Sad look at some thoughts on our fanbase

[Slumber]

11 minutes ago, Kobitohime said:

also gameplay have been progressively getting more complex and better, I fail to see how they are dumbed down compared to older game like some post here claim, I marathoned the series over 4 months started with Fe7, and I saw nothing but improvement except for the DS remake.

"Improvement" is also subjective, so for you, you may only see progress. For me(And a lot of people who have been with the series for a long time), Fire Emblem has always been a strategy game with RPG elements, and when both aspects shine, I'm at my happiest. But Awakening was a SEVERE dip in the "strategy" aspect.

- You easily could abuse mechanics that existed purely to make the game easier(Pair-Up, Second Seals, Map Grinding, DLC Grinding for powerful classes, weapons, skills, gold and EXP, etc.), with 0 reason not to. Not to mention support bonuses basically made units invincible, since not only did they all give the same, very broad benefits(Compared to older games where support benefits were based on Affinity), the guard and follow-up bonuses typically made your units nigh-invulnerable when supported and paired-up in the main game.

- EVERY first gen character had insanely good stats and growth rates, and could level up indefinitely so long as you didn't mind spending two minutes on extra maps, and THEN the child units not only inherited their parents' growth rates, skills and class sets, they could inherit the stats(Not base stats) of the parents.

- Maps were all basically one of two objectives: Kill Everything or Kill Boss(There was the "Defend Emmeryn" map, but I for the life of me can't remember if there are ANY other Defend maps in the whole game), and the map design is some of the most straightforward and simple map design in the whole series. Most maps were laid out in very open, with easily traversable layouts and very few maps containing major obstacles.

- If you wanted any sort of challenge if you were already familiar with the mechanics of the series and Awakening in general, you had to play Lunatic and Lunatic+, which were two of the most imbalanced difficulties in the franchise. Rather than making the AI any smarter, or making their placements and behaviors trickier, they just boosted their stats to insane degrees, gave them skills that reduced all damage by half, and gave them weapons that were actually impossible to obtain with the game's mechanics. Lunatic and Lunatic+ all boil down to hoping that the RNG is on your side to a nearly impossible degree.

These were relatively common complaints, and the fact that every single one of them was addressed in Fates(Even in Birthright, the closest thing to a proper Awakening follow-up out of the bunch), makes me think that as much as a smash hit as Awakening was, IS realized they majorly boned game balance and the strategy elements of the game. To the point where I struggle to call it a strategy game. If you asked me to classify what Awakening is, I'd just say it's a grid-based, turn-based JRPG, as weird as that sounds.

Which isn't to say that this doesn't have its benefits. While I'm not that big on Awakening, the fact that it was basically just a turn-based JRPG with heavy emphasis on character interaction appealed to a lot more people, as opposed to when the series was known for permadeath and planning.

And this is a lot of where the "Old vs. New arguments" stem. The old fans hate what Awakening did to the franchise, though they often admit that Conquest was a major step in the right direction, and can't get over just how ridiculously simplified Awakening is. The new fans, on the other hand, just don't care for many of the aspects that made the franchise appealing prior to Awakening, and since they're the much larger and more vocal group right now, they really get on the nerves of old fans. I'm generalizing here(I'm an old fan who doesn't like Awakening, but appreciate that it kept the series afloat and enjoyed my first few playthroughs of it), but that's the gist of the rift in the series.

[Extrasolar]

37 minutes ago, Kobitohime said:

so many people are bothered by the "fanservice" of newer game, kinda un-progressive in my opinion, telling women what they wear is ok or not, I fail to see why woman wearing revealing outfit is any less worthy of respect than women wearing less revealing one.

2

The difference is objectification.

While older FE games may have had fanservice elements in design (but it was heavily, heavily downplayed, to the point that you didn't notice unless they drew attention to it, like Eirika and Amelia's miniskirts in Sacred Stones), the female characters were never outright objectified.

Tellius was the best in this regard, easily. The vast majority of the women in Tellius are just as fully covered as the men, albeit with the occasional FE-favorite miniskirt like Ilyana or Mist, or long dress with slits in the side which dates all the way back to the Jugdral games. On the other thread someone brought up Nephenee as a fanservice design; sure, Nephenee doesn't have leg armor, but again, she's never objectified.

Whereas you get things like Camilla's cutscene in Fates, with the camera ogling her every step of the way, not to mention Charlotte's battle bikini and, ahem, "victory pose."

[Kobitohime]

5 minutes ago, Extrasolar said:

The difference is objectification.

While older FE games may have had fanservice elements in design (but it was heavily, heavily downplayed, to the point that you didn't notice unless they drew attention to it, like Eirika and Amelia's miniskirts in Sacred Stones), the female characters were never outright objectified.

Tellius was the best in this regard, easily. The vast majority of the women in Tellius are just as fully covered as the men, albeit with the occasional FE-favorite miniskirt like Ilyana or Mist, or long dress with slits in the side which dates all the way back to the Jugdral games. On the other thread someone brought up Nephenee as a fanservice design; sure, Nephenee doesn't have leg armor, but again, she's never objectified.

Whereas you get things like Camilla's cutscene in Fates, with the camera ogling her every step of the way, not to mention Charlotte's battle bikini and, ahem, "victory pose."

in my opinion, it's just people like you that is objectifying her, the very kind of disrespectful thing that I spoke of, Camillia have the personality fits with someone who confident with her looks and would wear revealing outfit to shows her sexiness, the cutsense shows that well, and seeing her in such outfit does not stop me from respecting her as a person, respecting her for her love for Corrin, and find her protective side endearing.

and off the top of my head, I can only remember Olivia and Camillia as fanservicy character of Awakening and Fates, none other were noticeable or stand out enough for me to remember. battle leotard been a thing in movies/comic/anime for forever, so them being on Nohr female paladin didn't bother me at all.

[Extrasolar]

Just now, Kobitohime said:

in my opinion, it's just people like you that is objectifying her, the very kind of disrespectful thing that I spoke of, Camillia have the personality fits with someone who confident with her looks and would wear revealing outfit to shows her sexiness, the cutsense shows that well, and seeing her in such outfit does not stop me from respecting her as a person, respecting her for her love for Corrin, and find her protective side endearing.

and off the top of my head, I can only remember Olivia and Camillia as fanservicy character of Awakening and Fates, none other were noticeable or stand out enough for me to remember. battle leotard been a thing in movies/comic/anime for forever, so them being on Nohr female paladin didn't bother me at all.

 

Uh. No. That's not how objectification works.

First of all, as people were saying above, Camilla is a fictional character with absolutely no agency. She cannot decide what she wears or why she wears it. She was designed by real, human people for the purpose of appealing to people who are attracted to women, plain and simple, personality be damned. I mean, there's nothing saying you can't like a character that the game objectifies, but you can't deny that the game is what's disrespecting her, if anything.

Do you think people are thinking about her personality when the camera is orbiting her cleavage and ass? No. They're not.

The game treats her as a sex object, to the point of the camera focusing on that specifically during her introduction cutscene on the Birthright path. Do any of the other royals get the same treatment? No. They aren't being objectified like she is, nor are they designed purely for fanservice in mind.

And "everyone else does it too" is not an excuse. There is no justification for transparent fanservice designs like Charlotte and Camilla.

[Kobitohime]

13 minutes ago, Extrasolar said:

Uh. No. That's not how objectification works.

First of all, as people were saying above, Camilla is a fictional character with absolutely no agency. She cannot decide what she wears or why she wears it. She was designed by real, human people for the purpose of appealing to people who are attracted to women, plain and simple, personality be damned. I mean, there's nothing saying you can't like a character that the game objectifies, but you can't deny that the game is what's disrespecting her, if anything.

Do you think people are thinking about her personality when the camera is orbiting her cleavage and ass? No. They're not.

The game treats her as a sex object, to the point of the camera focusing on that specifically during her introduction cutscene on the Birthright path. Do any of the other royals get the same treatment? No. They aren't being objectified like she is, nor are they designed purely for fanservice in mind.

And "everyone else does it too" is not an excuse. There is no justification for transparent fanservice designs like Charlotte and Camilla.

she could be indeed designed with that mindset, and what? does that mean designing such character is forbidden? do every characters have to be all the same modest girl that wear "innocent" outfit? what is that that makes such character "lower" than other characters, her personality is consistent with what she wear, if someone like Sakura were to wear it I would have problems, but it's fitting for Camillia, and such type of character is no "lower" than female character who is modest and shy, if it is then there is implication that women who wear revealing outfit is lower than tho who don't, objectification for me is that she is just fanservice but nothing else, but she is more than that.

Edited February 24, 2017 by Kobitohime

[Extrasolar]

6 minutes ago, Kobitohime said:

she could be indeed designed with that mindset, and what? does that mean designing such character is forbidden? do every characters have to be all the same modest girl that wear "innocent" outfit? what is that that makes such character "lower" than other characters, her personality is consistent with what she wear, if Sakura were to wear it I would have problems, but it's fitting for Camillia, and such type of character is no "lower" than female character who is modest and shy, objectification for me is that she is just fanservice but nothing else, but she is more than that.

 

 

 

Uh, it's not forbidden, but designing a female character near-explicitly for the purpose of titillating the heterosexual male audience is...you know, generally frowned upon. As is treating women as sexual objects.

Contrary to popular belief, you can do revealing outfits tastefully - look at Nailah's outfit from Radiant Dawn. More revealing than other female outfits in the Tellius games, but not so damn blatant as to be tasteless and kinda gross. Though Camilla is nowhere near as bad as Charlotte from the same game, so I guess there's that point in her favor.

I'm not saying she has no other features than that, but when it's kind of thrown in your face, you tend to focus on that over anything else.

Edited February 24, 2017 by Extrasolar

[eclipse]

29 minutes ago, Extrasolar said:

Uh, it's not forbidden, but designing a female character near-explicitly for the purpose of titillating the heterosexual male audience is...you know, generally frowned upon. As is treating women as sexual objects.

Contrary to popular belief, you can do revealing outfits tastefully - look at Nailah's outfit from Radiant Dawn. More revealing than other female outfits in the Tellius games, but not so damn blatant as to be tasteless and kinda gross. Though Camilla is nowhere near as bad as Charlotte from the same game, so I guess there's that point in her favor.

I'm not saying she has no other features than that, but when it's kind of thrown in your face, you tend to focus on that over anything else.

Charlotte, at least, has some in-game justification for dressing the way she does (no matter how tasteless I think it is).  Camilla?  No clue.

[NekoKnight]

16 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Charlotte, at least, has some in-game justification for dressing the way she does (no matter how tasteless I think it is).  Camilla?  No clue.

Y'know, I've never been completely sold on the excuse that Charlotte wears clothes like that because of her personality. Charlotte is trying to marry into wealth and she tries to maintain an image of sweetness and refinement. How then, would it help if she is dressed like a prostitute? She's not trying to sell her body, but that's the impression I get from her outfit more than "I'm a classy lady a rich person would want to marry".

Edited February 24, 2017 by NekoKnight

[eclipse]

2 minutes ago, NekoKnight said:

Y'know, I've never been completely sold on the excuse that Charlotte wears clothes like that because of her personality. Charlotte is trying to marry into wealth and she tries to maintain an image of sweetness and refinement. How then, would it help if she is dressed like a prostitute? She's not trying to sell her body, but that's the impression I get more than "I'm a classy lady a rich person would want to marry".

She tries to maintain a helpless act.  She also needs to draw attention to herself, and dressing like. . .that is one way to do so, especially since she was drawn to be visually appealing to men (toned, busty, etc.).  In her case, it's all about appearances, whether it be what she's wearing, or what she wants to project.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

23 minutes ago, NekoKnight said:

Y'know, I've never been completely sold on the excuse that Charlotte wears clothes like that because of her personality. Charlotte is trying to marry into wealth and she tries to maintain an image of sweetness and refinement. How then, would it help if she is dressed like a prostitute? She's not trying to sell her body, but that's the impression I get from her outfit more than "I'm a classy lady a rich person would want to marry".

 

18 minutes ago, eclipse said:

She tries to maintain a helpless act.  She also needs to draw attention to herself, and dressing like. . .that is one way to do so, especially since she was drawn to be visually appealing to men (toned, busty, etc.).  In her case, it's all about appearances, whether it be what she's wearing, or what she wants to project.

To add to this, acting helpless is meant to elicit chivalrous responses from her male allies and distract her foes long enough for a clean strike. Both of these help her stay alive on the battlefield, and she does hail from Nohr which has the literal knights of this universe. I wish she had a personal skill akin to Demoiselle, but they went and made that a Maid skill. In most of her supports, it's revealed that she doesn't mind living life as an actress because she resents the real women underneath. And of course the man accepts her and it's mushy from there. I can't think of a way they could write Charlotte that would make her seem more sympathetic. Her dialogues sort of come off more like the Lovely Ladies song from Les Miserables. 

[Hasnbaakoajsbakaiaja]

I really don't know how to put this, but I don't like how some fans in our community are pretty obnoxious when it comes to the "other side" and I think hats why we come off as intimidating. I don't mind the introduction of casual mode, marriage(as long as it doesn't overshadow the other elements of the game.), children, and other things veteran fans supposedly dislike. My qualm is the denial of getting into older games in the series without being knowledgeable about said games and insulting them for not being Awakening/Fates.

For example, I stumbled upon a comment on the YouTube:

"I hate how accurate this is. Love the video, but FE elitists can take their Gaidens and Genealogies and shove it."

Stuff like this is what I hate. Blatant insults at each other, not trying to mend the divide but widen it.