Corrobin Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 It feels like every time there's a major villain that's an evil dragon or a demon in an FE game, all people do is complain and whine and say how they make the plot 'dumb'. Should they be removed? Should the full FE plot be all politics, no evil cults or unsealed monsters whatsoever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinskyHaaz Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 This is something that I even argue with myself about. Most of the time, I come to the conclusion that dragons and giant monsters are okay as long as they are handled properly. For example, the classic fire dragon from the end of Fire Emblem 7 was amazing in my opinion. It seemed like just your ordinary fantasy dragon, and it was insanely scary and powerful. On the other hand, I wasn't a huge fan of The Immaculate One in 3 Houses. My main issue is just that for some reason her voice is still slightly the same instead of just being a typical dragon roar. Other notably well handled dragons: Idoun and all the FE6 manaketes, Grima, all of the FE1-3 dragons, Julius/Loptyr, etc. I didn't like Corrin's dragon but that is just because the design was shit. For the most part I think dragons are fine. Demons are a bit more out there. I thought that Conquest's handling of Takumi was awful, and I wasn't the biggest fan of Sacred Stones's Lyon either. That doesn't mean that I think demons are bad, but... they just weren't handled fantastically. As long as they are rooted in dark magic then I feel like it makes sense in the game. Ashnard, for example, was possessed by the medallion and I thought that was handled greatly. So really, I think demons are okay too as long as they are written decently. There's some stuff that I absolutely hate though. I prefer my Fire Emblems to be as low fantasy and as high grit as possible. Magic is cool. Large dragons and other monsters are cool. However, when you pull an Awakening and introduce time travel into the mix. Oh geezus, I shuddered when I first heard that time travel was a thing. And then Fates went even more into the shitstorm of nonsense with the pocket dimension for babies to be raised in. That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard, and it was only there for fanservice. Luckily 3 Houses returned to a slightly more low fantasy style. My #1 dream is that one day we will be back to the lowest of low fantasy though: Fire Emblem 4-5. Those games are the bomb. All political drama and realistic events that force the characters to be a bit less cartoony and more like real human beings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipse Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 The issue isn't the villain, it's the writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Branniglenn Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Well they tried going more the route of politics in Three Houses and people still haven't figured out which woman in charge they're more offended by. And I'm no better, I can blame bad writing and lack of content all I want but I can't find anything likable about Edelgard either. Maaaayybe if they try again but only have men in power, we'll have a better test case to judge. Really I'm more of an "execution is everything" approach so I don't leave any big ideas off the table. Heck, they can even try another villain who can remotely brainwash whichever character suits the drama most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoralityGames Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) Evil dragons are an aesthetic motif that dates back to the first game. They are part of the fabric of Fire Emblem. Like the good dragon, they represent primeval, natural forces that predate and supersede humans -- but whereas Tiki and her kind are generative forces that allow life to flourish, the evil dragons, like the giants in Norse mythology, are entropic forces of destruction. Defeating them signifies that humans have grown (or the world has shrank down to their size) and come into their own as heroes. Demons aren't as naturally part of Fire Emblem, but whereas dragons are a force external to humans (although they may represent humanity's destructive actions bouncing back to hurt us), demons come more from the inside and basically represent our fears about madness and our lowest impulses overtaking and overwhelming our best conscious intentions (ergo, demons are about what is hidden on the inside). Neither are really inherently dumb plot elements, it's just that Fire Emblem plots have often been dumb and demons and evil dragons happen to be in them Edited October 22, 2019 by MoralityGames Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Hardin Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 I'd like to see more dragons that are actual characters like Medeus was rather then "rawr, I'm an evil dragon." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriforceP Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 I feel like those complaints don't come from an actual dislike of dragons and demons; I feel like it more comes from the ending of the game feeling underwhelming. The final boss is a figurehead of the end of the game, and if the leadup to that final boss isn't properly led up to or treated with care, then the entire boss battle can feel underwhelming, and it's easy to blame the boss itself rather than everything surrounding it. Dragons and demons have both been done both well and poorly in Fire Emblem, and it's not the fault of the concept. It's the fault of the execution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henrymidfields Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) For once, I'd like to see none barring the standard wyverns as the "helicopters". The final boss being a remnant army, and the difficulty coming from secondary objectives that don't rely on overpowering the enemy. Something like, you need to convince enemy factions to surrender with either specified non-lord units, or lords with sufficient charisma. Or, evacuate specified units before they get overwhelmed. And failing in those objectives won't give you a game over, but will lead you into a sad/cynical ending. Alternately, the enemy can be reckless and desparate and unhesitant in taking you down in the process. Edited October 23, 2019 by henrymidfields Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Ithipathachai Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Evil dragons are just a cliché that I'm sick of seeing all the time in the series. I'm fine with various other kinds of monsters, though. I wouldn't mind seeing some sort of eldritch abomination enemy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redlight Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 The whole dragons lose their mind along with other things is an overused trope at this point. Unless it applies a unique twist, explanation or variation then it's lazy and unimaginative writing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
De Geso Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Dragons are wicked and fighting them with your army is always a blast. I don't want them to ever leave the series. Fun is more important in a game series than writing. Fighting the Immaculate One was one of the coolest parts of Three Houses and I would hate to see battles like it removed because a bunch of dorks whined that it wasn't good writing to battle a dragon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabulously Olivier Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Personally, I'm all for the eldritch horrors because they aren't our main antagonists. You can make, for example, our sorceror villains more nuanced (like Lyon was), while still having them intentionally or accidentally summon this inexplicable horror in the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonFlames Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 1 hour ago, De Geso said: Dragons are wicked and fighting them with your army is always a blast. I don't want them to ever leave the series. Fun is more important in a game series than writing. Fighting the Immaculate One was one of the coolest parts of Three Houses and I would hate to see battles like it removed because a bunch of dorks whined that it wasn't good writing to battle a dragon. Bold parts: Oh so much this. Add Deghinsea to that tally, too. I love dragons, so I'm probably biased to hell and back, but hey. While there are games that did the whole dragon-thing better than some Fire Emblem games (7th Dragon III comes to mind), I think they have a place in the series. Besides, if Ganondorf and Bowser are supposedly "iconic" and thus have to be major or main antagonists in their respective game franchises, why can't dragons? Though to be fair, no FE dragon boss will ever be as badass as these three: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanguard333 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 I don't think so. I think the problem people notice is that the general trend is that they simplify the plot and are often poorly-written or one-dimensional. But it doesn't have to be the case, as Fire Emblem itself has shown: The very first FE game's final boss was an Evil Dragon: Medeus. And yet, he didn't simplify the plot at all (admittedly, the plot was already pretty barebones), and he had some degree of depth: he was an evil conqueror, but more than that: he was the founder and ruler of the Manakete-Supremacist Dohlr Empire, which he created after seeing how manaketes were being mistreated by humans in the human kingdoms. In FE10, we had Ashera as the final boss (now; she's a "goddess", not a monster, but she's still an antagonistic supernatural entity so I'm going to count her just for the comparison) and the plot is not simplified or dumbed-down at all when she shows up. Similarly, in the same game, we have Deghinsea: an evil dragon (well, not evil; he's really a tragic villain) who contributes quite a bit to the story. The problem really is just quality of writing and overuse. Evil dragons and monsters have become almost formulaic at this point and their threat to the world usually amounts to moustache-twirling dumb muscle thanks to villains like Grima, Anankos, Duma (who I think we can all admit is less a badly-written character and more a victim of SoV's bad writing overall), Slime Garon, and random Fire Dragon. Really, all FE needs to do to get these villains right is to remember that their contribution to the story needs to be more than just "powerful monster fought at the end"; their being a monster or an evil dragon needs to be a feature of their character, not the entirety of it. Even if written to be pure evil, it can still be done well. For a quick comparison to Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood (great show), the main conflict is a massive conspiracy, and Father & the Homunculi are really good villains because they're at the center of it; their contribution and characterization is more than just being the guys fought at the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinskyHaaz Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 40 minutes ago, vanguard333 said: Really, all FE needs to do to get these villains right is to remember that their contribution to the story needs to be more than just "powerful monster fought at the end"; their being a monster or an evil dragon needs to be a feature of their character, not the entirety of it. Even if written to be pure evil, it can still be done well. For a quick comparison to Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood (great show), the main conflict is a massive conspiracy, and Father & the Homunculi are really good villains because they're at the center of it; their contribution and characterization is more than just being the guys fought at the end. This. However, I would argue that in some cases it is fine if the final boss is solely there for the final battle. Really only if it's a situation like FE7 where the real antagonist just so happens to summon something with his final breath. 2 hours ago, De Geso said: Dragons are wicked and fighting them with your army is always a blast. I don't want them to ever leave the series. Fun is more important in a game series than writing. Dragons are extremely fun to fight! But please, these games would be empty without good writing. Having fun is definitely important, but I would rather take part in a really intense medieval political drama that is slow at times, than just have a giant fight-fest that is super fun the whole time. There would be no reason to care about your army's success if the game had poor writing. Anyway, as everyone is saying. Ultimately, a final boss or climactic battle is not made by the character or monster itself. It's made by the writing that sets up that finale. There's not really any element of realism that's ruined by huge monsters as long as they are explained in the world of the game. I do wish, however, that Fire Emblem returned to more of a low fantasy aesthetic like in the Jugdral games (and somewhat the original Archanean games, but those were a bit lighter as well). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanguard333 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 9 minutes ago, KevinskyHaaz said: This. However, I would argue that in some cases it is fine if the final boss is solely there for the final battle. Really only if it's a situation like FE7 where the real antagonist just so happens to summon something with his final breath. Oh; I agree. I only included the random Fire Dragon as a joke. 10 minutes ago, KevinskyHaaz said: Dragons are extremely fun to fight! But please, these games would be empty without good writing. Having fun is definitely important, but I would rather take part in a really intense medieval political drama that is slow at times, than just have a giant fight-fest that is super fun the whole time. There would be no reason to care about your army's success if the game had poor writing. This, only swap "political drama" with "war story". I like FE plots for being a good medieval war story. It's one reason Path of Radiance is my favourite game; it got so much of the "war story" aspect right, as well as having just good writing in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NekoKnight Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 As others have said, if you want to include dragons, evil or otherwise, give them deeper characters than "I must eradicate all humanity because rawr". So, y'know, make them characters. I'm totally on board with dragons as final bosses or major threats but there should be more to the story than just their physical threat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heir of Dragons and Beasts Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 21 minutes ago, NekoKnight said: As others have said, if you want to include dragons, evil or otherwise, give them deeper characters than "I must eradicate all humanity because rawr". So, y'know, make them characters. I'm totally on board with dragons as final bosses or major threats but there should be more to the story than just their physical threat. So kind of like TWSITD or CF Rhea or make it where when these dragons blessed humanity they fell in love with a human, and humanity thinking that that god favored that human over them all but also wanted that kind of attention. So they killed the human the dragon was in love with, causing the dragon to hate all of humanity and ally with the sibling of said killed human to take out humanity and the manaketes that allied with them(humanity). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrobin Posted October 22, 2019 Author Share Posted October 22, 2019 34 minutes ago, NekoKnight said: As others have said, if you want to include dragons, evil or otherwise, give them deeper characters than "I must eradicate all humanity because rawr". So, y'know, make them characters. I'm totally on board with dragons as final bosses or major threats but there should be more to the story than just their physical threat. What if the reason they're "I must eradicate all humanity because rawr" is because... well, they're a literal mindless beast? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Hardin Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, Corrobin said: What if the reason they're "I must eradicate all humanity because rawr" is because... well, they're a literal mindless beast? In that case, I'd prefer Mystery of the Emblem style mindless Dragons as opposed to Fates style talking dragons. And I'd prefer the Dragon final boss to just be a tool of the real villain. Edited October 22, 2019 by Emperor Hardin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayBossEmmett Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) Basically every FE game has featured what is essentially a god as the final boss of most games outside of few exceptions and it all comes down to execution. Like for instance Fomortiis, once he takes his beast form has literally nothing interesting going for him other than his (albeit pretty cool) design. FE is at it's peak generally when people are having interpersonal conflicts between actual people [Arvis/Lyon/Black Knight] rather than giant imposing figures that have no ounce of rational to them. That's not to say stories can't work with a big final bad doesn't deserve to exist. People can still be manipulated or fall into evil and exploring it is cool, and having an imposing final boss makes more sense for FE because 1v1 personal duals ALWAYS SUCK. Ironically if Fates wasn't.... Fates... CQ!Takumi would be a pretty cool villain as someone who did nothing wrong and is trying to become the hero of his own story and falling into further insanity to try to protect his home. Edit: In fact, I still consider Awakening's Grima in monster form to be a fine antagonist. They're evil, smug, and directly teases&taunts the cast all good stuff for a final antagonist which puts them above a number of other things in the series that are just generically evil. They like already won in the past and are about win again, they deserve to be smug. What's terrible is how absolute dogshit Validar is as an antagonist and human Grima Robin being really weird. Like cool we literally killed the villain in chapter 5 but not really, way to set him up as a large source of conflict and intimidating. Validar stands for nothing, looks inhuman, and is actually our dad and we see him die like 3 times in the game technically while having no real personality traits at all. I'll defend Awakening like the foolish fan I am where it deserves Validar is absolutely among it's largest fuck ups. Edited October 22, 2019 by SubwayBossEmmett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeaceRibbon Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 11 hours ago, Glennstavos said: Well they tried going more the route of politics in Three Houses and people still haven't figured out which woman in charge they're more offended by. And I'm no better, I can blame bad writing and lack of content all I want but I can't find anything likable about Edelgard either. Maaaayybe if they try again but only have men in power, we'll have a better test case to judge. Really I'm more of an "execution is everything" approach so I don't leave any big ideas off the table. Heck, they can even try another villain who can remotely brainwash whichever character suits the drama most. Why exactly would we need men in power in order to execute on an effective political drama? I'm of the mindset that if a story is written well, a character's sex will only effect their execution in terms of physical capabilities and basic biological and cultural inclinations (or noticeable negligence of them). Not trying to drag the thread into a culture war or anything, just curious what you think this change would really do for a future Fire Emblem narrative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flere210 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) For starter, i consider Dimitri an unstable madman completely unsuited to lead a classroom, let alone a country. Second, after you fight soldiers, then stronger soldiers, then more soldiers, you need something that ups the ante for the final battle. More and stronger soldiers would not cut it. You need something that is bigger and stronger than any warrior could be. Luca Blight was the only time i felt they pulled it off whit a purely human fighter, but would a super powerful berserker that kill enemies like in a Musuo game fit FE? I am not sure. Edited October 22, 2019 by Flere210 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Branniglenn Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, PeaceRibbon said: Why exactly would we need men in power in order to execute on an effective political drama? I'm of the mindset that if a story is written well, a character's sex will only effect their execution in terms of physical capabilities and basic biological and cultural inclinations (or noticeable negligence of them). Not trying to drag the thread into a culture war or anything, just curious what you think this change would really do for a future Fire Emblem narrative. People don't like women being in positions of power. Always saying "I don't think women don't have the temperament for politics" and stuff like that. When a woman in power acts partly out of emotion, it is spun as acting from weakness. While a man doing the same thing is acting out of passion. This is a cultural stigma that's well documented by now and absolutely applies to the media we consume. Hence the theoretically interesting discussion of "Rhea or Edelgard: who's in the right?" becomes "which one was more wrong?" Edited October 22, 2019 by Glennstavos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterIceTeaPeach Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) As for me I prefer human villains in Fire Emblem simply because I can identify better with them. This is why Ashnard is my favorite final boss. The only exception would be Deghinsea who I absolutely can sense as a villain. Otherwise I do not really care for dragons because very most of them are bland. I would not even be sad, if dragons were dropped (what of course never ever will happen because dragons are a symbolic part of FE). Edited October 22, 2019 by Lysithea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.