More Unpopular Fire Emblem Opinions

[NekoKnight]

It isn't necessarily wrong to have certain types of expectations for your children, but it is wrong to treat your children as though you own them, or as though they're otherwise some sort of extension of yourself. I don't know about you, but I would say that forcing or pressuring your child to conform to standard gender roles and expectations is an abuse of your power as a parent. Your child should be free to express themself and be themself, so long as it's not hurting anyone. Parents being vocally-disapproving of harmless habits or traits their children may have does damage the self-esteem of the kids, as well as their trust in the parent in question. It also teaches them the same prejudice you hold that causes you to disapprove of the thing you're discouraging. It's demonstrably not a good way to treat your kids, no matter what your values are.

I'm getting a lot of "yes but no" out of this paragraph. Leo may have expectations but he's not allowed to vocalize his disagreement with his son's life choices? I don't want to get into a heated discussion of proper parenting, but the attitude that "the child may do whatever he likes as long as it's not physically harming anyone" is...open-minded to the point of not having standards. Believe it or not but most parents try to influence their children in a certain direction and it's the most natural thing in the world for a parent to reproach a child for what they deem improper behavior, be that sitting with a slouch or dressing up as a girl.

And of course, you're also making the classic mistake of assuming that a world that's technologically- and (tenuously) aesthetically-based on the real-world medieval era would necessarily have to be the same in all of its social attitudes, as well. It's a fantasy setting that doesn't at all have to adhere to the way the real world was at the equivalent point in its development. For example, Corrin, Niles, and Rhajat can form same-gender romantic relationships that are presumably not in secret and not be executed or ostracized for it, which in itself is a sign that Fates' world has at least a somewhat more progressive social climate than ours did at the equivalent point in time.

I'm going to bring up a point I said earlier about the relationship of the characters and their world. Because of a lack of world-building, It seems to me that characters often exist in a void, separate to the world the one the game takes place in. Take for example, Pieri. She's a psychopath and serial killer, but she's not locked up or executed for her crimes. Should we believe that murder is not a crime in Nohr? Err, uh, maybe? So how about marriages? It's apparently okay for crown prince Ryoma to marry a peasant farm girl. In fact, it's okay for the crown prince of NOHR to marry a Hoshidan farm girl. Does any of this make a lick of sense?

Characters exist primarily to be the quirky play-things of the player. Important things like sexual identity (such as being bisexual) or gender-norms are never commented on so we can't assume anything about the world of Fates. Maybe Forrest's behavior is perfectly acceptable and Leo's is only speaking against his son out of personal disappointment. Or maybe there ARE values that say a man should never wear a woman's clothes and Forrest is the one acting improperly. Who knows?

I can't say for certain if Forrest's behavior jives with the world of Fates but by that same virtue, people can't assume that THEIR values are the ones the Fates world adheres to either. In the wake of a lot of modern movements to break down gender-norms, I think a lot of people have a knee-jerk reaction to Forrest's particular case. I don't see many post lambasting Saizo for initially pressuring Grey to follow in his footsteps.

Anyway, I don't want to flood this thread with anymore posts about this topic. I've said my part and if that's unpopular, well, I'm in the right place!

[Topaz Light]

I'm getting a lot of "yes but no" out of this paragraph. Leo may have expectations but he's not allowed to vocalize his disagreement with his son's life choices? I don't want to get into a heated discussion of proper parenting, but the attitude that "the child may do whatever he likes as long as it's not physically harming anyone" is...open-minded to the point of not having standards. Believe it or not but most parents try to influence their children in a certain direction and it's the most natural thing in the world for a parent to reproach a child for what they deem improper behavior, be that sitting with a slouch or dressing up as a girl.

Apologies; I realize I wasn't really super clear about what I meant, but I felt that going too in-depth about something tangential to the initial point would've distracted from the main point I was trying to make at the time. What I mainly meant by that was that it's okay to have standards regarding, say, how well your child performs academically, how well they treat others, how much effort they put into their work, how much they contribute to the household, etc. I do not think that it's okay to chastise a child for harmless forms of self-expression, such as simply dressing in a manner that's unconventional for their gender, because all it does is damage their self-esteem and foster distrust and animosity towards the parent. I also think that it's important to try to exercise a little bit of detachment from your child's life choices, in the sense that you shouldn't take it as some sort of personal affront or act of disrespect if they don't end up following the specific path through life that you would've chosen for them. I do realize, however, that this is not the default attitude and it would need to be adopted manually, for lack of a better word. Again, I totally understand that you wouldn't really have gotten that out of my initial paragraph, because, in fairness, I didn't actually elaborate on what I meant by "some standards" hardly at all.

I'm going to bring up a point I said earlier about the relationship of the characters and their world. Because of a lack of world-building, It seems to me that characters often exist in a void, separate to the world the one the game takes place in. Take for example, Pieri. She's a psychopath and serial killer, but she's not locked up or executed for her crimes. Should we believe that murder is not a crime in Nohr? Err, uh, maybe? So how about marriages? It's apparently okay for crown prince Ryoma to marry a peasant farm girl. In fact, it's okay for the crown prince of NOHR to marry a Hoshidan farm girl. Does any of this make a lick of sense?

Characters exist primarily to be the quirky play-things of the player. Important things like sexual identity (such as being bisexual) or gender-norms are never commented on so we can't assume anything about the world of Fates. Maybe Forrest's behavior is perfectly acceptable and Leo's is only speaking against his son out of personal disappointment. Or maybe there ARE values that say a man should never wear a woman's clothes and Forrest is the one acting improperly. Who knows?

I can't say for certain if Forrest's behavior jives with the world of Fates but by that same virtue, people can't assume that THEIR values are the ones the Fates world adheres to either. In the wake of a lot of modern movements to break down gender-norms, I think a lot of people have a knee-jerk reaction to Forrest's particular case. I don't see many post lambasting Saizo for initially pressuring Grey to follow in his footsteps.

This is a fair point.

Anyway, I don't want to flood this thread with anymore posts about this topic. I've said my part and if that's unpopular, well, I'm in the right place!

As is this. This has gotten waaaaaay off topic, oops.

(If for some reason you're interested in continuing this discussion, feel free to PM me about it, but I do agree that it really oughtta be kept out of this unrelated forum thread.)

Edited August 16, 2016 by Topaz Light

[blah the Prussian]

...huh, now that I think of it, that is a good point about Forrest. Now,cI don't think the writers actually intended for Leo to disapprove of Forrest because it's important for the stability of the country that the royal family maintains its image, because that would be giving the writing too much credit, but it is a good point. Forrest's responsibility as a Prince of Nohr trumps his gender identity.

[Luchi]

- Ike is the most over-rated Lord in the series. Even IS favours him over Marth imho. He's the sole reason ( along with Sothe ) that I don't play FE9/10 and why they rank so low in terms of my favourite FEs.

- I prefer a well-written character to a good unit.

- In keeping with Tellius, Mia and Nephenee are the 2 most over-rated girls in the entire series, both in terms of looks and as units.

- I hate mounts/fliers on principle, unless the flier is named Elincia.

- I don't care about low-turn counts or resource management.

- Support convos are pretty much the main reason for shipping wars. I also don't bother with them.

[The DanMan]

As much as I can agree with the points stated, I think you guys are looking a bit too deep into the Forrest clothing issue. Leo wanted a son that conformed to a pretty normal masculine ideal, Forrest didn't do that so there was an issue. Leo also wasn't really there to guide Forrest into wearing manlier clothes since time shenanigans in the Deeprealms and being probably the most absent father of the lot so that didn't help. Adjusting that easily isn't really something people do so it's pretty surprising how quickly he warmed up to the idea but I can see how this situation could take place.

I guess that's my unpopular opinion.

That said the faceless need pants or something, they truly have BDSM gear passing for... attire?

I'm not the only one who thought this.

- Ike is the most over-rated Lord in the series. Even IS favours him over Marth imho. He's the sole reason ( along with Sothe ) that I don't play FE9/10 and why they rank so low in terms of my favourite FEs.

- I prefer a well-written character to a good unit.

- In keeping with Tellius, Mia and Nephenee are the 2 most over-rated girls in the entire series, both in terms of looks and as units.

- I hate mounts/fliers on principle, unless the flier is named Elincia.

- I don't care about low-turn counts or resource management.

- Support convos are pretty much the main reason for shipping wars. I also don't bother with them.

Umm... what?

"He's the sole reason (along with Sothe) that I don't play FE9/10 and why they rank so low in terms of my favourite FEs."

So you basically rank a game low on your favorites because you don't like how popular one or two characters are and as such won't even touch them?

Guess this is the internet, but... .

[Jave]

I'm not the only one who thought this.

Umm... what?

"He's the sole reason (along with Sothe) that I don't play FE9/10 and why they rank so low in terms of my favourite FEs."

So you basically rank a game low on your favorites because you don't like how popular one or two characters are and as such won't even touch them?

Guess this is the internet, but... .

I can see where she's coming from. Disliking two main characters in a game feels like a perfectly valid reason to not want to play it.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Jave

[MCProductions]

I can see where she's coming from. Disliking two main characters in a game feels like a perfectly valid reason to not want to play it.

For example, I dislike Sigurd and Ephraim, so I have trouble playing FE4 and 8 respectively, even if I LIKE those games, they're my least played FEs barring vanilla FE1 even if I don't consider them my least favorite

[The DanMan]

I can see where she's coming from. Disliking two main characters in a game feels like a perfectly valid reason to not want to play it.

But then you can't rank a game so low if you've never played it.

For example, I'd never try to rank TMS#FE with anything because I have no interest in it or desire to play it.

[Jave]

But then you can't rank a game so low if you've never played it.

For example, I'd never try to rank TMS#FE with anything because I have no interest in it or desire to play it.

How do you know she's never played them? The opinion she gives of Ike and Sothe makes me think she has in fact played the games, but she doesn't feel like playing them anymore. This is particularly truthful in the FE series, since the games tend to motivate multiple playthroughs (specially in FE10 where you need at least two playthroughs to unlock the full ending, and three playthoughs to unlock absolutely everything).

She also mentions she doesn't like Mia and Nephenee but likes Elincia, all of them as units, which is an opinion I would expect from someone who has played the games.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Jave

[The DanMan]

How do you know she's never played them? The opinion she gives of Ike and Sothe makes me think she has in fact played the games, but she doesn't feel like playing them anymore. This is particularly truthful in the FE series, since the games tend to motivate multiple playthroughs (specially in FE10 where you need at least two playthroughs to unlock the full ending, and three playthoughs to unlock absolutely everything).

She also mentions she doesn't like Mia and Nephenee but likes Elincia, all of them as units, which is an opinion I would expect from someone who has played the games.

The first part said "that I don't play FE9/10", which made me think that they hadn't played them at all.

And for comments about "units", they could mean growth rates/stats.

Though yeah, I should've probably read things a bit more closely.

[OliKad]

- Chapter 7 of FE4 wasn't so bad. Chapter 9, however...

- FE4 is a masterpiece despite the statement above

- All three stories featured in Fates are fine/okay, in my opinion

- Levin is overrated but still good. Sety though...

- I still like FE1 and FE2 despite me first playing them in 2016

- Chrom is one of my favorite lords

- Nino is an awesome unit

- Nino is better than Pent, who is better than Erk

- With the exception of Camilla, I like all the royal characters

[Drarky]

-I don't like mounted units for a very childish reason. I don't consider them to look cool enough.

-The FE6 Knights have a very small niche in some maps that require choking. At least Bors.

-I despise Cavalier because they feel extremely generic. Paladins are "okay".

-I like FE4 gigantic maps, even if it forced mounted favoritism.

-Fliers are boring. Except maybe the Wyvern.

-FE2 is one of my favorites.

[DragonFlames]

The whole cross-dressing issue doesn't change the fact that Forrest is a dick.

Anydangway, I thought up some more unpopular opinions for you guys:

- Idoun is the best dragon final boss we had so far, especially in terms of character and backstory

- Her difficulty, not so much (Fae says hi!)

- Nergal's Morphs are harder to beat than Nergal himself (especially Lloyd, Limstella and Sonia)

- Formotiis is the easiest final boss in the series (Myrrh says hi!)

- Both Ena and Nasir suck as units. They are very well written characters, however.

- The German dub for Radiant Dawn was good.

- Out of all the DLC maps released for Awakening, Rouges and Redeemers 3 is the most fun.

- At the same time, it can be the easiest if you have your Manaketes trained.

- I don't like the fact that you had to fulfill some arbitrary conditions to reach the actual final chapter in FE6 and FE12.

- Future Past 3 should have been the actual finale to Awakening's story. (I headcanon that to be the case)

- That being said, I like Awakening's final chapter a lot.

- Knights and Generals look hilarious in Awakening and Fates.

[Dengres]

- The German dub for Radiant Dawn was good.

True.

I mean it's not perfect, but at least Mist sounds somewhat good.

[The DanMan]

True.

I mean it's not perfect, but at least Mist sounds somewhat good.

I've heard tell that the French one wasn't bad as well.

Of course, there's so little to dub that actual quality is almost superficial- I'm just surprised that Jason Adkins managed to sound half-decent in Codename Steam.

[Etrurian emperor]

Seeing as how loathed Iago is I'd say its an unpopular opinion that birthright Iago is actually halfway decent.

The thing about Iago is that's he's just a big, overly smug bully with a high rank and Birthright get that across quite nicely. Its highlighed how pathetic Iago is. Everything Iago does fails, no one is intimidated by him and even Garon seems to only barely tolerate him. It fits well with Iago being such a loser.

Its only conquest where Iago is unbearable. Here, the complete loser doesn't keep failing but he keeps succeeding, scoring victory after victory against Corrin and even bossing around the likes of Xander. That contrast his characterization as a complete loser and makes it very irksome that he's the main source of drama.

[Harvey]

Seeing as how loathed Iago is I'd say its an unpopular opinion that birthright Iago is actually halfway decent.

The thing about Iago is that's he's just a big, overly smug bully with a high rank and Birthright get that across quite nicely. Its highlighed how pathetic Iago is. Everything Iago does fails, no one is intimidated by him and even Garon seems to only barely tolerate him. It fits well with Iago being such a loser.

Its only conquest where Iago is unbearable. Here, the complete loser doesn't keep failing but he keeps succeeding, scoring victory after victory against Corrin and even bossing around the likes of Xander. That contrast his characterization as a complete loser and makes it very irksome that he's the main source of drama.

That maybe so, but in gameplay wise, He's more challenging in Conquest compared to Birthright where the later is a complete joke thanks to Ryoma alone....... heck even without him around, the map is soooooo straight forward.

[Zigludo]

Having a mount does not automatically make a unit good

[Azure Sen]

Having a mount does not automatically make a unit good

I agree, unless it's FE4, whose map size gives mounted units a huge advantage over foot units, even if those foot units would be objectively better in other games.

[Magical Glace]

Having a mount does not automatically make a unit good

I mean, I don't see much praises sang to Treck, but it is an innate edge even if he's subpar overall.

[NekoKnight]

I mean, I don't see much praises sang to Treck, but it is an innate edge even if he's subpar overall.

How about Fiona? Did anyone use her?

[Magical Glace]

How about Fiona? Did anyone use her?

She's pretty bad as well. Lowen in FE7 is outdone by Kent and Sain as well, though he's servicable.

[MCProductions]

How about Fiona? Did anyone use her?

Mistakenly read that as Fiora lol

Seriously wonder what they were thinking with Fiona, I mean, with her backstory she should be amazing after all.

[Rezzy]

How about Fiona? Did anyone use her?

If I remember correctly, the maps she's in early don't let her make much use of her mount, and by then later she's overshadowed by pretty much everybody.

[ping]

I don't think anyone will say that a horse automatically makes a unit good. But is there any example of a unit that is / would be worse with a horse? I mean, Fiona is utter garbage, but would a hypothetical Soldier!Fiona with completely identical bases, growths and caps be better in any way?

@topic: To make Roy into an avatar, you'd only have to customize him and change basically nothing else about the game. Everyone in the game loves him already, even the enemies usually show respect for him, his decisions are always correct (I mean, Merlinus in this game basically exists to make Roy look good), he gets not all the girls but a sizeable share of the female cast; said girls even cover a rather large number of possible tastes...

I'd even say he would be (or is?) a rather good avatar because he isn't that involved in the plot (after chapter 8, at least), so the characters more relevant to the plot can be more fleshed out without forcing these attributes on the avatar. It's just too bad that there isn't really a female version of him in the game.