What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[Loki Laufeyson]

Quote

   On July 23, 2017 at 8:20 AM,  ChibiToastExplosion said: 

Yeah, it's not that Murdock is so so tough on his own (but he isn't a slouch, either), it's the rest of the map + time limit. It's really the last defining chapter before cruising through the rest of the game. 1/1 no boss is really so tough unless they can also move, like Lloyd levels of FoW.

Murdock is respectable enough in that you do need a very specific item to beat him comfortably, which is more than what the majority of other bosses in the series can say. Murdock is a good benchmark for what good bosses should be, and he is remembered correctly for being a badass.

I like the character of Murdock well enough, but again, I couldn't disagree more. He's not a remotely difficult opponent. Even among immobile FE6 general bosses, earlier ones such as Leygance and one of the ones on Bartre route have far, far higher stats for the time (particularly speed), and have WTA on Armourslayers instead of WTD (Hammer has garbage hit rate even with WTA). Murdock has a tough map but he himself is honestly quite easy. And FE6 has quite a few bosses who are very nasty 1/1, even moreso than those generals. Scott comes to mind as someone who may well require obtuse tactics to beat (like attacking with a mage then rescue-drop before he can switch to his Hand Axe) since he has a monstrous crit rate and high power such that nobody except maybe Zealot can tank a crit. Henning has high stats overall, two very different weapons to watch for which can double/ORKO various people, and ludicrous evade for the time. Zephiel is basically a strictly better version of Murdock: actual res, no armour weakness, a small crit rate for low-luck PCs, and support which appears in the room as you fight him.

 

   On July 23, 2017 at 9:12 PM,  familyplayer said: 

Please don't take this rudely, but can I ask why exactly? I just want to know why you feel that way. I personally think that they're popular because, for many, those two were their first FE and characters from your first FE you usually see in a biased way. I love Ogma to death and all, but I know that I probably wouldn't love him as much if he wasn't from SD which was my first FE.

My first FE was 7 and I think most of its characters are pretty weak. Great gameplay but characters? Eh. Beyond a couple amusing bit characters like Matthew it doesn't have much IMO. I see your point, mind; nostalgia is powerful. But it certainly doesn't fully explain this situation. I mentioned Fates and I feel like Fates is relatively few people's first FE. Awakening I'll grant, was a first for many, but IMO its characters hold up very well even as someone who had played most of the series before it; in fact it's precisely because its characters are so likable that it's the big hit that it was.

If you want my specific opinions on the characters I mentioned:

-Lucina is admirably determined to change her world's shitty future. She is the female lead (female Robin possibilities notwithstanding) and avoids most of the stereotypical anime female pitfalls, and doesn't have to worry about the game having a more badass man upstage her as happened to Eirika and Micaiah (who I think are also good, don't get me wrong!). Her voice work is superb.
-Like most comic characters, Tharja either works for you or she doesn't, but she certainly worked for me. She's... creepy and zany but has solid interactions in her supports; other characters often react to her in rather hilarious ways. There are some great scenes like when she pretends to be normal and somehow comes across even worse.
-Xander is easily the best execution of a Camus-type character in the series, precisely because his loyalty is not just to his king, but his father, and literally his entire existence is built on that loyalty. In Birthright in particular he's built up as the main antagonist and that plot arc has a shocking and effective conclusion. In Conquest you get to see what his trope looks like when he's on your side, which is also fun.
-Camilla is simultaneously admirable in her strength and self-confidence (and trope-breaks what female PCs in FE are rather hard in a way even Lucina doesn't) and a messed-up headcase (on Birthright especially) who gets some solid backstory development for why she's that way. Has a great set of supports and relationships.

None of these are unpopular opinions among the fandom at large but for some reason Serenes in particular seems quite negative on all these characters to varying degrees and I feel like a lot of it is just backlash. Not that there aren't honest reasons to dislike these characters of course. And I'm not going to claim to be perfect about this; it's entirely possible that I like Roy and Ike less than I should because of backlash myself.

 

 

^my unpopular opinion is that i agree with you in full. 

 

Edited July 26, 2017 by Loki Laufeyson

[Yula]

My unpopular opinion? I hate Fire Emblem 4 with a burning passion. I honestly believe that it is a slow, exceptionally unbalanced mess of a game and that though the first generation is mildly interesting and the characters wind up suffering for their actions, the entire game is brought down by the entirety of the second act which is only successful because Julius is stupider than Seliph.

[Von Ithipathachai]

20 minutes ago, Thran Starcrod said:

My unpopular opinion? I hate Fire Emblem 4 with a burning passion. I honestly believe that it is a slow, exceptionally unbalanced mess of a game and that though the first generation is mildly interesting and the characters wind up suffering for their actions, the entire game is brought down by the entirety of the second act which is only successful because Julius is stupider than Seliph.

The thing that stands out to me about Gen 1 of Genealogy of the Holy War is how a ton of problems could've been avoided if Deirdre wasn't dumb as bricks and stayed in the damned castle like Sigurd said to do.

[Topaz Light]

Gonna be honest, I actually never found Fire Emblem as a series to be that exceptionally bad story-wise.

A lot of people here seem to act like the series' stories are always bad, but I don't necessarily think that's the case. They're rarely exceptional, sure, but I don't think that makes them actively bad.

[Etrurian emperor]

55 minutes ago, Topaz Light said:

Gonna be honest, I actually never found Fire Emblem as a series to be that exceptionally bad story-wise.

A lot of people here seem to act like the series' stories are always bad, but I don't necessarily think that's the case. They're rarely exceptional, sure, but I don't think that makes them actively bad.

Those are my thoughts exactly though I admit my standarts arent very high.

[Azz]

Walhart is a better lobster than Ryoma

I dislike the seasonal banners in Heroes

I like the laguz system (I also liked the Taguel and the Fates beasts)

Ranulf/Ike is better than Soren/Ike fite me

I wish we had more male manaketes or more non-child like manaketes (I like the child manaketes but I'm tired of just seeing them)

I like Makalov and he always tends to be my best Paladin if I use him

Edited July 26, 2017 by Azz

[familyplayer]

1 hour ago, Azz said:

Walhart is a better lobster than Ryoma

I dislike the seasonal banners in Heroes

I like the laguz system (I also liked the Taguel and the Fates beasts)

Ranulf/Ike is better than Soren/Ike fite me

I wish we had more male manaketes or more non-child like manaketes (I like the child manaketes but I'm tired of just seeing them)

I like Makalov and he always tends to be my best Paladin if I use him

I agree with most of this. But I don't think the laguz system is that unpopular.

[Azz]

4 minutes ago, familyplayer said:

I agree with most of this. But I don't think the laguz system is that unpopular.

I think it's mostly here that people dislike the laguz system, or at least from what I've seen.

[NekoKnight]

8 hours ago, Topaz Light said:

Gonna be honest, I actually never found Fire Emblem as a series to be that exceptionally bad story-wise.

A lot of people here seem to act like the series' stories are always bad, but I don't necessarily think that's the case. They're rarely exceptional, sure, but I don't think that makes them actively bad.

In general I find most FE stories passable, but I do think that the series' strength lies in character interactions over complicated plots. 

[Flee Fleet!]

11 hours ago, Von Ithipathachai said:

The thing that stands out to me about Gen 1 of Genealogy of the Holy War is how a ton of problems could've been avoided if Deirdre wasn't dumb as bricks and stayed in the damned castle like Sigurd said to do.

What's more hilarious is that even if you place all your units in front of the base castle, and then have Sigurd conquer the first castle, Deirdre will just run over them while they don't give a crap about it. 

 

Then again I don't think the devs thought of a way to avoid this, since it's the player's choice of where to place their units.

[Loki Laufeyson]

10 hours ago, Topaz Light said:

Gonna be honest, I actually never found Fire Emblem as a series to be that exceptionally bad story-wise.

A lot of people here seem to act like the series' stories are always bad, but I don't necessarily think that's the case. They're rarely exceptional, sure, but I don't think that makes them actively bad.

Yeah. Personally, i find the fixation on story in this series by fandom to be a bit much, tbh. Like, i get people want a half decent narrative, but the real draw to the series are the characters and gameplay. Everything else feels like window dressing to me. 

[Sentacotus]

On 7/25/2017 at 6:38 PM, Dark Holy Elf said:

-Lucina is admirably determined to change her world's shitty future. She is the female lead (female Robin possibilities notwithstanding) and avoids most of the stereotypical anime female pitfalls, and doesn't have to worry about the game having a more badass man upstage her as happened to Eirika and Micaiah (who I think are also good, don't get me wrong!). Her voice work is superb.
-Like most comic characters, Tharja either works for you or she doesn't, but she certainly worked for me. She's... creepy and zany but has solid interactions in her supports; other characters often react to her in rather hilarious ways. There are some great scenes like when she pretends to be normal and somehow comes across even worse.
-Xander is easily the best execution of a Camus-type character in the series, precisely because his loyalty is not just to his king, but his father, and literally his entire existence is built on that loyalty. In Birthright in particular he's built up as the main antagonist and that plot arc has a shocking and effective conclusion. In Conquest you get to see what his trope looks like when he's on your side, which is also fun.
-Camilla is simultaneously admirable in her strength and self-confidence (and trope-breaks what female PCs in FE are rather hard in a way even Lucina doesn't) and a messed-up headcase (on Birthright especially) who gets some solid backstory development for why she's that way. Has a great set of supports and relationships.

None of these are unpopular opinions among the fandom at large but for some reason Serenes in particular seems quite negative on all these characters to varying degrees and I feel like a lot of it is just backlash. Not that there aren't honest reasons to dislike these characters of course. And I'm not going to claim to be perfect about this; it's entirely possible that I like Roy and Ike less than I should because of backlash myself.

 

On 7/25/2017 at 10:39 PM, Loki Laufeyson said:

 

^my unpopular opinion is that i agree with you in full. 

 

You know what I agree for the most part as well Lucina is probably my favorite female FE character by far just always digged the time traveling protag kinda my thing.  Xander is pretty awesome as well pretty much the spitting image of what I imagine an FE Knight should be.  Don't really care too much about Camilla one way or the other but found Tharja humorous minus the child abuse stuff with Noire (though I think part of it was explained as side effects from the pendant she gave her to make her more able to fight the Risen).

[Topaz Light]

On 7/26/2017 at 8:08 AM, NekoKnight said:

In general I find most FE stories passable, but I do think that the series' strength lies in character interactions over complicated plots. 

I definitely agree with this; I think the charm of Fire Emblem's writing lies more in the characters and their individual stories and personalities than in the overarching plots of the games.

Although, it is important to remember that "complicated" is not synonymous with "good" when discussing plots; you can have a plot that's simple, but very solid and effective, or a plot that's complicated, but handles its complexity ineptly and ends up just being a big mess more than anything else. 

On 7/26/2017 at 10:31 AM, Loki Laufeyson said:

Yeah. Personally, i find the fixation on story in this series by fandom to be a bit much, tbh. Like, i get people want a half decent narrative, but the real draw to the series are the characters and gameplay. Everything else feels like window dressing to me. 

Honestly I think most of the series' stories are decent, at least in the sense of being perfectly serviceable, but I do agree that the characters and gameplay are the main draw.

[Sushi God]

I think Mathilda looks average and isn't particularly super attractive.

Rip me to shreds.

[Loki Laufeyson]

6 hours ago, Topaz Light said:I definitely agree with this; I think the charm of Fire Emblem's writing lies more in the characters and their individual stories and personalities than in the overarching plots of the games.

Although, it is important to remember that "complicated" is not synonymous with "good" when discussing plots; you can have a plot that's simple, but very solid and effective, or a plot that's complicated, but handles its complexity ineptly and ends up just being a big mess more than anything else. 

Honestly I think most of the series' stories are decent, at least in the sense of being perfectly serviceable, but I do agree that the characters and gameplay are the main draw.

Oh i hear ya. Like even Birthright is serviceable. FE reuses themes in its narratives, like dragon gods, certain political squabbles, genocide, etc. So you kinda know what to expect. Honestly, i find Sacred Stones to have one of the most solid plots. Tellius has the best world building. But Awakening and Fates have rather mediocre to bad stories, but really memorable and fun characters, and some amazing gameplay. 

[Harvey]

I can never for the life of me understand why people complain about Echoes/Gaiden bland map design. The maps for the most part are pretty short which means that there will be several sections per chapter. That is equivalent to your typical 25 chapter plot.

And from what I can tell, this is exactly what Final Fantasy Tactics did. Having four chapters(less than one chapter compared to Gaiden) and having several maps that are bland and short as hell and a few gimmicky ones at that which is exactly what Gaiden has.

 

[familyplayer]

3 hours ago, Harvey said:

I can never for the life of me understand why people complain about Echoes/Gaiden bland map design. The maps for the most part are pretty short which means that there will be several sections per chapter. That is equivalent to your typical 25 chapter plot.

And from what I can tell, this is exactly what Final Fantasy Tactics did. Having four chapters(less than one chapter compared to Gaiden) and having several maps that are bland and short as hell and a few gimmicky ones at that which is exactly what Gaiden has.

 

Because we have seen how fun good map designs can be. I think some maps are well designed, but there are several that are copy and paste as well as ones that are literally just fields of nothing, sometimes with a bridge. I don't think the less than stellar design ruined the game, but it does hurt replay value some. 

[Armagon]

4 hours ago, Harvey said:

I can never for the life of me understand why people complain about Echoes/Gaiden bland map design.

Because most of the maps are bland. Some are pretty nice such as Rigel Castle and the Sluice Gate but other are just

1 hour ago, familyplayer said:

copy and paste as well as ones that are literally just fields of nothing, sometimes with a bridge.

Then there's also pretty bad maps such as Wolff's Fort and that one forest in Alm's route that was just filled with Arcanists.

That being said, i don't think Echoes has the worst map design. That goes to Genealogy of the Holy War, where it takes forever to get from point A to point B, how it's borderline impossible to save the villages completely intact, and how half the time, the map is just empty with no enemies. Also the fact that anyone who isn't on a mount just gets left behind because the Rescue command didn't exist yet. The worst map in the entire series has to be Genealogy Ch.7 for having a huge desert filled with Fenrir-casting Druids. And in that game, Fenrir was a 3-10 range spell. Genealogy Ch.2 and 4 are close contenders for being the worst because of the bullshit backtracking you have to do.

Like, i get that the huge maps relate to the narrative of the game, but Genealogy's abysmal gameplay just ruins the entire thing for me.(and i'm saying this as someone who doesn't care about the gameplay vs story debate).

[This Is A Whatever]

Lute is the worst Mage ever in all of the Fire Emblem Series.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm screwed if ObsidianWasp ever reads my message.

[familyplayer]

7 hours ago, Armagon said:

Because most of the maps are bland. Some are pretty nice such as Rigel Castle and the Sluice Gate but other are just

Then there's also pretty bad maps such as Wolff's Fort and that one forest in Alm's route that was just filled with Arcanists.

That being said, i don't think Echoes has the worst map design. That goes to Genealogy of the Holy War, where it takes forever to get from point A to point B, how it's borderline impossible to save the villages completely intact, and how half the time, the map is just empty with no enemies. Also the fact that anyone who isn't on a mount just gets left behind because the Rescue command didn't exist yet. The worst map in the entire series has to be Genealogy Ch.7 for having a huge desert filled with Fenrir-casting Druids. And in that game, Fenrir was a 3-10 range spell. Genealogy Ch.2 and 4 are close contenders for being the worst because of the bullshit backtracking you have to do.

Like, i get that the huge maps relate to the narrative of the game, but Genealogy's abysmal gameplay just ruins the entire thing for me.(and i'm saying this as someone who doesn't care about the gameplay vs story debate).

It's definitely something I hope, if it gets one, a remake could fix. It would make the game 100X better. They could just do as the Fe7 rom hack remake of it is doing and just make smaller maps with the same general designs so it can still keep the aspect of looking like the world map, an aspect that I still love from FE4. 

[Armagon]

2 minutes ago, familyplayer said:

It's definitely something I hope, if it gets one, a remake could fix. It would make the game 100X better. They could just do as the Fe7 rom hack remake of it is doing and just make smaller maps with the same general designs so it can still keep the aspect of looking like the world map, an aspect that I still love from FE4. 

I mean, FE7 Ch.25 Hector's Tale kinda does that already.

The map keeps the FE4-style objective while also not making the map unnecessarily huge. This is what an FE4 remake should be like.

[Slumber]

4 minutes ago, Armagon said:

I mean, FE7 Ch.25 Hector's Tale kinda does that already.

The map keeps the FE4-style objective while also not making the map unnecessarily huge. This is what an FE4 remake should be like.

It'd also make nerfing mounted units(Something that really needs to happen) a bit easier to swallow if the maps were shrunk like, 25%.

Additionally, I think it'd be neat if each time you went to capture a castle, there was a mini-map that you had to fight through before making it to the throne and seizing it. It'd make FE4 more dynamic, and again, hopefully give more use to infantry units.

Edited July 29, 2017 by Slumber

[X-Naut]

The Mercenary/Myrmidon split created two classes that are largely superfluous, Kaga had the right idea with just one sword infantry unit.

[Nobody]

One that I just remembered: I sort of like fog of war as long as it's not FE5/12 style. Thieves + Torch gives you enough visible range, and having a unit that controls what you can see makes it fun imo. I mean, i obviously wouldn't want that many of those chapters, but i miss having a couple of them each game.

18 minutes ago, X-Naut said:

The Mercenary/Myrmidon split created two classes that are largely superfluous, Kaga had the right idea with just one sword infantry unit.

I agree, but with the exception of fates, since the hoshidan/nohrian mercenary/myrmidon split was something that i liked. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by Nobody

[Slumber]

3 hours ago, X-Naut said:

The Mercenary/Myrmidon split created two classes that are largely superfluous, Kaga had the right idea with just one sword infantry unit.

Kaga created the split.

Granted, it worked differently in FE5 than any other incarnation, but FE5 was the first time we saw a split in the Merc/Myrm classline.