Do you want Fire Emblem to be mature and realistic?

[Kysafen]

No, I want Fire Emblem to have good writing.

 

Which with the exception of FE7x, the series has never had.

[Shoblongoo]

31 minutes ago, Thane said:

frankly speaking I'm kind of afraid that Intelligent Systems did whatever the writing equivalent of lucking out is. No GBA game had a particularly good story, and after Tellius came Shadow Dragon, Fates, and Echoes. I don't think it's a simple matter of Intelligent Systems just going back to writing stories like they used to, because I don't think they can

....god I hope not...
 

38 minutes ago, BZL8 said:

That said, while I personally want to see a very dark and mature installment, I am not sure everyone would be on board. 

It would be an execution thing. It would have to be done correctly, organically, and respectfully to the franchise. I actually think Fates with its Birthright/Conquest split and the whole light-vs-dark duality theme would have been the perfect game to give it an experimental try.

Like they could have purposefully gone out of their way to make Birthright the most light, fluffy, upbeat, unicorns-and-rainbows installment in the history of Fire Emblem. 

And then as a point of contrast--with Conquest just gone full grimdark.

(i.e. imagine a reworking of the plot of conquest where there's absolutely no pretense of Corrin is a good person and trying to do the right thing here, with all the the storytelling problems that premise caused within the context of what Corrin actually does in Conquest. Corrin in this imagining of conquest is unambiguously and unapologetically evil. There's no pretense of "FOR THE GREATER GOOD!"--you're playing the villains. You're sacking towns, massacring entire populations, and crushing the hopes and dreams of the hero-prince so badly that the game ends with him killing himself in shame and despair. Oh btw--you have this weird masochistic fetishy thing going on with "Big Sister." One of your Lord Brother's most elite and respected retainers is a bone-fide serial killer. Annnnndddd YOUR retainers are slave-girls in maid costumes with the all the connotations THAT entails, in your indentured service because you demanded that a particularly troublesome and rebellious village chieftain produce his daughters as "tribute." Thats not a trope or a silly moment or a fanservice thing--thats just par-for-the-course on how dark this story is gonna get. Now lets talk about the scene where you put down the rebellion in Cheve...)

...there's a more interesting story then what we actually got in Conquest...

*sigh* so many missed opportunities in that game. Fates could have been so spectacular it they stuck to their original concept and just ran with it. 
  

Edited November 27, 2018 by Shoblongoo

[Slumber]

16 minutes ago, Thane said:

Funny, I've heard the exact opposite. I've heard that Karel is great because he's impossible to take seriously and is therefore brilliant. 

Karel was intent on killing Karla, but didn't. That is the same as saying as it's okay that Peri is messed up because she didn't actually succeed in harming someone of the cast.

Karel is also very clear in that he is waiting for the trio - whoever recruits him - that he is waiting for them to get strong so that he can then kill them.

1. ??? The hell are you talking about with the bolded? Even if that's what people take away, it's clearly not the intention of his character.
2. Uh, no? How does this make Peri and Karel at all similar? Karel's whole deal is he wants to kill strong people. He doesn't even bother with Guy when Guy challenges him and wants to become Karel's apprentice. He's not out killing random bystanders or innocents in the middle of a conflict. If I recall, one thing we never actually hear from Karel is if he kills innocents, and his interactions with Guy are pretty clear of that. Karel doesn't target the weak. While he's definitely a sociopath/cold-blooded killer in FE7, he's a focused killer. Peri is not, and kills whoever. And, once again, Peri's played for laughs. You can say "Ha ha Karel's such a silly character that I laugh every time he talks", but it's clear as day that his characterization is supposed to be played for laughs. He's a creep and it's played straight. Nobody's cracking jokes about him. Everybody's legitimately creeped out by him(Geitz and Dart), praying for his mortal soul(Lucius), or they want something out of him(Karla and Guy). You could argue that Dart's line is supposed to be comedic, but the situation of the matter is supposed to be funny, not Karel himself.
3. Which is, again, clear night and day from what we get out of Tharja and Peri. Karel's a bad man, but he has somewhat of a code to who he goes after. And, while a bit unfair to Peri and Tharja, we know he changes pretty much as soon as he joins in FE7. We know he eventually becomes a peaceful and wise swordsman. On the other hand, some people try to rein in Peri's bad habit, but people also straight up tell Peri "I don't care if you're a murderer, I love you for who you are(Which is strictly a murderer)!", and Thraja's love confession to most people is a threat, and the furthest look we get into the future for her, while skewed in one direction due to the horrific circumstances surrounding it, show that Tharja is capable of becoming a much worse person than she already is.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Slumber

[Thane]

1 minute ago, Slumber said:

• ??? The hell are you talking about with the bolded? Even if that's what people take away, it's clearly not the intention of his character.

Easy, tiger, I merely pointed out I found it a fun contrast.

2 minutes ago, Slumber said:

While he's definitely a sociopath/cold-blooded killer in FE7, he's a focused killer.

Well that certainly excuses him tagging along with the Elibe trio without any major troubles. 

Yes, I think Karel is better than Peri, but Peri happens to be the very worst minor character in the series. Karel is still an unhinged murderer, just like the people you spend the majority of the game fighting. Why aren't we putting this obviously dangerous man - who's already got a large body count to his name - to the sword, other than the reason that we know he'll survive the game because of his appearance in Binding Blade? 

[BZL8]

11 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

....god I hope not...
 

It would be an execution thing. It would have to be done correctly, organically, and respectfully to the franchise. I actually think Fates with its Birthright/Conquest split and the whole light-vs-dark duality theme would have been the perfect game to give it an experimental try.

Like they could have purposefully gone out of their way to make Birthright the most light, fluffy, upbeat, unicorns-and-rainbows installment in the history of Fire Emblem. 

And then as a point of contrast--with Conquest just gone full grimdark.

(i.e. imagine a reworking of the plot of conquest where there's absolutely no pretense of Corrin is a good person and trying to do the right thing here, with all the the storytelling problems that premise caused within the context of what Corrin actually does in Conquest. Corrin in this imagining of conquest is unambiguously and unapologetically evil. There's no pretense of "FOR THE GREATER GOOD!"--you're playing the villains. You're sacking towns, massacring entire populations, and crushing the hopes and dreams of the hero-prince so badly that the game ends with him killing himself in shame and despair. Oh btw--you have this weird masochistic fetishy thing going on with "Big Sister." One of your Lord Brother's most elite and respected retainers is a bone-fide serial killer. Annnnndddd YOUR retainers are slave-girls in maid costumes with the all the connotations THAT entails, in your indentured service because you demanded that a particularly troublesome and rebellious village chieftain produce his daughters as "tribute." Thats not a trope or a silly moment or a fanservice thing--thats just par-for-the-course on how dark this story is gonna get. Now lets talk about the scene where you put down the rebellion in Cheve...)

...there's a more interesting story then what we actually got in Conquest...

*sigh* so many missed opportunities in that game. Fates could have been so spectacular it they stuck to their original concept and just ran with it. 
  

Well, not necessarily by making the protagonist a full-blown edgy villain. I would rather see a traditional Fire Emblem lord and cast be displaced in a brutal, bleak setting that is crawling with a mixture of Cormac McCarthy-esque villains (think Judge Holden and Anton Chigurh) and Genealogy schemers like Arvis  and seeing how they respond to such a brutal setting (Think Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, a traditional archetypal Western hero, being displaced in the bleakness and violent world of "No Country For Old Men"). I pretty much want Genealogy's first half, but to an even more extreme extent. I voiced this idea in a different thread, and I acknowledge it may not fly well with some. 

When I think about it though, tossing Corrin in a world that is more like "No Country For Old Men" would be pretty similar to how Sheriff Bell is displaced in his setting. 

[Shoblongoo]

The difference between a Karel and a Peri/Tharja is that Karel actually displays self-awareness of his immorality and character growth over the course of his appearances in Blazing Sword and Binding Blade.

Something Tharja and Peri never do. 

Karel is more like a Nyx-type character. (Nyx not coincidentally being one of the more well-conceived and well-written chracters in Fates)
 

25 minutes ago, Slumber said:

1. people straight up tell Peri "I don't care if you're a murderer, I love you for who you are(Which is strictly a murderer)!"

This is where Conquest gets lost in the weeds trying to be shonen fluff, when its premise and its characters are screaming "go grimdark"

Peri is a character that makes sense if you're just full-on trying to illustrate the moral depravity of your setting. And thats your consistent theme throughout.

i.e. Xander's relationship with her is well I don't necessarily LOVE that you're completely psychotic. But you're freaky-hot and I'm into some WEIRD shit--I'm going to allow this. Provided of course I get my...benefits...

And that's consistent with Xander's character throughout the narrative--again, there's no pretense of nobility or honor. We are made to understand in no uncertain terms that Xander is not a good dude. 

And everyone else's reaction to this--arrangement--ranges from  morbid fascination to I know. Its disgusting. Don't fucking question it--Prince Xander WILL kill you.

Thats the only  moral setting where a character like Peri works.

18 minutes ago, Thane said:

Peri happens to be the very worst minor character in the series. 

No argument there 

Edited November 27, 2018 by Shoblongoo

[JimmyBeans]

50 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

 

Thank you for reminding me of this scene.... I got a good laugh out of it today.

 

Now in regards to the everyone and the argument,

 

Since people like to pick on the 3ds games a lot I'll compare characters within recent titles, these are 2 characters who I think fit in the category of "Goofy side Character"

Forsyth: A soldier with an, even in Clive's eyes, overbearing sense of patriotism and optimism who dreams of becoming a knight despite coming from a commoner background.

Setsuna: A clumsy, lazy, and absent minded retainer of Hinoka who stumbles into traps for excitement because her privileged life didn't provide any excitement for her.

These two characters do not fit the "mature" aspect we talked about earlier in my opinion, but 1 of them is realistic (gee I wonder which one.....).

A pattern that the 3ds games do is to replace fleshing characters out with easy to recognize tropes to try and make characters more memorable, the 3ds games do this even more than the other games in the series do. Forsyth and Setsuna are both tropy characters, but Forsyth retains his somewhat goofy personality and feels grounded in the world SoV gives us, with his sense of honor, patriotism, and desire to put his life on the line to put Zofia back in proper hands which is the is driving force for being there in the first placed. Forsyth unironically displays all the qualities of a knight, which he so desires to become but the man just does his job with a good attitude. He doesn't constantly spout about how he want's to be a knight in every conversation he is in, but displays what he strives to be with his immense respect for Lukas and Clive, even celebrating and chanting for Clive upon him even talking to him in their first support conversation.

Setsuna on the other hand, while having a few decent supports, is constantly reminding us that she is always getting in stuck in traps and is pretty lazy and absentminded. They choose to remind us of that when instead they could of built of the aspect of her trying to find excitement in her life and maybe that would be a driving force rather than the only reason of her being there in the first place is because she serves Hinoka. Setsuna and Azama are not the worst retainers in birthright and are in my opinion better than Takumi's and Sakura's, but there is a disconnect between to goofy and realistic side of things in that regard, I just find it silly that she is a retainer in the first place, especially for a princess who is a renowned warrior.

Tropes can be done right, and I hope that really tropy characters are done well in the future because I think this pattern will continue throughout the series. There were definitely exceptions, but for the most part SoV did a good job making characters recognizable but still grounded in the world that was set-up.

[Thane]

1 minute ago, Shoblongoo said:

The difference between a Karel and a Peri/Tharja is that Karel actually displays self-awareness of his immorality and character growth over the course of his appearances in Blazing Sword and Binding Blade.

Something Tharja and Peri never do. 

Karel is more like a Nyx-type character. (Nyx not coincidentally being one of the more well-conceived and well-written chracters in Fates)

I strongly oppose how Bartre and Karel were reduced to cartoon caricatures in Blazing Blade when they were rather appealing in Binding Blade. I don't somehow automatically consider it good writing if they take a good character and then in a prequel have them be a complete and utter tosser.

[omegaxis1]

2 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

The difference between a Karel and a Peri/Tharja is that Karel actually displays self-awareness of his immorality and character growth over the course of his appearances in Blazing Sword and Binding Blade.

Something Tharja and Peri never do.

First of all, we have no idea how the hell Karel went from a brutal murdering psychopath to someone that is hailed as a saint. That's not character growth, that's a random 180. And he has two games set in two different time periods that he appears in, something that Peri and Tharja didn't have.

Second, Tharja doesn't change? Where did you get that idea? She's not a good person, sure, but she definitely grows, which you can see in both her supports and various endings. I have no arguments about Peri but don't put Tharja on her level.

29 minutes ago, Slumber said:

and Thraja's love confession to most people is a threat, and the furthest look we get into the future for her, while skewed in one direction due to the horrific circumstances surrounding it, show that Tharja is capable of becoming a much worse person than she already is.

Yeah, you have one Future Past that indicates that, but nothing in her actual endings indicates that she's like that. Also, the fact that Tharja has odd ways of expressing love makes a hell lot more sense than Karel doing a 180 flip like that. Because at least Tharja is in character. 

9 minutes ago, BZL8 said:

Well, not necessarily by making the protagonist a full-blown edgy villain. I would rather see a traditional Fire Emblem lord and cast be displaced in a brutal, bleak setting that is crawling with a mixture of Cormac McCarthy-esque villains (think Judge Holden and Anton Chigurh) and Genealogy schemers like Arvis  and seeing how they respond to such a brutal setting (Think Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, a traditional archetypal Western hero, being displaced in the bleakness and violent world of "No Country For Old Men"). I pretty much want Genealogy's first half, but to an even more extreme extent. I voiced this idea in a different thread, and I acknowledge it may not fly well with some. 

When I think about it though, tossing Corrin in a world that is more like "No Country For Old Men" would be pretty similar to how Sheriff Bell is displaced in his setting. 

Honestly, what you described could easily be something you could use for Lucina's Future as a game. There is really nothing bleaker than Lucina's future, and having the characters there deal with that hellscape is something I want to see more of.

[JimmyBeans]

4 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

 

Second, Tharja doesn't change? Where did you get that idea? She's not a good person, sure, but she definitely grows, which you can see in both her supports and various endings. I have no arguments about Peri but don't put Tharja on her level.

There is a very good reason that people don't acknowledge Tharja's growth, it's because her relationship with her daughter completely ruins any growth she may of had with her supports, I agree that she is nowhere near Peri level, but her growth gets trivialized especially when she is cursing her husband who she supposedly learned from.

[Slumber]

14 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Yeah, you have one Future Past that indicates that, but nothing in her actual endings indicates that she's like that. Also, the fact that Tharja has odd ways of expressing love makes a hell lot more sense than Karel doing a 180 flip like that. Because at least Tharja is in character.

I attribute that 180 flip to be more of a problem with FE6's way of characterizing, since it was IS' first attempt at hardcore character focus. I agree that 180 flip isn't good for him.

And the main issue with that second bit that I have, and the focus of this thread, is how emblematic it is with the writing of Fates and Awakening. Yeah, Tharja being a terrible person, hexing allies and threatening love interests is entirely in-character for her. The problem is that she's supposed to be a good guy and that this is in-character. Even the product(Not necessarily the actual act of it, since that's generally when Noire gets semi-serious) of her child abuse with Noire is often played for laughs.

Things like harming your allies and abusing your child/spouse should be treated with more weight and consequence than Awakening gives. When you're under the impression that characters like Tharja are totally fine for goofy comedy and don't at all compromise the tone of the games, this is when you start getting Peris and Camillas.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Slumber

[Shoblongoo]

2 minutes ago, Slumber said:

Things like harming your allies and abusing your child/spouse should be treated with more weight and consequence than Awakening gives. When you're under the impression that characters like Tharja are totally fine and don't at all compromise the tone of the games, this is when you start getting Peris and Camillas.

Tharja is basically Sonia 2.0 + the stalker-waifu angle.

In a game that took her character flaws seriously she would be a villain.  

[omegaxis1]

5 minutes ago, JimmyBeans said:

There is a very good reason that people don't acknowledge Tharja's growth, it's because her relationship with her daughter completely ruins any growth she may of had with her supports, I agree that she is nowhere near Peri level, but her growth gets trivialized especially when she is cursing her husband who she supposedly learned from.

 

1 minute ago, Slumber said:

I attribute that 180 flip to be more of a problem with FE6's way of characterizing, since it was IS' first attempt at hardcore character focus. I agree that 180 flip isn't good for him.

And the main issue with that second bit that I have, and the focus of this thread, is how emblematic it is with the writing of Fates and Awakening. Yeah, Tharja being a terrible person, hexing allies and threatening love interests is entirely in-character for her. The problem is that she's supposed to be a good guy and that this is in-character. Even the product(Not necessarily the actual act of it, since that's generally when Noire gets semi-serious) of her child abuse with Noire is often played for laughs.

Things like harming your allies and abusing your child should be treated with more weight and consequence than Awakening gives. When you're under the impression that characters like Tharja are totally fine and don't at all compromise the tone of the games, this is when you start getting Peris and Camillas.

Both instances of Tharja's case are still more in character for her. It makes sense. She was raised under the dark arts. She even stated that her umbilical cord was cut using dark magic. It is messed up that she abused Noire in a Future Past, and she is still doing it with the Noire that came back to the past, but the issue is that Tharja also expresses a case of genuine love for her daughter. Despite how Noire hated being cursed and hexed, she showed actual enthusiasm for it as well, wanting to learn it, yet Tharja ended up forbidding her from taking it up because she feared that it might hurt her. 

Tharja might be a "good" guy, but she's not a good person. She's not meant to be. She's raised under dark magical traditions and grew up to be how she is. And yet, despite that, she does go through efforts to help people, using her hexes to protect people from illnesses, protect people from harm, etc.

And honestly, in regards to laugh, it isn't like we have had dark humor. One thing that really pissed me off about Holmes in TRS is how the pirate that was spared from death and tried to be a better person, Holmes still considered killing the guy off despite the man trying to make an honest effort to change for the better. It's played for laughs, but it's still screwed up in my opinion. Cause Holmes from my perspective gave the impression that he'd do it. 

Dark humor exists and we're supposed to laugh at it nonetheless. Just cause one seems more blatant and on your face doesn't excuse the other ones either.

1 minute ago, Shoblongoo said:

Tharja is basically Sonia 2.0 + the stalker-waifu angle.

In a game that took her character flaws seriously she would be a villain.  

Oh? I didn't know that Tharja would murder someone's parents and then take their child like that. 

Would that actually be something Tharja would do? 

The answer is no, by the way. 

Also, take its flaws seriously? Honestly, that's another thing. So people are gonna be whiny about minor child abuse (can't even consider it child abuse since Noire is not even a kid in this scenario), despite how the person also does many other good things, yet people defend Karel, who murdered his OWN family? 

[BZL8]

21 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Honestly, what you described could easily be something you could use for Lucina's Future as a game. There is really nothing bleaker than Lucina's future, and having the characters there deal with that hellscape is something I want to see more of.

The thing is though (your mileage might vary), is that something like Lucina's Future comes no where close to what hell a Cormac McCarthy-like setting would be. You thought Grima or Loptyr/Loptous was nasty? Try Judge Holden, a human villain who feels more like evil incarnate himself, or Anton Chigurh, an assassin that feels more like an unstoppable force of nature than a regular old assassin. Those villains, are arguably more terrifying than an evil dragon. The scenes of violence in a McCarthy setting is more terrifying than any violence in a Fire Emblem game. The worlds of Cormac McCarthy are haunting because they show nothing but humanity at its very worst or show few small sources of light in an otherwise dark world. I personally want to see how a usual FE cast would respond to such a setting.

[Thane]

4 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

Tharja is basically Sonia 2.0 + the stalker-waifu angle.

In a game that took her character flaws seriously she would be a villain.  

Hang on, being a shit person is grounds for being a villain, but being a psychopathic mass murderer isn't because of an earlier appearance in a prequel-sequel?

Tharja's flaws should have been treated with more seriousness, and she can leave a bad taste in my mouth, but Karel is walking around talking about waiting to murder people, blood raining, and mentioning people he has killed. What exactly separates him from the people you're fighting in Blazing Blade? 

[ChefGuevara]

I'd prefer it, yeah, if only because, at the end of the day, there's an excessive amount of uh

dumb anime shit around already, especially in video games, so it'd be nice to have something more grounded, if only for the sake of variety. Also, you know, it keeps the weirdos away and that's always a plus 

[Shoblongoo]

6 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Also, take its flaws seriously? Honestly, that's another thing. So people are gonna be whiny about minor child abuse (can't even consider it child abuse since Noire is not even a kid in this scenario), despite how the person also does many other good things, yet people defend Karel, who murdered his OWN family? 

Karel is interesting because of what we get from his backstory and his supports.

1) He was basically raised in a warrior cult 

2) Everyone in his clan was expected to murder their family or be murdered by their family if they became strong enough--which is to say, Karel wasn't even doing anything that the rest of his family would consider wrong or outlandish when he killed them

3) Karel despite his upbringing and the values that were instilled upon him by his clan eventually has the moral wherewithal to reject those teachings, become his own man, come to terms with his bloodsoaked past, and achieve a form of tranquility.

 

34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

First of all, we have no idea how the hell Karel went from a brutal murdering psychopath to someone that is hailed as a saint..

 
4)  We know from Karel's support with Lucius that meeting Lucius and being exposed to Lucius's strength-of-character and way of processing trauma and seeing the world was instrumental in FE7 Karel becoming FE6 Karel; Lucius showed him the light and changed him.

Which if a fucking phenomenal feat of piety for Lucius, and helps flesh Lucius out as a character + illustrate whats so special about him (one of the reasons Lucius is one of my favorite characters in FE7)

Thats the beauty of the writing in FE7. Even a psycho killer like Karel is written at a level where there's nuance and depth of character and believable relationships in the way they interact with other characters.

And Karel is admittedly one of the shallower characters in FE7's writing. 

[BZL8]

I personally see a wasted potential with characters like Karel, Tharja, and Peri. Why not use those characters (particularly bloodlusted Karel and Peri) to have the other characters in the game philosophically reflect on the violence in the war and/or to explore the inner human darkness within the various characters on the roster?   

[Thane]

Well, this debate does tie into what I said in my first post: there's no clear cut answer for maturity even means in this context. The consensus for what to do seems to be "write better and don't muck it up", which is a groundbreaking new agreement between fans.

[Slumber]

45 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

And honestly, in regards to laugh, it isn't like we have had dark humor. One thing that really pissed me off about Holmes in TRS is how the pirate that was spared from death and tried to be a better person, Holmes still considered killing the guy off despite the man trying to make an honest effort to change for the better. It's played for laughs, but it's still screwed up in my opinion. Cause Holmes from my perspective gave the impression that he'd do it. 

Dark humor exists and we're supposed to laugh at it nonetheless. Just cause one seems more blatant and on your face doesn't excuse the other ones either.

Oh? I didn't know that Tharja would murder someone's parents and then take their child like that. 

Would that actually be something Tharja would do? 

The answer is no, by the way.

It's one thing to attempt dark comedy. It's another to attempt dark comedy, and then have the reactions basically be the exact same as every other comedic situation involving character gimmicks.

Take South Park for example, which is a pretty cartoonish and colorful dark comedy series. When Cartman gets people killed or does other monstrous things, the joke isn't "Hehe, Cartman got people killed", which is more or less how Fire Emblem has presented "dark" comedy for Awakening and Fates. In South Park, the jokes surrounding Cartman's darker moments involve how he's a complete idiot who becomes incredibly competent when it comes to harming people or accomplishing his own twisted goals, the deadpan/straight(Yet not realistic) reactions of the people around him and his over the top awful actions, wondering why anybody bothers even associating with Cartman, or the pettiness of the catalysts that set off Cartman's episodes. There's basically nobody else like Cartman, and people don't treat/react to other characters the same way they do to Cartman, and the dark comedy of other situations is handled differently from how Cartman's episodes are(Stanley's Cup is nothing like Scott Tenorman Must Die or Kenny Dies, for example).

In Fates and Awakening, you pretty much take the bad shit that people like Tharja, Peri and Camilla say and do at face value, and accept the jokes that the developers put on top of it. Most of this amounts to people going "Oh boy, what am I going to do with you?". Tharja mentioning that she's hexing members of the army and threatening her own husband? Almost the exact same reactions people give to Peri when she mentions killing innocent people. Alright, both heinous acts, people are clearly exasperated dealing with them. But then you get to Nina and her gay fantasies involving men in the army, and she's given the exact same treatment people give Tharja and Peri, another character where the punchline to her quirk is generally "Oh boy, what am I going to do with you?"

Maybe if I felt that Fire Emblem did dark comedy well at all, I'd have a different opinion. But I feel like Tharja would have to be an entirely different character for it to work. I also feel like, maybe, just maybe...

This whole conversation has been what I've been saying from the start, and that having the vast majority of supports be comical and silly is a bad idea. Maybe turning Fire Emblem into a borderline comedic franchise only hurts the tone and characters when you try to tackle any issue that's more serious than a boy who likes to dress up like a girl. Maybe there needs to be some second thoughts that go into writing characters like Tharja and Peri, and maybe they shouldn't be treated the same way as everyone else. They used to do this. Karel's not treated the same way Barte is in FE7.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Slumber

[TheGoodHoms]

Above all else I just hope that the gameplay remains enjoyable not matter the tone. In my eyes nothing makes or breaks a game more that how a game plays, the story and tone of Tokyo Mirage Sessions is ridiculous and stupid, but the game itself is so much fun that I don't really care about anything else once I'm exploring a dungeon and fighting monsters.

[BZL8]

7 minutes ago, Thane said:

Well, this debate does tie into what I said in my first post: there's no clear cut answer for maturity even means in this context. The consensus for what to do seems to be "write better and don't muck it up", which is a groundbreaking new agreement between fans.

The answer to what constitutes better writing is highly subjective, especially in regards to characters whose ideals and thought process might be a little messed-up. 

[GrandeRampel]

Tharja's character is an hot mess and it saddens me. Because with her character we could have the best example of a classic dark mage who isn't a villain in all of fire emblem.

First of all:

31 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

The difference between a Karel and a Peri/Tharja is that Karel actually displays self-awareness of his immorality and character growth over the course of his appearances in Blazing Sword and Binding Blade.

Something Tharja and Peri never do. 


 

What? What game have you played? I can give you Peri, but Tharja knows she is an immoral and pretty selfish person. She admits it, she is a loner who doesn't want to be bothered by other people. She is okay with being hated and misunderstood, she expects it.

Which is exactly why she could have been good, oh so good. You don't become a dark mage if you are a good guy who wants to help people, and you don't decide to become one on a whim. This shit is weird, complicated and dangerous, ask Canas' siblings. You need to have a particular ambition to go down this dangerous path (or you can just be crazy in the head like Henry), which is why many dark mages are power hungry villains. And why all the playable dark mages feel off, like they aren't different from regular mages.

Canas is a nerdy goofball, Knoll is depressed but a pretty selfless good guy and Nyx is actually a pretty well thought character in the sense that she was an actual dark mage in the past but was punished for being power hungry like dark mages SHOULD be and now seeks redemption. I don't know much about Salem but I think he is supposed to be same as Nyx.

Which leaves Awakening as the only game with playable dark mages that act like ACTUAL dark mages, cursing, loving blood and being weirdos that people don't want to interact with.

Think about it, Tharja joins us because she doesn't give two shits about her country and just wants to be left alone, and not forced to die for a cause that isn't the one she decided herself. This is Dark Mage 101 and i love it:

"I don't give a shit about politics, the only war I will fight in is the one against the kids who threw rocks at me when I was six."

Which is why it's such a disappointment that her own game treats her like a joke. I can give a pass to the yandere thing.

It actually makes sense for a being connected to the dark arts to feel weirdly charmed by the vessel of Grima, and in a better written game this could have been used to give Tharja a reason to stay with the sheperds after the war and as some clever foreshadowing for the big twist about Robin.

But alas, in the game Tharja gets like 40 other gag-traits on top of the obsession with Robin and her good supports are like 6. Wasted potential.

Oh yeah, to answer to the op, being "mature" isn't the problem. There are a lot of mature elements hidden in both games. Sometimes not even hidden, like Lucina's doomed future that is played very seriously. They just need better writers, and to actually do something with the perfectly good characters they create, outside of supports.

[Thane]

23 minutes ago, BZL8 said:

The answer to what constitutes better writing is highly subjective, especially in regards to characters whose ideals and thought process might be a little messed-up. 

Right-o, that was my point, though I wouldn't exactly call an unhinged serial killer who loudly states his intention to kill people of the party at a later date to have a "little messed up" thought process. Again, that's pretty much the Black Fang, the same unsympathetic twats you spend most of the game fighting. There is no complexity here.

Edited November 28, 2018 by Thane

[omegaxis1]

28 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

Karel is interesting because of what we get from his backstory and his supports.

1) He was basically raised in a warrior cult 

2) Everyone in his clan was expected to murder their family or be murdered by their family if they became strong enough--which is to say, Karel wasn't even doing anything that the rest of his family would consider wrong or outlandish when he killed them

3) Karel despite his upbringing and the values that were instilled upon him by his clan eventually has the moral wherewithal to reject those teachings, become his own man, come to terms with his bloodsoaked past, and achieve a form of tranquility.

... Okay, take everything you just said... now apply it to the fact that Tharja was raised in a family of DARK mages. Even moreso, add in the fact that she's from Plegia, which is also known to be a Theocracy where the major religion is the Grimleal. If you are going to say that what Karel does makes perfect sense due to his upbringing, then guess what? Tharja's makes just as much sense. 

36 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

4)  We know from Karel's support with Lucius that meeting Lucius and being exposed to Lucius's strength-of-character and way of processing trauma and seeing the world was instrumental in FE7 Karel becoming FE6 Karel; Lucius showed him the light and changed him.

Which if a fucking phenomenal feat of piety for Lucius, and helps flesh Lucius out as a character + illustrate whats so special about him (one of the reasons Lucius is one of my favorite characters in FE7)

Thats the beauty of the writing in FE7. Even a psycho killer like Karel is written at a level where there's nuance and depth of character and believable relationships in the way they interact with other characters.

And Karel is admittedly one of the shallower characters in FE7's writing. 

... Not really. It still doesn't make the biggest case of how he changed from a psychotic murderer to a saint that became all calm. Hell, even their support makes little sense in how Karel just felt "calmer" because it felt like a dramatic shift.