How would you describe Fire Emblem's overall writing quality?

[Roland]

If you had to describe Fire Emblem's writing quality as a whole, how would you describe it?

 

Personally, I'd describe it as rather poor. I mean, yeah, we have Path of Radiance and, to some, Radiant Dawn, and I hear Geneology's storytelling is pretty good. But most Fire Emblem games tend to rather mediocire story telling, some worse than others.

[Armagon]

Good enough. Fire Emblem isn't particularly noteworthy when it comes to overall writing but i will say that the series is better at writing characters than it is at writing stories. Even the best written games in the series in the series wouldn't really score anything higher than a 7/10 if you want to quantify it. If we look at character writing specifically, i'd say anywhere between 7.5 to 8/10.

Then there's Fates, a game that actually has a decent amount of good enough character writing but the story itself has been torn apart enough already. Though i will say that i have seen games (and other stuff) with worse writing. I don't think Fates' story writing is the complete dumpster fire some make it out to be.

[Ottservia]

26 minutes ago, Armagon said:

Good enough. Fire Emblem isn't particularly noteworthy when it comes to overall writing but i will say that the series is better at writing characters than it is at writing stories. Even the best written games in the series in the series wouldn't really score anything higher than a 7/10 if you want to quantify it. If we look at character writing specifically, i'd say anywhere between 7.5 to 8/10.

Then there's Fates, a game that actually has a decent amount of good enough character writing but the story itself has been torn apart enough already. Though i will say that i have seen games (and other stuff) with worse writing. I don't think Fates' story writing is the complete dumpster fire some make it out to be.

Agreed for the most part. Honestly the main issue with FE stories as a whole(as far as I can tell at least) is the more “tell” less “show” like presentation as well as the sort of “and then” structure rather than “but so”. Honestly now that I think about it the sort of “and then” structure is why fates’ story is as bad as it is cause there’s no real thread connecting these chapters like each chapter in it of itself is structured fine(for the most part) but the thing connecting the chapters themselves are not so concrete.  

 

[Etrurian emperor]

Pretty good overall. Its no Witcher or Nier but it never pretended to be. Its good enough for what what it is as long as we're not talking about Fates or Shadow Dragon. 

[Dinar87]

I think in terms of writing and story, it goes...

Fire emblem path of radiance > every story ever written > other fire emblem games >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>fates

[Shadow Mir]

I'd say the writing is generally all right... unless it's the dumpster fire known as Sacred Stones, that is. Or Binding Blade.

[Shoblongoo]

I'll reserve judgment on jugdral and Fe6, unless and until we get actual english games rather than fanslation.  I found the writing rather flat when I played the ROMs, but I also got the sense that there was ALOT getting lost in translation. So I can't fairly judge them.

For the rest.  I'd put it at:

Tellius >> FE7 >>>>> Awakening > Echoes of Valentia > FE8 >>>>> Shadow Dragon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fates

Edited November 20, 2018 by Shoblongoo

[Icelerate]

12 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

Tellius >> FE7 >>>>> Awakening > Echoes of Valentia > FE8 >>>>> Shadow Dragon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fates

My list is similar. It'd go FE10>>>FE9>>FE7>FE8>FE6>>Book 2 Heroes>>>Book 1 Heroes. 

I think the writing overall is average from the games I played. Could be better but still enjoyable nonetheless. 

Edited November 20, 2018 by Icelerate

[DragonFlames]

1 hour ago, Armagon said:

Good enough. Fire Emblem isn't particularly noteworthy when it comes to overall writing but i will say that the series is better at writing characters than it is at writing stories. Even the best written games in the series in the series wouldn't really score anything higher than a 7/10 if you want to quantify it. If we look at character writing specifically, i'd say anywhere between 7.5 to 8/10.

Interesting. I'd actually say the opposite, when we look at overall writing quality. I think the story quality is - overall - better than character writing, though not by much.
After having experienced a lot of well written games now, both story- and character-wise, I'd say Fire Emblem is serviceable. There is only one game where I'd say it horribly botched both story and character-writing overall (yes, there are a few good ones in there, but the bad far outweighs the good in that game), and that's Fails. Yup, I'm totally gonna call FE14 "Fails" from now on.
I think "good enough" is a good statement to sum it up, actually.

As far as personal ranking goes, I'd say something like this (only the ones I've played apply here):

SoV > Awakening > Tellius > Shadow Dragon > New Mystery > Elibe >>> Sacred Stones >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fails

I would put Tellius over Awakening in the story department, but Awakening has the better characters overall, I find, which is why I put it over the Tellius games.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

There are high points and low points. No game I can point to that's doing everything right.

• I think Shadows of Valentia has the highest quality dialogue writing by employing old english terms. And obviously the fully voiced lines hammer that quality home. But it's larger ten second plot is pretty straightforward and makes the protagonists hard to relate to in the final acts
• Fire Emblem 7 has pretty stellar character arcs when you dive into support conversations, but it's impossible to see all of more than one support line in a single playthrough because those geniuses were more concerned with game balance than realizing we eat up these support conversations.
• Tellius has a great plot and world, at least until it pratfell in the final act of Radiant Dawn that shoves the "Chosen One" business down our throat. Radiant Dawn also suffers from lack of character arcs thanks to its rejection of support conversations and reuse of the previous game's roster. That having been said Path of Radiance is pretty free of major issues, just a lack of resolution for most characters and nations because they had to not so subtly set up a sequel.
• I think Awakening has a very attractive world and plot, but the baby paralogues feel like they take place in a separate universe and only serve to introduce a new character who doesn't know or care about the actual bad guys. Highly recommended that you ignore the brats until post game. Ignore the dead people coming back to life chapters too.
• Sacred Stones is so simplistic you need to hunt for the undertones. Like how our protagonist and antagonist are both princelings in line for the thrown yet show no interest. However, when Ephraim's father dies he must accept his responsibility where his friend Lyon failed to do so. But we don't explore any of those themes explicitly because, and you can comb the game's script yourself, there's never a moment in Sacred Stones where Ephraim acknowledges or reacts to his father's passing. So really the story comes off as "here are some already great people doing a great thing". Just a bunch of Lords at the highest station in their respective countries showing the way. The world is also lacking dreadfully in lore almost to the level of Fates' universe. And what does exist - a group of legends and a dragon who may be Myrrh or related to Myrrh saving the world feels like a shameless ripoff of the Scouring of Elibe.

[redlight]

The games' plot have it's ups and downs, but rounds up to above average, just that recent times hasn't been that kind to their writers. It's more about the characters for me really. Some might be surprised, but these are just my opinions. SoV has a decent story, as we haven't seen anything above average since FE12, as well as having a living breathing world. Fates's plot has been critiqued a lot. Awakening is somewhere between meh and bad (the first act is somewhat decent at least). FE12 has a good story. FE11 is weaker than it's sequel, but decent still. FE10 was way too ambitious, but for what it's worth part 1 and 2 were nice. FE9 has a good story aside from hamfisted racism in some parts of the story as well as a slow start (I'd also like to mention "info" being a great addition to the game). FE8 and FE6 are incredibly barebones, but not the level of Fates "critique". FE7 has a decent story, better than SoV for sure. I have a soft spot for FE5 as it has an overall enjoyable story with it's themes. FE4 has a good story, but it progresses as fast a snail due to the gameplay

Edited November 20, 2018 by silveraura25

[Slumber]

Overall I'd say below average if we're talking about plot and main character writing.

The lows are much more noteworthy than the highs at this point, and the highs are commendable, but nothing mind-blowing.

Writing didn't really come into focus until Genealogy. FE3 has some stuff, but it's still laying the groundwork, and outside of Marth's growth throughout Books 1 and 2, I have very little to say, positively or negatively, about its writing. It just... really isn't there.

And then Gaiden's whole story and script could fit on a napkin.

Tellius is solid all around but I don't think it ever reaches the highs of the Jugdral games, and the very best I can say about it is "It handles racism kinda well". On the flipside, Jugdral has some highs, but gen 2 of Genealogy is nothing to write home about, and Thracia 776, depending on how you want to look at it, is either amazing(As a personal journey for Leif) or, once again, not much to write home about(The overall plot of the game divorced of Leif's development, since it's a very typical "I'm liberating my homeland!" plot). Overall solid packages, but nothing crazy.

And for me, that's about as far as Fire Emblem's "Good writing" goes.

From there, you have the barebones rehash of Binding Blade. You have the unremarkable, but once again very dependent on its main characters for anything of interest and actually has arguably a very poor plot, of Blazing Blade. You have the complete "F, see me after class" writing of Sacred Stones that was just interested in putting plot elements in front of you and not ever expounding on them, and still had somehow a fuckton of absolute nonsense filler to meet the page requirements for this assignment.

Then you get the modern era Fire Emblem, which only ever gets average at best. Awakening has a... fine first act. From there, it's total dogshit, with the last chunk of Awakening being just as bad as anything from Fates... and then you actually have Fates, which is just some of the worst game writing I have ever seen. And I'm one of those "games don't have very good writing" people, so for it to be that noteworthy? It's bad.

SoV had a cool premise and could have been a decent commentary on classism, and the rights/ability of the common man vs. nobility... but it absolutely squanders that because Alm is the main character and responsibility is thrust upon him immediately, and from the very beginning the game is pounding it into your head that Alm is special. So once that whole theme falls apart, it's another pretty standard FE game.

Talking about the writing of like, supports and characters overall, that'd be a much bigger discussion, but honestly probably not too different.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Slumber

[FiboSai]

Compared to other RPGs, Fire Emblem's writing is definately below average. I consider Path of Radiance the best in that regard, since it is the only game that doesn't fail in either the plot department or the character department. It is solid in both. All other games have either a flawed story (Sacred Stones, Fates, Shadows of Valentia) or flawed character writing (all the pre Elibe games, Radiant Dawn). Path of Radiance is also the game with the least supernatural influence, the final boss is a powerhungry human ruler, not a possessed wizard or a mythological dragon. 

[DarthR0xas]

I consider FE1 and 2 amazing for the time, although pretty bland now-a-days. Not bad, just bland. Solid good I suppose

Never played FE3

Jugdral's games have amazing stories, hampered somewhat by the gameplay. Mainly just Genealogy in that regard. The quality of the characters is variable. Any main character is great, and many of the side characters range from decent to Finn. Finn is just the best. Anyways, while a few characters ended up being slightly shafted (Noish), overall I'd say Great.

FE6 is, well it has potential. I don't feel it quite reaches those heights. I'm going to say bad overall for this one.

FE7 has a standard plot with few twists, supplemented by an amazing cast of characters. Problem is a lot of those characters aren't the main guys. Halfway between Great and Good.

FE8 has fantastic undertones, but that's all they are, undertones. Decent characters, a boring and slightly contradictory narrative buries those great parts of the game. Overall Poor

Tellius is amazing, easily the high for the series. Not every character is good, but the ones that are absolutely astound me. The plot (barring Part 4) is fantastic. Overall Amazing

FE11 is alright. Plot is fine, but basically no character development. Decent

Never played 12.

FE13 has a meh plot, with the highlight for me being the Valm arc and nothing much else before or after that. The characters are very hit or miss, with most ending up as bunts, this meaning "I mean, I guess they kinda nailed it but that doesn't have much impact". There are some standouts (I love Owain), but just Decent

FE14 has an infamously terrible plot, and characters that range from Kaze to basically everyone else. Very much a poor.

FE15 Probably the best characters by virtue of having voice acting. Voices just bring out more details in a character that weren't there before. I personally love SOV's plot, but it's kinda bland aside from the new stuff. Pretty Great.

Heroes is terrible, as is Warriors. TMS was pretty good in my opinion.

Overall, I'd say something between Good and Great, although most of that is held up by the quality of the characters, and not the quality of the plot. 

[Etrurian emperor]

Since everyone is going into detail about the games themselves I should probably do the same.

The Tellius games are easily the best as they give almost everything the time and attention it deserves, or at least everything not named Tormod. 

POR is the best story in the series because it just doesn't screw up. It doesn't have the giant blunders of Fates, the technical limitations of Genealogy nor is everything as underdeveloped as in Stones, Awakening and Shadow Dragon. It combines this lack of failures with the strong world building and presentation of Tellius to ensure its all good, there's no black mark that stands out. The main characters are good, the rest of the cast is good, the story telling is good. Its all good.

Unlike POR its sequel does screw up. There are a lot of things that don't work and the game tried to do far too much for its own good. But it still has the core strengths of POR, just not its lack of failures. I'd say it even expands on POR's strengths. The world building is even better and the presentation does a lot to make up for the flaw. Part 3 is where the failures begin but this is also the part where they go through the effort of having every mayor battle be proceeded by a strategy meeting. Radiant Dawn has many flaws but it does so much right that the balance leans towards the positive end of the spectrum. 

Blazing sword is just competent all around. Its a competent escalation of events were the heroes go from fighting bandits to corrupt nobles, an international mercenary guild and eventually an ancient wizard and his creation. Having three lords means the main characters can have an interesting dynamic throughout the plot and the world building is second only to Tellius. 

Genealogy is a little bit tragic. It has the best plot in the series and the potential for the strongest cast but the game lacks the means to tell this story and show these characters in an engaging way. The technology held Genealogy back a lot but despite this the game tried so hard. But the game sadly doesn't entirely succeed. The cutcenes are only barely less archaic than Shadow Dragon and Binding Blade, and despite playing on a map that covers the whole world the world building is kind of weak. 

Echoes has the opposite problem of Genealogy. Its presentation is incredibly good but at the end of the day its still the plot of a NES game that barely had a plot.  Echoes should get a lot of credit for turning a cast of blank slate and mutes into one of the best FE casts and for breathing life in the barren continent of Valentia but the age of its story clearly shows and the new additions did more to hinder than to help.  

Sacred Stones is okay. In almost all areas its consistently only okay and as such its very boring. Aside from a strong villain cast I don't think it ever manages to get beyond merely being okay and the world building is the worst in the series. That said Stones being so average across the board means very little is actually bad. 

Awakening is similar to Stones but worse. Stones can sometimes excels but in its storytelling Awakening never ever got beyond merely being okay. ''Okay'' is the best Awakening ever did in the Gangrel arc and after that the story is always very simple and very rushed. But its got a pretty lovable cast. 

New Mystery was a significant step up from Shadow Dragon. Things actually happen, the map narration isn't as strong as Shadow Dragon but it does it jobs, old Heroes become new enemies and interesting precedents were set. 

Binding Blade is a pretty big step down from Blazing Sword. Like its prequel its a simple plot but unlike its prequel everything in binding blade lacks detail. 

Fates is....kind of a trainwreck. Everyone already said so much about it that I won't. Its reputation speaks for itself. 

Shadow Dragon's writing is pretty good when it actually bothers to go do some storytelling but the game's biggest flaw is that it refuses to do so. No one but Marth, his boring adviser and the plot princess ever talks, the villains never show up for work and nothing of interests ever happens. Its got the worst story but virtue of only barely having a story.  Its got good moments and its writing can be on point but if you compare the times it gets things right to the times it refuses to put in even the smallest bit of effort the balance easily lands in the negative end of the spectrum. 

As for Heroes...I don't see the point of judging its writing alongside the main Fire Emblem games because its not a main game. Its a mobile game and I'll treat it as such. I don't find it fair to compare Heroes with games which stories received far more resources and attention.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Etrurian emperor

[Quackra]

5 hours ago, Dinar87 said:

I think in terms of writing and story, it goes...

Fire emblem path of radiance > every story ever written > other fire emblem games >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>fates

I think you are stretching the truth with how good path of radiance's story because we halo that has mostly good writing that makes path of radiance look only decent and we also have other games like The Witcher(Only that I have heard) and Undertale.

[Armagon]

5 hours ago, DragonFlames said:

Interesting. I'd actually say the opposite, when we look at overall writing quality. I think the story quality is - overall - better than character writing, though not by much.

I might agree with you if FE stories were different enough but at the end of the day, most are pretty much the same premise. "Prince(ss) gets kicked out of the kingdom by the bad evil empire, has to take it back. Either that, or the evil empire is invading and the prince(ess) has to fight back and it's usualyl after the bad evil empire has occupied most of the good kingdom. Shadow Dragon, Shadows of Valentia, Mystery of the Emblem, second half of Genealogy, Thracia 776, Sacred Stones, Path of Radiance, Part 1 of Radiant Dawn, second act of Awakening and all of Birthright do that. Even Warriors and Heroes do that. Though credit where credit is due, Path of Radiance did a spin on it by making it so that the protagonist wasn't of royal of blood. And in the case of Genealogy, Radiant Dawn and Awakening, it's not the whole story. But regardless, the premises are too similar. In fact, notice how it's almost always an empire that is villainized. Dolhr Empire in Shadow Dragon, Rigel Empire in SoV, Archanea Empire in Mystery, Granvelle Empire in the second half of FE4 and all of Thracia, Grado Empire in Sacred Stones, Daein Empire in PoR (pretty sure it's an empire), Begnion Empire in Part 1 of Radiant Dawn and the Valmese Empire in Awakening. 

Oh and don't forget that a dragon is usually the final boss. And if there isn't, there is at least draconic presence.

See what i mean? The premises in most games are too similar right down to who's the good guys and who's the bad guy and it doesn't really do much to differentiate. It doesn't stop most of the games from being good enough stories but it's for this reason that i see the story writing to be worse than the character writing.

I will say that i value characters over story and i believe if the characters are good enough, they can salvage a bad story. Not all the time and sometimes stories are so bad they can't be saved but i do think that because FE has generally good characters, the series writing as a whole gets a pass from me. Even Fates. The characters don't salvage Revelation's plot but i do like to think they are enough to salvage the plots of Birthright and Conquest.

5 hours ago, DragonFlames said:

There is only one game where I'd say it horribly botched both story and character-writing overall (yes, there are a few good ones in there, but the bad far outweighs the good in that game), and that's Fails.

See, Fates' character writing is weird because when it comes to story important characters, there's essentially two versions: the story versions and the support versions. Like, story!Azura, for example, is pretty bad. Support!Azura, on the other hand, is actually pretty good. Same goes for Corrin. Corrin in the story is ultimate player pandering but Corrin in Supports is actually alright.

There's really only one character i can say i truly hated in Fates and that's Peri. But like, she's my least favorite character in the whole series.

But like, even if i get really critical on Fates' plot, i can't really say it's a dumpster fire when i've seen games with worse writing *cough* Kingdom Hearts series *cough*

Edit: (why is editing quotes into posts impossible) @Etrurian emperor even though Heroes is a mobile game, it's writing is still....not great. And yes, i'm comparing it to other gachas. I mean, the only other gacha i've played is Dragalia Lost and in just two chapters, that game has better writing than all of Heroes. The characters that are only relevant in the Raids (DL's version of Tempest Trials) have gotten way more characterization than any of the Heroes OC.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Armagon

[Sand55]

I definitely feel that the main stories in Fire Emblem are pretty lackluster. To me, the characters are all one-note and predictable. There are some exceptions (like in Sacred Stones, when the Imperial Three have to choose between their loyalty to the crown and their consciences). But overall, you know exactly what Roy will do, exactly what Marth will do, and Eliwood and Chrom and so on because they're all The Good Guy. With the villains, too, it's usually: "I'm bad." Some are bad because they are greedy. Others are bad because they will do anything to get power. But that's about it.

Where I think Fire Emblem made a huge breakthrough in its writing, though, was with the support conversations. It's the perfect way to use dialogue in a game with a million different one or two-sided characters. On their own, they're boring, but get all these exaggerated stereotypes to interact with each other, and suddenly it becomes way entertaining. Personalities clash, backstories are brought up, resolutions are found. The support conversations in Awakening might be my favorite part of that game, precisely because I wonder how Henry's strange love of violence that leads to him saying some shocking things will interact with Olivia's shy, timid manner, or how Frederick, a strict, sardonic and experienced knight of the realm will get along with, say, a dark stalker like Tharja, or Cordelia, someone who leads a similar lifestyle to his own. I absolutely love it when they just focus on the characters having simple interactions with one another.

[Shadow Mir]

49 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Sacred Stones is okay. In almost all areas its consistently only okay and as such its very boring. Aside from a strong villain cast I don't think it ever manages to get beyond merely being okay and the world building is the worst in the series. That said Stones being so average across the board means very little is actually bad. 

With all due respect, I beg to differ on the villain cast - it's the biggest case of "quantity over quality" in the series ever. Only Glen and Duessel were great, whereas most every other notable villain was okay at best to downright abysmal.

[Etrurian emperor]

1 minute ago, Shadow Mir said:

With all due respect, I beg to differ on the villain cast - it's the biggest case of "quantity over quality" in the series ever. Only Glen and Duessel were great, whereas most every other notable villain was okay at best to downright abysmal.

I heard your argument on that some time before I believe. However most people seem to think they are pretty good. This site in particular seems to like Lyon quite a bit. 

[Shadow Mir]

2 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I heard your argument on that some time before I believe. However most people seem to think they are pretty good. This site in particular seems to like Lyon quite a bit. 

And I don't see why when he's so ineptly and inconsistently written. The other villains, again, excepting Duessel and Glen, are not much better, with at least 3 of them being evil for evil's sake.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Shadow Mir

[Ottservia]

Just now, Shadow Mir said:

And I don't see why when he's so ineptly and inconsistently written.

And I personally would like some elaboration on that. I mean I’ve only played like half of sacred stones but so far Lyon is not that bad as you appear to be making him out to be.

[Punished Dayni]

3 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

I think Awakening has a very attractive world and plot, but the baby paralogues feel like they take place in a separate universe and only serve to introduce a new character who doesn't know or care about the actual bad guys. Highly recommended that you ignore the brats until post game. Ignore the dead people coming back to life chapters too.

That..... That's what I did. Works just great. Hell if Lucina had done so too I wouldn't have minded.

3 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

And what does exist - a group of legends and a dragon who may be Myrrh or related to Myrrh saving the world feels like a shameless ripoff of the Scouring of Elibe.

The dragon is Myrrh's dad, that's said in story and the fact that that's so easy to forget when you fight him should say a lot. I'm also in some disagreement about it being a ripoff of the scouring, mainly because the events seem to play closer to the Archanea games but with undefined legendary weapons. They also don't have the nuclear parallel and the dragons were wiped out rather than leaving Magvel.

I think I'll have to agree that it's not an exceptional writing experience for the series as a whole. I am more of an optimist, but I've said my piece elsewhere. Kaga was certainly missed there.

[Etrurian emperor]

2 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:

And I don't see why when he's so ineptly and inconsistently written. The other villains, again, excepting Duessel and Glen, are not much better, with at least 3 of them being evil for evil's sake.

I don't really see Duessel and Glen as villains. Duessel never really does anything villainous on screen and openly criticizes the villains actions of his country before defecting. Glen also never does anything and dies upon finding out he's working for baddies. Now that I think about it I recall having argued Caelach not being evil for evil's sake but evil for his own desires sake.  But I never had a problem with evil for the sake of evil as long as it works. Valter is an insane maniac and definitely a rapist but being Grado's mad attack dog is his role and that's fine by me. Rief likewise is just supposed to be a Gharnef and manages to be exactly that which is also fine, if a little bit boring. Its only when evil for the sake of evil do active damage like Garon when it starts becoming a problem. 

 

[Slumber]

1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I heard your argument on that some time before I believe. However most people seem to think they are pretty good. This site in particular seems to like Lyon quite a bit. 

EDIT: Actually, I really don't want get into a big argument about this.

Anyway, I'm on Mir's side here. I tend to think they're really bad(Selena, Orson, Valter) at worst, and passable(Caellach) at best. Sticking more towards the "Really bad" side.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Slumber