Should "Pick your Path" be a series mainstay?

[AnonymousSpeed]

10 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Personally I thought Fates had the best idea for reclassing. Every character has one alternate class (with some late game methods to get anyone essentially anything). This greatly widens the pool of classes available to the player, but also serves well for the plot as it shows where the characters other skills lie. Outside of cases where they want to just abandon traditional class systems entirely like Three Houses, this is how I'd like to see reclassing handled in the future (including future remakes, as I have fun speculating what alternate reclasses would best fit what characters in existing games).

You have, in fact, made a thread about that.

As have I.

Edited August 14, 2022 by AnonymousSpeed

[Acacia Sgt]

Personally, I feel multiple paths always carry the big risk of being narrative dead-ends. As it is, Three Hopes shows that we were unlikely to get an actual sequel to Three Houses, since unless we go multi-route again with each one being a continuation of the already existing ones, it'd mean choosing a path to follow and, well, that's going to upset a portion of the fans that their preferred route isn't the canon one. Unless the writers have the guts to pick a route as canon, or pull a Daggerfall and make every route canon somehow, or pull a Fallout 4 where the game takes place so far away from the previous one that we won't be hearing what happened back there, or the game takes place long enough after that it won't matter. But as it is, I doubt we'll have a MotE or RD style sequel where we see what happened to Fodlan short term. From either Houses or Hopes. All thanks to the multi-route nature of both. Since, again, they won't be trying to step on anyone's toes, so they'll keep it ambiguous.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Acacia Sgt

[Florete]

1 hour ago, kratoscar2008 said:

I meant that most people like multiple paths considering the success of Fates and Houses. Most of the support for single path I see here is from people thinking that they should dial back because they bit more than they could chew but I say no and keep chewing because the results speak for themselves in overall reception (Yeah I know the fanbase loves to hate on Fates but Metacritic and the sales show that Fates is generally looked favorably).

This assumes that multiple paths had anything to do with the success of either, much less was a major factor. For Fates I'd say it succeeded not because of, but in spite of its multiple paths, because its method of selling the paths separately was quite controversial. That leaves Three Houses alone, where the path choices certainly pushed engagement and sooner helped its success than hurt, but it's also the best-marketed FE game by any metric and was bound to succeed as long as it wasn't complete garbage.

And of course, you're leaving out that Awakening was a big success despite not having multiple paths and having worse worldwide marketing than either Fates or Three Houses. And we don't have to look just at FE; if multiple paths are so successful, why don't we see other big franchises doing it? While slight deviations and different endings are relatively common, fully-unique separate campaigns are quite rare in games.

While I personally think it would be safest to just stick to one main route, possibly with some slight deviations like GBA FE, I do feel like they could probably pull off two separate routes. But not any more.

[Jotari]

25 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Personally, I feel multiple paths always carry the big risk of being narrative dead-ends. As it is, Three Hopes shows that we were unlikely to get an actual sequel to Three Houses, since unless we go multi-route again with each one being a continuation of the already existing ones, it'd mean choosing a path to follow and, well, that's going to upset a portion of the fans that their preferred route isn't the canon one. Unless the writers have the guts to pick a route as canon, or pull a Daggerfall and make every route canon somehow, or pull a Fallout 4 where the game takes place so far away from the previous one that we won't be hearing what happened back there, or the game takes place long enough after that it won't matter. But as it is, I doubt we'll have a MotE or RD style sequel where we see what happened to Fodlan short term. From either Houses or Hopes. All thanks to the multi-route nature of both. Since, again, they won't be trying to step on anyone's toes, so they'll keep it ambiguous.

Prequel is the other way to go, set everything before the route split....preferably with Judith as the main character.

[Acacia Sgt]

3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Prequel is the other way to go, set everything before the route split....preferably with Judith as the main character.

It can be, but that's basically taking a step backward instead of forward. Since again, you reached a dead-end with the multi-path.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Acacia Sgt

[Jotari]

32 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Personally, I feel multiple paths always carry the big risk of being narrative dead-ends. As it is, Three Hopes shows that we were unlikely to get an actual sequel to Three Houses, since unless we go multi-route again with each one being a continuation of the already existing ones, it'd mean choosing a path to follow and, well, that's going to upset a portion of the fans that their preferred route isn't the canon one. Unless the writers have the guts to pick a route as canon, or pull a Daggerfall and make every route canon somehow, or pull a Fallout 4 where the game takes place so far away from the previous one that we won't be hearing what happened back there, or the game takes place long enough after that it won't matter. But as it is, I doubt we'll have a MotE or RD style sequel where we see what happened to Fodlan short term. From either Houses or Hopes. All thanks to the multi-route nature of both. Since, again, they won't be trying to step on anyone's toes, so they'll keep it ambiguous.

Though I really wish they'd have the balls to make a sequel of a single route some day. Even if it's not my preferred ending (not that I have a massive preference for the endings of any of Fire Emblem's games thus far, they mostly always boil down to the same thing only with a few different characters alive/dead), I'd still respect them for choosing something and saying to hell with the fans.

4 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

It can be, but that's basically taking a step backward instead of forward. Since again, you reached a dead-end with the multi-path.

Then you prequel again! And again! And again! Tell all stories in reverse! Seriously though, it's not necessarily a dead end. I was thinking of a single path prequel, but you could do a prequel that's also multi path wherein one path leads to the original game while another path leads to a distinctively different scenario (which you can then sequel into). That's how Zero Escape handled it's third installment prequel...though Zero Escape being Zero Escape that was also a sequel so they were kind of forced to do something like that to maintain continuity with timelines and...stuff.

And let's not just ignore that simply ending a story can lead to a dead end too if you don't have a sequel planned. Mystery of the Emblem brought back literally every villain of consequence from the previous game because they had no decent set up for a sequel.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Jotari

[Acacia Sgt]

Just now, Jotari said:

Then you prequel again! And again! And again! Tell all stories in reverse! Seriously though, it's not necessarily a dead end. I was thinking of a single path prequel, but you could do a prequel that's also multi path wherein one path leads to the original game while another path leads to a distinctively different scenario (which you can then sequel into). That's how Zero Escape handled it's third installment prequel...though Zero Escape being Zero Escape that was also a sequel so they were kind of forced to do something like that to maintain continuity with timelines and...stuff.

Like I said, there are ways, but it's still hard to pull off an immediate sequel like MotE or RD without choosing a set path. Daggerfall made like seven of its eight endings canon (the infamous Warp in the West Dragon Break) and the eighth was too incompatible with the other seven else it would've been canon too. Fallout 4 went back to the East Coast so we wouldn't see who won the Second Battle of Hoover Dam. So it could be done with Three Houses, but that still means we are unlikely to have the game take place in Fodlan again. Not until centuries have passed at least. Or the sequel has multiple routes again, and they're basically continuations of the previous ones.

Multi-path prequel with a canon path would just be Fates all over again, with people complaining that Revelation existing invalidates Brithright and Conquest since why play those when there is the one path. It goes back to always there being a group not satisfied.

Just now, Jotari said:

Though I really wish they'd have the balls to make a sequel of a single route some day. Even if it's not my preferred ending (not that I have a massive preference for the endings of any of Fire Emblem's games thus far, they mostly always boil down to the same thing only with a few different characters alive/dead), I'd still respect them for choosing something and saying to hell with the fans.

Yeah, there comes a point where the developers shouldn't be too shackled by the fans.

[Jotari]

1 minute ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Like I said, there are ways, but it's still hard to pull off an immediate sequel like MotE or RD without choosing a set path. Daggerfall made like seven of its eight endings canon (the infamous Warp in the West Dragon Break) and the eighth was too incompatible with the other seven else it would've been canon too. Fallout 4 went back to the East Coast so we wouldn't see who won the Second Battle of Hoover Dam. So it could be done with Three Houses, but that still means we are unlikely to have the game take place in Fodlan again. Not until centuries have passed at least. Or the sequel has multiple routes again, and they're basically continuations of the previous ones.

Multi-path prequel with a canon path would just be Fates all over again, with people complaining that Revelation existing invalidates Brithright and Conquest since why play those when there is the one path. It goes back to always there being a group not satisfied.

I don't really see how. Imagine before we got Three Hopes we got a Three Houses prequels with two paths, one of them obviously lead to Three Houses (maybe even ending with Byleth meeting the three heads of houses), while the other ending lead to some twink called Shez coming into existence, and then they made Three Hopes. One game, two paths, two different sequel outcomes.

[Acacia Sgt]

2 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I don't really see how. Imagine before we got Three Hopes we got a Three Houses prequels with two paths, one of them obviously lead to Three Houses (maybe even ending with Byleth meeting the three heads of houses), while the other ending lead to some twink called Shez coming into existence, and then they made Three Hopes. One game, two paths, two different sequel outcomes.

I could see people fearing they'd be trying to retcon out Three Houses for Three Hopes, at the least.

[Jotari]

17 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

 

Yeah, there comes a point where the developers shouldn't be too shackled by the fans.

Thinking on just picking a path from Three Houses, I think Silver Snow would suit best. Edelgard is the only character of importance dead or missing (though I think Rhea should stay dead as she's played out now...despite getting very little screen time in both games) and even Edelgard can be brought back with some Hegemon nonsense, or just stay dead (Thales is also dead, I guess, but he literally died under a pile of rubble so it's not like you couldn't bring him back either). By choosing Silver Snow you also have a more balanced route unconnected to any of the three lords, and they could develop the super weird ghost Dimitri plot point.

Course the Three Houses sequel I'd most like to see is a Crimson Flower follow up where Edelgard's idealistic new world falls completely apart like the Soviet Union XD But they'd never dare make that. One also need ask does Three Houses seriously require a sequel? Dead end is a but of a cynical way of viewing it. Fire Emblem has gotten so few direct sequels because so few of the games actually lend themselves to direct sequels. As I said, Mystery just rehashed everything and Radiant Dawn was planned in advance. Radiant Dawn is a single route game but it just as much as a "dead end" as Fates or Three Houses, as there's no sensible place you can go after Ike cleaves a goddess in two, unless you just focus on a really small story unrelated to big events (which the branching stories could do also).

8 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

I could see people fearing they'd be trying to retcon out Three Houses for Three Hopes, at the least.

Couldn't you say that's already the case with them even making Three Hopes in the first place? If there had been a two path prequel first then it would pretty firmly establish two canons, over just making a game ignoring previously established plots without a care. What they've done now is quite literally retroactive continuity in a much more literal way.

[Acacia Sgt]

9 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Thinking on just picking a path from Three Houses, I think Silver Snow would suit best. Edelgard is the only character of importance dead or missing (though I think Rhea should stay dead as she's played out now...despite getting very little screen time in both games) and even Edelgard can be brought back with some Hegemon nonsense, or just stay dead (Thales is also dead, I guess, but he literally died under a pile of rubble so it's not like you couldn't bring him back either). By choosing Silver Snow you also have a more balanced route unconnected to any of the three lords, and they could develop the super weird ghost Dimitri plot point.

Course the Three Houses sequel I'd most like to see is a Crimson Flower follow up where Edelgard's idealistic new world falls completely apart like the Soviet Union XD But they'd never dare make that. One also need ask does Three Houses seriously require a sequel? Dead end is a but of a cynical way of viewing it. Fire Emblem has gotten so few direct sequels because so few of the games actually lend themselves to direct sequels. As I said, Mystery just rehashed everything and Radiant Dawn was planned in advance. Radiant Dawn is a single route game but it just as much as a "dead end" as Fates or Three Houses, as there's no sensible place you can go after Ike cleaves a goddess in two, unless you just focus on a really small story unrelated to big events (which the branching stories could do also).

That wouldn't be too bad of an idea, yes.

Ah, so the Edelgard/Robespierre comparison would come full circle. XD And yeah, the writers would almost definitely not have the guts. Well, did Shadow Dragon required one? Did Path of Radiance? It basically always boils to that. If a sequel is decide to be made, a way will be found to have one.

9 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Couldn't you say that's already the case with them even making Three Hopes in the first place? If there had been a two path prequel first then it would pretty firmly establish two canons, over just making a game ignoring previously established plots without a care. What they've done now is quite literally retroactive continuity in a much more literal way.

I suppose it depends. Do people are thinking that right now? Admittedly I don't know.

[Jotari]

11 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

That wouldn't be too bad of an idea, yes.

Ah, so the Edelgard/Robespierre comparison would come full circle. XD And yeah, the writers would almost definitely not have the guts. Well, did Shadow Dragon required one? Did Path of Radiance? It basically always boils to that. If a sequel is decide to be made, a way will be found to have one.

I suppose it depends. Do people are thinking that right now? Admittedly I don't know.

Shadow Dragon, no, I thought i made that clear with the "reviving everyone" thing. Path of Radiance, yes, as one was obviously planned. But does Blazing Blade or Genealogy or Awakening need sequels? Non not really, and that's why they got prequels and the like.

[Acacia Sgt]

19 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Shadow Dragon, no, I thought i made that clear with the "reviving everyone" thing. Path of Radiance, yes, as one was obviously planned. But does Blazing Blade or Genealogy or Awakening need sequels? Non not really, and that's why they got prequels and the like.

Planned yes, but the story could've easily just stopped there.

As much Shadow Dragon needed one, yet it still got one. So it's still not out of the realm of probability we might get one for them. The probability is not zero, as it is. Binding Blade, at least, teases us of future events that we have yet to see any following for. Radiant Dawn the same. So them getting the Awakening treatment of having distant sequels is still on the table.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Acacia Sgt

[Jotari]

18 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Planned yes, but the story could've easily just stopped there.

As much Shadow Dragon needed one, yet it still got one. So it's still not out of the realm of probability we might get one for them. The probability is not zero, as it is. Binding Blade, at least, teases us of future events that we have yet to see any following for. Radiant Dawn the same. So them getting the Awakening treatment of having distant sequels is still on the table.

No, I think there is significant differences between Shadow Dragon and Path of Radiance. Path of Radiance has specific plot points that were left hanging. Could the story have stopped there? Well yes, of course it could have its still a stand alone story. But had it stopped there then it would have stood out as the Fire Emblem game were a sequel would make the most sense. Of course a sequel doesn't have to be planned either (if I were making a Shadow Dragon sequel I would have focused in on Pyrathi and the wake of Marty's actions which obviously hadn't been co sidered at all when they wrote that chapter, plus it would give us easiest access to dragons and dragon lore which was what Mystery of the Emblem did best as a sequel), but the issue with Fire Emblem games and sequels is that Fire Emblem stories tend to go big and complete. They end in spectacuker fashions that wkuld make follow up difficult. This series has been around over thirty years so far and in all that time they only ever did direct sequels twice. It's not a case where branched plot lines put an end to Fire Emblem with sequels, it's the direct sequels have never been something to come naturally to the series, that's why we've had more prequels and interequels and parallel timelines and BS Spinoffs (that is Broadcasting Sattelite, not bullshit).

I don't remember any sequel hair for Binding Blade unless you just mean Idunn smiling. Radiant Dawns sequel bait was set so far into the fiture as to hit the "it's kind of irrelevant clause" that a Fodlan distant sequel would have (and was also less sequel bait and more just solidifying the themes of the story).

[Acacia Sgt]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

Path of Radiance has specific plot points that were left hanging.

Such as?

2 minutes ago, Jotari said:

But the issue with Fire Emblem games and sequels is that Fire Emblem stories tend to go big and complete. They end in spectacuker fashions that wkuld make follow up difficult. This series has been around over thirty years so far and in all that time they only ever did direct sequels twice. It's not a case where branched plot lines put an end to Fire Emblem with sequels, it's the direct sequels have never been something to come naturally to the series, that's why we've had more prequels and interequels and parallel timelines and BS Spinoffs (that is Broadcasting Sattelite, not bullshit).

Mhm, as it is, we basically have:

Two direct sequels (MotE and RD)

One side-story (Gaiden/SoV)

One distant prequel (Genealogy)

Two interquels (Thraccia 776 and the Satellaview chapters)

One prequel (Blazing Blade)

One distant sequel (Awakening)

One... alternate universe retelling (Three Hopes)

So yeah, not a whole lot of any category.

2 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I don't remember any sequel hair for Binding Blade unless you just mean Idunn smiling. Radiant Dawns sequel bait was set so far into the fiture as to hit the "it's kind of irrelevant clause" that a Fodlan distant sequel would have (and was also less sequel bait and more just solidifying the themes of the story).

Centuries after Roy’s time, the nations in Elibe were united under a single flag, but that is another story for another time…

It's the same thing that would be repeated for Radiant Dawn. Something happening far into the future. Hence why I said "Awakening style", as in, a Distant Sequel. However, they can always bring up some new story happening much closer. Which yes, isn't something that could be done as easily with Fodlan.

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Such as?

*Altina's identity being revealed at the very end with no explanation as to how unrelated to the herons (the characters even say huh that's weird).

*Sothe looking for "someone"

*The Dark Knight listening to Sephiran's orders.

*The Dark knight's relationship with Greil (and to a lesser extent his identity, as Zelgius has very little reason to exist otherwise).

*Characters showing up that are important to the setting but have no real role in the story at all, essentially being cameos for the next game (Kurth, Lekain, Numida and, especially, Izuka).

*And if you're particularly eagle eyed, Renning and Betram sharing a portrait.

*Even Lehran's Medallion itself is mainly an unfired checkov's gun baiting a sequel. Consider it's role in Path of Radiance's plot. What character actions would change if it didn't exist? It mainly just gives the Dark Knight something to do.

*Characters not getting typical Fore Emblem endings (not necessarily a plot based point but the most direct interface demonstration of it being planned).

Quote

Mhm, as it is, we basically have:

Two direct sequels (MotE and RD)

One side-story (Gaiden/SoV)

One distant prequel (Genealogy)

Two interquels (Thraccia 776 and the Satellaview chapters)

One prequel (Blazing Blade)

One distant sequel (Awakening)

One... alternate universe retelling (Three Hopes)

So yeah, not a whole lot of any category.

Yeah, so two direct sequels and seven alternate ways of doing a follow up.

Quote

Centuries after Roy’s time, the nations in Elibe were united under a single flag, but that is another story for another time…

It's the same thing that would be repeated for Radiant Dawn. Something happening far into the future. Hence why I said "Awakening style", as in, a Distant Sequel. However, they can always bring up some new story happening much closer. Which yes, isn't something that could be done as easily with Fodlan.

Why not? A Fodlan set centuries later would have no difference to Elibe being set centuries later. Both would have no bearing. Awakening certainly had no direct relation to Archanean despite using the same names, items and even a character. There is absolutely nothing stopping them from making a Fodlan 100 years in the future with a bunch of different countries and even creatures.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Jotari

[kratoscar2008]

2 hours ago, Florete said:

This assumes that multiple paths had anything to do with the success of either, much less was a major factor. For Fates I'd say it succeeded not because of, but in spite of its multiple paths, because its method of selling the paths separately was quite controversial. That leaves Three Houses alone, where the path choices certainly pushed engagement and sooner helped its success than hurt, but it's also the best-marketed FE game by any metric and was bound to succeed as long as it wasn't complete garbage.

And of course, you're leaving out that Awakening was a big success despite not having multiple paths and having worse worldwide marketing than either Fates or Three Houses. And we don't have to look just at FE; if multiple paths are so successful, why don't we see other big franchises doing it? While slight deviations and different endings are relatively common, fully-unique separate campaigns are quite rare in games.

While I personally think it would be safest to just stick to one main route, possibly with some slight deviations like GBA FE, I do feel like they could probably pull off two separate routes. But not any more.

The marketing argument has always been iffy for me. Seems like its used by fans to justify get rid of features they dislike as S supports, avatars and now multiple paths when marketing really works if the thing being advertised is appealing and has appealing features so while marketing works, it doesnt catapult a game unless the features it advertises are actually appealing.

Regardless my argument isnt that single paths dont work but rather that multiple paths have given great results and rather than being deferred by the flaws, they should keep attempting. Why arent they more common? Ambition. Many dont have ambition and would rather not apply the resources necessary to make it work which is why its mostly old games who had them (Barring SMT which is mainly because the paths are short). There is also resources which is something that IS has in spades now (Though they still hit roadblocks) IS has ambition and I want to see where will it lead rather than fall back to single path, specially when the Remakes will be single path experiences.

[Florete]

22 minutes ago, kratoscar2008 said:

The marketing argument has always been iffy for me. Seems like its used by fans to justify get rid of features they dislike as S supports, avatars and now multiple paths when marketing really works if the thing being advertised is appealing and has appealing features so while marketing works, it doesnt catapult a game unless the features it advertises are actually appealing.

Well, yeah. Multiple paths is just one potentially-appealing piece of the game, so who's to say it was any kind of big factor in the game doing well? Avatars and player character romance are features that have proven popular not just in FE but in many series, so I think it's obvious that those drew people to the game. But as far as having multiple paths, I'd sooner believe it was Edelgard, Dimitri, and Claude themselves who drew people in more than having a (supposedly) unique path for each. Do the same thing but in a more Sacred Stones-style and what do you think happens?

Note that I'm not saying I think the path options didn't help the game at all, I just doubt that they were so impactful that it's something the majority of players actively want in more games. Just because Three Houses was a success doesn't mean everything it did was popular with the people who played it.

[Samz707]

7 hours ago, kratoscar2008 said:

Well I disagree, specially if the majority of buyers would rather want that. I can't say for sure because well most non fans dont interact with Nintendo so them doing research and then reacting accordingly should be best. Also I remember reading that Koei was told to not undermine Three Houses with Hopes so probably the next game might include one.

As well as I disagree with fixed/limited classes. I dont want to go back to games where if I wanted to use an axe user I had to use generic looking gruff men or I had to bench a cute cavalier girl because there are already too many of them. IS can just work maps with the "canon" classes in mind and let players break it or do whatever they want and purists can stick with the classes.

I meant that most people like multiple paths considering the success of Fates and Houses. Most of the support for single path I see here is from people thinking that they should dial back because they bit more than they could chew but I say no and keep chewing because the results speak for themselves in overall reception (Yeah I know the fanbase loves to hate on Fates but Metacritic and the sales show that Fates is generally looked favorably).

How would you know the majority want it? 

If FE3H had fixed Classes, Edelgard would still have Axes since that's her unique class, FE Does change weapons which classes use, so it's not impossible that say, Annette's late-game promotion would give her an axe for Crusher and Echinda is in FE6 as a Female Hero, an Axe using Class.

Didn't Fates Paths be one of the most commonly complained about things of the game? 

This logic of "game is successful so every single thing from it worked" isn't..quite how it works, Fates probably has a not in-signifficant chunk of people who got it because they liked Awakening then proceeded to hate everything about it.

For the most obvious big example of this, due to a mix of people enjoying past games/a marketing push, Resident Evil 6 is the the best selling Resident Evil game of all time, it's also commonly regarded as one of, if not the worst game in the series (Also actually kinda did multiple paths too, though more following a different duo of characters through the same events.), and aside from somtimes the combat (which even then is only good in the Mercenaries mode, the main campaigns are not actually designed to make good use of it.), almost every single thing about that game is hated.

Or then you have the Tomb Raider Reboots, which for anyone unfamiliar, basically threw everything out and made a generic uncharted clone but sold well due to a big marketing push and how the general audiences prefer just shooting things in the face instead of puzzles/exploration, they basically completely threw out anything that appealed to older fans. (It'd be like if FE became exclusively Warriors titles.) 

And finally, Driv3r, while I enjoy it, it is a buggy unfinished rushed out mess, it also sold better than any previous Driver title due to a high marketing push, including an actual scandal with bribing gaming magazines with early reviews in exchange for high scores despite the fact it is one of the more infamously bad games out there, so yes it sold the best compared to the previous 2 games, but most of the new additions were criticised for clearly being unfinished, to the point where when the series had a brief resurgence with Driver San Francisco, part of it's praise was ditching all of Driv3r's additions.

Arguing that a game was good/certain mechanics should return entirely because of sales really ignores the entire concept of people getting a game due to hype then hating it, as far as sales are concerned, they have it so good, there are plenty of games that sold well due to hype/appealing more to the casual audience in ways that make the experience worse for long-running fans, again, Driv3r/Resi 6 were (and still is in Resi 6's case) the best selling games in the series but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who actually says they're the best in the series or wants a ton of elements from those games to return.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Samz707

[Acacia Sgt]

8 hours ago, Jotari said:

*Altina's identity being revealed at the very end with no explanation as to how unrelated to the herons (the characters even say huh that's weird).

Unrelated or you actually mean related? The wording is weird there.

Also, what exactly is the plot hook here? Learning Altina was the founder of Begnion or that Sanaki is her direct descendant is as significant as learning Velthomer's crest is called the Fire Emblem or that Leweyn was actually Forseti. Nothing confirming that we'll have a second game exploring this.

Quote

*Sothe looking for "someone"

That's not necessarily a sequel hook. It's just character fluff. He's looking for someone, and the game ends with him continuing the search. It can easily just be left to our imaginations if he ever did succeed or not.

Quote

*The Dark Knight listening to Sephiran's orders.

Do those two actually interact during PoR? Or if you mean the Black Knight as Zelgius... well, Sephiran is the Prime Minister. That means he outranks him in the Begnion hierarchy, no? Of course he'll defer to him.

Quote

*The Dark knight's relationship with Greil (and to a lesser extent his identity, as Zelgius has very little reason to exist otherwise).

The Black Knight outright calls Greil his teacher in PoR. There's no need to go beyond that. It's not like we got huge backstories with Petrine and Bryce either. Of the Four Riders, only Tauroneo got fleshed out, and then by virtue of him being recruitable.

His identity isn't really something vital to know, or a sign that it's being reserved for a sequel. As for Zelgius existing... well, see below.

Quote

*Characters showing up that are important to the setting but have no real role in the story at all, essentially being cameos for the next game (Kurth, Lekain, Numida and, especially, Izuka).

NPC´s can exist just for the sake of worldbuilding. They don't need to have big roles. Their existence is not a definite sign that they're being "saved" for use in a sequel work.

Quote

*And if you're particularly eagle eyed, Renning and Betram sharing a portrait.

Unless you hacked the game, you wouldn't be able to see Renning's PoR portrait anyway. As it is, there's no connection to make, or to suspect it would be explained in a future work. Can just be a tragic connection to make in hindsight. Yggdra Union is a game that does this, to give an example.

Quote

*Characters not getting typical Fore Emblem endings (not necessarily a plot based point but the most direct interface demonstration of it being planned).

This could be the only sign that can point more to there being a sequel in the works than not. Then again, Sacred Stones also did the "characters give a few lines in conversation, divided by countries and stuff", though it did had standard endings as well. As it is, it's not an 100% sure thing. For all we knew, they simply were changing the format of the endings.

Quote

Yeah, so two direct sequels and seven alternate ways of doing a follow up.

Why not? A Fodlan set centuries later would have no difference to Elibe being set centuries later. Both would have no bearing.

Indeed. But we're unlikely to get a Fodlan that is only years or a decade or two later, like MotE or RD did, or Blazing Blade only going back twenty years.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Acacia Sgt

[Jotari]

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Unrelated or you actually mean related? The wording is weird there.

Also, what exactly is the plot hook here? Learning Altina was the founder of Begnion or that Sanaki is her direct descendant is as significant as learning Velthomer's crest is called the Fire Emblem or that Leweyn was actually Forseti. Nothing confirming that we'll have a second game exploring this.

Because it's presented as a mystery in the game and upon finding out the characters are left further confused as to how it relates to the set up of the mystery. In other words, the mystery is unsolved and the game makes a point of noting that.

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

That's not necessarily a sequel hook. It's just character fluff. He's looking for someone, and the game ends with him continuing the search. It can easily just be left to our imaginations if he ever did succeed or not.

Sure, if they didn't make a sequel...But they did make a sequel and the girl he was looking for was the protagonist.

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Do those two actually interact during PoR? Or if you mean the Black Knight as Zelgius... well, Sephiran is the Prime Minister. That means he outranks him in the Begnion hierarchy, no? Of course he'll defer to him.

No, the Black knight as the Black knight receives an order from Sephiran (still in disguise) when he shows up in the port town. This whole page on the site details why people pegged the identity of the Black knight.

https://serenesforest.net/general/zelgius-theory/#:~:text=This is the theory that,is%2C his image is here.

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

The Black Knight outright calls Greil his teacher in PoR. There's no need to go beyond that. It's not like we got huge backstories with Petrine and Bryce either. Of the Four Riders, only Tauroneo got fleshed out, and then by virtue of him being recruitable.

His identity isn't really something vital to know, or a sign that it's being reserved for a sequel. As for Zelgius existing... well, see below.

NPC´s can exist just for the sake of worldbuilding. They don't need to have big roles. Their existence is not a definite sign that they're being "saved" for use in a sequel work.

They can, but Zelgus's role is specifically minor in an unnecessary way. He adds nothing by existing as himself and getting a portrait and dialogue. This is called conservation if detail.

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Unless you hacked the game, you wouldn't be able to see Renning's PoR portrait anyway. As it is, there's no connection to make, or to suspect it would be explained in a future work. Can just be a tragic connection to make in hindsight. Yggdra Union is a game that does this, to give an example.

I thought he showed up once in one of the chapter intros.

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

This could be the only sign that can point more to there being a sequel in the works than not. Then again, Sacred Stones also did the "characters give a few lines in conversation, divided by countries and stuff", though it did had standard endings as well. As it is, it's not an 100% sure thing. For all we knew, they simply were changing the format of the endings.

But in a case where there was no Radiant Dawn and people were discussing the potential sequels to Fire Emblem games the fact that Path of Radiance didn't have official endings to it's characters would lead more credence to a potential sequel as other games set quite firmly what happens to characters.

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Indeed. But we're unlikely to get a Fodlan that is only years or a decade or two later, like MotE or RD did, or Blazing Blade only going back twenty years.

Yes, and were unlikely to get an Elibe, Magvel, Jugdral or Ylisse set a few years after the current games. Yes? We got an Elibe prequel, and while I don't actually expect a Fodlan prequel (though I want a Judith prequel for mild OCD reasons), the nature of Three Houses split timeline (the point of this convo) is completely irrelevant for a prequel set several decades before. As split timelines don't have any bearing on prequels (welln usually, Zero Escape is an exception).

[Acacia Sgt]

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Because it's presented as a mystery in the game and upon finding out the characters are left further confused as to how it relates to the set up of the mystery. In other words, the mystery is unsolved and the game makes a point of noting that.

Do they? Looking at the script, it doesn't look like it. Only Ike asks if it's common knowledge that Sanaki has the surname Altina, since Lillia did knew the name after all. But as it stands, it's not a definite sign that it's a sequel hook.

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Sure, if they didn't make a sequel...But they did make a sequel and the girl he was looking for was the protagonist.

Irrelevant. By itself it's not a sign of being a sequel hook, so someone back in 2005 would have no reason to think there'd be a sequel based on the fact a minor character has a personal issue that remained unresolved.

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

No, the Black knight as the Black knight receives an order from Sephiran (still in disguise) when he shows up in the port town. This whole page on the site details why people pegged the identity of the Black knight.

https://serenesforest.net/general/zelgius-theory/#:~:text=This is the theory that,is%2C his image is here.

It does make it suspect, but as it stands, we'd be more likely to believe the Black Knight simply knows he is Begnion's Prime Minister and thus would prefer to avoid causing a possible Diplomatic Incident. Sephiran may travel the world in disguise, but his disguise is simply a change of clothes and the fact Tellius still lives in the era that not a whole lot of people could see a picture of him beforehand to recognize him. Hiding in plain sight and all that.

Also... it's still not a definite sign that it's being saved for a sequel work.

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

They can, but Zelgus's role is specifically minor in an unnecessary way. He adds nothing by existing as himself and getting a portrait and dialogue. This is called conservation if detail.

Writers can do whatever they want. If that's making up one-scene NPC's, so be it. Or rather, their purpose is simply worldbuilding. The plot calls for Ike to be in command of a cadre of Begnion soldiers. Zelgius is the leader of said cadre. The writers simply felt it'd feel more compelling if said leader had a name and design attached to it, rather than just have Ike talk to a generic NPC. Specially since Zelgius does show up a couple times, so he's not that minor of an NPC. And that's more likely the reasoning someone back in 2005 to reach, rather than "there is obviously a sequel in the making and this Zelgius guy will have a bigger role there".

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I thought he showed up once in one of the chapter intros.

Nope, he never did in person until RD.

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

But in a case where there was no Radiant Dawn and people were discussing the potential sequels to Fire Emblem games the fact that Path of Radiance didn't have official endings to it's characters would lead more credence to a potential sequel as other games set quite firmly what happens to characters.

Then again, in a world with no Radiant Dawn, Path of Radiance may have had character endings anyway, making it a repeat of Sacred Stones' format.

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Yes, and were unlikely to get an Elibe, Magvel, Jugdral or Ylisse set a few years after the current games. Yes? We got an Elibe prequel, and while I don't actually expect a Fodlan prequel (though I want a Judith prequel for mild OCD reasons), the nature of Three Houses split timeline (the point of this convo) is completely irrelevant for a prequel set several decades before. As split timelines don't have any bearing on prequels (welln usually, Zero Escape is an exception).

Unlikely, but not impossible. Shadow Dragon also looked like it could not, but it did.

Indeed, but the topic was on direct sequels, not prequels, which was long accepted they wouldn't be affected since the route-splitting goes forward, not backwards.

[Jotari]

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Do they? Looking at the script, it doesn't look like it. Only Ike asks if it's common knowledge that Sanaki has the surname Altina, since Lillia did knew the name after all. But as it stands, it's not a definite sign that it's a sequel hook.

It feels like your arguing just for the sake of arguing now. Have you actually played Path of Radiance or just read the script? Because this is very clear in my mind as a sequel hook. It is placed after all the rest of the action, it's given very specific focus and the cutscenes itself even has unique ending style programming that stops you from skipping over the dialogue. It is made to express and unfinished element of the story.

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Irrelevant. By itself it's not a sign of being a sequel hook, so someone back in 2005 would have no reason to think there'd be a sequel based on the fact a minor character has a personal issue that remained unresolved.

No, but they did go and make a sequel out of it because a sequel was planned and they were planting the seeds in it there already.

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

It does make it suspect, but as it stands, we'd be more likely to believe the Black Knight simply knows he is Begnion's Prime Minister and thus would prefer to avoid causing a possible Diplomatic Incident. Sephiran may travel the world in disguise, but his disguise is simply a change of clothes and the fact Tellius still lives in the era that not a whole lot of people could see a picture of him beforehand to recognize him. Hiding in plain sight and all that.

Also... it's still not a definite sign that it's being saved for a sequel work.

I'm not talking about definite signs. As I said, Path of Radiance is a stand alone story, it's not like a part 1 part 2 like the Final Fantasy 7 remake or something. But these are things people spotted at the time and speculated on and turned out to be right about because the game intentionally out them in. If Radiant Dawn had never cone to be then they are still elements that people would have picked up on and speculated about as further potential for the story. This is not like the vases of other Fire Emblem games.

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Writers can do whatever they want. If that's making up one-scene NPC's, so be it. Or rather, their purpose is simply worldbuilding. The plot calls for Ike to be in command of a cadre of Begnion soldiers. Zelgius is the leader of said cadre. The writers simply felt it'd feel more compelling if said leader had a name and design attached to it, rather than just have Ike talk to a generic NPC. Specially since Zelgius does show up a couple times, so he's not that minor of an NPC. And that's more likely the reasoning someone back in 2005 to reach, rather than "there is obviously a sequel in the making and this Zelgius guy will have a bigger role there".

Said leader could have been established characters Tannith or Sigrun. Your also ignoring that people back in 2005 literally did note on this and figure out the Black Knight twist in advance.

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Nope, he never did in person until RD.

My mistake.

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Then again, in a world with no Radiant Dawn, Path of Radiance may have had character endings anyway, making it a repeat of Sacred Stones' format.

Oh I'm sure if they had planned for Radiant Dawn then it absolutely would have had character endings. It also couldnt have had all the things I've mentioned.

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Unlikely, but not impossible. Shadow Dragon also looked like it could not, but it did.

I don't know what you mean.

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Indeed, but the topic was on direct sequels, not prequels, which was long accepted they wouldn't be affected since the route-splitting goes forward, not backwards.

I misread your remark about Blazing Blade as Binding Blade. But considering Binding Blade was made first, its not actually a sequel in any production sense.

[Acacia Sgt]

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

It feels like your arguing just for the sake of arguing now. Have you actually played Path of Radiance or just read the script?

I own it and have beat it several times.

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Because this is very clear in my mind as a sequel hook. It is placed after all the rest of the action, it's given very specific focus and the cutscenes itself even has unique ending style programming that stops you from skipping over the dialogue. It is made to express and unfinished element of the story.

I think the problem here is that you're letting RD's existence cloud your judgement. You need to see this from the lens of 2005, when PoR had just released and we had no knowledge that a sequel was indeed in the plans.

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

No, but they did go and make a sequel out of it because a sequel was planned and they were planting the seeds in it there already.

See above.

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I'm not talking about definite signs. As I said, Path of Radiance is a stand alone story, it's not like a part 1 part 2 like the Final Fantasy 7 remake or something. But these are things people spotted at the time and speculated on and turned out to be right about because the game intentionally out them in. If Radiant Dawn had never cone to be then they are still elements that people would have picked up on and speculated about as further potential for the story. This is not like the vases of other Fire Emblem games.

Which wouldn't be new to FE. As stated earlier, BB teased the story of Elibe wasn't over, and we still are waiting, as it were.

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Said leader could have been established characters Tannith or Sigrun. Your also ignoring that people back in 2005 literally did note on this and figure out the Black Knight twist in advance.

Tannith and Sigrun already had their roles, as members of the Holy Guard.

Does it count if it involved looking at the game files? Even the document you linked relied on checking the internal data to postulate its theory. Which is also how the Renning-Bertrand connection was made too.

We'd need to check actual discussions using only evidence the developers wanted us to see. Hacking the game is just cheating, as it were.

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I don't know what you mean.

That Shadow Dragon had a sense of finality, yet it still got a sequel.

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I misread your remark about Blazing Blade as Binding Blade. But considering Binding Blade was made first, its not actually a sequel in any production sense.

It was about Three Houses, not Binding Blade.

[Jotari]

28 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

I own it and have beat it several times.

I think the problem here is that you're letting RD's existence cloud your judgement. You need to see this from the lens of 2005, when PoR had just released and we had no knowledge that a sequel was indeed in the plans.

See above.

But, as I've said, these are things people from that time literally picked up on.

28 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Which wouldn't be new to FE. As stated earlier, BB teased the story of Elibe wasn't over, and we still are waiting, as it were.

The story of Elibe wasn't over, but the story of Roy and his friends was. Gaiden pulled the same thing with "people will eventually fight again". These are not sequel hooks, they are affirmations of themes and if they were sequel hooks they'd be hooks to distant futures of the continent which would work just as well in a game with branched stories.

28 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Tannith and Sigrun already had their roles, as members of the Holy Guard.

Does it count if it involved looking at the game files? Even the document you linked relied on checking the internal data to postulate its theory. Which is also how the Renning-Bertrand connection was made too.

We'd need to check actual discussions using only evidence the developers wanted us to see. Hacking the game is just cheating, as it were.

If it were just hacking the game then that would be it. But people didn't just hack the game and see identical stats and called it a day. Aside from the Renning thing they hacked the game and found supporting evidence.

28 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

That Shadow Dragon had a sense of finality, yet it still got a sequel.

Yes...What is the point? I've already talked about bow that sequel wasn't planned.

28 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

It was about Three Houses, not Binding Blade.

This is what I was referring to.

9 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Indeed. But we're unlikely to get a Fodlan that is only years or a decade or two later, like MotE or RD did, or Blazing Blade only going back twenty years.

We did indeed see Elibe decades after Blazing Blade...But that's because it was a prequel and thus has no relevance to the topic of sequels to multi path games.