New vs Old

[Tolvir]

Little bit of a rant here, but something I really want to talk about.

Fire Emblem's community has one giant gap that has been being pulled apart by both sides since Awakening. Old fans vs New fans. Unfortunately, nothing IS has put out has really helped bridge that gap. Fates was supposed to do it, but the old fans still found things to whine about, while the new fans just sat and enjoyed the game.

The old fans have been complaining about the general direction of the series. They see everything before Awakening with rose colored glasses, and drink one big glass of Nostalgia before talking about their favorite Fire Emblem games. I see nothing but hatred for anything post Awakening come from them. Sure smaller things they enjoy, like Conquest's return of map objectives, but even then they found things to complain about. They complain a lot about Avatars, some with valid complaints such as the praise they receive or the constant shoving into the story. But they totally disregard the things it does bring into Fire Emblem, like a personal character that one can customize and call their own, a character that can really immerse you into the story, and the general enjoyment of having a custom character. The current support system is in the same boat, with valid complaints like too many of the supports being not very good, or the emphasis on marriage and kids. At the same time though, they tend to forget, due to their nostalgic view of the old, that this really isnt anything new. Fire Emblem's supports, while a  unique system that not a lot of other games have, haven't always been very good, at all. Do we really want to see a return of Radiant Dawn's support system, or worst like the Nintendo era?

They tend to forget a lot of things the older games have done, and how the new games have improved them. Things like Casual mode are overlooked, and sometimes viciously attacked by them. Phoenix mode is even worst, even though it was completely optional. They also tend to forget how the old games were not really different. Most of Fire Emblem's stories in the end leave a lot to be desired. Some are worst than others, but in the end, they all kind of suck. But this doesn't keep them from acting like Fates is the worst thing to ever touch the series. Even when previous games had the same issues like lack of world building, lack of meaningful villains, and bland characters. It doesn't mean their complaints aren't valid or that they don't bring up good points, but they don't exactly see the Hippocratic view they have on the series. 

They also run over the new fans of the series due to their reactions to it all. Its their way or the highway. The constant want for Avatars to be absolutely gone from the series is an example of this. Avatars definitely need to be addressed. The constant praise they receive, like Robin and Corrin, or the complete shoving into an already established story, like Kris. At the same time though, they have a place in the series that none of the old fans want to admit. It is a draw for the new crowd. Plenty of people enjoy this feature, and the want to completely chop it off like a cancer many of the old think it is, cuts off one of the main drawing points for the new fans, and alienates them from the rest of the community.

Now I am not calling anyone out here, but I do see this a lot in other FE communities. My point for writing this is I think that is exactly what Echoes is trying to do, bridging the gap between new and old. So I ask both fans of new and old to do this.

Take a step back and be optimistic for whatever Echoes brings. Old fans, if new systems like the Avatar or the current support system make it in, it isnt the end of the world. It is there to draw the new fans into the remake of an old game. And if the avatar is in, trust that IS takes the criticism like they did with Fates, and that Avatar. New Fans, realize that things like Pair Up as you know it, may not make it in. This is a recreation from the ground up of one of the first games in the series, and they want to stick to what ideas and concepts it had. Pair Up might not fit in very well here. Neither may the Avatar or the Support system.

Sorry if my rant was a little too long, and if I lost anyone here or lost where I was going. Tried my best to make sure I didnt go too crazy with this, read over it 2-3 times.

tldr: There is a huge divide between Old and New, Echoes is clearly trying to bridge that gap between the two, so I think everyone should remain optimistic, and not freak out if systems like avatars and pair up do or do not make it in.

 

 

Edited January 19, 2017 by Tolvir

[CappnRob]

Honestly I think the "divide" between old and new fans is -greatly- exaggerated. In my few months of being back here in the FE community after being absent since basically Radiant Dawn or Shadow Dragon hit shelves, I've seen a lot of old school fans who have played and enjoyed both Awakening an Fates. Yes, there are things in these games they are critical of, but being CRITICAL of something doesn't mean you HATE it. On the contrary the most critical fans are going to be the ones who love something the most, because they CARE about its future. Like a nagging parent I suppose. Now admittedly I primarily stick to the general FE and NES/SNES subforums with the occasional dive into the GBA and Tellius ones, but the fact remains I haven't seen much if any actual HATE for modern FE. Supports get criticized for being overbloated, yes. Avatar gets criticzed for detracting from the narratives, yes. But you know what else gets criticized?

Radiant Dawn's god-awful support system. Radiant Dawn's plot holes.

Binding Blade's awful character balance, especially on hard mode, and its bare bones lackluster story.

Genealogy's broken as hell skill system and bad AI.

Thracia's fog of war and other unfair mechanics.

Mystery of the Emblem's dragon wasteland missions, and overall crudeness as a SNES game.

Gaiden's clumsy design and haphazard implementation of original ideas.

Etc, etc, etc. The old games are not above reproach by the old guard, if anything, the old guard has far more intricate criticisms because they've played the games and thus know their strengths and weaknesses inside and out. I don't know where you get the idea that veterans are drugged up on nostalgia and thus ignore every flaw FE has ever had, because EVERY game has had its flaws, and they're well known and pointed out. Hell, we have an active thread right now in general discussing the perks and flaws of the Tellius Saga's story and world building. 

I don't think anyone isn't excited for Gaiden being remade. The trailer shows that it will likely be true to original self and not get rid of what made Gaiden unique and special, and thats great. Whatever concerns there are of avatars or what have you being in Gaiden aren't out of a dislike for these concepts in and of themselves, but rather if those concepts don't BELONG in Gaiden and would distract from what it already has to offer. Awakening and Fates were built around having an Avatar character, Gaiden wasn't, so if IS comes out and says Gaiden will have a shoe-horned in avatar character, of course long time fans are going to feel annoyed at that, but it isn't the end of the world either way. This "rift" between fandoms seems largely constructed out of hearsay and assumptions, and while I have seen some knuckle-headed people who either think Fire Emblem is RUINED FOREVER or absolutely refuse to touch anything older than 2010 because they're "dense as hell" (their words, not mine), these people seem to be relegated to the extreme minority and more often than not are found more around places like Tumblr or Reddit, not here on SF.

Relax about it, man.

[Tolvir]

I fully agree those features don't belong in the remake, but at the same time I won't be surprised to see them added in, at least to a minor extent.

 

My post was something I have been wanting to say for a while. It wasn't so much directed to people here. It's something I see occasionally here, but it is mostly in other communities.

[Busterman64]

Tolvir, I can kinda see where you're coming from. I can't speak for everyone, but I'm just gonna say how I personally feel.

None of these game are perfect, far from it. Every game has an issue in it somewhere, but some are more glaring then others. 

And I'm gonna be blunt...I'm not the biggest fan of Awakening's story, and Fates's story, while it had some moments, was pretty bad, but that's how I personally feel. I'm not gonna act like the older games had stories that were the leaders of story telling or something, but I felt like those stories were just a bit more refined(but I'm also not gonna act like the newer games don't have their flaws or were complete garbage either). 

Awakening's Story just needed to be fine tuned because it was pretty alright in general, but how somethings were executed screwed things up. Fates was just...bad. It had much potential, but it wasted ALOT of it!

Now I will say, gameplay wise, they shine better there. Fates especially. Awakening had a system that, while good, was still a bit shaky(but it was their first attempt). Fates refined things more and made it much more enjoyable!

Casual Mode I appreciate and respect because it's a way for others to get into Fire Emblem easier. I'll probably recommend Classic mode for an old school experience, but Casual mode is there if you want it. Phoenix mode, I'm not gonna lie, I was baffled by it at first, but since it's option, I just it be and left it alone(buuut I still feel like it takes some of the challenge away that FE is kinda known for).

Avatars...Awakening I feel like it got it right. Robin felt like another member of the group and didn't completely have the spotlight. S/he had a personality and honestly, had a role that was very fitting for the player. A nice supporting role!

Fates on the other hand...no. I personally feel like they screwed that up royally! I get Corrin is supposed to be the character that connects you to everyone else in the game. Problem is, s/he is the main spotlight for the story and, since s/he didn't have much of a personality and barely grows as a character, it makes the experience harder to enjoy. 

Corrin honestly made me want to not have Avatars in the games going forward. Can they work? Yes. But if they're like Corrin, I rather not. (However, if we DO get Avatars in FE15, just do better with them is all I ask.)

 

Supports...having too many is not really the issue, it's the quality of said supports! I know not every support is gonna be fantastic, but at the same time, I feel like some supports don't help you find out more about a character or bring something really interesting to the table. Now, that's an issue that's ALWAYS been in this series, but it just feels more so in Fates.

To bring up the older games, there was a limit to how many supports you could have on a current playthrough(it was x5), something I'm happy Awakening got rid of! However, characters who are kinda one note become more apparent(and if that one note of their is uninteresting, it can get annoying).

And that brings up something that kinda make things a bit worse...everyone can support with everyone. More so for the point of everyone can get married. Again, Awakening I feel did that better. Even more so with the child units since they're from the future. Fates kinda messed up in this department, especially since the child units felt shoehorned in for the fact that Awakening successfully did it. 

I will say something on Fates behalf though. Most FE games having around 50 playable characters(a bit more if you count NPCs). Of course, the games before Awakening, characters could only support with a certain amount of people. Fates have around 70-80 characters...all who could support with each other(although the children are a bit of a special case since they could really support with their parents, other children, and the Avatar). That's 5,000+ conversation combinations! I feel like that affected some of the quality of the writing, which honestly make me want them to either have them support with only a certain amount of people(like before) or just avoid having too many characters going forward.

 

I know the newer games get a bad rep for being a "waifu" similator and having fanservicey stuff in it...but it's an issue I have more with Fates because I felt like it had a bit too much with that(because I feel like characters like Camilla kinda suffer because of it. She actually a pretty cool character, but since most of her supports are pretty much "tell Corrin how much I love them" or being a little too...affectionate, or the game reminding me she of how she looks, I feel like her character gets dragged down tremendously. )

 

I personally do kinda worry for the series future. I don't think some of these new things added in are dooming it or anything, but I feel like they need to not lose what makes Fire Emblem special, just for the sake of attracting more people. That' s all I want really...I love this series too much...

 

Also, just to be clear, while I may be saying a lot of "Fates this" or "Fates that", I don't hate it. It just messed alot of areas(But what it got right, it did it pretty darn well).

 

 In the end though, everyone is gonna have their own opinion on things. However, acting like the newer game are completely trash with no redeemable qualities is a no-no.

 

(Hopefully I made sense in what I'm saying and got my point across properly. I will never say the newer games are pieces of garbage, but they still have issue I just can't ignore either. Also, and this is a side thing, but I want ALL the games to get love and attention! Not just the newer games, but also not just the older ones either. Each game has something that makes me love and enjoy this series so much! However, I also have my preferences, just like everyone else. There are some things in the older games I enjoy more then in the newer games, but that also goes vice versa as well. Honestly, just play what you like! But If something is wrong, something needs to be said so the games going forward are even better...but they need to be somewhat reasonable. ) 

OH, and as for Gaiden...I think it'll be fine!  

Edited January 19, 2017 by Busterman64

[Etrurian emperor]

I do see your point and I do agree to some extend when I see complaints about the new style but I wouldn't attribute that criticism to either hatred for the new style or nostalgia towards the older games. 

Fire emblem is in a transitional phase and is experimenting a lot. These experiments don't always work out and lead to situations where criticism is warranted. But that's not always hate. Fates really dropped the ball on how to introduce the kids but pretty much everyone, including the ones that complain about the kids seem to love a character like Forrest. I think a situation like that much more resembles people being harsh on it because they care. 

Its the faulty implementation of things that brings out the criticism. The pair up mechanics were rightfully critisized in Awakening but after being fixes in Fates I don't see much complaints about them anymore. Similarly if the next potential batch of kids are implemented better I don't think its likely they would be such a divisive subject. The same goes for the Avatar. Somewhere there should be a middle ground where the avatar is relevant but not to the extend of taking the screentime of others and praiseworthy without being worshiped for no reason. Once that middle ground is found the avatar will be more accepted. 

Ensuring these experiments all end with a competent result is going to have the older fans accept these changes. If you don't give people much reasons to complain they generally won't do so. 

Quote

most of Fire Emblem's stories in the end leave a lot to be desired. Some are worst than others, but in the end, they all kind of suck. But this doesn't keep them from acting like Fates is the worst thing to ever touch the series. Even when previous games had the same issues like lack of world building, lack of meaningful villains, and bland characters.

I think that has to do with Fates genuinely being in a league of its own when it comes to bad storytelling. The other stories have their flaws but they still manage to give you something or at the very least don't have their flaws stand out to much. With Fates its much harder to get around these flaws.
I think Fates story is very bad at giving the player something that makes them willing to look past its flaws. The blood pact might have been stupid but Radiant dawn offers strong world building and tries to be interesting. It tries much to hard but there's something admirable in that. 

And the GBA games might not have to many bell and whistle's but at least its told decently and has some enjoyable villains. Shadow dragon's world was as bare bones as that of Fates but people seemed to enjoy seeing Marth grow. 

Fates lacks all of that. A lot of the time it seems the story is making effort for it to be less interesting, its villains are either forgettable or written in a frustrating way, Corrin doesn't just not grow but gets told he shouldn't even be growing in the first place and the story certainly can't boast of any bells and whistles. I think people are to harsh on Fates over a lot of things but the story isn't one of them. When compared to the others it really does lag behind quite a bit. 

 

Edited January 19, 2017 by Etrurian emperor

[NekoKnight]

3 hours ago, CappnRob said:

This "rift" between fandoms seems largely constructed out of hearsay and assumptions

This, basically. I do think Fates is the worst thing to ever happen to Fire Emblem in terms of writing quality but I also think it (Conquest at least) has the best gameplay in the series. Blazing Sword is full of charming characters but I'll be the first to tell you the support gathering system was awful. So where do I fall on this old guard/new generation division?

Peoples' appreciation of series is not a black and white issue. People have MIXED opinions about different games.

[Thane]

21 minutes ago, NekoKnight said:

This, basically. I do think Fates is the worst thing to ever happen to Fire Emblem in terms of writing quality but I also think it (Conquest at least) has the best gameplay in the series. Blazing Sword is full of charming characters but I'll be the first to tell you the support gathering system was awful. So where do I fall on this old guard/new generation division?

Peoples' appreciation of series is not a black and white issue. People have MIXED opinions about different games.

Yeah, this is something that cannot be overstated. I know it's completely anecdotal, but I joined the fandom in 2013 with Awakening, then I went back to playing the older games, and then I played Fates, which I think has the worst writing out of any game I've ever played, something that's countered by Conquest's amazing gameplay. I'm a big fan of the series as a whole but have quite a few complaints about pretty much all installments I've played, like I assume most people do.

Splitting fans up into very general categories doesn't make much sense; of course you've got rookies and veterans, but saying that all newcomers are here for waifus or whatever is just intellectually dishonest. 

I think it's much more productive and interesting to talk about our different opinions on the games themselves rather than obsessing over how we differ as fans.

Edited January 20, 2017 by Thane

[General Banzai]

If you can't see that there is a tremendously different narrative tone between 1-12 and 13-14, or refuse to believe that anybody might prefer one tone over the other, you're deluding yourself.

Quote

Most of Fire Emblem's stories in the end leave a lot to be desired. Some are worst than others, but in the end, they all kind of suck. But this doesn't keep them from acting like Fates is the worst thing to ever touch the series.

Despite your arrogant posturing otherwise, it's not incontrovertible fact that all stories in all FEs "kind of suck." FESS and POR have good stories. RD and 7 have stories that, while deeply flawed, have some good elements. Other stories, like Thracia, 6, and SD, are at least elegant in their simplicity. That's nowhere near the level of absolute steaming garbage that is 13 and 14's stories, which are mindnumbing to the point of being an affront to a player in search of a serious fantasy narrative. "All FE stories are the same" is basically like saying "the Republican and Democrat parties are the same."

Edited January 20, 2017 by General Banzai

[Irysa]

1 hour ago, General Banzai said:

RD and 7 have stories that, while deeply flawed, have some good elements.

who are you and what have you done with banzai

[General Banzai]

10 minutes ago, Irysa said:

who are you and what have you done with banzai

Actually I'd still probably say that FE7's story is worse than FE14 Conquest's story. But it's real close.

Edited January 20, 2017 by General Banzai

[CappnRob]

I thought FE7's story was great myself, but mostly because it had really good character writing and less so  the merits of the plot itself :Y

 

Anyway it helps to remember we were all newcomers once. When FE7 hit America, there was still a small, dedicated niche English audience who thrived off either emulating the Japanese games or actually imported them, and for a time there was a divide between us but it healed. And again when FE8 came out due to its easier nature. And again still with Path of Radiance. Now all these audiences are in the "veteran" clique, and have gone back to enjoy some if not all of the games before their entry title. Divides come and then they go, we'll probably be facing new ones still when the Gaiden remake or Warriors come out as well. It passes with time.

Edited January 20, 2017 by CappnRob

[AbsoluteZer0Nova]

1 hour ago, General Banzai said:

Actually I'd still probably say that FE7's story is worse than FE14 Conquest's story. But it's real close.

I can agree with that. I liked Conquest's story, but I would be in denial if I said it didn't have problems. Last I recall though wasn't Radiant Dawn met with harsh story criticism before and then years later it's now not as vocal? I see the same happening for Conquest eventually at some point perhaps, I still largely think most of the outcry of its story being completely irredeemable is that a lot of people are just not too pleased about how it's story was marketed with the whole fighting a kingdom from the inside, though I also see Birthright in the same light due to how Corrin was highlighted as the birth siblings for the Hoshidan royals and yet he recovers from the revelation that he isn't so easily... and I could go on, but I already had a topic of my reasons of enjoying Conquest's story more than Birthright's generic story which doesn't even feel like a war story with issues of its own on the flip side.

 

I'm curious about Gaiden's story seeing as how the game is being remade, especially since it's considered the black sheep of the series which Sacred Stones got some of its gameplay elements from.

 

Edited January 20, 2017 by AbsoluteZer0Nova

[NekoKnight]

13 minutes ago, AbsoluteZer0Nova said:

I can agree with that. I liked Conquest's story, but I would be in denial if I said it didn't have problems. Last I recall though wasn't Radiant Dawn met with harsh story criticism before and then years later it's now not as vocal? I see the same happening for Conquest eventually at some point perhaps, I still largely think most of the outcry of its story being completely irredeemable is that a lot of people are just not too pleased about how it's story was marketed with the whole fighting a kingdom from the inside, though I also see Birthright in the same light due to how Corrin was highlighted as the birth siblings for the Hoshidan royals and yet he recovers from the revelation that he isn't so easily... and I could go on, but I already had a topic of my reasons of enjoying Conquest's story more than Birthright's generic story which doesn't even feel like a war story with issues of its own on the flip side.

I'm sure people will eventually lose their passion in talking about Fates but that doesn't make the criticisms invalid. Marketing creating expectations is part of the backlash but even without biases, the writing doesn't hold up when analyzed. Radiant Dawn was flawed but Fates had 5 times as many "Blood Pact" tier narrative failings.

[Ryo]

3 hours ago, Thane said:

Yeah, this is something that cannot be overstated. I know it's completely anecdotal, but I joined the fandom in 2013 with Awakening, then I went back to playing the older games, and then I played Fates, which I think has the worst writing out of any game I've ever played, something that's countered by Conquest's amazing gameplay. I'm a big fan of the series as a whole but have quite a few complaints about pretty much all installments I've played, like I assume most people do.

Splitting fans up into very general categories doesn't make much sense; of course you've got rookies and veterans, but saying that all newcomers are here for waifus or whatever is just intellectually dishonest. 

I think it's much more productive and interesting to talk about our different opinions on the games themselves rather than obsessing over how we differ as fans.

I'm in the same situation as you for Awakening was also my first game in the series, so technically I'm a "new fan" as well, and a rather casual one at that. However, that doesn't mean that I can turn a blind eye to the things that I find questionable in the current direction of the series, just as much as I don't overrate the goodness of the older titles. Although, I do acknowledge IS's effort in at least trying to improve some of the flaws, for better or for worse.

[General Banzai]

2 hours ago, AbsoluteZer0Nova said:

I can agree with that. I liked Conquest's story, but I would be in denial if I said it didn't have problems. Last I recall though wasn't Radiant Dawn met with harsh story criticism before and then years later it's now not as vocal? I see the same happening for Conquest eventually at some point perhaps, I still largely think most of the outcry of its story being completely irredeemable is that a lot of people are just not too pleased about how it's story was marketed with the whole fighting a kingdom from the inside, though I also see Birthright in the same light due to how Corrin was highlighted as the birth siblings for the Hoshidan royals and yet he recovers from the revelation that he isn't so easily... and I could go on, but I already had a topic of my reasons of enjoying Conquest's story more than Birthright's generic story which doesn't even feel like a war story with issues of its own on the flip side.

 

I'm curious about Gaiden's story seeing as how the game is being remade, especially since it's considered the black sheep of the series which Sacred Stones got some of its gameplay elements from.

 

I'm not gonna lie, despite its flaws I also like Conquest's story. It might be because I heard such negative backlash against it going in, and also because I started with the far more bland Birthright, but Conquest at least tries interesting stuff? It's at least attempting to be innovative, and I think in a lot of its attempts it actually succeeds. I like the situation the Avatar is placed in, where they have to awkwardly tiptoe around Garon's madness while also trying to not be an evil dickhead. It's a good premise with inherent tension. I like the early chapter where you go to Flora's village and Silas has a bunch of characterization for no reason. I like that the story really ties into the gameplay with neat map design. Yeah, it's still written poorly, definitely more poorly than FE7, but it delivers on certain fundamentals that FE7 lacks. It's easily the best "New FE" storyline and I don't understand why it's so reviled.

Also, I like that IS tried. After Awakening success, it would be real easy to lie back and phone in infinity no effort stories. But the attempted something innovative and brought in renowned story people to make the story work. It didn't work, they executed like donguses, but they tried. It's why I can't be too hard on FERD, either. It's got major issues, but it's clear IS is attempting something ambitious, beyond their usual ability.

[Irysa]

I actually kinda sympathise with that sentiment about Conquest's story, but more because Fates was a new thing and so didn't end up fucking around with established narratives, wheras a lot of post Kaga FE's "lets do new things!" have kinda just been plain detractive from the works they're connected to. (7, 10, 12). Heck, Awakening's story is pretty corny and horribly executed but I'd still rate it over the shitfest they did with New Mystery any day f.ex.

Edited January 20, 2017 by Irysa

[CrimeanRoyalKnight]

There definitely is a divide in the fandom, but while in some places it is handled more maturely and thus almost feels unexistant (like Serenes, where we mostly have all differing opinions on all the games), in others it's the first thing that you will notice: 4chan, GameFaqs, YouTube comments, they're all cesspool communities (and I'd argue 4chan is the least worst); all these have a huge divide and always have arguments about New VS Old. 

I've seen both sides be terrible: fans of the older games will shit talk the new ones asap while also shitting on the new fans, fans of the newer games will do the same but with more waifu posting. 

While you might say it's useless to consider bad communities as part of the community, imo they still are. I read all FE communities when I want to. 

That said, I don't think there's anything wrong in presenting negative opinions, but one should always consider how to present them, and they especially should not attack the fans unless the discussion at hand is about the fans. If you can say something sucks balls you should at least back up your argument. The worst communities never back up their arguments, or if they do they always beat a dead horse.

[Dinar87]

I completely disagree with statements like that most fire emblem stories "leave a lot to be desired" as you're stating it like it's a fact (rather than your own opinion) when really whether these sorts of things are good or not is opinion based. For some people, plot holes and other stuff are enough to ruin a story yet others can overlook them and enjoy things the previous group doesn't care about. My main problem with the whole "objectively" argument is that it puts down any opposing views as opinion-based...yet the people who use this sometimes don't realize that their own "objective, inherently right" views are very much based on their or others' opinions and what they personally find interesting or not.

Personally, I can't stand the whole "objective" mindset as it creates instant wars between people as we try to find what is the objective truth...ignorant of the fact that there isn't one for electronic entertainment of all things. I've seen many flame wars often started because some people decide their view and opinion is the "objectively right one" and try to stop anyone saying that things they hate are good or vice versa.

We'd be a lot more peaceful if some of us didn't pretend their games/tastes were holy than thou when they really aren't. I don't pretend that path of radiance (my favorite game of all time) is objectively better than awakening and fates...and I expect other fans to do the same. If we all can't just admit we like different things and we can say different things are good...then the fan base will constantly be at war with itself trying to find the "right" game to praise.

In short, I just want less people arguing online and I see getting rid of the "objectivity" argument as a means to do that. I admit I don't know whether the argument is completely flawed or has some merits that I've yet to realize, but I just find it hard to respect such a thing when it causes so much fighting and internet bloodshed.

Edited January 20, 2017 by Dinar87