Do you wish Awakening treated Death more seriously? (Spoilers)

[UnknownUber]

I mean the story deaths are not even deaths...

Emm dying and "Don't Speak Her Name" Plays in the background, it's sad right? But no she comes back 2 years later fine but her memories are lost.

Basilio dying? No they just bought him back...

Even in Classic Mode when Units actually die I feel that it plays out in a light tone.

In games like Valkyria Chronicles for example, death is actually pretty sad and when a unit dies they get a tearful death quote and you can visit them in a war graveyard, it's just sad and that IMO is how death should be treated in a SRPG.

But in Awakening, One death quote with generic music and the unit is just never seen again...

Anyone else feel the same way?

[Czar_Yoshi]

Yes. But please don't start an internet backdraft.

[Roivann]

Probably should have. It didn't. Oh well.

[Subsonic]

I mean the story deaths are not even deaths...

Emm dying and "Don't Speak Her Name" Plays in the background, it's sad right? But no she comes back 2 years later fine but her memories are lost.

Basilio dying? No they just bought him back...

Even in Classic Mode when Units actually die I feel that it plays out in a light tone.

In games like Valkyria Chronicles for example, death is actually pretty sad and when a unit dies they get a tearful death quote and you can visit them in a war graveyard, it's just sad and that IMO is how death should be treated in a SRPG.

But in Awakening, One death quote with generic music and the unit is just never seen again...

Anyone else feel the same way?

1. Kind of. Didn't like the return of Emmryn. Honestly. I like to think that she came from another time line/outrealm. (But that's just wishful thinking.)

2. It's hard for Fire Emblem to treat death really seriously unless it's a lord character. It's mostly because of the gigantic cast of characters players have to work with. Unless you build an emotional attachment to the unit (who are mainly developed by support conversations) or just filled with rage, than we kind of feel nothing about their deaths. (Plus we can reset the game when people die so...)

Edited September 18, 2014 by Subsonic

[HF Makalov Fanboy Kai]

it would've made me respect the story more at the least.

[Skynstein]

Spotpass characters aren't canon. For me, Emmeryn and Gangrel stay dead and are just bonus content.

[bookofholsety]

axe the spotpass sidequests and it'd be okay. of all fe13's issues, basilio surviving is fairly acceptable. emmeryn et al, not so much

[Sifer]

I understand. In battle many characters are joking about killing the enemy even when it is out of character. For example, Lissa gets a cut in she goes "What a loser" as she runs and brings down the hammer on her enemies. These kind of thing just ruins the grim tone that was set by the children running from their apocalyptic future and one they are trying to prevent in this timeline. Though, as I understand this is because the translators made it more lighthearted and funny :/ and this somewhat ruined the tone and the game for me.

Even in XCOM, I care more about the deaths of those silent soldiers than the Fire Emblem characters who talk with each other, since the silent soldiers in XCOM remain dead and their stories of triumph and near misses makes me sad they could not see another day. While the Fire Emblem characters get a 2^nd chance because of you know, restarts when characters die. Thus reducing deaths impact for me in Fire Emblem. Then there is casual setting but that is another story...

[spoiler=Gone, but never forgotten]

Edited September 18, 2014 by Sifer

[Skynstein]

Even in XCOM, I care more about the deaths of those silent soldiers than the Fire Emblem characters who talk with each other, since the silent soldiers in XCOM remain dead and their stories of triumph and near misses makes me sad they could not see another day. While the Fire Emblem characters get a 2^nd chance because of you know, restarts when characters die. Thus reducing deaths impact for me in Fire Emblem. Then there is casual setting but that is another story...

You can save scum in XCOM too. At least in the original you could. The original did NOT have Ironman mode. Ironman mode is a community thing that the developers of the remake included in the game. OpenXcom has Ironman mode, however.

And XCOM is sorta different because the soldiers are generic but you can name them whatever you want.

[Sifer]

You can save scum in XCOM too. At least in the original you could. The original did NOT have Ironman mode. Ironman mode is a community thing that the developers of the remake included in the game. OpenXcom has Ironman mode, however.

And XCOM is sorta different because the soldiers are generic but you can name them whatever you want.

You can, but I choose not to. In XCOM units are replaceable, since you can just call in more and use the rookies during the mission and one death doesn't result in a screeching halt for the story. But you can't replace unique Fire emblem characters and if you keep them dead you are going to be in a tight spot later on through recruitment and manpower, an example is if your lord dies do you restart the chapter or restart the game. The replaceable nature of XCOM soldiers makes their deaths more heartbreaking it seems, knowing they don't get a second chance at life than the FE crew.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Sifer

[metalsnowman3]

You can, but I choose not to. In XCOM units are replaceable, since you can just call in more and use the rookies during the mission and one death doesn't result in a screeching halt for the story. But you can't replace unique Fire emblem characters and if you keep them dead you are going to be in a tight spot later on through recruitment and manpower, an example is if your lord dies do you restart the chapter or restart the game. The replaceable nature of XCOM soldiers makes their deaths more heartbreaking it seems, knowing they don't get a second chance at life than the FE crew.

you can ironman fe by just starting the game over from the beginning if a lord dies.

I mean the story deaths are not even deaths...

Emm dying and "Don't Speak Her Name" Plays in the background, it's sad right? But no she comes back 2 years later fine but her memories are lost.

Basilio dying? No they just bought him back...

Even in Classic Mode when Units actually die I feel that it plays out in a light tone.

In games like Valkyria Chronicles for example, death is actually pretty sad and when a unit dies they get a tearful death quote and you can visit them in a war graveyard, it's just sad and that IMO is how death should be treated in a SRPG.

But in Awakening, One death quote with generic music and the unit is just never seen again...

Anyone else feel the same way?

Isn't that the case in like all the FEs, not awakening in particular. They would die, have a one liner, and then you would see them in the epilogue and it would just say Killed in Action or whatever in most FEs IIRC

If you are looking for games that treat death realistically, FE in general is not the franchise for you. I mean you slaughter like countries whole army. I don't think there are many RPGs that treat death that well seeing as you kill things to gain levels.

[Czar_Yoshi]

The replaceable nature of XCOM soldiers makes their deaths more heartbreaking it seems, knowing they don't get a second chance at life than the FE crew.

Generics having a stronger attachment to the player than uniques? Seems a little YMMV to me.

To each his own, I guess.

[BrightBow]

Let's put it this way, I had to turn the voices silent early on because I simply couldn't stomach the battle scenes otherwise. It's not even the kind of trashtalk of games like the Tales series or something. It's pur supposed heroes litterally indulging the killing of their opponents. And they don't sound like soldiers in a live and death battle but of a bunch of kids playing Counter Strike. So characters come across as sadistic psychopaths.

And even if the tone wasn't different from Tales, it still wouldn't work because Tales leaves the fate of defeated enemies ambigious. In Tales people don't die in combat. They are only dead if a cutscene confirms it. And defeated allies are merely unconscious.

But in Fire Emblem, there is the clear implication that people whose HP reaches 0 are really dead. So it's the entire opposite of the Tales series: People are dead until a cutscene confirms the opposite. It puts every battle in a different context.

Not to mention that it comes across as even worse when you combine it with the massacre in chapter 14 and the neglegation of the Valm and Plegian people. At that point, the battle quotes can no longer be shrugged off as simply an unfortunate design decision and instead appear as another symptom of the game's overall messed up attitute. A small part of a consistent theme.

It's the main reason I consider this game nothing short of a betrayal and mockery of everything that Fire Emblem stands for.

Fire Emblem has during it's entire existance challenged the idea that enemy soldiers should be seen like a bunch of Goombas waiting to be stomped. The series was never anti-war but it advocated awareness.

To be aware of the price that comes with a war. To think wisely about what you want to archieve with it because you are inevitable going to kill good and innocennt people. To take war seriously.

In that regard it was always very mature. Also preachy, but you have to keep in mind that it is usually preachy about the subject of thoughtfulness and not about the subject off what we actually should think.

Like, FE4 chapter 10 presents Arvis, the guy who is responsible for the death of the entire first generation, as a broken old shell of a man whose ambitions were crushed and corrupted and who spends his existance in regret and desperatly tries to undue some of the damage that were set in motion by his actions. But the game never tells us that we should feel sorry for him.

It merely presents things as they are and challenges our initial assumptions about the guy and our desire to get back on him for what he did in ch.5. Maybe it makes us think differently about him and we wish that we didn't have to kill him... Or maybe we enjoy his well-deseved misery and look forward to finish him off for good. The game doesn't pass judgement on either, it just asks us to think about it. Not just about Arvis but also about the purpose of the entire war. Is this war about revenge or to create a better tomorrow?

But all that Awakening does is to present war and killing as a fun social event.

Edited September 18, 2014 by BrightBow

[Airship Canon]

Spotpass are fine, and one of 'em is undead as-is [another's a timetraveler/"2nd gen unit" and is pretty important that he is, and a third is by all means a "sequel hook".]

What isn't fine is the fact that half the damn cast CAN'T die. The story's in such a place that the actual second gen of the playables does not matter whatsoever. Yet the mothers have to survive. >_>; (The fathers can die which negates the existence of the unplayable/baby 2nd gen as is too boot)

The could've thrown a "Chrom: "I'm sorry [X] but your mother was killed in battle." in there.

[Etria]

Yes and No.

The protagonists have plot protection. It doesn't really matter if they die because they come back when (or rather if) you reset the chapter. So I don't care too much about their death quotes (only if they're telling about the character or emotionally gutting because I'm maso like that.

But, goddamn, could this game not treat the enemy soldiers like dirt? They are still normal people and not in any way different than the protagonists. They follow their leader, probably just want to protect their country (or maybe don't even have a choice in the matter) and the protagonists gleefully slaughter them. I mean...

Stahl (Critical): I love this part!

Kellam (Critical): They gotta notice this! / It's my big moment!

And others...

So, I totally agree with Bright Bow. Awakening treats the enemies horrendously.

[Dragoncat]

I can understand the jokey critical hit quotes with risen. But yeah...with living enemy soldiers it does seem kinda mean.

I agree that Emmeryn and Gangrel shouldve stayed dead, I don't see their paralogues as canon...

[NinjaMonkey]

Spotpass characters aren't canon.

I'm pretty sure the folks at IS would disagree with you.

And them >>> you.

Also, I don't care that I'm slaughtering thousands of of enemy units, since they aren't real people.

Edited September 18, 2014 by NinjaMonkey

[Roivann]

I don't care that I'm slaughtering thousands of of enemy units, since they aren't real people.

True, but they're still just as real as the playable characters. So our heroes shouting a disconcertingly large array puns at their opponents (whom, in the context of the game world, are very much real) is the sort of tonal inconsistency that people are upset about, especially in a game such as this one, where the topic of death flip-flops from being a crushing reality of war to being the punchline of a joke between conversations. Edited September 18, 2014 by Rollertoaster

[Etria]

Also, I don't care that I'm slaughtering thousands of of enemy units, since they aren't real people.

They are real people to the characters. You're heroes are gleefully killing other people? Yeah, they're assholes and not particularly hero-like. And considering that we're supposed to cheer them on, I find it quite disgusting that they celebrate killing this much.

Also, since they're not real people, we're never supposed to feel for fictional characters? We should never be sorry when something bad happens to them, because they're not real? And no, I am not too invested in this. Believe me, I'm not putting any effort in thinking about this. This is quite plainly in the text.

[shadowofchaos]

I understand. In battle many characters are joking about killing the enemy even when it is out of character. For example, Lissa gets a cut in she goes "What a loser" as she runs and brings down the hammer on her enemies.

This was an attempt to make her more tomboy in the English version and thereby less generic princess. Just clarifying. Edited September 18, 2014 by shadowofchaos

[Czar_Yoshi]

Also, I don't care that I'm slaughtering thousands of of enemy units, since they aren't real people.

I suppose I'm not supposed to care one bit when Denethor sends Faramir and his regiment to retake Osgilliath in The Lord of the Rings either, because they're fictional too, right?

Caring about fictional characters is a fundamental requirement for fiction to work. They can't and shouldn't be blown off lightly, and when the author does so, it can either mean (depending on the level of self-awareness present) that they're delivering some scathing social critique, or a poor writer. So do you really not care about them because they're fictional? Or because the devs don't and want you to feel the same?

Edited September 18, 2014 by Czar_Yoshi

[Ϲharlie]

I suppose I'm not supposed to care one bit when Denethor sends Faramir and his regiment to retake Osgilliath in The Lord of the Rings either, because they're fictional too, right?

Comparing Faramir to generic enemy units seems more than a little off kilter to me. If anything, Faramir would be more comparable to a friendly NPC like Phila. It would be more apt to compare generic enemy units to the various orcs and trolls, and I doubt Tolkien was particularly concerned if readers felt a pang of sympathy for those creatures. What's more, Gimli and Legolas compete with each other by keeping track of how many enemies they have killed. How is that any better than the irreverent behavior the characters in Awakening display when they kill their enemies?

[NinjaMonkey]

I suppose I'm not supposed to care one bit when Denethor sends Faramir and his regiment to retake Osgilliath in The Lord of the Rings either, because they're fictional too, right?

Whether you choose to care or not is up to you, not me. I can't decide for you.

Caring about fictional characters is a fundamental requirement for fiction to work. They can't and shouldn't be blown off lightly, and when the author does so, it can either mean (depending on the level of self-awareness present) that they're delivering some scathing social critique, or a poor writer.

Most of the enemies you fight don't even have a name, let alone a personality or backstory. So why should I care about some nameless enemy Bandit, who shares his model with countless others, and tries to kill my units for no other reason besides he's on team red and my units are on team blue?

Furthermore, the CPU controlled units will not show any mercy to my units, so why should I show them any mercy (especially since they drop EXP on their defeat)?

Edited September 18, 2014 by NinjaMonkey

[Roflolxp54]

In essence, it doesn't matter regardless since there is the lovely soft-reset. As for Emmeryn, Gangrel and Walhart, they all can be ignored.

[Ϲharlie]

I would say that Emmeryn and company are essentially trial map characters like Zephiel and Lyon. The only difference is that the Awakening characters are given an actual story reason for being there, unlike the previous trial map characters.