'll be particularly enjoyable enough to have warranted the dev time for it. I mean, did anyone even ASK for such an outrageous feature?

An example of fans liking things would be like say Bioware RPG romances. They clearly take additional time for the devs, and are clearly optional, but players really enjoy these little subplots, so Bioware continues to give them to fans because they realize that it DOES attract certain group dynamics and doesn't hurt them enough -- if at all to not include it. Here with Fates, I think people are at a: sure, it's optional, but is it worth it?

[NeonZ]

There are no pre chapter prep screens for maps before Chapter 3, and everyone is surprised by the fact there are Risen in this current location. Additionally, everyone is grouped together so Robin can lay out a general strategy to everyone.

As for the second point, it doesn't because it's neccessary for it to be an SRPG. Additionally, characters have to sign up and agree to fighting and being ordered around in the first place to even get a place in a goddamn army. It's part of their initiative to do as they're told in battle, it is not in someone's initiative to genuflect and adore the self insert.

There aren't preparation screens, but there are cutscenes between the stages, like the scene where Vaike is introduced. That specific dialogue only comes up after the battle has started and it gets to the player's phase again. The context is clear.

Anyway, I'm not talking about the mechanic itself, but the in-universe justification given to it in this case (orders from another character).

Who's talking about the core story though? I'm talking about the game as a whole, and for like, the umpteenth time, I've conceded that specifically this feature is not the single problem, it's a symptom of a larger one. However it's easy to point at and get angry about because of how acutely it emphasises a problem.

What defines whether the epilogue is optional content or not? Please, elaborate, because I have definitely read plenty of epilogues that don't even look at the actual characters within the story at all and examine the lives of a bystander who views the world as it is after everything has occured. How is that not optional content? I can choose not to read it, by definition it must be optional.

And I've read books that change the point of view from the core cast in the middle of the narrative, resulting in a similar effect. I've also read books that talk about separate events during the characters's lives, with some of them being of little relevancy to whatever main conflict comes up eventually. There's nothing special there about it being an "epilogue". The author is doing all that to achieve some effect. Just because it's not part of the main conflict doesn't make it not part of the narrative. So, I don't think you can consider it optional. It's like closing your eyes or skipping a scene you dislike. That doesn't make the scene optional even if it's irrelevant.

The feature we're talking about in this case is purely a gameplay gimmick that's not acknowledged in the narrative, whether it's the main story, side story, prologue or epilogue, and it's an optinal gameplay gimmick.

As to the latter, that's misrepresentative. They're lacking purpose in the first place, to me this is not a scale that goes into negatives, it's simply binary. There are some human qualities to the cast in this game, the point is that they're grossly overshadowed due to the nature the title.

I don't see how it's misrepresentative. Recruitable enemies join after being captured and then convinced in a specialty built building. I don't see how you can give skinship of all this reading and meaning then dismiss other similar optional elements as meaningless gameplay. The Amiibo characters have actual joining chapters and My Castle conversations too, just no supports or role in the main story.

I said no such thing. All I said was that when taking an entire work into account, everything must be reasonably accounted for. If we are less objective then everything that is relevant to the individual taking the work into account. And, surprise surprise, people who have no interest in ever using this feature are going to take it into account beacuse of the larger effects it has on what the game IS. A player's experience of a game is not limited solely to exactly what they do or experience within the game. There was a user earlier who talked about how they only cared about the in battle gameplay and nothing else concerned them. Obviously it follows that such things to do with character debasing don't bother them, but if you do care about what I've been talking about, you cannot just ignore something that regressively destroys it.

But you've been talking about how you've disliked the avatar focus and glorification, which have existed since FE12 and 13 (You don't even need an avatar for that kind of hero glorification too, just look at FE10). Those elements clearly then are not a consequence of the addition skinship. So, I don't see how you can say that their characterization is a consequence of skinship.

Furthermore, you've just said, after I had written my last post, that you haven't actually spoiled yourself too much on the story or even supports, so it's kind of odd to talk so strongly about the indirect consequences of skinship regarding characters that you apparently haven't even followed closely.

Edited August 8, 2015 by NeonZ

[Loki Laufeyson]

Here with Fates, I think people are at a: sure, it's optional, but is it worth it?

We wont know the answer to this entirely, until the game is released overseas. Often, people decry a feature initially, and then try it themselves. Only to find that they either enjoy it, or they dont find it half as nefarious as they did originally. Time will tell. Like i said, i feel like its an experiment to see what people want in FE in general. (by capitalizing on some of the more otome-esque elements)

[dondon151]

It is truly optional though.

i don't get your comparison. GBA supports are truly optional, too.

[Irysa]

There aren't preparation screen, but there are cutscenes between the stages, like the scene where Vaike is introduced. That specific dialogue only comes up after the battle has started and it gets to the player's phase.

Anyway, I'm not talking about the mechanic itself, but the in-universe justification given to it.

What, that people who sign up for an army are willing to obey the orders of their superior in matters relating to combat? I think I've already been over the realities of this in previous posts and I can't be bothered to retread.

If you really want to argue that Robin is the only person who can do any sort of strategy in FE13 at all, then fine, accept it, but you're only chalking up more negative attributes towards the game itself as a whole if you do so. There are some unelegant realities to the changing nature of FE as a series, but again, there is no real sustainable comparison between "choosing where a character moves is not giving them a choice in battle when you're the tactician undermines their agency" and "getting to grope and fuck your barely-legal-technically-not-sisters undermines their agency". The former has at least has reasonable justification unless the tactician is a fucking asshole and suicides their units repeatedly, which is not productive in any strategical sense, and the vast majority of players intuitively see this as a bad thing and get frustrated at themselves (or the game) if it happens. Heck, this is why we have casual and phoenix mode. It's a non-argument, we intuitively recognise that letting units die is undesirable and should be avoided, and if we make tactical errors and someone dies, then a mechanical metaphor would be that that is in fact what happens in war sometimes. The game won't accomodate for units refusing to suicide themselves because as an option it only exists to be a state of failure. Groping minigames are a reward.

And I've read books that change the point of view from the core cast in the middle of the narrative, resulting in a similar effect. I've also read books that talk about separate events during the characters's lives, with some of them being of little relevancy to whatever main conflict comes up eventually. There's nothing special there about it being an "epilogue". The author is doing all that to achieve some effect. Just because it's not part of the main conflict doesn't make it not part of the narrative.

The feature we're talking about in this case is purely a gameplay gimmick that's not acknowledged in the narrative, whether it's the main story, side story, prologue or epilogue.

The epilogue is at the end though, past the point of where the story has formally ended. If there is anything you really don't have to read, it's that.

The feature does not have to be acknowledged in the narrative to impact upon the meta-narrative by simply existing; I thought I already established this. A players experience is not limited solely to what they do within the game.

I don't see how it's misrepresentative. Recruitable enemies join after being captured and then convinced in a specialty built building. I don't see how you can give skinship of all this reading and meaning then dismiss other similar optional elements as meaningless gameplay. The Amiibo characters have actual joining chapters and My Castle conversations too, just no supports or role in the main story.

It's misrepresentative because you're claiming I'm somehow saying that "a non-characterised generic has more character and motivation than a character who is having their motivations undermined". Which I didn't get at whatsoever. A 0 simply being a 0 is not the same as a 1 being minused to a 0.

I'm hardly dismissing the other elements as meaningless, but they do not conspire to the same effect. Generics who do nothing and say nothing obviously get less focus in an argument about whether characters are being represented as human or not, because there isn't a pretense to presenting them as such in the first place. This is actually a loss I think, but the nature of such stories is inclined to get bogged down in the sheer hopelessness of humanity, which is why it's usually a side theme rather than a main focus, so there's a justifiable reason to focus on different dramatic aspects. As for the Amiibo characters, I think their inclusion is silly, but all their characterisation exists primarily within their own games, and unless Fates misrepresents them or does stupid shit to them, of course it makes no sense to get into it when discussing Fate's approach to characterisation instead of the relevant title.

But you've been talking about how you've disliked the avatar focus and glorification, which have existed since FE12 and 13 (You don't even need an avatar for that kind of hero glorification too, just look at FE10). Those elements clearly then are not a consequence of the addition skinship. Furthermore, you've just said, after I had written my last post, that you haven't actually spoiled yourself too much on the story or even supports, so it's kind of odd to talk so strongly about the indirect consequences of skinship regarding characters that you apparently haven't even followed closely.

I did not say they were, I said groping was a symptom of the problem. Like, a million times. I'm getting really sick of repeating this. It's that this is a culmination of that problem being realised in a way that is even more offputting. Actually who am I kidding, they can do worse than this.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Irysa

[Folt]

i don't get your comparison. GBA supports are truly optional, too.

Not really. They're a hassle to do, but does affect things like bonuses to hit and crit and maybe even give you paired endings. Fire Emblem Amie is just one way of many in terms of getting support points for the Avatar, and can thus be ignored by people, unlike GBA Supports which is necessary if you want bonuses, paired endings, or filling out the support library.

[Irysa]

But those features are entirely optional. You do not need to raise supports to play the game ever.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Irysa

[Sentacotus]

^Yeah because Sakurai understands what IS is going through putting in optional things for those who want it but still gets insulted even though it doesn't effect the game at all.

I agree probably has a sense of empathy for them and probably the reason he referenced Fates in the first place. Plus he is an outspoken fan of the Fire Emblem series.

For the record I'm only agreeing with Sakurai on the bit about extra content not taking up dev time from other things, because I think it's pretty obvious from the rest of my posts that I have a dev job (granted, it's not game dev, but I have also done mobile game dev on the artist side of things) and know a bit more about how the process works than most people here on the forums

This is the biggest take away in all of this. The concept that an optional or added feature (even if its poorly implemented) takes away from other parts of the game because...reasons is just not true. In most cases the code, resources, and templates are already there and it takes a matter of less than a day to put in.

Consider this if the optional feature was so costly and development for it was going to be so intensive to the point where it was going to require fundamentally rewriting the game 9/10 times they are not going to do it if they were already far into development at the point that the "extra" was considered.

Also people do know that every Fire Emblem game on the highest difficulty is possible to complete without the optional features and grinding right? I would assume Fates would be the same way.

Edited August 8, 2015 by LordTaco42

[NeonZ]

i don't get your comparison. GBA supports are truly optional, too.

If you want paired endings or the support stat boosts you need supports. There's nothing locked by skinship aside from the skinship quotes themselves. You can still get supports just like in Awakening and every character that isn't the avatar can only get supports like that (aside from supports with the avatar itself).

It's misrepresentative because you're claiming I'm somehow saying that "a non-characterised generic has more character and motivation than a character who is having their motivations undermined". Which I didn't get at whatsoever. A 0 simply being a 0 is not the same as a 1 being minused to a 0.

You can capture and recruit unique bosses that don't join your party in the actual story scenes and would usually just be killed by your party, not just faceless generics. Those sometimes have some character before joining, they'll just have nothing to add afterwards.

I did not say they were, I said groping was a symptom of the problem. Like, a million times. I'm getting really sick of repeating this.

And I'm repeating myself too at this point. If groping is just a symptom of larger issue you have with the recent games, I don't see how this has anything to do with optional features hurting what else exists in the game. That's the actual core of what I'm talking about. Even if it weren't there your main issue still would be there. So, optional features aren't diminishing the game's value.

Edited August 8, 2015 by NeonZ

[Water Mage]

But those features are entirely optional. You do not need to raise supports to play the game ever.

I promised myself I wouldn't post here again, but I had too.

Are you aware that you just condradicted yourself?

[Dark Sage]

I promised myself I wouldn't post here again, but I had too.

Are you aware that you just condradicted yourself?

He's pointing out people's hypocrisy. GBA supports are bad because you if you want support bonuses or paired endings or whatever, you need to do them. Except those things are optional so therefore, GBA supports are optional. By that logic, people using the optional defense for amie should use it for GBA supports but they don't, which is hypocrisy. He's not actually defending GBA supports.

[XeKr]

Yeah I can’t keep up with these kinds of topics. >_>

Re: “optional”

Gaidens in FE11 bother people because some of us consider it important in FE to recruit all the characters and not let any die. Support conversations in GBA games don’t really bother me, but some people think it’s important to have the character interactions and stat boosts and find it painful to grind.

My Room only matters if you think it’s an important, core part of the game (doesn’t feel that way to me after playing it) or if you’re generally interested in that sort of thing (player interaction, direct dialogue).

I use charged language occaisonally because I am not a robot and I feel strongly about stuff like this (although I have tried to distance myself and thought I was making progress, evidentally not though), and I don't think it's worth self policing myself on such things when I'm not being directly confrontational. People know exactly what I mean, but using "imprecise descriptions" doesn't really detract from any of the points I think I've made, rather it just prevents me from having to add the qualifying descriptor of "what I view to be..." onto everything. It allows me to convey contempt (because that's what this is, contempt, I'm not at the point of benign indifference yet) without directly insulting other individuals. Unless those people get upset because I don't like the thing they like, but in that case, criticisms alone are already going to be doing as such.

Honestly a lot of these topics are me just venting frustrations, developing my own thoughts, and trying to get over it rather than neccessarily convince anyone that it's bad, because that's a fruitless task. Acceptance takes time. I don't think tone policing myself really makes much of a difference.

True, however some of the arguments (yours and others) are compelling enough that they shouldn’t be dismissed from tone alone. Which is something that inevitably happens for things framed with that kind of negativity. Perhaps unfortunately, but it happens.

…

It does not mean you can't find said content bad anyway for entirely other reasons that doesn't involve "man the devs spent time making this when they could've been doing something else" no, they wanted this, it's their vision, you don't have to like their vision but that's what they wanted to make. Unless it's one of those games that are clearly being rushed because they're on some tight-ass schedule or something, which considering the timeframe between awakening and fates, don't seem to be, fates do not seem to be in the category of rushed product.

…

Does their vision include gimpy looking Lancer animations? Like clearly weird and telekinetic during Attack Stance. Opportunity cost is real, even if they weren’t necessarily very rushed.

Edited August 8, 2015 by XeKr

[Folt]

He's pointing out people's hypocrisy. GBA supports are bad because you if you want support bonuses or paired endings or whatever, you need to do them. Except those things are optional so therefore, GBA supports are optional. By that logic, people using the optional defense for amie should use it for GBA supports but they don't, which is hypocrisy. He's not actually defending GBA supports.

And yet, I don't need to do Amie in order to get Support Bonuses for Fates. There's nothing in Amie that I can't get anywhere else. Paired Endings or support bonuses has to be gotten through Supports though.

[Water Mage]

He's pointing out people's hypocrisy. GBA supports are bad because you if you want support bonuses or paired endings or whatever, you need to do them. Except those things are optional so therefore, GBA supports are optional. By that logic, people using the optional defense for amie should use it for GBA supports but they don't, which is hypocrisy. He's not actually defending GBA supports.

If so I apologise, I did lose my cool there, but even so there's a big difference supports and FE amie, so I don't think it should be used as a comparison.

[Irysa]

And yet, I don't need to do Amie in order to get Support Bonuses for Fates. There's nothing in Amie that I can't get anywhere else. Paired Endings or support bonuses has to be gotten through Supports though.

If you want paired endings or the support stat boosts you need supports. There's nothing locked by skinship aside from the skinship quotes themselves. You can still get supports just like in Awakening and every character that isn't the avatar can only get supports like that (aside from supports with the avatar itself).

Re: “optional”

Gaidens in FE11 bother people because some of us consider it important in FE to recruit all the characters and not let any die. Support conversations in GBA games don’t really bother me, but some people think it’s important to have the character interactions and stat boosts and find it painful to grind.

My Room only matters if you think it’s an important, core part of the game (doesn’t feel that way to me after playing it) or if you’re generally interested in that sort of thing.

So, as I understand it, you're invoking that you have to want something and you're allowed to criticise things that get in the way of that?

What about if I want to have geninue characters that don't blatantly function as indulgent, manufactured toys at a self insert's beck and call? Clearly, the game is getting in the way of what I want, so I should be allowed to freely criticise it!

You can capture and recruit unique bosses that don't join your party in the actual story scenes and would usually just be killed by your party, not just faceless generics. Those sometimes have some character before joining, they'll just have nothing to add afterwards.

That sounds more like wasted potential and laziness rather than contempt for those characters and, dare I say it, lack of resources towards a particular feature that maybe could have been resourced from elsewhere. hint hint.

On a more serious note, that is dissapointing but it's not the same as something else that exists and has a lot of effort put into it that undermines characters. That's the absence of a thing vs the active negative impact of a thing, and if that's what you were getting at, I agree, I would rather have almost nothing to something in depth that is bad, since the former lets me headcanon. I like the characters in Shadow Dragon a million times more than I like the characters in Awakening.

And I'm repeating myself too at this point. If groping is just a symptom of larger issue you have with the recent games, I don't see how this has anything to do with optional features hurting what else exists in the game. That's the actual core of what I'm talking about. Even if it weren't there your main issue still would be there. So, optional features aren't diminishing the game's value.

Adding things that exacerbate the issue equate to diminishing the game's value.

True, however some of the arguments (yours and others) are compelling enough that they shouldn’t be dismissed from tone alone. Which is something that inevitably happens for things framed with that kind of negativity. Perhaps unfortunately, but it happens.

If my primary purpose here was to convince people then you'd have a point, but that's kind of a secondary concern. Plus it's debatable if people who are going to dismiss an entire sound argument on tone are really worth it.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Irysa

[Folt]

So, as I understand it, you're invoking that you have to want something and you're allowed to criticise things that get in the way of that?

What about if I want to have geninue characters that don't blatantly function as indulgent, manufactured toys at a self insert's beck and call? Clearly, the game is getting in the way of what I want, so I should be allowed to freely criticise it!

Complain all you want. I myself disagree with you (as I find the characters genuine enough) and will continue to disagree with you, but I don't really care about converting people to my side. After all, I can choose to give people my opinion on your points and arguments if I disagree with them, or side with whoever I feel match my opinion the closest, and who people choose to side with are not of my concern.

[XeKr]

@Irysa:

No one said you can't criticize it. Any perceived comments to that extent (silencing discussion) are the same as you trying to dismiss other people's responses (irrelevantly meta)

We can offer our opinions (and our wallets). My own thoughts are that My Room and the ilk are such an insignificant part of the gameplay that it negligibly affects the FE14 experience. For the most part at least, there was some mention of things like opportunity cost and western sales (it's going to outsell FE13 in Japan, given current trends, certainly impressive) that could impact later games, that I would care about.

Fluff is fluff.

Edited August 8, 2015 by XeKr