Serenes Forest's Teehee Thread

[Codename Shrimp]

2 minutes ago, Dayni said:

You know what, I want to taste the spice in this take.

Please elaborate on what parts you think are completely not up to standard, I want to know.

Oh boy
I will link you to what i wrote a couple months ago xD

I talked about it in page 452 and the pages after. Take a look if you are interested xD

[DragonFlames]

Emperor Shrimpy's quest to read all the Villainess manga continues! xD

[The Roger The Paladin]

I hate to take my leave as the thread picks up... but alas the hours I can be active have shifted since the whole being sick bit ended. See you guys whenever I'm in again.

[Ottservia]

1 hour ago, twilitfalchion said:

I actually like a good portion of Awakening's cast, ngl. Fates less so, and even then I don't mind some of them as much as others do.

Overall I see Fateswakening as a step back because of how well Tellius handled story, character interactions, and supports. But then 3H came after Fateswakening and vastly improved the quality of conversations and depth of characters, from my perspective. Looking back, It's not that they're all bad, it's just that they're lower quality by comparison, imho.

Anyway, good morning everyone! *waves*

My question is why the comparison at all though? For one how are awakening and fates of lesser quality to Tellius? From what I’ve played of both of them. They’re not all that different as far as the quality of storytelling is concerned. Even so, I find comparisons like that to be unnecessary. Personally, I feel like if you have to throw one thing under the bus in order to praise something else then that’s just empty praise. You shouldn’t have to throw something else under the bus to praise something. Likewise you shouldn’t have to put something on a pedestal to criticize something else. If something is truly good it should be able to stand on its own merits without the need for comparison. The same goes if something is truly bad. Not to say comparison is entirely bad mind you but generally most of the time when people make comparisons like this it’s in bad faith.

[Codename Shrimp]

8 minutes ago, DragonFlames said:

Emperor Shrimpy's quest to read all the Villainess manga continues! xD

5 minutes ago, The Roger The Paladin said:

I hate to take my leave as the thread picks up... but alas the hours I can be active have shifted since the whole being sick bit ended. See you guys whenever I'm in again.

take care!

 

[null]

Just now, Ottservia said:

My question is why the comparison at all though?

Because I can? That's reason enough.

Just now, Ottservia said:

For one how are awakening and fates of lesser quality to Tellius?

Because I think they are? That's reason enough.

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

They’re not all that different as far as the quality of storytelling is concerned.

A matter of perspective.

1 minute ago, Ottservia said:

Even so, I find comparisons like that to be unnecessary. Personally, I feel like if you have to throw one thing under the bus in order to praise something else then that’s just empty praise.

If you find them unnecessary, fine. But I have no qualms about comparing two games within the same series.

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Likewise you shouldn’t have to put something on a pedestal to criticize something else. If something is truly good it should be able to stand on its own merits without the need for comparison. The same goes if something is truly bad. Not to say comparison is entirely bad mind you but generally most of the time when people make comparisons like this it’s in bad faith.

If you feel that way, that's fine. I choose to analyze media and other forms of entertainment differently.

[Sooks]

8 minutes ago, The Roger The Paladin said:

I hate to take my leave as the thread picks up... but alas the hours I can be active have shifted since the whole being sick bit ended. See you guys whenever I'm in again.

See you!

[Interdimensional Observer]

7 hours ago, Armagon said:

Three Houses does this but it has the 3D model and the 2D portrait at the same time which is ???????.

I think I'd prefer if we keep 3D models for important story sequences and 2D portraits for everything else.

 

I uh, never noticed. 😅 The few scenes I was forced to see, never used the portraits.

FE could try using beautifully hand-drawn artwork instead of sprites with a polish of charming pixilation. But reclass becoming a standard means this would be extraordinarily unlikely.

 

11 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

There are very few exceptions where the male is best character (imo, Yuri Lowell from Tales of Vesperia, is more interesting than any other character in that game). 

I'd say Tales of Abyss is in the same boat. Anise is... oh Anise, Tear could use a little work on emoting, Natalia is nice, but she ultimately is a pretty cliche princess. However, when Luke spends the first arc being one of the greatest jerks in gaming, Jade being a bit of an acquired taste, that leaves Guy as the one shining(?) character. I guess you could toss Ion into the male pool though, and he isn't bad. Maybe the whole ToAb cast is questionable.

Tales of Graces is also better on the male side I'd say with Hubert, Malik, and Richard, but that isn't difficult for the game to achieve when Sophie is 😒, Cheria is filler, and Pascal is so eccentric.

XC1, well, Melia is good IMO, probably the best, but Sharla is like the weakest character of the seven, and Sheik is Zelda I'm not particularly fond of. The combined characterization power of the four males, which include the good Dunban and nice Shulk, I think overrides the combined characterization power of the three females. Xenogears is also much better on the male side of the equation I'd say.

[DragonFlames]

12 minutes ago, The Roger The Paladin said:

I hate to take my leave as the thread picks up... but alas the hours I can be active have shifted since the whole being sick bit ended. See you guys whenever I'm in again.

Take care of yourself!

7 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

xD

10 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

My question is why the comparison at all though? For one how are awakening and fates of lesser quality to Tellius? From what I’ve played of both of them. They’re not all that different as far as the quality of storytelling is concerned. Even so, I find comparisons like that to be unnecessary. Personally, I feel like if you have to throw one thing under the bus in order to praise something else then that’s just empty praise. You shouldn’t have to throw something else under the bus to praise something. Likewise you shouldn’t have to put something on a pedestal to criticize something else. If something is truly good it should be able to stand on its own merits without the need for comparison. The same goes if something is truly bad. Not to say comparison is entirely bad mind you but generally most of the time when people make comparisons like this it’s in bad faith.

In addition to everything twilitfalchion says: comparisons are a very common and frequent tool of literary analysis, usually done to see how differently two or more works utilize similar themes, characters, or plot points.

Edited November 19, 2020 by DragonFlames

[Dayni]

17 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Oh boy
I will link you to what i wrote a couple months ago xD

I talked about it in page 452 and the pages after. Take a look if you are interested xD

I looked, I saw, I expected far more spice in the mix.

I don't think 1-on-1 supports and group supports are incompatible. Personally, it's not like FE supports are all filler trash either, we could certainly do with a simplification and outside of Byleth 3H did take things in the right direction. The mechanics of getting them are a technical debate that is worth having and has varied constantly, but on the fundamental point I have not been swayed to the demolition of the system.

This is not to say I don't think there's nothing to improve on, oh boy. (One thing I will add, I'm not a fan of skills being obtained just through supports like that, but that's me talking.) Don't really have an opinion on the in combat stuff you had linked (Then again the demo of trails of cold steel I tried didn't light the world up for me at all and the series is large enough that jumping in seems terrifying to me.)

And on the 3D models, isn't the Switch supposed to be on a level with the PS3 era? I don't know about you, but a console like that wasn't half as bad as all that in the right hands in the looks department. I can point to more than a few titles to say that. The Last of Us didn't look as good on PS3, but I do think IS could up its bloody game. Hell, for a comparison I can't help but make, R&C Tools of Destruction, a game 12 years older, still makes 3H's 3D models look bad. And the series improved over the next 5 games on the system, though incrementally.

[Ottservia]

2 minutes ago, DragonFlames said:

In addition to everything twilitfalchion says: comparisons are a very common and frequent tool of literary analysis, usually done to see how differently two or more works utilize similar themes, characters, or plot points.

Y’see my thing with Comparison is that again you shouldn’t have to say “Oh well RD is better than fates so it’s good” cause that doesn’t really say much of anything in the end. You haven’t really told me why RD is good based on its own merits just that it is better than fates. In terms of literary analysis you haven’t said anything about either work. Really all you’re doing is throwing fates under the bus for no reason. Even beyond that why does Fates need to be like RD? What is there to be gained from one being like the other? Why can’t Fates just be its own thing? Fates does not benefit from being like RD. Fates benefits from being like Fates. I just feel like that’s kind of reductive to say that one story should be like this other story because stories can be different. Why does Fates need to be like RD? You already have RD, why do you need another one? In that way, I feel like the comparison falls apart. Like you could say that RD has better world building than Fates and you’d be correct but does Fates need world building like RD? No, no it doesn’t. Fates is doing its own thing and so is RD. I feel comparing the two like that is a bit of a moot point cause you can’t really compare them. They’re different as with any two stories. It’s like comparing apples to oranges. It just doesn’t make sense to me.

[Sooks]

6 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

You already have RD, why do you need another one?

Because if a work is good in your mind then you would want more like it because you loved it.

[null]

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Y’see my thing with Comparison is that again you shouldn’t have to say “Oh well RD is better than fates so it’s good” cause that doesn’t really say much of anything in the end.

To you perhaps, but again, everyone sees everything differently.

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

“Oh well RD is better than fates so it’s good” cause that doesn’t really say much of anything in the end. You haven’t really told me why RD is good based on its own merits just that it is better than fates.

I mean, I could go into why I love RD and why I think it's leagues ahead of Fates as an FE game, but you'd pick that apart as being "in bad faith" all the same, as you always do. It's not worth the effort.

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Even beyond that why does Fates need to be like RD? What is there to be gained from one being like the other? Why can’t Fates just be its own thing? Fates does not benefit from being like RD. Fates benefits from being like Fates.

They're FE games. Comparisons are natural when they're entries in the same series, and even with similar games from different series.

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I just feel like that’s kind of reductive to say that one story should be like this other story because stories can be different.

As if I said otherwise. I'm not talking content, I'm talking quality.

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

n that way, I feel like the comparison falls apart.

Exactly.

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

You already have RD, why do you need another one?

Because RD is my favorite FE game and I want the next entries to be like it. That's reason enough.

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Like you could say that RD has better world building than Fates and you’d be correct but does Fates need world building like RD? No, no it doesn’t. Fates is doing its own thing and so is RD. I feel comparing the two like that is a bit of a moot point cause you can’t really compare them. They’re different as with any two stories. It’s like comparing apples to oranges. It just doesn’t make sense to me.

Which is why I don't need others to agree with my opinions. I have them. They make sense to me. Therefore they are valid. It's not any more complex than that.

Edited November 19, 2020 by twilitfalchion

[DragonFlames]

13 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Y’see my thing with Comparison is that again you shouldn’t have to say “Oh well RD is better than fates so it’s good” cause that doesn’t really say much of anything in the end. You haven’t really told me why RD is good based on its own merits just that it is better than fates. In terms of literary analysis you haven’t said anything about either work. Really all you’re doing is throwing fates under the bus for no reason. Even beyond that why does Fates need to be like RD? What is there to be gained from one being like the other? Why can’t Fates just be its own thing? Fates does not benefit from being like RD. Fates benefits from being like Fates. I just feel like that’s kind of reductive to say that one story should be like this other story because stories can be different. Why does Fates need to be like RD? You already have RD, why do you need another one? In that way, I feel like the comparison falls apart. Like you could say that RD has better world building than Fates and you’d be correct but does Fates need world building like RD? No, no it doesn’t. Fates is doing its own thing and so is RD. I feel comparing the two like that is a bit of a moot point cause you can’t really compare them. They’re different as with any two stories. It’s like comparing apples to oranges. It just doesn’t make sense to me.

I mean, both are stories about war, both take place in a medieval light fantasy era, both are games within the Fire Emblem series.
Comparing them based on that alone makes complete sense. If it doesn't to you, that's fine, but stop denying other people the chance to think differently.

And Fates benefitting from being like Fates? I hold nothing but hatred for Fates, so to me, that is a detriment. If Fates wasn't Fates, then I'd find it enjoyable. As it stands, it's just the game that almost killed my interest in Fire Emblem. But that is beside the point.

And I don't know where you got that Fates needs to be like Radiant Dawn. Literally nobody said that.
Same with "RD is better than Fates, so it's good". Nobody said anything to that effect.

Edited November 19, 2020 by DragonFlames

[Interdimensional Observer]

17 minutes ago, DragonFlames said:

In addition to everything twilitfalchion says: comparisons are a very common and frequent tool of literary analysis, usually done to see how differently two or more works utilize similar themes, characters, or plot points.

And of course, metaphor, which is a form of comparison, is a timelessly basic way of communicating information. Humans can assign qualities to anything on its own, but points of reference help to guide anyone.

 

3 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Y’see my thing with Comparison is that again you shouldn’t have to say “Oh well RD is better than fates so it’s good” cause that doesn’t really say much of anything in the end. You haven’t really told me why RD is good based on its own merits just that it is better than fates.

Well, if all you say is "X is bad, Y is good", then yes, you aren't saying a whole lot. Thats one short sentence. Though if a person follows it up with a series of additional sentences that defines the contrasting qualities of what makes X bad and Y good, in a tone more measured than a flaming rant, then comparison is perfectly fine. The attitude could be so moderate, someone could say "X is bad, for me, but I can see how another would like it", it'd be hardly hateful then.

Your reductionism of all comparison to single-sentence comparison is explicable to me as you being sick and tired of people on social media bashing 13 & 14, to which I offer empathy. But that isn't what comparison has to end at.

[DragonFlames]

Just now, Interdimensional Observer said:

And of course, metaphor, which is a form of comparison, is a timelessly basic way of communicating information. Humans can assign qualities to anything on its own, but points of reference help to guide anyone.

Exactly.
There is even a theory that states that humans talk in metaphors all the time. It's a rather interesting subject.

[Codename Shrimp]

16 minutes ago, Dayni said:

I looked, I saw, I expected far more spice in the mix.

Haha

Well, i wanted to write a really big post about it once with alot of spice, but eh, too lazy xD

Honestly, the main thing i want is to have more group convos rather than 1-on-1, and that during those convos characters can gain support points together to get support levels.

16 minutes ago, Dayni said:

(Then again the demo of trails of cold steel I tried didn't light the world up for me at all and the series is large enough that jumping in seems terrifying to me.)

If you know me, you'd know i am the last person to ever recommned Cold Steel, as it made me drop my once fav. series, and that story wise, i really really hate the link System. I do like it gameplay wise though.

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by Shrimperor

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Cold Steel is like Fates. It's fixed on a character who stole the spotlight of the others (although Rean is hundred times more tolerable than that puppet avatar), but its gameplay is awesome, and that's what counts for me. Actually Rean is acceptable in IV.

Quote

I missed the talk on my least favorite fe thus far! No!

Meh, I rather prefer to talk about the positive things.

Edited November 19, 2020 by Kasumi Yoshizawa

[Dayni]

3 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Honestly, the main thing i want is to have more group convos rather than 1-on-1, and that during those convos characters can gain support points together to get support levels.

I feel like base convos should take more advantages of groups personally, even if I'm not looking for that kind of convo interaction (keep in mind I wasn't all that fond of it in 3H it was limited there)

Besides, giving those options to the player implies an avatar (seeing as controlling a minor player character can seem odd to me) and if there's one thing I'd like to see the back of in modern FE it's that.

[Ottservia]

4 minutes ago, DragonFlames said:

And Fates benefitting from being like Fates? I hold nothing but hatred for Fates, so to me, that is a detriment. If Fates wasn't Fates, then I'd find it enjoyable. As it stands, it's just the game that almost killed my interest in Fire Emblem.

Well then what about someone who enjoys Fates? If you made fates different than what it was than it wouldn’t appeal to those people anymore. It’s fine to not like it. That’s totally fair but I mean if you’re going to criticize something. Criticize it for what it’s trying to be not what you think it should be. It’s like saying Rock Lee would’ve made a better protagonist than Naruto because he fits in line better with the “hard work theme” when Naruto was never about “hard work” to begin with and if you were to try to do that it would hardly be the same story anymore. You’re criticizing an entirely different story at that point.

10 minutes ago, DragonFlames said:

And I don't know where you got that Fates needs to be like Radiant Dawn. Literally nobody said that.
Same with "RD is better than Fates, so it's good". Nobody said anything to that effect.

I was just using the RD and Fates comparison as an example to get across my point

 

 

6 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Well, if all you say is "X is bad, Y is good", then yes, you aren't saying a whole lot. Thats one short sentence. Though if a person follows it up with a series of additional sentences that defines the contrasting qualities of what makes X bad and Y good, in a tone more measured than a flaming rant, then comparison is perfectly fine. The attitude could be so moderate, someone could say "X is bad, for me, but I can see how another would like it", it'd be hardly hateful then.

Your reductionism of all comparison to single-sentence comparison is explicable to me as you being sick and tired of people on social media bashing 13 & 14, to which I offer empathy. But that isn't what comparison has to end at.

I’m not saying comparison is entirely bad mind you. But there’s a difference in saying “A is worse than B for not being B” and “A and B are interesting for being A and B”. The former statement is arguing in bad faith. There’s a difference between critical comparison and bad faith debate. 

[Codename Shrimp]

4 minutes ago, Dayni said:

seeing as controlling a minor player character can seem odd to me

Why is it odd though? Viewing some group convos from the pov from a different character could help quite a bit in characterization, i think

[DragonFlames]

Just now, Ottservia said:

Well then what about someone who enjoys Fates?

They're free to enjoy it, of course.
I was just speaking from my own perspective.

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

when Naruto was never about “hard work” to begin with

Kishimoto himself said that Naruto is about brotherhood.

1 minute ago, Ottservia said:

I was just using the RD and Fates comparison as an example to get across my point

Well, alright then.

[null]

3 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

The former statement is arguing in bad faith. There’s a difference between critical comparison and bad faith debate. 

Every statement that you disagree with is "bad faith."

points to the unpopular opinion thread

points to the "soooooo whatcha' playing?" thread

points to this thread

[Codename Shrimp]

2 minutes ago, DragonFlames said:

Kishimoto himself said that Naruto is about brotherhood

TIL Kishimoto wanted to make a C&C spinoff

[DragonFlames]

1 minute ago, Shrimperor said:

TIL Kishimoto wanted to make a C&C spinoff

XD