More Unpopular Fire Emblem Opinions

[Hero of the Fire Emblems]

-I don't get why people cry and moan about Emmeryn surviving when in actuality it would make LESS sense for her to die when you factor in that Lucina succeeds in changing the future despite SEEMING to fuck up at every turn, only to have people like Basilio survive and her to succeed, and when you take into account Emmeryn is implied to be the victim of the Curse of the Emblem as Camus was, if you read between the lines. The curse permanently maims people and relationships sure, but Camus survived, so it seems the curse doesn't actually kill anyone (I am going by the DS remakes' script since Awakening, Fates, TCG Cipher, and TMS#FE all pretend that FE1 and 3 never happened and firmly established 11 and 12 are the canon versions). What doesn't make sense is the fact she can recover in the Avatar supports which should be impossible if it is indeed the curse of the emblem, and Gangrel/Aversa don't particularly make much sense unlike Walhart (implied to be a risen) and Yen Fey (Outrealm shenanigans so we can do what we want)

[blah the Prussian]

I, too, shall have to apologize for a drastic delay in responding! Ooh, that sounds very neat - I've never been to Croatia!

You have a good point - I suppose I was using "successful revolution" in the very generous sense of "displaces the existing government", whereas perhaps a better (albeit more restrictive) definition for a successful revolution would include "and sets up something viable in its place". In which case, it seems a good revolution is hard to find...

I don't know that I'd necessarily agree that what the Black Fang is doing will make things worse, at least in the short-term. If killing corrupt nobles results in said nobles waging war with the Fang and increasing surveillance or restrictions on the local peasantry, then I guess the Fang's actions would indirectly make things worse. If, on the other hand, it results in such a noble reforming their actions out of fear for their life, then the Fang could indirectly make things a little bit better.

I would agree more that it's not a long-term solution. If the legal system is allowing this corruption to take place, then you'd want to pressure to reform it in such a way that the nobles are at least held accountable for the well-being of those people in their purview, and unable to excessively tax or oppress their citizenry. The Zephiel of FE7 may have been such a leader, but if FE6 teaches us anything, it's that Zephiel is all messed up inside (owing, in large part, to having the World's Best Father*). Which, come to think of it, makes the end of Zephiel's arc in FE7 super dissonant - his last scene with Hellene suggests that everything is going to get better, while The Struggles of Roy strongly suggest that things got even worse. So I agree reform is needed to make things better in Bern, I just wonder if Zephiel is up to the task.

Regardless, I've really enjoyed discussing this, and thank you for the many civil and well-thought-out posts!

While it's true that Zephiel would eventually become King Misanthrope, no one knew that at the time, and he wasn't that yet. Wasn't his breaking point when Desmond openly tried to murder him? As for nobles reforming out of fear, a paramilitary organization intimidating authority figures into changing their actions REALLY isn't my idea of a good arrangement. I mean, what if they demand that taxes be lowered? In a particular case where a noble is using those taxes to party, or hunt, or whatever that might be good, but that's a precedent that should not be set. People hate paying taxes, and that's generally true whether they're being used to construct a new palace or to develop infrastructure or expand the army. You simply can't have a guild of assassins thinking that they can get what they want through that kind of intimidation.

[Moblin Major General]

-I don't get why people cry and moan about Emmeryn surviving when in actuality it would make LESS sense for her to die when you factor in that Lucina succeeds in changing the future despite SEEMING to fuck up at every turn, only to have people like Basilio survive and her to succeed, and when you take into account Emmeryn is implied to be the victim of the Curse of the Emblem as Camus was, if you read between the lines. The curse permanently maims people and relationships sure, but Camus survived, so it seems the curse doesn't actually kill anyone (I am going by the DS remakes' script since Awakening, Fates, TCG Cipher, and TMS#FE all pretend that FE1 and 3 never happened and firmly established 11 and 12 are the canon versions). What doesn't make sense is the fact she can recover in the Avatar supports which should be impossible if it is indeed the curse of the emblem, and Gangrel/Aversa don't particularly make much sense unlike Walhart (implied to be a risen) and Yen Fey (Outrealm shenanigans so we can do what we want)

Anri is implied to have died not long after forming Altea, before he could consider marrying Artemis, and leaving his much younger brother to rule Altea. True, the Curse of the Emblem doesn't have to be fatal, but when Linde passed the Fire Emblem to Marth, it came at the cost of Hardin's life, Sable notwithstanding. Emmeryn was one casualty, but technically, Robin became one as well when he took it from Chrom. He technically died so that Grima would forever have been slain, but Robin's personal bond with Chrom broke the curse, potentially forever.

[Augestein]

I had been thinking about this just recently, actually.

Had they made a moderately entertaining but flawed narrative, I would have given them the "At least you tried" gold star, but they did everything so poorly that I can't even praise them for that. Besides, I wouldn't even call it "something different" considering Micaiah's story arc was a much more competent telling of what they were trying to do in Conquest.

The difference with Micaiah and Corrin in Conquest though is that Micaiah has an outlet in the fact that it's not actually her will entirely but the bloodpact. Corrin could certainly "stop" at any point, but chooses not to by convincing him/herself that this is the right thing to do. Everything Corrin does is a conscious choice. For that, it IS refreshing, because they didn't cop out by saying that something was forcing Corrin to not only side with Nohr, but continue to side with it afterward.

I honestly prefer it because I feel like things actually happen in Conquest. Hoshido is essentially "find Takumi and Ryoma." Once you do, it's pretty much a straight march towards Nohr with nothing particularly interesting happening outside of the traitor subplot-- which is kind of obvious to the traitor.

Revelations starts fine, but ends up becoming Corrin just beating down people and then they join him/her. At least Conquest can annoy me rather than simply make me feel apathy.

Growth Rates DO NOT MATTER

The newer FE's protagonist centered morality is more in line with FE storytelling should in theory work than Tellius' grey morality. FE plots try to showcase themselves as historical events more than something presently happening, and since history is written by the victors, morality being completely centered on the protagonist makes sense, as they wrote the history books and are obviously biased as no one lacks bias.

Honestly, I was under the impression that most don't care about growth rates.

And this, I do think that FE has honestly stepped in a different direction from the other games. Playing FE4 again, man, I forgot how wildly different the storytelling was in that game.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Augestein

[Azure Sen]

The newer FE's protagonist centered morality is more in line with FE storytelling should in theory work than Tellius' grey morality. FE plots try to showcase themselves as historical events more than something presently happening, and since history is written by the victors, morality being completely centered on the protagonist makes sense, as they wrote the history books and are obviously biased as no one lacks bias.

Protagonist centered morality is where everyone and everything in the narrative bends to the moral views of the protagonist, conventional morality or logic be damned, and FE's tendency to stick to black and white morality in its storytelling isn't the same thing. Michalis being saved because he helped the heroes in New Mystery and then allowed to go on and inflict his awful leadership skills on the people of another continent despite admitting that he killed his father of his own free will is a prime (and rare pre-Awakening) example of actual PCM at work. Except unlike that scenario, which is completely optional and probably non-canon, Nohrrin being a selfish and self-centered moron with absolutely zero consequences for herself (at least Michalis nearly got himself killed twice if he does survive) is the entirety of Conquest.

And even if the games were written like that (which they aren't), that doesn't excuse bad writing. You can have intentional protagonist centered morality where there are hints, subtle or otherwise, that the protagonist is morally wrong or an unreliable narrator. Conquest doesn't do that. It's a mess of player worship, where Kamui is absolved of all sins because of the personal sacrifices she has to make and because no one understands her suffering and everyone else forgives her simply because she maybe she did a bit of good and getting rid of Garon, regardless of all the destruction she enabled in the process. A mindset that, in earlier FE games, would have made her and those around her incompetents at best and villains at worst.

Edited July 12, 2016 by AzureSen

[Etrurian emperor]

I think Cordelia's obsession over Chrom is pretty pathetic.

Frederick to Cordelia: ''Do you even recall our conversation? ...If, indeed, it can be called that? You spent two hours describing in vivid detail your unrequited passion for Chrom. You also sobbed repeatedly and kept asking me "Why, Frederick?! Why?!" Then you devoured all the sandwiches and ran off with the picnic hamper.

Cordelia to Chrom: ''*Pant* *weeze* *Choke''

I have a feeling Awakening itself finds it a bit pathetic as well

As for an unpopular opinion. Most people seem pretty down on the S support of Frederik and Cordelia but that line alone makes me think its pretty great.

[NekoKnight]

I like Corrin, hell, I'd go as far as to name him my third favorite Lord character and fourth favorite FE character

Growth Rates DO NOT MATTER

The newer FE's protagonist centered morality is more in line with FE storytelling should in theory work than Tellius' grey morality. FE plots try to showcase themselves as historical events more than something presently happening, and since history is written by the victors, morality being completely centered on the protagonist makes sense, as they wrote the history books and are obviously biased as no one lacks bias.

I love FE3/5's all 20 Stat caps

Citation needed? What Fire Emblem game uses "history written by the victors" as a framing device?

The difference with Micaiah and Corrin in Conquest though is that Micaiah has an outlet in the fact that it's not actually her will entirely but the bloodpact. Corrin could certainly "stop" at any point, but chooses not to by convincing him/herself that this is the right thing to do. Everything Corrin does is a conscious choice. For that, it IS refreshing, because they didn't cop out by saying that something was forcing Corrin to not only side with Nohr, but continue to side with it afterward.

I honestly prefer it because I feel like things actually happen in Conquest. Hoshido is essentially "find Takumi and Ryoma." Once you do, it's pretty much a straight march towards Nohr with nothing particularly interesting happening outside of the traitor subplot-- which is kind of obvious to the traitor.

Revelations starts fine, but ends up becoming Corrin just beating down people and then they join him/her. At least Conquest can annoy me rather than simply make me feel apathy.

If he could have stopped, why didn't he? If he knew Garon was the true enemy, why not go after him directly? Because rebelling directly wasn't an option (at least, we're supposed to believe this).

Everyone makes choices and those choices are affected by circumstances. Micaiah could have let the blood pact run its coarse but she chose to submit. Kamui's "choice" was to follow orders, only deviating from them to spare an insignificant number of enemy soldiers. The difference between Micaiah and Kamui is that Micaiah made the best choice (open to interpretation) out of two terrible options whereas Kamui made the worst choice out of a myriad of options. Both characters are forced to act against their morals, and both ultimately decide to support a villainous faction for selfish reasons (Micaiah to protect her country and Kamui to protect his siblings). Micaiah has decency to admit that her choice made her a bad person. Kamui seems to think himself a hero, despite supporting the villains. Can you see how alike they are and yet Micaiah is way more likable and human for how she handles it?

I'll take a character forced into villainy over a character who allows evil to happen through their inaction and ineptitude. Kamui is "refreshing" in the same way a rotten apple is "refreshing" after a lifetime of fresh fruit.

Edited July 12, 2016 by NekoKnight

[Dinar87]

While I don't know if these opinions are unpopular I'm going to put them here anyway....

1. The tellius series are some of the greatest games ever concieved by mankind
​2. Awakening is EXTREMELY overrated
​3. Jagens can fuck off. I like starting from the absolute bottom and working my way up....not being handed victory on a silver platter.
​4. Radiant dawn has the best sound track of any fire emblem game
​5. I can't bloody stand things like mycastle or face rubbing. I want fire emblem to be 100% serious damn it!
6. I despise grinding in a FE game. I'd just like the option to disable it when I start a new save file as I don't have the self control needed to play the game by my own rules.

​So there you go, there's my opinions that will probably get me a ton of hate on any FE site I visit.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Dinar87

[Moblin Major General]

While I don't know if these opinions are unpopular I'm going to put them here anyway....

Responses in bold

1. The tellius series are some of the greatest games ever concieved by mankind sort of popular, needs more players.

​2. Awakening is EXTREMELY overrated unpopular sans SF

​3. Jagens can fuck off. I like starting from the absolute bottom and working my way up....not being handed victory on a silver platter. Very popular

​4. Radiant dawn has the best sound track of any fire emblem gamePopular? Most who've played it like it.

​5. I can't bloody stand things like mycastle or face rubbing. I want fire emblem to be 100% serious damn it!Popular on SF, acceptable to other communities

6. I despise grinding in a FE game. I'd just like the option to disable it when I start a new save file as I don't have the self control needed to play the game by my own rules.Rather unpopular, but many around SF would agree.

​So there you go, there's my opinions that will probably get me a ton of hate on any FE site I visit.Not SF, fortunately for you. SF is large, but it definitely on the conservative side of FE forums.

[Saint Rubenio]

- I hate Lute and Rutger despite them being some of the best units in their respective games.

- I love Knoll and Raigh despite being terrible and mediocre, respectively.

- My favourite class is Shaman/Druid despite sages being about 99.5% better.

- Frey >>>>> 7th platoon

- I don't mind Arcadia (chapter) that much. Sophia could be way worse if she was a knight (goodness, I got knight Karel in her place in one of my randomized runs... I had to use the boots on him in order to survive and get the guilding ring... not that it mattered, he predictably became my MVP afterwards

[Just call me AL]

​3. Jagens can fuck off. I like starting from the absolute bottom and working my way up....not being handed victory on a silver platter. Very popular

Only among casuals. Not among the hardcore players.

[Augestein]

If he could have stopped, why didn't he? If he knew Garon was the true enemy, why not go after him directly? Because rebelling directly wasn't an option (at least, we're supposed to believe this).

Everyone makes choices and those choices are affected by circumstances. Micaiah could have let the blood pact run its coarse but she chose to submit. Kamui's "choice" was to follow orders, only deviating from them to spare an insignificant number of enemy soldiers. The difference between Micaiah and Kamui is that Micaiah made the best choice (open to interpretation) out of two terrible options whereas Kamui made the worst choice out of a myriad of options. Both characters are forced to act against their morals, and both ultimately decide to support a villainous faction for selfish reasons (Micaiah to protect her country and Kamui to protect his siblings). Micaiah has decency to admit that her choice made her a bad person. Kamui seems to think himself a hero, despite supporting the villains. Can you see how alike they are and yet Micaiah is way more likable and human for how she handles it?

I'll take a character forced into villainy over a character who allows evil to happen through their inaction and ineptitude. Kamui is "refreshing" in the same way a rotten apple is "refreshing" after a lifetime of fresh fruit.

Because he was wrong and convinced him/herself otherwise? Even the Azura x Corrin supports seem to well... Support that notion. The constant lamenting that Corrin has over his actions are enough to make that readily apparent. I'm not really sure I get this too much. People want lords that aren't perfect, and then we GET lords like Nohr Corrin and Micaiah that aren't perfect, and then people complain that they aren't perfect. Xander was willing to kill Corrin if (s)he lied, people from Hoshido think Corrin is just filth, and the only real supporters of Corrin are directly in his/her army.

And for that, I see nothing wrong with that. People keep talking about PCM here, and then Corrin makes a bad decision, sticks with it, and the pain train wreck of Conquests' plot happens. Corrin also fights to protect Nohr as well. Corrin's ramblings literally always sounded like self-reassurance. Like (s)he wasn't even sure if what they did was right.

And Corrin does the same thing Micaiah does. Except (s)he doesn't have a stupid subplot going on to make them continue to make decisions. Corrin is just dumb. The only people that really excuse that are Nohrians.

[Lord Tullus]

Emmeryn was one casualty, but technically, Robin became one as well when he took it from Chrom. He technically died so that Grima would forever have been slain, but Robin's personal bond with Chrom broke the curse, potentially forever.

I'm sorry to say suggest this, but, it's basically another "Power of friendship" thing? That ended a curse, of all things? How did the curse even come to be, anyway? (Coming from a guy who's played shadow dragon over 70 times)

I'm just a little confused over it is all.

[Illiterate Scholar]

-I don't get why people cry and moan about Emmeryn surviving when in actuality it would make LESS sense for her to die

I think it's more of the suspension of disbelief. Yes, this is a story with magic and dragons, but if there's one thing that stays true is that people die.

[Acacia Sgt]

I think it's more of the suspension of disbelief. Yes, this is a story with magic and dragons, but if there's one thing that stays true is that people die.

To be fair, there is still a chance for her to live. Her bio has her as the most resilient. And in real life people have survived falls from bigger heights than what Emmeryn most likely fell from. Not to mention it's not like she survived intact from the ordeal.

It's that 1 in an X chance. The writers simply decided to go with that 1. It's not uncommon in fiction.

For my part, as long the chance is not 0, I don't mind much if the writers want to go with the least probable route. So count me there about unpopular opinions, I guess.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Acacia Sgt

[Raguna]

To be fair, there is still a chance for her to live. Her bio has her as the most resilient. And in real life people have survived falls from bigger heights than what Emmeryn most likely fell from. Not to mention it's not like she survived intact from the ordeal.

It's that 1 in an X chance. The writers simply decided to go with that 1. It's not uncommon in fiction.

For my part, as long the chance is not 0, I don't mind much if the writers want to go with the least probable route. So count me there about unpopular opinions, I guess.

I think the problem lies that her sacrifice was pretty much negated by the fact that she lived. Events lose impact when in retrospect one can see that there was nothing to worry about in the first place.

Plus, I just feel that they needed to do this in order to give the throne to Chrom for no better reason because the developers wanted him to become a king instead of keeping him as a prince. In my opinion, they brought Emmeryn back with her new inabilities to have an excuse of not bringing her back up to the throne. If she had been fine and well, there wouldn't be a reason to keep Chrom on the throne if we're going by the laws of primogeniture.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Raguna

[Acacia Sgt]

I think the problem lies that her sacrifice was pretty much negated by the fact that she lived. Events lose impact when in retrospect one can see that there was nothing to worry about in the first place.

Plus, I just feel that they needed to do this in order to give the throne to Chrom for no better reason because the developers wanted him to become a king instead of keeping him as a prince. In my opinion, they brought back Emmeryn back with her new inabilities to have an excuse of not bringing her back up to the throne. If she had been fine and well, there wouldn't be a reason to keep Chrom on the throne if were going by the laws of primogeniture.

The way I see it, when you consider her memory loss... can we really say that Emmeryn is still alive?

I would go as far as saying that Emmeryn did indeed died, in a sense. What Chrom and company later encounter... is not his sister. Merely a shell that looks like her. Add that her ending states she never recovered her memories, then to me, it does not make the impact of her previous actions any less. Because the way I look at it, they were never undone. Emmeryn never came back, they just find her body, still alive, but she herself is gone.

[Raguna]

The way I see it, when you consider her memory loss... can we really say that Emmeryn is still alive?

I would go as far as saying that Emmeryn did indeed died, in a sense. What Chrom and company later encounter... is not his sister. Merely a shell that looks like her. Add that her ending states she never recovered her memories, then to me, it does not make the impact of her previous actions any less. Because the way I look at it, they were never undone. Emmeryn never came back, they just find her body, still alive, but she herself is gone.

Damn deep man.

I'll start by saying that I can see your point but at the same time I can't agree with it. Emmeryn's support with Robin at least makes the player remember that even though she might not be the same she's still retained a recollection of the kind woman she was before on the inside. She can still recover and in her supports with Male Robin and their S-support she does seem to be on the road to getting there at least in my eyes. I'd definitely help if she had actual supports with her siblings after we recruit her back, but I don't think she's gone just lost.

She's lost her memories up to the point that she was found by the group but that doesn't mean she can't return to being the kind person she was before. Not sure how big rehabilitation is in the world of Archanea but it's certainly possible considering she's still able to talk albeit with many pauses. I'm still more convinced this was all just framed to give Chrom the kingship without losing her, but we have different opinions on the matter and I can respect that.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Raguna

[Acacia Sgt]

Well, it is true. Her paired ending with Robin has her making a not-full but still significant recovery. And then there's her death quote which has her do remember... though considering it's her death quote, it doesn't really mean much.

Oh yes, she can recover to become a functional member of society again. But I would say that if her memories as Emmeryn are still gone, then she simply becomes a new person, who may act like Emmeryn did, but it would still not be her. But yeah, that's the way I would see it. I suppose that's another unpopular opinion. Or at least, I don't know of many who also shares the "memories gone = she is still 'dead'" opinion on the subject.

[NekoKnight]

Because he was wrong and convinced him/herself otherwise? Even the Azura x Corrin supports seem to well... Support that notion. The constant lamenting that Corrin has over his actions are enough to make that readily apparent. I'm not really sure I get this too much. People want lords that aren't perfect, and then we GET lords like Nohr Corrin and Micaiah that aren't perfect, and then people complain that they aren't perfect. Xander was willing to kill Corrin if (s)he lied, people from Hoshido think Corrin is just filth, and the only real supporters of Corrin are directly in his/her army.

There is a difference between a flawed character and a bad character. A flawed character will make mistakes but ultimately prove to be competent in their decision making. A bad character will continue to make bad decisions (Kamui continuing to support Garon) or be hypocritical in their actions (Xander going on about peace after conquering a nation). I don't know what peoples' reactions were at the time of Radiant Dawn's release but in a somewhat recent thread on SF asking who people preferred, Micaiah or Kamui, people preferred Micaiah on a scale of like 4 to 1.

Bolded: Kamui is also supported by his Hinoka and Sakura despite being directly responsible for

the deaths of two of their brothers, not to mention Sakura's soldiers.

And Corrin does the same thing Micaiah does. Except (s)he doesn't have a stupid subplot going on to make them continue to make decisions. Corrin is just dumb. The only people that really excuse that are Nohrians.

Gooron's mission to make you cry, shattering crystal balls, the curse, the magical throne and non-lethal-warfare-Kamui make the Blood Pact sound like Shakespeare by comparison.

[Azure Sen]

Because he was wrong and convinced him/herself otherwise? Even the Azura x Corrin supports seem to well... Support that notion. The constant lamenting that Corrin has over his actions are enough to make that readily apparent. I'm not really sure I get this too much. People want lords that aren't perfect, and then we GET lords like Nohr Corrin and Micaiah that aren't perfect, and then people complain that they aren't perfect. Xander was willing to kill Corrin if (s)he lied, people from Hoshido think Corrin is just filth, and the only real supporters of Corrin are directly in his/her army.

And for that, I see nothing wrong with that. People keep talking about PCM here, and then Corrin makes a bad decision, sticks with it, and the pain train wreck of Conquests' plot happens. Corrin also fights to protect Nohr as well. Corrin's ramblings literally always sounded like self-reassurance. Like (s)he wasn't even sure if what they did was right.

And Corrin does the same thing Micaiah does. Except (s)he doesn't have a stupid subplot going on to make them continue to make decisions. Corrin is just dumb. The only people that really excuse that are Nohrians.

None of Corrin's laments in the main story are actually about the horrible consequences her actions are having on Hoshido or about whether or not what she's doing is right or even a display of regret. They're all about how the Hoshidians won't understand why what she's doing is necessary, and how she's prepared to sacrifice her happiness for the sake of taking down Garon, or how much it personally hurts her to pretend to be Garon's lapdog while she enables his invasion without regret. And like most of the Conquest supports, the Nohrrin/Azura support chain is completely disconnected and from the reality of the story, and also directly contradicts it in a way most of the other disconnected supports don't (Azura and Nohrrin not even thinking about sparing the Hoshidans, Nohrrin having nightmares about killing Hoshidans when she feels barely any regret for the Hoshidan deaths she causes in the storyline, etc.).

Most people who hate Micaiah do so for what they perceive as her having an overabundance of super special snowflake traits, not because she's flawed, and even then opinion has shifted dramatically since Radiant Dawn first came out as the Micaiah vs. Nohrrin thread has recently shown. You can argue that Nohrrin is flawed, but the narrative certainly doesn't portray her that way. Especially when the only people that criticize her are either flatly evil (Garon, Iago, Hans), portrayed as unreasonably hateful (Takumi), or portrayed as ignorant or otherwise unable to understand her actions (the Hohsidans). The problem isn't that Nohrrin made a bad choice and stuck with it, the problem is that the story goes out of its way to to absolve Nohrrin of any wrongdoing in making said bad choice.

A good counter to the idea that Nohrrin is intentionally flawed instead of being poorly written and given way too much leeway by the story is the narrative's treatment of Kotaro and Zola. The former is treated as an irredeemable monster because he took Kagero hostage to use as a bargaining chip to get Hoshido to surrender, and the latter (and all of his troops, who were just guilty of being there and following orders) is killed by his own allies, despite both trying to do what Nohrrin was trying to do and end the war even if their methods and motives were morally wrong. Instead, without any hint of irony, Nohrrin and her siblings are given the moral high ground despite being guilty of similar if not worse crimes than those they're passing judgment on. That sort of treatment is protagonist-centered morality at its finest.

Gooron's mission to make you cry, shattering crystal balls, the curse, the magical throne and non-lethal-warfare-Kamui make the Blood Pact sound like Shakespeare by comparison.

One bad plot device doesn't compare to an entire game of bad plot devices, I agree.

Edited July 13, 2016 by AzureSen

[Augestein]

I suppose. I just think it's more that people find it painful to actually be playing a stupid and incompetent protagonist in this case.

[henrymidfields]

I don't know whether this is unpopular or otherwise, but I am starting to like Fates Conquest's story...because it inspires me to poke fun at the term "peace-loving", applied on the nation based on my home country.

[Troykv]

There is a difference between a flawed character and a bad character. A flawed character will make mistakes but ultimately prove to be competent in their decision making. A bad character will continue to make bad decisions (Kamui continuing to support Garon) or be hypocritical in their actions (Xander going on about peace after conquering a nation). I don't know what peoples' reactions were at the time of Radiant Dawn's release but in a somewhat recent thread on SF asking who people preferred, Micaiah or Kamui, people preferred Micaiah on a scale of like 4 to 1.

Bolded: Kamui is also supported by his Hinoka and Sakura despite being directly responsible for

the deaths of two of their brothers, not to mention Sakura's soldiers.

Gooron's mission to make you cry, shattering crystal balls, the curse, the magical throne and non-lethal-warfare-Kamui make the Blood Pact sound like Shakespeare by comparison.

Exactly!

Many stupid plot devices < (Worse) A forced plot device.

At least the Blood Pact could work better if was more explained and blah. The things that Conquest did were just plain stupid.

Poor Sakura... Well... At least she try to fight him/her when Garon and the Takumi's Thing were still alive.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Troykv

[NekoKnight]

Exactly!

Many stupid plot devices < (Worse) A forced plot device.

At least the Blood Pact could work better if was more explained and blah. The things that Conquest did were just plain stupid.

Poor Sakura... Well... At least she try to fight him/her when Garon and the Takumi's Thing were still alive.

I'm not even bothered by the Blood Pact for how it affects Micaiah's story because even if it didn't exist, the story would still work. Instead of the Blood Pact it could just be Begnion threatening to reoccupy Daein if Daein doesn't support their war effort.

Fates isn't just hindered by it's plot devices, you NEED the dumb plot devices for the plot to happen the way it does. For Kamui to invade Hoshido and for it to be framed as a good thing, you need:

[spoiler=Conquest]

1. The curse which prevents Kamui from telling anyone why he's doing what he does.

2. A magic orb that exists exclusively to reveal Garon as a goo monster instead of the human monster everyone else can see, and shatters before anyone else can see it.

3. A magic throne that exists exclusively to reveal goo monsters that Hoshido keeps in their final castle.

4. Iago not having a day job and relentlessly monitoring you so you definitely can't go against Garon.

5. Azura witholding critical information about the true enemy

And the final piece, Kamui, a lord so spineless and narrow-minded that he can't even consider the idea of NOT invading Hoshido, or working around the curse and finding a way to reveal the truth to his siblings BEFORE he conquers his homeland/kills his blood family.

It's just... so many layers of dumb.

Edited July 14, 2016 by NekoKnight