End game reflections are story discussion. Spoilers.

[Acacia Sgt]

40 minutes ago, Jotari said:

In other words, they were able to create a new body for him.

The Hyacinth approach, then.

[Sidereal Wraith]

9 hours ago, joevar said:

 

through warp-rescue shenanigans

I believe the literary technique which was used in the story at this point is called an ass pull.

57 minutes ago, Jotari said:

But doesn't Alear's physicals body like dissolve moments before that? And even sans dissolving, it had already taken a lethal injury. Is he still effectively a corpse and they just gathered his atoms back together and went all Frankenstein on it? 

Alear’s body was turned into an Emblem, I have the cutscene linked on the previous page. Again the game does nothing to really explain what it means now that Alear is an Emblem and what limitations if any they now possess as a result. The fact that all of us are providing our own conjecture to explain it shows how poorly it was defined in the story.  

Edited February 17, 2023 by Sidereal Wraith

[joevar]

8 hours ago, Sidereal Wraith said:

I believe the literary technique which was used in the story at this point is called an ass pull.

Alear’s body was turned into an Emblem, I have the cutscene linked on the previous page. Again the game does nothing to really explain what it means now that Alear is an Emblem and what limitations if any they now possess as a result. The fact that all of us are providing our own conjecture to explain it shows how poorly it was defined in the story.  

"The game does nothing to explain"

Like in every fire emblem then. I think i have replied in another thread in various stuff that doesnt get explained. Including dragon, dragonstone and their transformation. Because only elibe have excuse to make it like that.(archanea too, i think?) While other games are just "they were like that in other games, deal with it" approach.

It was not "poorly defined". Its "not defined" at all.

Back to topic, at least it has cutscene where alear body turned into emblem. Instead of forming from nothingness. So corporeal form is still in the table to me.

8 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

The Hyacinth approach, then.

Maybe he spit it out back immediately after chapter 10, just like morion who has been consumed but still there in the flesh. Being a snake i imagine sombron just treat hyacinth like candy. (Snake dont chew, afaik) lol

------------------

Im half convinced already they just take lottery between the programmer to write the storyboard for almost of all FE. Instead of working back to back with competent writer when making the overall gameplay narrative.

[Jotari]

5 hours ago, joevar said:

"The game does nothing to explain"

Like in every fire emblem then. I think i have replied in another thread in various stuff that doesnt get explained. Including dragon, dragonstone and their transformation. Because only elibe have excuse to make it like that.(archanea too, i think?) While other games are just "they were like that in other games, deal with it" approach.

It was not "poorly defined". Its "not defined" at all.

Back to topic, at least it has cutscene where alear body turned into emblem. Instead of forming from nothingness. So corporeal form is still in the table to me.

Maybe he spit it out back immediately after chapter 10, just like morion who has been consumed but still there in the flesh. Being a snake i imagine sombron just treat hyacinth like candy. (Snake dont chew, afaik) lol

------------------

Im half convinced already they just take lottery between the programmer to write the storyboard for almost of all FE. Instead of working back to back with competent writer when making the overall gameplay narrative.

If I remember, they did hire an established professional writer for Fates, and then took a hatchet to all of his work cutting the story into a loose abridgement of what he'd actually created. Course that's probably hearsay.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Jotari

[joevar]

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

If I remember, they did hire an established professional writer for Fates, and then took a hatchet to all of his work cutting the story into a loose abridgement of what he'd actually created. Course that's probably hearsay.

another big problem then. in story-rich RPG (usually the one thats successful/famous) one of the writers for the story has big authority or sometimes just outright the assitant director level. so even if they do butcher some of it, they know which part is critical or not.

i just hope im wrong but it really seems like they use the same approach with JP anime: having the entire thing sliced into episodic manner and have different people direct / manage it. which lead to uneven quality and sometimes feel disconnected. thats what i feel with Engage story. if that were true, then chapter 10 > chapter 11 weirdness become near unavoidable. 

i checked past FE Credits theres only "scenario" in the Credits names, unlike some other RPG where there are both Narrative and Writer....
Lorebook where IS? 😄 

[Jotari]

10 minutes ago, joevar said:

another big problem then. in story-rich RPG (usually the one thats successful/famous) one of the writers for the story has big authority or sometimes just outright the assitant director level. so even if they do butcher some of it, they know which part is critical or not.

i just hope im wrong but it really seems like they use the same approach with JP anime: having the entire thing sliced into episodic manner and have different people direct / manage it. which lead to uneven quality and sometimes feel disconnected. thats what i feel with Engage story. if that were true, then chapter 10 > chapter 11 weirdness become near unavoidable. 

i checked past FE Credits theres only "scenario" in the Credits names, unlike some other RPG where there are both Narrative and Writer....
Lorebook where IS? 😄 

Group writing projects can definitely work, but it's almost always vital to have one leading visionary. An auteur, so to speak. I think the best a disperate group of writers under the supervision of a powerful marketing team can do for trying to tell a serious Fire Emblem story is Three Houses (that being said, I actually like Engage's story a lot more than Three House's, but it clearly is a less ambitious and seriously considered work).

And this really isn't going to change. Because modern Fire Emblem's approach has been working. Having these cookie cutter, market researched, trend following, low risk animesque stories is giving them massive success. Far more than Fire Emblem was in its early years where there was one creative lead. Which will make it quite interesting to see how they handle the inevitable Genealogy if Holy War remake, which was Kaga's most ambitious and daring attempt and epic story telling.

[Sidereal Wraith]

9 hours ago, joevar said:

"The game does nothing to explain"

Like in every fire emblem then. I think i have replied in another thread in various stuff that doesnt get explained. Including dragon, dragonstone and their transformation. Because only elibe have excuse to make it like that.(archanea too, i think?) While other games are just "they were like that in other games, deal with it" approach.

It was not "poorly defined". Its "not defined" at all.

The dragon stones are explained in most of the games. In Archanea it is explained that dragons will suffer from degeneration if they remain in their dragon state all the time, hence why there was a war between the divine dragons and the earth dragons over this fact. That’s also why Naga put Tiki in a deep slumber so she won’t degenerate and cause a lot of destruction due to being young and inexperienced. So the dragon stones are explained in all the games from Shadow Dragon and Blade of Light through Thracia 776 and all of the remakes of these games plus Awakening, because all these games take place in the same world. So that’s already 9 games where the dragon stones are explained. In Fates it is explained that the dragon stone is used by Corrin to prevent them from turning into a dragon and going berserk due to extreme emotional duress.

(The conversation starts at around 21 minutes about the dragon stone)

Including the Elibe games that’s a total 12 games where the dragon stone is explained. As for the Laguz shapeshifting is a trait that they are defined as having from the start and with Panne and Yarne them having beast stones can be seen as being in a similar vein to the dragon stones seeing as they live in the world of Archanea. The only time it isn’t really explained to my knowledge is in Sacred Stones which isn’t great, but at least there the dragon stone not being properly explained doesn’t lead to huge plot holes in the narrative, unlike Alear’s situations with being turned into an Emblem or the Chapter 11 escape.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Sidereal Wraith

[joevar]

38 minutes ago, Sidereal Wraith said:

explained in most of the games. In Archanea

see. this is assumption based on what usually happen. despite them always have different world, different setting etc.

then some plot holes in ENgage can be answered with assumption from other game assumption. the series at this point just like to refuse to explain many info or plot point, for reason unknown

Edited February 18, 2023 by joevar

[Sidereal Wraith]

2 hours ago, joevar said:

see. this is assumption based on what usually happen. despite them always have different world, different setting etc.

If you’d actually read what I had written before you would know that I explained that when it comes to the explanation of the dragon stones in some of the FE games it is explained how they work in the Archanea games. The Valentia and Jugdral games BOTH take place in the same world as the Archanea games. This is proven both in Awakening and in Shadows of Valentia. We know that Jugdral takes place in the same world because Naga was the leader of the dragons that appeared at The Miracle of Dahna, who came from Archanea to help the people of Jugdral in their time of need. Julia’s holy weapon is called “The Book of Naga” for this very reason. These games take place in the same world, ergo the explanation of how dragon stones work in Archanea extend to both the continents of Valentia and Jugdral and in the future when Archanea is renamed Ylisse. And when it comes to the other games which take place in other worlds, you yourself stated that the Elibe games gives a reason, I stated that Fates gives a reason and that Sacred Stones doesn’t give a reason as far as I know. That means of all the games in the series that have units with dragon stones only Sacred Stones and Engage don’t give any lore reasons as to how they work, as far as I know.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Sidereal Wraith

[Jotari]

3 hours ago, Sidereal Wraith said:

The only time it isn’t really explained to my knowledge is in Sacred Stones which isn’t great, but at least there the dragon stone not being properly explained doesn’t lead to huge plot holes in the narrative, 

Sacred Stones is pointed to as a game with very lack luster wirld building. The dragons in particular, for how much is talked about the great dragon, we have very little idea what they are, what they cone from and what they do aside from oppose Fomortiis (or more frequently, become zombies for him). And quite annoyingly we get to know the name of two of the five heroes who defeated Fomortiis the first time. It'd be almost better to know none of them and leave them mysterious then give us hust incomplete information like that.

35 minutes ago, Sidereal Wraith said:

If you’d actually read what I had written before you would know that I explained that when it comes to the explanation of the dragon stones in some of the FE games it is explained how they work in the Archanea games. The Valentia and Jugdral games BOTH take place in the same world as the Archanea games. 

Yeah Awakening's world building has some serious issues with how it actually relates to Awakening (and somehow Shadows of Valentia too).

But I think the main point Sidereal is trying to make here is about narrative more than world building. Dragonstones really don't need to be explained, it's nice for them to be, but they don't require it for a functional story. We never get a proper explanation as to how people can hurl fire balls or ride flying steeds either. Magic A is Magic A and that's simply how works. But that's not how Emblems, and specifically Alear becoming an Emblem works. That is a pretty pivotal plot point (or rather it's made into one...because let's face it, it could actually be removed with no major consequences to the plot) of which the mechanics and implications aren't really explained. Something can simply be without needing an explanation, but something can't happen without an explanation  (usually...ideally...typically).

Edited February 18, 2023 by Jotari

[joevar]

I was trying to make a comparison that something bound to not have any or lack of explanation in every FE, not specifically dragonstone to not have any explanation in every single FE.

But funnily enough engage not having explanation actually the one to me that desperately need it. The whole conflict is about fell dragon, alear is a dragon, lumera is a divine dragon, so "what could happen when alear already have divine power despite originally a Fell dragon trying to transform using his dragonstone?" Not to mention his dragonstone is all red.

But thats also going too deep into what the game dont care to explore.

Trying to explain what the miracle did also fall into same category to me. Thats why i said it like that  in previous posts

Also about "no one return from death", the emblem suggest to use the miracle to Lumera, in chapter 18. Lumera already corpse for at least several weeks already. Not just in the process of dying like Alear.  so basically they already contradict themselves befofe chapter 22, or miracle rules is "anything goes", aka didnt any follow rules. Its miracle afterall.

[Etrurian emperor]

On 2/16/2023 at 6:45 PM, Sidereal Wraith said:

Basically must of my thoughts on Engage’s story and characters neatly summarized by someone:

I think that's a little harsh. The cast is undeniable a step down from Three Houses, but I think they elevate the story rather than detract from it.

As the youtuber points out, stories typical have three aspect. World building, narrative and characters. And in that sense I think the cast of Engage does a lot to lift up the intensely weak narrative and worldbuilding. 

Elusia for instance is just as bare bones as Plegia, but because it has team Hortensia and team Ivy it at least has something to offer. Solm is really just the typical FE country that's neutral until it inevitably gets invaded but because most characters from Solm are either morons or hedonists it at least manages to get some charm. The story itself meanwhile is boring, overly tropy, predictable and bare bones, but because they're relatively fun to have on screen the cast brings at least some life into scenes that otherwise wouldn't have much life in them.

[avbitran]

I generally think very low expectations, some very good moments, and overall great voice acting saved this game for me. I acknowledge all its faults, worse of which imo are tons of pay off without any set up, badly executed scenes and cringe dialogue, but I did have fun with it.

[Etrurian emperor]

While I'm less harsh towards the story than I expected, I still think that Engage absolutely wasn't the story the series needed at this time. I enjoyed the stupid charm of Engage to some extend, but I think this particular story at this particular time was a mistake that has some concerning implications for the future. 

Some people use the argument that the quirky Engage is a nice palette cleanser after the much more heavy story of Three Houses, but its worth noting that Three Houses itself was a much needed course correction after Fire Emblem had a string of bad or bland stories in a row. To successfully solve a recurring problem in the series only to fall back into bad habits immediately afterwards is not a good look. What the series needed was to follow up the story success of Three Houses to show the series could still tell decent stories, rather than immediately return to a basic story and barebones worldbuilding. The more detailed style of Three Houses was at least owed a second chance before shelving it to return focus to a style Three Houses got praised for moving away from. Perhaps finding a middle ground between the relative depth of Fodlan and the charm of the 3ds era would have been the best option, rather than so openly abandoning the former style in favor of the lator. 

I think that in the review department Engage did itself no favors by so happily clinging to past mistakes. The story and characters are often described as a big flaws of the game, to the point where I don't think its entirely deserving. I suspect reviewers would be far less harsh on the story and cast if Engage was a follow up to Awakening or Fates rather than Three Houses. Because Three Houses showed a successful course correction meant reviewers entered Engage with the wrong expectations, and judged the game accordingly. 

So far it seems to mostly be me who thinks this, but I strongly feel that Engage's story casts a lot of doubt on the future of Fire Emblem stories. I find it very noteworthy that the only recent story that can be deemed a success was from the one game that Intelligent Systems didn't make itself. Because this carries the implication that Intelligent Systems wasn't deliberately going for a course correction with Three Houses, that it was just a happy accident due to a different developer doing the work, and that Intelligent Systems is still as disinterested in plot and worldbuilding as it has been since the 3ds era. After Three Houses it was a very safe expectation that the next story in the franchise would follow up on the improvements and have a decent story, but now its actually a safer bet that IS feels very comfortable with the bare bones style introduced in Awakening, and that plot and worldbuilding just aren't high on their priority list anymore. 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Etrurian emperor

[Acacia Sgt]

I'd say this has been FE's thing ever since Kaga left. They certainly tried with Tellius, but then you have the developers admitting they put ~15% of RD's script behind Hard Mode because they wanted the more casual fans to just play the game and not focus much on the story.

[lenticular]

7 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Some people use the argument that the quirky Engage is a nice palette cleanser after the much more heavy story of Three Houses, but its worth noting that Three Houses itself was a much needed course correction after Fire Emblem had a string of bad or bland stories in a row. To successfully solve a recurring problem in the series only to fall back into bad habits immediately afterwards is not a good look. What the series needed was to follow up the story success of Three Houses to show the series could still tell decent stories, rather than immediately return to a basic story and barebones worldbuilding.

I largely agree with this. I think that if they wanted a palette cleanser after Three Houses, they could have gone with a simpler story or a lighter story, but that doesn't mean getting rid of any semblance of worldbuilding or internal consistency. Instead, they seem to have doubled down on exactly the wrong elements. I'm thinking of things like the various villain death scenes which were overwrought and filled with cheap attempts at pathos, but were ultimately meaningless because they weren't backed up by anything that had gone before. It felt to me as if they were trying to have the trappings of a grand epic tragedy but without any of the weight behind it. Whereas what I personally want is to have the foundations of strong worldbuilding and consistent character motivations, but I don't much care if the plot laid on top of the foundations is a simple one.

[Jotari]

7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

I'd say this has been FE's thing ever since Kaga left. They certainly tried with Tellius, but then you have the developers admitting they put ~15% of RD's script behind Hard Mode because they wanted the more casual fans to just play the game and not focus much on the story.

I think there is a lot of truth to this. In retrospect, the Game Boy Games really were not ambitious in their story telling. They're betrer received than the 3DS games by the more vocally critical fans, but that comes down to a combination of nostalgia and just playing things really safe. And in that regard they are very similar to Engage. Tellius is the only time since Jugdral where I really feel like they had a story to tell and actually succeeded. But even then, how well they succeeded is probably influenced in my own eyes by nostalgia and bias. And if I'm really honest,  Kaga had some great ideas an obviously  a lot of passion and consideration...but his writing was definitely less than stellar. We mostly give it a pass by blaming console limitations, but really who knows how his writing wpuld have actually measured up without that. To this day I view Seliph as the worst written Lord in the series because he's just so bland, which cant be chalked upto console limitations as characters in his own game are more interesting. 

[Seazas]

On 2/13/2023 at 3:31 PM, Sidereal Wraith said:

I honestly believe that the hype will have to die down a bit before discussions of the story will be taken more seriously. What I’m more interested in now is the legacy that Engage will have, which I believe will be the same as Conquest. I.E. good gameplay but a bad story. It saddens me that people seem to just accept the fact that Engage’s story isn’t good and just tout that all you need is good gameplay in an RPG. Especially coming right after 3H, which seemed to at least tell an interesting story in a mostly successful manner. The fact that Engage’s story is so ineptly told truly boggles my mind. It’s sad that some people will just accept mediocrity, even if said mediocrity looks and sounds good.

Because I have no reason not to "accept mediocrity" if Engage is open about what it aimed to do. It wasn't designed as an attempt at a step forward for FE like Fates was. Engage is confirmed as a one time gimmick, to be designed as more stupid and simplistic from the getgo. It being an anniversary one off quells any reason I have to spend too much energy on most of the writing. Any chance of it being near 3H's tier died the instant Mars came out of Alear's ring and went "It's time to Engage!"

Edited February 24, 2023 by Seazas

[Sidereal Wraith]

7 hours ago, Seazas said:

Because I have no reason not to "accept mediocrity" if Engage is open about what it aimed to do. It wasn't designed as an attempt at a step forward for FE like Fates was. Engage is confirmed as a one time gimmick, to be designed as more stupid and simplistic from the getgo. It being an anniversary one off quells any reason I have to spend too much energy on most of the writing. Any chance of it being near 3H's tier died the instant Mars came out of Alear's ring and went "It's time to Engage!"

The prosecution rests.

[Etrurian emperor]

On 2/24/2023 at 8:22 AM, Jotari said:

I think there is a lot of truth to this. In retrospect, the Game Boy Games really were not ambitious in their story telling. They're betrer received than the 3DS games by the more vocally critical fans, but that comes down to a combination of nostalgia and just playing things really safe.

I'm not really sure I agree with that. There's a real difference in tone and story cohesion compared to the Gameboy and 3ds era. Stories like Blazing Sword and Sacred Stones certainly played it safe, but they aren't bare bones as later games would become. 

A simple story about a rebellion eventually escalating into a conflict with assassins and the evil mages controlling them has a very different feel from ''lol lets just get into random fights until we reach Ganon's castle'', or ''lets go clockwise around the map to gather rings!''

I think that unlike Awakening, Fates or now Engage the GBA games at least tried. For all the flaws people now like to point out FE7 at least has a lot of character interaction and, a constant escalation of the plot, and an assortment of hatable villains who have good crossover with the cast. Stones might be simple but its conflict between Lyon and the twins pays off, and I think most people would agree it has an impressive side cast and rogue gallery. 

[Sentinel07]

Engage has super bad pacing issues. I dare say probably some of the worst in this franchise in my opinion.

The first 16 chapters or so are spent meandering around and barely moving the plot forward other than just showing off all the countries. Then, when they finally decide to have a plot, it's only really from Chapter 20 onwards and it feels super rushed and half-baked with every chapter jam packed with exposition. Certainly doesn't help that Alear only plays the part of the good-hearted amnesiac for over half the plot before suddenly getting a new plot twist every chapter. Seriously, this might just be me, but regardless if the premise was simple or not, this was amateurish writing.

Kind of why it bugs me so much when the GBA games get lumped in with Engage because "they all went for simple stories". Yes, their premises are simple, but the GBA games still tried a heck of a lot more and told more cohesive plots with far better worldbuilding.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Sentinel07

[TheHBK]

It's kinda weird to see some of the complaints. Characters are mostly fine. And the dialogue is okay is nothing stellar.

It's just the whole story which makes no sense at any internal or meta-textual standpoint.

I mean the story doesn't have like a ton of gigantic plot holes other then the usual stuff of "you can rewind time in gameplay, but not in cutscenes" and some other usual nonsense (villains turnaround, etc).

It's just that you can tell in the cutscenes and voice acting that they were taking everything very seriously and dramatically which 1/ is nonsensical if this is supposed to be a lighthearted celebration of sorts, 2/ is unearned at best when the story makes absolutely zero efforts in building any kind of setup with a very honorable mention of the most "I'm gonna die in the next chapter" character introductions I've even seen.

They wanna make every character death super dramatic except it's either a character we just met a chapter ago, so we don't care, or a character which gets its character development at the time of their death, which is just, like, yeah, whatever, you had a life, I guess 😑

But the dialog itself and the characters are fine. They're not the issue. The issue is the insane amount of plot contrivances and overuse of cheap tropes like mind-control...

But then again it's weird because the story has some super-dark undertones with ton of efforts put into cutscenes, yet they never built any plot element bar one or two tops (with some twists you could see from 300 parsecs away) so it all falls flat when it happens, and yet they were seemingly going for a lighter "anniversary mood" with chill designs and a deluxe resort with the Somniel, so all this overplayed drama feels out-of-place and fake as hell.

It's like they had no direction for the story and just wrote stuff which would somewhat justify the battles planned by the mission design team with the least amount of effort possible. It's like it was written at the last minute which can't be true given all the voice acting there is.

It's legit one of the worst story I've ever experienced because you can never tell if they tried to be serious and failed, or tried to be tongue-in-cheek and failed, or didn't try yet put a ton of budget into it because the previous games were successful and let's burn some money. None of it makes sense.

When even Fates made more sense, you know you screwed up.

[Jotari]

16 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I'm not really sure I agree with that. There's a real difference in tone and story cohesion compared to the Gameboy and 3ds era. Stories like Blazing Sword and Sacred Stones certainly played it safe, but they aren't bare bones as later games would become. 

A simple story about a rebellion eventually escalating into a conflict with assassins and the evil mages controlling them has a very different feel from ''lol lets just get into random fights until we reach Ganon's castle'', or ''lets go clockwise around the map to gather rings!''

I think that unlike Awakening, Fates or now Engage the GBA games at least tried. For all the flaws people now like to point out FE7 at least has a lot of character interaction and, a constant escalation of the plot, and an assortment of hatable villains who have good crossover with the cast. Stones might be simple but its conflict between Lyon and the twins pays off, and I think most people would agree it has an impressive side cast and rogue gallery. 

I'd like to think you're right, but if I take off my own nostalgia goggles, I think I can pick a lot of holes and short cuts in how they operated in the GBA games too (and hell even for Tellius, which I've praised, the Blood Pact is pretty reviled and not unrightfully so). Lyon, for example, shoves pretty much all it's actual interactions with the Twins into very obviously choreographed flash back sequences. And when he does finally show up, the story accelerates into first gear and suddenly the whole game is over within half a dozen chapters and far shorter than it feels like. Eirika rescuing Ephraim is like 40% of the game, yet it feels like it's the opening quarter (and would have been if they let us play both twins in one playthrough).

And on the other side of the coin, I don't think they've really tried quite as little with the modern titles as people give them credit. Certainly I think they tried to make a compelling narrative with Alear and Veyle in Engage, and while I don't like it as much as Lyon, I do think genuine effort was put in to make both characters likeable and for the conflict to feel real (and yeah, that corrupted Alear resolution, that was some smart way of working in the lore mechanics that have been around since basically the start of the series that have never been used that way).

The only time in the series where I truly felt like someone just called it in and didn't care what the result would be would Azura's super magic one use orb with an extra helping of super specific magic curse. That just reeks of a writer being told they need to finish the game in Hoshido's throne room but Corrin can't be morally compromised as a character. Outside of that? Well they might not have taken the series in directions I've liked in regards to tone and story telling, but I think they have tried and succeeded in making what they intended to make and have reaped the financial benefits for it. And I make here the opposite prediction I made in regards to Three Houses early in it's life span, when I said people would turn on this story after the initial experience wore off, I think for Engage people will mellow out a lot more towards the story as time goes on.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Jotari

[TheHBK]

Awakening and Fates definitely tried.

Awakening was kind of a FE best-of made with ... let's just say minimal talent. But that's it. It had a minimal amount of talent so that it would feel mildly competent if nothing great.

And Fates. Yeah, Fates kinda is nice-intentions-gone-awfully-wrong. But they tried. The whole idea of "let's split the three act basic storytelling layout over three different games which tell three different versions of a somewhat similar story so that the three narratives form a whole story" did fail miserably, but that was definitely a tentative.

Engage feels like it was supposed to be an anniversary title with a silly narrative to back it up (a la FE Muso 1), but somewhere along the way they decided it needed to have some super dramatic cutscenes because Fire Emblem is known for its character deaths right? (spoiler alert, it's much more complicated than that, between Casual modes and players resetting on character losses)

It's like they weren't going to try, yet decided along the way they'd try, yet wouldn't bother trying properly. As I already said, it makes no sense.

Edited February 27, 2023 by TheHBK

[Seazas]

On 2/27/2023 at 7:05 AM, TheHBK said:

Awakening and Fates definitely tried.

Awakening was kind of a FE best-of made with ... let's just say minimal talent. But that's it. It had a minimal amount of talent so that it would feel mildly competent if nothing great.

And Fates. Yeah, Fates kinda is nice-intentions-gone-awfully-wrong. But they tried. The whole idea of "let's split the three act basic storytelling layout over three different games which tell three different versions of a somewhat similar story so that the three narratives form a whole story" did fail miserably, but that was definitely a tentative.

Engage feels like it was supposed to be an anniversary title with a silly narrative to back it up (a la FE Muso 1), but somewhere along the way they decided it needed to have some super dramatic cutscenes because Fire Emblem is known for its character deaths right? (spoiler alert, it's much more complicated than that, between Casual modes and players resetting on character losses)

It's like they weren't going to try, yet decided along the way they'd try, yet wouldn't bother trying properly. As I already said, it makes no sense.

"Trying" is not good enough if you fail on every possible level like Fates did. Engage in spite of its over the top nature still has better plot beats that make more sense than Fates. Our leading character and cast were treated far better as a whole than Fates and its garbage character assassinations 24/7. Engage is easily a better story when its plot doesn't involve everyone trusting Corrin enough that they'd be absolved of any mistake and they'd flat out jump off a cliff for them.