What do you think about FE Stories in general?

[Harvey]

Topic says it all. What do you overall think about the stories for the Fire Emblem in general? You think its too cliche, follows too many troupes or no matter how its done, makes the whole story forgettable.

I'll start by saying that Fire Emblem depending on which game you play ranges from either too cliche or good but could be better. FE1's main problem was that there weren't much of cutscenes or any backstories for each unit you get in the game and the only one who has such a thing is Camus.

The thing that I'm noticing in FE is that the stories instead of revolving around with the actual plot of the games revolves around with the characters most of the time. Eliwood has to rescue his dad so the plot goes through a whole lot on that aspect and little about other things and such.

FE also doesn't get into much about politics and human resources. Having people talk about politics in the FE world seems to be more realistic rather than just the plot ignoring all this and just go straightforward. 

So what do you guys think about the stories within FE? Keep in mind that I haven't played FE8,9,10 and 11 and I've yet to beat 12.

 

[Icelerate]

There needs to be a more political nature in FE games. A dragon, god or dark lord corrupting the emperor who then wages an insane war is asinine. Also, the battles should be well-written as well. Fire Emblem writers should take heed of this advice. 

Though when you compare FE stories to Zelda, FE is leagues above IMO. 

[Armagon]

Fire Emblem stories aren't super amazing. Instead, it's the characters that make these stories memorable to me. Even Fates, with it's terrible story, is still memorable to me because i found most of the characters likable. You can have the most amazing story in the world, if you don't give me a reason to care about your characters, i'm not even gonna bother. Likewise, you can have the worst story ever but if you give me a reason to care about your characters, i'll give it some of my time.

[NekoKnight]

I don't think any Fire Emblem story has been a masterpiece but sometimes they excel in one particular area (world building in Tellius, villain writing in Sacred Stones). A lot of the stories have generic story premises and rely more on character moments (Blazing Sword was full of these) rather than an amazing central plot. Other games try to create deeper themes or a grander scale but end up tripping over themselves (aspects of Radiant Dawn, SoV and all of Fates). 

I do think they should keep trying and not settle for "serviceable". Empty stories like Shadow Dragon and Revelation are painful to play, but complex and poorly considered stories are just as bad. What they really need, I feel, is some feedback on their writing decisions. It baffles me some of the things in the latest game could have escaped quality control.

Personally, I'd like to see more politics and human based conflicts. Thinking about human motivations and how people react to events is more intriguing than "Those wacky dragons are at it again".

[Etrurian emperor]

I think that overall Fire emblem has a fairly solid set of stories. Not masterpieces but generally serviceable with most characters having enough charm to increase the value of the stories. I never really understood the sentiment that Fire emblem ''never'' had good stories. 

Individually there are games that are obviously stronger then others. When one of the stories has problems its generally because they move to much towards two extreme ends of the spectrum.

Either those games have stories where none of the writers put in any effort and nothing happens like in Shadow dragon and Birthright or the stories are so ambitious they end up being damaged by it like Radiant dawn and Conquest.

It tends to be the games that stick to an established formula while still putting in the effort to come up with interesting scenarios like POR or blazing sword that end up being the best in my opinion. 

[Thane]

25 minutes ago, NekoKnight said:

I don't think any Fire Emblem story has been a masterpiece but sometimes they excel in one particular area (world building in Tellius, villain writing in Sacred Stones). A lot of the stories have generic story premises and rely more on character moments (Blazing Sword was full of these) rather than an amazing central plot. Other games try to create deeper themes or a grander scale but end up tripping over themselves (aspects of Radiant Dawn, SoV and all of Fates). 

I do think they should keep trying and not settle for "serviceable". Empty stories like Shadow Dragon and Revelation are painful to play, but complex and poorly considered stories are just as bad. What they really need, I feel, is some feedback on their writing decisions. It baffles me some of the things in the latest game could have escaped quality control.

Personally, I'd like to see more politics and human based conflicts. Thinking about human motivations and how people react to events is more intriguing than "Those wacky dragons are at it again".

These are effectively my thoughts as well. Fire Emblem's stories have their moments but all too rarely reach the lofty heights of "above average". You can point at specific story flaws in any Fire Emblem game and make fun of them, but what I think is more pressing is how the structure of the series has remained so rigid all this time. The human elements are rarely the main contributing factor behind the overarching conflicts, and the stories usually end with the protagonists ushering in some new golden age after defeating the dragon of the week; it's a very simple plot, and the lack of deviations from it is one of my main problems with the series as a whole. I believe Fire Emblem could lend itself to telling great and diverse stories without ever losing its core identity, so seeing the same premise repeated over and over again with a fresh coat of paint is infuriating.

Like many here, I believe the characters carry most of these games in terms of writing, and many of them are great. However, I believe firmly that you can have the best of both worlds and have an appealing cast and an intriguing story. 

[Book Bro]

I think in general FE stories are good, with Jugdral and Tellius being the closest to outstanding. Some are pretty standard and most have certain flaws, but overall they're all told competently and are enjoyable.

There's definitely room for improvement though. They should take more risks. Less dragons and cults, a change of the usual setting, more complex themes, more mature writing in the sense of telling stories that are gray and not plainly black and white. 

[Slumber]

Generally just average. 

Some stories are downright awful(Sacred Stones, Awakening, Fates). 

Some are very average(The Archanea games+Gaiden/SoV, Elibe). 

Some try to do something incredibly grand, but falter(Genealogy and Radiant Dawn). 

The two I generally regard as the best/my favorite overall are PoR and Thracia. Neither have amazing overarching stories, but PoR places more emphasis on broader themes that can resonate with people today without overstepping anything(Go figure, "racism and classism are bad" are still hot button issues). Thracia is probably the most scaled back and protagonist-centric FE, which does a lot to make it stand out. There's no crazy dragon or this evil emperor threatening to control the continent/wipe out humanity. 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Slumber

[Jotari]

I'm in the camp that thinks Jugdral and Tellius are pretty great. I can very easily and readily acknowledge and point out their flaws  but I really appreciate trying to do something different and special over playing it safe and secure. To put it crassly, Jugdral had balls and I really respect that. It wasn't afraid to be dark, not edgy dark but proper shit happens and we need to deal with it dark. While Tellius (though more specifically Radiant Dawn) was grand. They really went for something big and epic without just ripping off Lord of the Rings or something similar.

As far as the other stories go, Shadow Dragon manages to really succeed at simple elegance in story telling. Mystery of the Emblem was just sequel for sequel's sake (though it solidifed the mythology and backstory well which was woefully lacking in it's predecessor to my knowledge). Gaiden nicely subverted a few things but I feel it's intent kind of got muddled in Shadows of Valentia. Sword of Seals I like mainly for Zephiel and Roy but overall it was quite lacking. Tried to emulate the first game while also trying to be something more grounded and the half way between didn't really succeed. Binding Blade is a nice departure from the series standard of grand but it was kind of all over the place and wasn't really sure what story it was trying to tell. Much as I hate Lyn mode for having to play through it an unfortunate amount of times, it was actually pretty neat in how self contained and straight forward it is. Sacred Stones was pretty meh for me. Lyon was good but he's actually barely in it and the pacing just sucked by splitting the story into two playthroughs. Awakening I really liked some of the ideas presented but it was clear they didn't actually care about their own story and just wanted to make it as appealing as possible to wide audience (and to their credit they succeeded). Fates I had pretty low expectations of after Awakening so I just didn't really care about it's story to begin with. Splitting it into three made several fractured and incomplete stories that really fall apart logically when taken as stand alones and as a whole. 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Jotari

[Ae†her]

Pre-Fates stories have generally been fairly decent for video game stories. It's hard to fit a really interesting story, that places complete emphasis on plot when you have to work to develop good gameplay experience as well, and build up constant battles. I think Genealogy got it the most right, except when they were planning on doing a second generation sort of thing, but other than that love affairs, having a protagonist not being king of the world already or at the end, and having more interesting set of characters each wither their own role and meaning in the game (Ishtar, Olwen, Reinhardt...etc.) was pretty good. However, it's not okay that after so many games Fire Emblem a gaming series that basis it's combat and gameplay largely on story to not have a really good story, that is well written, avoids Deus ex Machinas, and 2-dmensional characters. IS should put the effort in to develop an FE game with an amazing story that matches the same quality of gameplay experience, at least for once.

[Skyla]

Actually, Radiant Dawn part 1 and 2 is basically a political struggle. 

As far as Fe stories goes, I find the Tellius stories to be the most intriguing. I love all the detail given in the narrative of the game, each character (besides a few) feel so real and their struggle is so apparent, making a simple story-line feel so real and complex.

Thracia storyline is also quite intresting emphasizing on Lief and Finn's struggles makes it quite tragic and I found myself enjoying it a lot.

The rest are quite basic (Sov, Archanea and Ebile)

I liked Birthrights story line, it was basic but at least it was a story line. Conquest just pissed me off.

Awakening just bored me to death, by the time I reached the third act I just ended up skipping the entire narrative. 

Haven't played Geneolgy so can't say anything about that. Please IS remake Geneolgy already!

Edited November 24, 2017 by Skylorella Con

[Lau]

Fire Emblem's stories always have a lot of potential - that potential, unfortunately, is almost never tapped into. Fates is the obvious example here. It could've been absolutely fantastic, but it just wasn't to be.

In terms of my personal favourite story, I'll have to give it to PoR. RD started out great, but kinda just slumped due to so many parties joining up. Echoes and SD were so simple yet so good, so they're definitely up there. SD in particular feels like you're reading a history book, it's a nice feeling. NMotE was okay...Kris ruined it, and it pales in comparison to SD.

Awakening had a decent story, the first part was nicely executed, and the build up to Gangrel and Emmeryn's sacrifice was really nice. The Valm arc left a lot to be desired, but the Grima arc was...actually really good. I liked how Robin started questioning himself, and the emphasis on bonds made my tropey heart soar. The Future Past is where Awakening truly shone, though.

Blazing Blade was simple and enjoyable. Sacred Stones was a mess and played out like a children's book, especially with how it was worded: "Eirika was confused." "Eirika did this." Though, the mini Joshua arc was interesting.

Never played Binding Blade, Genealogy or Thracia.

[Zkitty8]

I think the stories are okay. They're usually very simple, but that works for me because I care more about the gameplay and characters, and I think those are good. I'd still love to see the stories improve and take on more complex themes.

Genealogy of the Holy War's story stood out to me because of that plot twist and how it focuses on the politics of the war. It probably has my favorite story out of the games I've played. (I haven't played the Tellius games and I'm only a few chapters into Thracia 776 so I don't know much about their stories.)

[Florete]

Fire Emblem stories in most cases are at least good enough to keep me interested. Even though I don't consider Sacred Stones and Awakening to have great stories, I still found them good enough to care about what happened next. Shadow Dragon and Binding Blade are the only ones where I couldn't find myself able to care, and then there's Fates, which avoids being boring like the previous two but is instead just awful. On the other hand, Radiant Dawn is the one where I actually was so engrossed in the story I occasionally wanted to skip the gameplay.

[Noni]

Even though the overall Quality is maybe not the greatest Thing ever, FE-Stories had(for the most Time) always a combination out of exactly the Clichees, that cater to my Preferences, so I was always quite happy.

[edgelordweeaboo]

too cliche for a lot of the games like you said. Jugdral stories were really good though.