What sort of Fire emblem game would you like Three Houses to be?

[nhaer042]

I'm okay with an Avatar. I'd prefer an original main character but it isn't a deal breaker.

I like romantic supports as much as the next guy but no more children please. That bit has been played out enough.

Never cared for FE plots. None really stick with me. So long as the core gameplay and supports aren't bad, I'm happy.

[Quiyonce]

Avatars:

I hit the first option, cause I'm not sure about the wording of the middle option. I don't think pandering/being the main character is the problem with Avatars as much as the character/story being poorly written. I think there were some aspects of Corrin that had great potential to make an interesting character but Fates had such a jumbled narrative that all their uniqueness got muddled. I'm quite fond of FE Avatars as they add on to the replay value but I do think it'd be a nice change of pace if IS did something different with Byleth, like make them more of a background unit or even allowed them to die to continue the story. Whatever their contribution to the story, it just needs to be written well.

 

Marriage and Children:

I think these should be separated. I think children need to serve an actual story-progressing purpose to be included; otherwise they're too easy to just shoehorn in. Romance, on the other hand, I think always has a place in FE, as different support chains can also add to replay value. I also don't think it's strange to marry in the middle of a war. When any moment could easily be your last, why wait to promise yourself to someone you hold dear? Bringing up a child when either parent could fall is a different story though.

I do hope for an end of Avatarsexuals though. Characters that have no support use besides marrying/birthing the child of the player unit is just a waste of a character imo.

 

Gameplay or Story:

Both. But also consider, Characters. While gameplay and story are both important. To me, neither really adds up to much without engaging characters to draw me in. Even though I'm not having the greatest time playing Echoes (it's a beautiful game, just not that exciting), I still plan to eventually continue it because I fell in love with the characters, their designs and voices. While I don't recommend sacrificing gameplay or story, I think strong characters can help players overlook aspects of the former two that are lacking.

 

Hope this was helpful and good luck making your game!

Edited October 29, 2018 by Quiyonce

[YingofDarkness]

1) I choose the third option because the only Avatar character I've liked from them is Robin so I'm not holding out much hope that they would do it well in Three Houses. Also, I forgot that an Avatar character had basically been confirmed by Nintendo at this point. If I could take that vote back I'd switch it to the second one. Either give us dialogue choices or give them a small bit of personality. Even without that though I'd still be fine with it so long as every single playable character isn't falling all over themselves to mention how perfect we are and how we can do no wrong...

2) I picked the third option just because I don't want any child units to return. Although I actually wouldn't mind if some endings ended up in marriage but only if it makes sense. I actually liked how some of the Fates couples ended with them wanting to get to know each other better, and then the ending mentioned the marriage.

3) Both are important, but I choose story because that is the one I care about most. Unless the game in painful to play I will do my best to finish it if the story is good. Specifically the characters though.

[Sidereal Wraith]

Personally, I’d like this Fire Emblem to be more akin to Shadow of Valentia rather then Awakening or Fates. In my opinion of the 3DS trilogy SoV was the only one that tonally felt like a traditional FE game.

[AsherCrane]

1. I chose the third option, because I haven't particularly liked most of the avatars so far. Most of them have felt fairly bland to me, and the supports where they get more deep as characters only make them feel less like Avatars. I'd be more for a character where the personality is completely separate from any concept of being an avatar, and we just get the ability to choose starting class and such. Which I suppose could maybe be seen as an avatar still, but eh. 

 

2. I don't particularly want this, because the mostly seem a lot less connected to the story. If you took out all the kids in Awakening bar Lucina, it doesn't really feel like anybody would miss them or much would change. Obviously it's supposed to feel like that, since their parents can be basically anyone, but it still sort of makes them feel disconnected, and a bit pointless. With regards to marriage, a lot of them in both Awakening and Fates felt really forced owing to a need for marriage with every person of the opposite gender, and it meant that every support needed to vaguely end on a note that could sort of result in marriage. I feel like this really sabatoges the possibilities the support system has. The only real ways I'd agree to this staying would be the aforementioned example of Genealogy style where both groups are separate, or maybe a situation where marriage does happen and you get kids, but the marriages are limited to a few options per person, so there's still some amount of customization, but the supports could still be much more unique. Then any other supports either don't hit S, or S is platonic, and there is no kid. 

 

3. Story for sure. I could barely manage to get through Shadow Dragon over the course of a half year, just because it was so boring that I ended up getting distracted by other things. Echoes, on the other hand, has been said to have terrible gameplay, and I've played it at least 5 or 6 times all the way through. To be fair, I may just like Echoes's more simplistic style, however. 

[Shadow Mir]

On 10/27/2018 at 4:34 PM, Etheus said:

I could have also mentioned Geneology, yes. But at least it was trying. At least it felt like an actual strategy game, as opposed to Gaiden maps looking and feeling like it was procedurally generated. Too ambitious and grandiose for its own good (to the detriment of the player experience), but an actual strategy game with actual maps. 

But really, both fit this, and whichever was worse is a matter of preference. 

Fair enough. I mentioned Genealogy because whatever strategy aspect that was supposed to be there... wasn't, all because of the big maps. Instead, the one strategy to rule them all is "cavalry rush". Well, that, and the aforementioned bloated maps make for a huge exercise in tedium...

On 10/27/2018 at 5:03 PM, Ertrick36 said:

This comes with a huge caveat; I would only really like it if it was handled like Genealogy's two-generation system.  I mean, the bonding method sucked - I much prefer getting S-supports over whatever the hell garbage marriage system Genealogy had - but the transition for Gen 1 to Gen 2 in that game was the best introduction to a 2nd generation the series has ever done.  That's not even an exaggeration; there's so much catharsis and general good feelings I got out of taking control of Seliph's army and destroying everything with him and the ridiculously OP kids of Ayra and Lex.

You gotta admit, that's kinda a big gamble. There's the risk of alienating people who liked the old characters and/or wind up disliking the new ones.

[Ertrick36]

2 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

You gotta admit, that's kinda a big gamble. There's the risk of alienating people who liked the old characters and/or wind up disliking the new ones.

What I want most is for Gen 2 to have a more prominent role.  The ways they've done it in Awakening and Fates have not worked at all to that end.

I'll say again, if they won't do it the Genealogy way, they should just not bother at all.

I never cave to the "it's a gamble" argument.  Because when you create anything at all, it's always a gamble.  That's just what happens when you're working with subjective material.  Or as Captain Picard said, "It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose."  And also, I've not heard anyone who has played Genealogy complain about the game abandoning, like, half of the cast.  People just need to learn to let go.

If anything, I'd say IS has been a little too clingy to older characters.  How many times have they been bringing back older characters?  Not counting the crossover stuff or Cipher, they've done it about six times with the whitewings and Camus, twice through amiibos, and they even fully integrated three actual Awakening characters and three copies of Awakening characters into the story and lore of a world they have no business being in.

So basically, my retort is screw that noise.  Life's not fun without risks, and you'll never go anywhere if you are always comfortable.

[Shadow Mir]

1 hour ago, Ertrick36 said:

What I want most is for Gen 2 to have a more prominent role.  The ways they've done it in Awakening and Fates have not worked at all to that end.

I'll say again, if they won't do it the Genealogy way, they should just not bother at all.

I never cave to the "it's a gamble" argument.  Because when you create anything at all, it's always a gamble.  That's just what happens when you're working with subjective material.  Or as Captain Picard said, "It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose."  And also, I've not heard anyone who has played Genealogy complain about the game abandoning, like, half of the cast.  People just need to learn to let go.

If anything, I'd say IS has been a little too clingy to older characters.  How many times have they been bringing back older characters?  Not counting the crossover stuff or Cipher, they've done it about six times with the whitewings and Camus, twice through amiibos, and they even fully integrated three actual Awakening characters and three copies of Awakening characters into the story and lore of a world they have no business being in.

So basically, my retort is screw that noise.  Life's not fun without risks, and you'll never go anywhere if you are always comfortable.

Well, frankly, if I'd found that I struggled to find any of the second gen characters likable in a game that treated its second generation like Genealogy did, I'd probably wind up selling it, or in the worst case, going "pass" altogether. One point that was not originally brought up was that characters should be weighed along with gameplay and story. Going back to my first point, if I find it hard to like, let alone care for, most of the characters, it's most likely I won't bother with a game. Which is why I avoid the Jugdral saga like the plague - it fails the litmus test on both the character front and the gameplay front. Well, that, and most of the gambles Kaga took clearly didn't work out, and even worse, resulted in games with loads of problems.

[Ertrick36]

8 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:

Well, frankly, if I'd found that I struggled to find any of the second gen characters likable in a game that treated its second generation like Genealogy did, I'd probably wind up selling it, or in the worst case, going "pass" altogether. One point that was not originally brought up was that characters should be weighed along with gameplay and story. Going back to my first point, if I find it hard to like, let alone care for, most of the characters, it's most likely I won't bother with a game. Which is why I avoid the Jugdral saga like the plague - it fails the litmus test on both the character front and the gameplay front. Well, that, and most of the gambles Kaga took clearly didn't work out, and even worse, resulted in games with loads of problems.

And your solution to this possibility is to just shove them all to the side like Fates did?  Or to do Awakening's abundantly lazy route of having the most involved 2nd gen unit just screaming at the sidelines and only actually doing something once or twice?

Look, if what you want is a rehash of the 3DS games' implementation of the 2nd generation, then I will just stop arguing right here and agree to disagree.  I don't even think they need to kill off the 1st generation; I think they can still keep them around while shifting the focus onto a 2nd generation and having that transition be natural.

My main gripe is that the 3DS games shamelessly shove pointless plot devices in to explain why things are the way they are, and they don't do enough to make the conflicts feel like the conflicts of the 2nd generation.  Even in Awakening, it just feels like the 2nd generation is there only to help their parents live; they aren't even fighting for their own peace.  This comes from a guy who started with Awakening and Fates and loved them both.

So my opinion is either they go all-in with the 2nd generation - giving them a natural transition and a proper story focus - or they do nothing and just focus on one generation of warriors.  If they're gonna do an even remotely serious plot, I'd rather they don't half-ass any of the details for convenience/gameplay sake.  In the end, I just really hate the way it's done in the 3DS games; it feels as if it's only there to check off another item on an obligatory "list", rather than to actually enhance the game, story, and characters as a whole.

 

Also, I still struggle to see why the prospect of not liking a cast applies specifically to the 2nd generation.  The possibility could be equally prevalent for the 1st generation, and I doubt even them dying horrifically would make up for having to use them for half the game.  I'd be just as inclined to dislike a game if its 1st generation sucked as I would if the 2nd generation sucked - probably even more so for the former because I'd actually have to progress to get to the 2nd generation, so I'd be more committed to the game if the 1st generation was solid.  Though I'm also the kind of guy that doesn't like reading into every little detail of a game before I even play it.

[Shadow Mir]

10 hours ago, Ertrick36 said:

And your solution to this possibility is to just shove them all to the side like Fates did?  Or to do Awakening's abundantly lazy route of having the most involved 2nd gen unit just screaming at the sidelines and only actually doing something once or twice?

Look, if what you want is a rehash of the 3DS games' implementation of the 2nd generation, then I will just stop arguing right here and agree to disagree.  I don't even think they need to kill off the 1st generation; I think they can still keep them around while shifting the focus onto a 2nd generation and having that transition be natural.

My main gripe is that the 3DS games shamelessly shove pointless plot devices in to explain why things are the way they are, and they don't do enough to make the conflicts feel like the conflicts of the 2nd generation.  Even in Awakening, it just feels like the 2nd generation is there only to help their parents live; they aren't even fighting for their own peace.  This comes from a guy who started with Awakening and Fates and loved them both.

So my opinion is either they go all-in with the 2nd generation - giving them a natural transition and a proper story focus - or they do nothing and just focus on one generation of warriors.  If they're gonna do an even remotely serious plot, I'd rather they don't half-ass any of the details for convenience/gameplay sake.  In the end, I just really hate the way it's done in the 3DS games; it feels as if it's only there to check off another item on an obligatory "list", rather than to actually enhance the game, story, and characters as a whole.

 

Also, I still struggle to see why the prospect of not liking a cast applies specifically to the 2nd generation.  The possibility could be equally prevalent for the 1st generation, and I doubt even them dying horrifically would make up for having to use them for half the game.  I'd be just as inclined to dislike a game if its 1st generation sucked as I would if the 2nd generation sucked - probably even more so for the former because I'd actually have to progress to get to the 2nd generation, so I'd be more committed to the game if the 1st generation was solid.  Though I'm also the kind of guy that doesn't like reading into every little detail of a game before I even play it.

Bold: I know that all too well - I've said it in other threads, but the only FE4 character I actually care about is a second generation character. Yet another facet of my lack of motivation to want anything to do with Jugdral.

Everything else: I'm actually more in favor of not having children in this game, since I think they need to give it a rest. I mean, the two most recent non-remake games had them. That's pushing it imo.

[colossus86]

Ultimately I don't think the highly linear nature of fire emblem games lends themselves to the Avatar concept very well. As much as I can just Robin's name, appearance, and class, at the end of the day their personality, actions, and place within the plot remains the exact same. That being said I'm mostly resigned to their presence in the series from here on out since they're too popular to justify removing. All I hope for is that the pandering is kept to reasonable levels.

While Children in Awakening weren't superfluous from a story perspective like Fates, they were still completely unnecessary from a gameplay standpoint, and if children have to return I at least hope they aren't shoehorned. 

Getting Married in the middle of a war is dumb and I hate it. It also encourages IS to vear away from characters with pre-existing releationships and cannon pairings which is unfortunate.

As for story vs gameplay. While both are important, ultimately gameplay wins out since it's what you spend more time doing, and is the source of replay value.

[Dinar87]

Wow...I can't believe this poll got around 80 votes! Thank you guys so much!!!
 

But back on topic, I agree with others that a compromise of having the avatar and stuff back, but doing it as well as possible from a character development and world building standpoint, along with having amazing gameplay, would get me really hooked on Three Houses if it turns out to be like this. If IS could just balance these mechanics in the right way, I think we could get a true "best of both worlds" scenario; the "dating sim" mechanics would still be there, but more restrained, taken more seriously and consistently in game, and allowing for play styles without ever using those mechanics.

Also I'd love the amiibo units from Fates to return...dammit I want my playable Ike!!!

Edited November 2, 2018 by Dinar87

[PrincessAlyson]

1: I don't mind a player character being included, but I don't want them to be the main focus. The pandering to the PC went too far in Fates, even though I like Corrin well enough.

2: These should be separate things, but... I don't mind marriage returning since it's optional. However, I do not want child units again. In FE4 (because yes, it started in Genealogy of the Holy War. Not saying this for the veteran players btw) and Awakening, they had plot importance but they had no reason to be in Fates. They should still include characters with pre-existing relationships since it fleshes out character.

3: I do tend to prefer story over gameplay, but if the gameplay is completely horrible... Well, I'm not going to play very much of it. But I am hoping Three Houses will have a decent if not amazing storyline. I'd like the characters to have good characterization and not just quirks.

[Guest Tobi]

A simple good game nothing more nothing less which no game disappoints in. Love making player characters in games so ✔, like marriage so many charming waifus to pick from every playthrough(and husbandos for other people) ✔, excellent gameplay ✔ and story while subjective to every person NONE are bottom tier bad even the ones that could've done more so ✔. One thing I do agree that some here say is not to include child units this time around it's NOT mandatory and doesn't need to show that a pairings relationship in the game is very syron. if something similar should happen make it be a trainee system which fits the whole teaching students aspect with the raising familiarity.

[Guest This Guy]

Heavy amounts of political intrigue and minimal to no focus on fanservice and pandering.


.......I never claimed it was a realistic expectation.

[henrymidfields]

On 11/20/2018 at 4:31 PM, Guest This Guy said:

Heavy amounts of political intrigue and minimal to no focus on fanservice and pandering.


.......I never claimed it was a realistic expectation.

Can't it be? Especially after Jugdral, FE6 Elibe (though mostly on the backstory), and Tellius did focus on the former?

The avatar should be something similar to the Persona series. Both genders are a given (P3P), and they should generally be silent like said series, or maybe even the Command and Conquer: Red Alert series where cutscenes are from your perspective. They can have some implied personalities, but ultimately, it's up to you.

I would only allow the children generation to take arms if the entire story was several in-universe decades long.

I would focus more on the story. The gameplay? Just reuse and modify the main mechanics from Fates Conquest, though with rebalances to accomodate the classic units. Some of the aspects of the story that I want to see, which I extracted from another thread:

• A new story with the female lord taking the lead until the very end. C'mon, all the "having the male lead overshadowing the female one" is getting stale now. At least Kiria and Tsubasa had their moments to shine in TMSFE. There are female rulers who either ruled a nation or led one to victory in history. Maria Teresa, Joan of Arc, Catherine the Great, Queen Elizabeth I/Victoria, Himiko etc etc. There's a reason why I played as Rosa or Hilda in Pokemon Black 1/2 and why I am playing as Minako in Persona 3 Portable. Here's hoping that a female Byleth is an option - and the female lord also finally has her time to fully shine.
• Massive and detailed world-building surpassing FE6 Elibe, and Thracia, and maybe even surpassing Tellius. I think that is generally enough said. FE6's backstory was why I got interested into the series in the first place. Awakening/Fates is the reason why I'm currently on hiatus from FE.
• A "humans are the real villains" story with slightly less black and white. For once, can we remove the dragon supervillain, and have a skilled politician as the ultimate bad guy? Maybe like Persona 5's Masayoshi Shido where he is a manipulative villain, and a really charismatic/popular one? Or maybe someone like Arvis who had the noble intentions, and did change his nation for the better, but ultimately was the wrong answer?

Edited November 22, 2018 by henrymidfields

[Faustino]

1. I’m kind of in between this avatar thing. It could go either way.

2. I’m not a big fan of this marriage and child units crap for reasons I’m just gonna keep to myself.

3. I’m pretty much the type of guy to enjoy the story and gameplay of any game, as long as the storytelling isn’t bad.

[BZL8]

Regarding story or gameplay, I personally lean towards story more, though the latter also plays a factor as well. I will admit, that my ideas for story may not sit well with some (not to mention, I have read some works by Cormac McCarthy recently, so they are fresh in my mind).

• Characters and themes over political intrigue, complex story, and lore: I don't care about byzantine lore, story, or politics. For me, very complex characters are what matter the most. Even if it may mean reducing the cast (both playable and non-playable), I personally would rather take 20 strongly-written characters over 50 poorly-written ones.
• Displace characters in a bleak, brutal world (Cormac McCarthy-esque):  If Genealogy of the Holy War displaced Sigurd and co. by placing them in a world that is less like Fire Emblem and more like George R.R. Martin's, my personal wish is to have the characters of Three Houses be displaced in a world that feels more like Cormac McCarthy's. This would interesting to see since a lot of long time story and character traditions and standards in the Fire Emblem series would either be deconstructed, twisted, and/or dismantled in a McCarthy-like setting. Like Ed Tom Bell of "No Country For Old Men", a Classical Western character displaced in a brutal Western setting who must to the terms with the world he is in, and Llewellyn Moss, a traditional hero who perceives the conflict he is in as black and white when in reality it is black and grey,  I would like to see traditional FE characters be displaced in a brutal setting and how they respond and/or come to terms with the world they are in. (Think Genealogy's 1st half, but an even more extreme setting).
• Who says an ending must be happy?: It would be interesting to see a world where the protagonists and the armies don't get what they want. This might be a big no from long-time fans, but I personally want to see one. If done and well-executed in conjunction with the above two points, this could be extremely effective.
• The villains shouldn't be supernatural deities or dragons, but rather human characters who feel more like forces of nature/evil: Another thing from Cormac McCarthy's works is that many of his villains are humans that feel like unstoppable forces of nature (Anton Chigurh) or even evil incarnate (Judge Holden from "Blood Meridian"). Having villains like those would shake up the narrative significantly.
• I am okay with an Avatar but make moral and ethical choices and actions more difficult for the player (to the point of discomfort): Having an Avatar character can be extremely effective if used correctly in conjunction with the story. Have the player make extremely difficult choices that forces them to think. Forcing the Avatar and thus the player to make extremely difficult moral and ethical choices in the narrative is probably the best way for the Avatar to be handled in the series IMO. 

All of these would shake up the Fire Emblem series to its core. For better or worse, these ideas would make for a very interesting installment.

[Guest This Guy]

So.......Game of Thrones Emblem?

......Sure I'm down.

Admittedly even White Walkers would be a better villain than another dragon at this point.

[BZL8]

26 minutes ago, Guest This Guy said:

So.......Game of Thrones Emblem?

......Sure I'm down.

Admittedly even White Walkers would be a better villain than another dragon at this point.

Not even close. The brutality of Game of Thrones comes no where close to the when compared to the  horrifying things that occur in several of Cormac McCarthy's works. (And besides we already have a Game of Thrones Emblem, its Genealogy of the Holy War). Even though I personally want it, something like Blood Meridian Emblem may prove too much for some, even for those who abhor the tone and focus of recent installments.

[Rapaille]

I likely won't play Three Houses because I don't have a switch and don't feel the need to afford a console for which I will only play one game. But I still have some some opinions on the matter.

Avatar; No... Fire Emblem isn't structured in a way for avatars to work. The only way they could work is by having them do nothing/optional (like fe7) or by having a strong focus on player choice. But Intelligent Systems has shown that they can barely  write a normal story so they first need to show me that they can write a good story before they start doing things with avatars. But story isn't the only reason why I dislike them.  In every game avatars are playable they are simply the best unit. They are perfect units with perfect availability with the only drawback being that they aren't promoted. There are also minor things like how you can't have a conflict from different views like in fe10 which seems cool (seems since I haven't played fe10). Maybe in later installments when they have proven to me that they are capable of writing a decent story will I be open to avatars but not now.

Marriage & child units; While I love fe4 and child units where a huge part of it I think that they should abandon it for a while. Romance & marriage should be handled in the fe7 & fe8 way with it being something that exists but not a focus. I often have thoughts what they could have done with the resources they put in child units in fe14. Then I think about the fact that I almost never recruited a child unit in any of my playthroughs and realize how pointless it was and that they just added child units because 'it's popular' without realizing that it doesn't add anything and the fact that other parts of the game needed those resources a lot more. Fe13 is similar but it was justified in the story so not as bad. 

What I'm trying to say is that these things are unnecessary. Fe5, Fe6 & Fe12 didn't have them and they didn't need it to be good games (Imo). 

Gameplay/story; I honestly don't know. I think they should be in balance but I'm more forgiving to a mediocre story when the game is fun then when the story is good but the game isn't fun. Fe8 has some good writing at times but I can't bring myself to playing it because I don't enjoy the gameplay. Fe12 on the other hand doesn't have a good story but it's still one of my favourites because of the gameplay. In a perfect world both the gameplay and story are great but this is rarely the case (in some cases they both suck). 

[EdeaCreamer]

Avatar: Yes, but Mark-typed as far as plot involvement goes, and Kris-typed as far as mechanical customization goes. No snowflake classes (Robin, Corrin), no shoehorning oneself into a plot to the point that the Lord unit might as well go on vacation (Kris, Robin), and absolutely no MyUnit as the actual main character again (Corrin). Billy looks like he's 'mentoring' Edgelord in the Three Houses trailer, which bodes ill (though at least he didn't talk, which is a good sign).

Supports: No, honestly. I dislike the game herding me into using certain units together (and within a certain proximity of one another) due to 'sweet support bonuses'. Also, in a game with perma-death and plot twists (even especially trite twists like the ones we got in Fates), it's close-to-impossible to write up support conversations that have any impact on (or even relation to) the main plot. They end up being irrelevant discussions about pickles/arm-wrestling contests/sharing ellipses with one another/etc.; pass.

Marriage: God, no. It's war; save that crap for the ending, and between characters that 1) have their relationships well-established throughout the game (not C/B/A -> meh, you're weird but let's be friends anyway and then suddenly S -> LET'S BANG), and 2) are all guaranteed to survive said war (so really no PC characters other than the Lord unit/s).

Second-Gen Eugenics: If you end up receiving another Astral Realm for microwaving up War-Ready Instant Baby Soldiers again, I am -out-. No freaking -way-.

Gameplay/Story: They need to be well-integrated and complement one another. Segregation of these two elements almost always takes me right out of the experience, without fail ('why didn't they use a Phoenix Down on Aeris', the supposedly fearsome enemy commander getting one-shot by a country girl with a bow because he happens to be on wyvern-back, etc. etc.). If they have to prioritize one over the other, then it'd have to be the gameplay, but it'd be a much lesser game for it, especially since Fire Emblem's tacitly about not losing any of your guys in battle (supposedly because you give a damn about them).

[Guest Edrey]

Avatar

-Well ; I'm leaning slightly towards option B regarding avatars; but wouldn't mind if they were not around; the history can be good either way if they put effort into it. I for example would be satisfied getting dialogue options when my character is spoken to; and sometimes ; let those choices have some minor impact on the course of things; like; on a strategy meeting; they ask what route should we take to advance into the enemy's territory ; (maybe making a vote kind of thing for the sake of not being the one calling the shots just because we are “wise” o “smart” or whatever) and then the objectives or even the next chapter map can vary because of that. I'm cool with robin and mark; don't know much about Kris; and well; I don't hate the corn; but I won't ask for seconds.

 

Marriage and kids

-Can't really decide a standing with marriage and kids... marriage or at least the hint of a future relationship has being around for a while and is not really a bad thing; even in war; humans have feelings; fears; and the desire to be with someone else; of course; if marriage is going to be a thing inside the gameplay time-lime; it would be nice having more development towards it ; like maybe getting supports could require more than one conversation between characters. About kids; mmm; i...well; I can't stop thinking about fates; all the resources invested in the kids could have been used to give the story more depth or give the capturable bosses supports... sounds kinda like ranting; so I won't go on about that; my point is that; three houses can use the time and efforts in making a longer and meaningful story along with paralogues that offer more; like world building ; lore or side characters' development.

-Gameplay vs story?

Totally B; and more honestly 55% gameplay 40% story 5% characters. Can't really say anything ; overall I can go on if the story or the gameplay is good ; the characters are a bonus but if not along one of the former s can't say that I will be able to stay interested. FE has always felt more Gameplay attractive first to me.

[Maronmario]

1) I don't inherently mind the concept of an avatar character. I like having a character I can customize and sort of be me. But the execution the past few games have been, lacking in some places and strong in others. Kris had good customization by giving us an option to start in a class of our choice which is cool. But suffered from being almost like a Sue, they just aren't well written.
Robin had even better customization but the second half of the story started to suffer because of his role in the story causing him to be his own character and not an avatar, but was overall the best.
Corrin was honestly the weakest, he had well balanced customization but not only was an awful character at times and was almost as bad as Kris for the story but the choice of class was restricted heavily because of the Yato which heavily incentivizes you to play as a class with a sword instead of something else.
A balance between this should be kept, don't pull another Yato on us and have us be a main character. I would be fine being a sort of support character to the main lord like a Jaegin (Character wise). And have them either be a well written character or have us have some sort of control over their personality.

2) Honestly these two would only really work if there was a time skip like Genealogy of the Holy War did. If not please don't have children or marriages until the endings

3) Both are important. Lean to much towards gameplay and we get Fates, lean to much towards story however and we get Radiant Dawn, while great has some gameplay moments that are just suffering like the limited times to level several characters. Have a good balance between the two of them