The place of a protagonist in Fire Emblem

[NekoKnight]

11 minutes ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

Yeah, I finished all three routes. Honestly, I can understand his viewpoint and action in CQ, it is incredibly stupid and naive, but it is also in-character for them because they are meant to be naive. Yes, the soldier didn't kill anyone sounds unbelievable, but so is Ephraim storming a castle with just about six people or Ike didn't think about using the sword that his dad left behind, or the entire concept of blood pact. 

Ephraim storming the castle and the blood pact are often criticized and rightfully so. No one is claiming that the other stories are without flaws. Fates however is widely considered as being the worst story in the series not for a single flaw, but countless. In regards to Corrin, his mistakes are indeed "in character" but apart from that character being incredibly frustrating, the other characters are always there to absolve him all of his sins and have an unreasonably high opinion of him. We can both agree that Corrin messes up in a lot of ways but can you name a single thing he does that doesn't get forgiven by the rest of the cast? The player worship gets so bad Corrin is even PRAISED for his flaws.

I can't tell you to dislike a character you like, but I also can't take it seriously if one has the opinion that Corrin is just as flawed as any other protagonist. The only arguments in favor of him leave out the very important context that the game presents him as being blameless.

22 minutes ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

maybe 10 years from now Corrin will be remembered as the classic FE lord and the golden example of "how a good FE lord should be like".

I won't be a member of the fandom if the stories ever get so bad that Corrin is considered one of the better characters.

[vanguard333]

8 hours ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

PoR has your typical shounen Ike, RD has him being worshiped like some god, even in a game that tried to present multiple sides/faction he still somehow ended up being the hero in the story. From the beginning when he was appointed leader of Greil's mercenary just because he is the son of Greil, or that Black Knight leave him alive, and to the final battle against Ashera, everything points to him being the special chosen one just as much as Corrin is.

Why is it that everyone I've seen try to defend Corrin tries to incorrectly argue that Ike is no better? It's starting to get annoying. If you're going to make a defence for how a character's written; talk about the positives of Corrin as a character. Don't try to bash one of the most well-liked FE characters just to try to argue that they're no better; you will lose any debate or discussion by doing so. Even if you had irrefutable evidence, saying that one hero sucks as a character does not invalidate a different hero sucking as a character. 

Regarding your argument about the Black Knight, a lot of villains leave the hero alive out of no other reason than plot-driven stupidity; a good example being Anankos with Corrin in Conquest; even Slime Garon believed that they should've killed Corrin when they had the chance. But the Black Knight is not one of those villains. Initially, he left Ike alive to threaten Greil into giving up the location of the medallion (it's rather hard to carry out a threat of harm upon someone who's dead), then the arrival of King Caineghis forces the Black Knight to retreat. But, even then, there's yet another reason that he spares Ike: his victory over Greil was too easy, and he knew it. He needed to know what it was that made Greil so weak compared to what he used to be, and the best way to do that would be to spare the life of Greil's final student until he can figure out what it was. 

 

54 minutes ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

After reading tons of analysis afterwards, I am still not convinced that Corrin is any worse than say Sigurd or Hector in terms of writing. But someone told me that before fateswakening, the flak was focus on Roy, Eirika and Micaiah, and then 3ds lords shift those focus away, and those three previous flak-receivers became well-loved, so who knows maybe 10 years from now Corrin will be remembered as the classic FE lord and the golden example of "how a good FE lord should be like".

Oh, my gosh. "These guys used to be disliked by fans, but now, after these guys that people are saying are even worse, those previous guys are being much better-received. Therefore, the new guys might one day be well-loved" is not an argument, or if it is, it's a really bad one. It doesn't work as evidence for anything, as it can indicate a wide variety of different things. 

[MagicCanonBalls]

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

Why is it that everyone I've seen try to defend Corrin tries to incorrectly argue that Ike is no better? It's starting to get annoying. If you're going to make a defence for how a character's written; talk about the positives of Corrin as a character. Don't try to bash one of the most well-liked FE characters just to try to argue that they're no better; you will lose any debate or discussion by doing so. Even if you had irrefutable evidence, saying that one hero sucks as a character does not invalidate a different hero sucking as a character. 

Regarding your argument about the Black Knight, a lot of villains leave the hero alive out of no other reason than plot-driven stupidity; a good example being Anankos with Corrin in Conquest; even Slime Garon believed that they should've killed Corrin when they had the chance. But the Black Knight is not one of those villains. Initially, he left Ike alive to threaten Greil into giving up the location of the medallion (it's rather hard to carry out a threat of harm upon someone who's dead), then the arrival of King Caineghis forces the Black Knight to retreat. But, even then, there's yet another reason that he spares Ike: his victory over Greil was too easy, and he knew it. He needed to know what it was that made Greil so weak compared to what he used to be, and the best way to do that would be to spare the life of Greil's final student until he can figure out what it was. 

Because I wasn't trying to praise Corrin for being a well-written character, I was just saying him and Ike aren't exactly too far apart in terms of writing quality. Like if this Ike guy can get away with being an average lord then why doesn't Corrin get a pass. Yes, I am fully aware that I am doing it again, because that's how I view all the arguments against Corrin. Like is Sigurd or Ike really any better than him? I AM trying to say that both heroes sucks equally.

The last reason as to why Black Knight leave Ike alive (to test him at his fullest one day) has got to be one of the most edgy and cringy reason in anime/game when I first heard about it. I preferred the Japanese version of how he escaped by using Warp Powder. So Black Knight and Hans basically serve the same function, as in one kills Greil and the latter kills Gunter in BR, and both Ike and Corrin have the reason to revenge against said villain.

Quote

Oh, my gosh. "These guys used to be disliked by fans, but now, after these guys that people are saying are even worse, those previous guys are being much better-received. Therefore, the new guys might one day be well-loved" is not an argument, or if it is, it's a really bad one. It doesn't work as evidence for anything, as it can indicate a wide variety of different things. 

I didn't intend to present this as argument to defend Corrin, more like, just trying to say that opinions and taste on things changes and varies, no matter who or what the subject is.  

I am not trying to win some debate on something as subjective as quality of stories and characters. So I won't be putting together iron clad arguments or evidence to win or prove anything. I don't even hope to convince anyone. It's just what I have been thinking this whole time about fates and comparing it to other games in FE series.

[Ottservia]

34 minutes ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

Because I wasn't trying to praise Corrin for being a well-written character, I was just saying him and Ike aren't exactly too far apart in terms of writing quality. Like if this Ike guy can get away with being an average lord then why doesn't Corrin get a pass. Yes, I am fully aware that I am doing it again, because that's how I view all the arguments against Corrin. Like is Sigurd or Ike really any better than him? I AM trying to say that both heroes sucks equally.

the two may appear similiar but it's the subtle nuances in how they are involved in their stories that make all the difference. You know I've honestly started to hate the argument that "all FE stories/lords are the same" cause it ignores all the fundamental subtle differences in themes, nuances, and storytelling that each story has. Yes, they may all appear the same on the surface and follow the same general archetype/template but when you really dig deep and analyze each of them for what they are they truly are different in their own unique ways(For better or for worse). Since I have only played ten chapters of PoR, I'm gonna compare Corrin to a protagonist I'm a little more familiar with like Chrom/Robin(Even though Comparing two characters is fundamentally a moot point cause they are in fact different people and as I said the way their stories are told are different on a fundamental level). Let's break things down shall we? 

What kind of story is awakening trying to tell? Well in the case of Chrom it's a case of generational burdening. You know stuff like passing the torch and all that jazz. The idea that you must place your trust in the next generation to fix the failings of the previous. You must find the strength to be the person your country needs to set a standard and guide the next generation toward a brighter future. The way Chrom is used to tell this theme is relatively solid. A little rushed and rough around the edges sure but it works for the most part. Chrom starts out as sort of a hot-headed shounen hero. He's reckless, quick to anger, and is always to the first to bark and take action. If Gangrel wants a war by the gods he'll give him one. It is only after Emmeryn's sacrifice and Robin's influence that he begins to cool his head and learn what his sister truly stood for. He learns to think before acting. He is able to grow into the leader his country truly needs to lead it into a brighter future. Now this arc is not perfect. For one, Chrom's recklessness is not dwelled on as long as it needs to be. Secondly, A lot of that growth does kind of get undercut/overshadowed by Robin and Lucina and the greater emphasis on Grima later in the story. Fundamentally(I'm using that word a lot) speaking though, it's sound and it works.

Now let's do the same for Corrin. What kind of story is fates trying to tell with Corrin? what is Corrin's arc? Well the only overarching theme I can think of is the whole blood vs bond thing which is directly undercut by Corrin being allowed to S-support his hoshidian siblings meaning their whole side of the argument is rendered completely moot cause at that point they're just being hypocritcal selfish assholes. Now besides that what exactly is Corrin's character arc throughout the course of any of the three paths? war is bad? well we kind of already knew that cause it's nothing new to the FE franchise. Thing is I can't really think of one. Even if we're under the assumption that they're going for a "flat character arc" with him(Which they're not judging by how much stupid angst they go through), then they certainly didn't do a good job of it. Again, they don't go through any sort of real character arc. They don't change or grow throughout the story, the way the world reacts to the them isn't at all interesting(Again that's if they were going for a flat character arc), they don't learn anything. Corrin just exists as a stand in to stroke the player's ego which is what most light novel isekai harem protags are used for like kirito(and we all know how those stories turn out).

[Book Bro]

In no way does Corrin compare to Ike, Sigurd, or any other lord.

Ike being made commander is met with at least some resistance and in PoR is shown to need Titania and Soren, among others, to guide him and keep him from being impulsive, clueless, and offending people. Corrin is loved by people who they just met and is instantly given command of an army despite literally all their siblings being more qualified, and their mistakes are excused constantly by those around him. Sigurd needs to work to gather support and is ultimately punished for his mistakes in a huge way.

[vanguard333]

50 minutes ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

Because I wasn't trying to praise Corrin for being a well-written character, I was just saying him and Ike aren't exactly too far apart in terms of writing quality. Like if this Ike guy can get away with being an average lord then why doesn't Corrin get a pass. Yes, I am fully aware that I am doing it again, because that's how I view all the arguments against Corrin. Like is Sigurd or Ike really any better than him? I AM trying to say that both heroes sucks equally.

Okay; when you said you didn't understand all the Corrin bashing, I thought you were trying to make a defence of Corrin. 

That being said; the answer to your question that I bolded is: yes; very much so. There's a lot that I could say that shows how, even from a purely character-writing and literary perspective, Sigurd and Ike are better than Corrin. I can't say much about Sigurd, but the fact that he's a tragic hero who dies as a result of his own fatal flaws puts him above Corrin.

As for Ike, the two are not even comparable. I've said so much stuff about why Ike is a very well-written protagonist across multiple threads on this forum, and trying to include every reason why would be almost impossible. I'll say why later. But if you look at some of my older comments, they say why. 

1 hour ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

The last reason as to why Black Knight leave Ike alive (to test him at his fullest one day) has got to be one of the most edgy and cringy reason in anime/game when I first heard about it. I preferred the Japanese version of how he escaped by using Warp Powder. So Black Knight and Hans basically serve the same function, as in one kills Greil and the latter kills Gunter in BR, and both Ike and Corrin have the reason to revenge against said villain.

It may seem cringy to you, but it's completely in-character for the Black Knight. Everything the Black Knight does is out of service to his master, except for this; this is his personal ambition: surpassing his teacher. Him having a personal goal such as this gives him depth beyond just being a minion of the bad guy. You're arguing that you would prefer that the Black Knight have no depth beyond a minion of the bad guy that kills the mentor? Because that's all that Hans has: he's sadistic, he kills the mentor, and he serves Garon. I just summed up Hans in his entirety. 

Wait; you prefer the "my warp powder malfunctioned and you only fought an afterimage of me" excuse for why the Black Knight survived Path of Radiance than him having let Ike win? The latter is in-character and explains the power difference between him in PoR and him in RD, while the former sounds a fantasy version of the premise of every second episode of Star Trek: The Original Series. 

[MagicCanonBalls]

14 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

the two may appear similiar but it's the subtle nuances in how they are involved in their stories that make all the difference. You know I've honestly started to hate the argument that "all FE stories/lords are the same" cause it ignores all the fundamental subtle differences in themes, nuances, and storytelling that each story has. Yes, they may all appear the same on the surface and follow the same general archetype/template but when you really dig deep and analyze each of them for what they are they truly are different in their own unique ways(For better or for worse). Since I have only played ten chapters of PoR, I'm gonna compare Corrin to a protagonist I'm a little more familiar with like Chrom/Robin(Even though Comparing two characters is fundamentally a moot point cause they are in fact different people and as I said the way their stories are told are different on a fundamental level). Let's break things down shall we?

Well I like Chrom more than Corrin so if you compare these two I am definitely gonna agree with you cuz I like him more. I mean do I have more things to said about Corrin regarding your third paragraph that tackle character arc and developement ? Yes, but I just watched the latest episode of Brooklyn 99 and I am kinda high on laughing right now so.... Also it seems like you haven't played some of the games in the series like PoR so I am sorry if I spoil anything to you earlier on. 

[MagicCanonBalls]

5 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

It may seem cringy to you, but it's completely in-character for the Black Knight. Everything the Black Knight does is out of service to his master, except for this; this is his personal ambition: surpassing his teacher. Him having a personal goal such as this gives him depth beyond just being a minion of the bad guy. You're arguing that you would prefer that the Black Knight have no depth beyond a minion of the bad guy that kills the mentor? Because that's all that Hans has: he's sadistic, he kills the mentor, and he serves Garon. I just summed up Hans in his entirety. 

Wait; you prefer the "my warp powder malfunctioned and you only fought an afterimage of me" excuse for why the Black Knight survived Path of Radiance than him having let Ike win? The latter is in-character and explains the power difference between him in PoR and him in RD, while the former sounds a fantasy version of the premise of every second episode of Star Trek: The Original Series. 

See if Black Knight revelation (the real identity, not just the removed helmet identity, and his motivation) in the final chapter of RD came out much earlier, I would have like him much more, cuz I am a sucker for those "loyal and help master to achieve their greater ambition" kind of character. But his entire interaction with Ike in the earlier PoR just irks me in the wrong way, like he is just there to make sure Ike wants to level up. In PoR he is the mysterious and strong character who works for the big bad and killed the protagonist's dad while casually speaking in vague terms to increase his mysterious element, which I still sorta dig. It's only in RD he started to have development at the final chapter.  

Well the original Japanese excuse was more believably ridiculous (does that make sense?), while the localized version makes him sounds like a sore loser so it sort of undercut his original badass-ness, because Ike still win the fight with a freaking hammer (at least in my version). 

I happens to like Star Trek, which reminds me I haven't started watching the season 2 of Discovery yet. Here's hoping Michelle Yeoh doesn't freaking disappear after 2 episodes.

[Flere210]

2 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Corrin just exists as a stand in to stroke the player's ego which is what most light novel isekai harem protags are used for like kirito(and we all know how those stories turn out).

Pls, even Kirito get a character arc: he start not trusting other people, then befriend that newbie guild, when they die he go full edgelord, and then slowly reconcile whit humanity and start the relationship whit Asuna. It's even solid on paper, it just that kawahara only show like 5% of the 2 years in Aincrad and everything came out as super rushed and shallower than it could be. The whole reason why SAO is hated compared whit so many trainwrecks is that it could be great whit more care. 

Corrin doesn't have even that, Fates need a massive rewrite to be salvaged.

 

4 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

Why is it that everyone I've seen try to defend Corrin tries to incorrectly argue that Ike is no better? It's starting to get annoying. If you're going to make a defence for how a character's written; talk about the positives of Corrin as a character. Don't try to bash one of the most well-liked FE characters just to try to argue that they're no better; you will lose any debate or discussion by doing so.

I don't think that RD is as bad as Corrin, but it's like saying that getting punched in the face is not as bad as getting punched in the face by Mike Tyson. 

Corrin is undefendable if you understand even a litle about writing, but i also believe that people overhate them. Sure they are bad, but Fire Emblem is not Suikoden, it's protagonists are mediocre to bad. As bad as Corrin is, they are just a litle worse than other worse, not massively worse imo, because the bar is not exactly high. And i hate RD Ike because i found it a massive step down compared to PoR Ike.

Edited February 18, 2019 by Flere210

[vanguard333]

29 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

I don't think that RD is as bad as Corrin, but it's like saying that getting punched in the face is not as bad as getting punched in the face by Mike Tyson. 

My point was never about whether or not it is as bad; my point was that "But this other thing is no better" is not a defence for the first thing being bad.

 

39 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

Corrin is indefensible if you understand even a little about writing, but i also believe that people over-hate them. Sure they are bad, but Fire Emblem is not Suikoden, it's protagonists are mediocre to bad. As bad as Corrin is, they are just a little worse than other worse, not massively worse imo, because the bar is not exactly high. And i hate RD Ike because i found it a massive step down compared to PoR Ike.

I'd hardly consider PoR Ike "mediocre"; Ike is a very well-written protagonist. 

 

2 hours ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

I happens to like Star Trek, which reminds me I haven't started watching the season 2 of Discovery yet. Here's hoping Michelle Yeoh doesn't freaking disappear after 2 episodes.

I like the good Star Trek shows (namely Next Generation, aside from most of seasons 1 and 8). Besides; my point wasn't that those plots I mentioned were bad (to be honest, my point was mainly for humour); I simply meant that it seemed extremely out-of-nowhere. 

 

2 hours ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

Well the original Japanese excuse was more believably ridiculous (does that make sense?), while the localized version makes him sounds like a sore loser so it sort of undercut his original badass-ness, because Ike still win the fight with a freaking hammer (at least in my version). 

Not really. To me, it just sounded ridiculous. 

You could beat him with a hammer in RD because the armour lost its blessing (look at how much damage it's taken; it has a massive gash in the chestplate). 

[NekoKnight]

I've seen a few people reply to this thread with their belief that all of the protagonists are on a similar level, without really explaining in detail why they came to that conclusion. If you think most of the writing in the series is mediocre to bad or that writing quality is purely subjective, that's fine. I can't argue against your feelings, those belong to you. But I'd appreciate it if you acknowledged that's just how you feel instead of ignoring or deflecting the majority of counterarguments people reply with.

I made this thread to have a critical look at what protagonists have been for the series and offer my argument for those that were not good. If you don't want to critically engage that topic, I don't know why you're here.

[SimplyUnknown]

When it comes to the protagonists that the Fire Emblem series has had over the years, I think that you need to look at two places for them. Their role in the story itself, and their role in supports. How a protagonist behaves in the plot is important because that is what everyone playing is going to see, regardless of whether they're doing a speed run or trying to see everything the game has to offer. Support conversations allow us to see how the protagonist interacts with the members of their army and make them a little more human to us.

I feel that both these are important to create a successful protagonist. A character with a lackluster role in the plot, or one that makes decisions that an audience can't agree with, can make it hard for the audience to root for them. Corrin is probably a good example of this type of protagonist. However, a character with minimal or no supports can feel a bit alienating to the player because all we can see of them is how they are in-story. We don't get to see any real humanizing moments. The remake of the original game with Marth is one such example, as is Micaiah from Radiant Dawn.

I think having a strong role in the plot and strong supports are important for a player to really relate to the protagonist. It's similar to what the Tales series does with skits, or social links in the Persona series. We play as these characters and watch them overcome challenges through the plot and get to enjoy the traits less associated with combat through the quieter moments. Which is part of why I think certain characters can be so divisive in this fandom. Because some characters aren't the best in battle or don't contribute much to the plot, but have really good supports that make people want to use them more. Or look them up on Youtube, but that's not important.

The main dilemma that comes from a Lord or Avatar in these games is that unlike with other characters, who are mostly learned about through their supports, we also learn about them through their actions in the main story, and sometimes there's a contrast between them. Either the characterization is off depending on when supports are unlocked or a character's plot actions overshadow how they are in supports. There needs to be a balance between them. A few of the protagonists that I believe have both are the trio from Blazing Blade and Ike in Path of Radiance.  We can see our lords grow more over the course of the story while the supports act as an enhancement to their characters.

Personally, I think FE protagonists have developed a problem because of a slight focus on avatars. Avatars allow the player to interact with the game characters in their own way. However, since no FE avatar has truly been a blank slate except for maybe Kris, this comes into conflict with the role of a protagonist, which is to help guide the story. In order to do that, the protagonist needs to have some sort of personality of their own, which is a direct contrast with the idea of a player avatar. But it's not something IS can address without heavy reworking of the player character's supports and that's not something I believe they are willing to do.

Anyways, that's all I've got for now.

[Errorik]

FE stories are good? Radiance series was mediocre at best. Pro tip: Buy books from the young adult section instead. You won't be frustrated.

[vanguard333]

3 hours ago, Centh said:

FE stories are good? Radiance series was mediocre at best. Pro tip: Buy books from the young adult section instead. You won't be frustrated.

Two things wrong with this sentence:

1.  Path of Radiance's story is good. It is cohesive, has plenty of well-executed twists and turns, thoroughly explores the themes that it presents, and utilizes its characters very effectively. It is most certainly not "mediocre at best". 
2.  Have you seen all the terrible young adult novels that have been churned out in recent years?! Seeing the young adult section in a book store does make frustrated: frustrated that immature, overly edgy stories with almost nonexistent worldbuilding, mediocre-at-best plots, passive protagonists in a story that demands an active protagonist, terrible love triangles (though I may as well be saying terrible pieces of poop with that last one: 99% of love triangles are garbage), and bad attempts at presenting a theme that don't actually explore said theme, somehow are the type of book that "every young adult needs to be reading right now!"

[Errorik]

The idea is if you want meh story telling, it's the place to go. The FE stories are good for someone who is in the young adult section. Hitting bare minimums doesn't make a story good. Why do I even bother lol

[Ottservia]

4 minutes ago, Centh said:

The idea is if you want meh story telling, it's the place to go. The FE stories are good for someone who is in the young adult section. Hitting bare minimums doesn't make a story good. Why do I even bother lol

Then what does make a story “good” to you? If you don’t mind me asking 

[vanguard333]

34 minutes ago, Centh said:

The idea is if you want meh story telling, it's the place to go. The FE stories are good for someone who is in the young adult section. Hitting bare minimums doesn't make a story good. Why do I even bother lol

Two things:

1.  Oh; that's what you meant when you mentioned young adult novels. I agree that young adult novels these days are utter garbage.
2.  You have presented zero evidence or arguments for why FE stories are "mediocre at best" or "hit the bare minimum". By contrast, I presented several arguments for why Path of Radiance's story is good, and you didn't respond to a single one. You say, "Why do I even bother lol" when you haven't bothered; you haven't bothered to present any arguments or evidence; merely made statements and presented them as irrefutable facts when the truth is that those statements are far from irrefutable.

[Book Bro]

Pretending FE never had good stories is possibly my least favourite trend post-Awakening. Up there with reducing every female character to a waifu.

I'd agree that FE was never revolutionary in its storytelling (though it's certainly gone to ambitious places like in FE4 and Radiant Dawn), but to say the stories were "the bare minimum" after the NES days is mistaken.

[Ottservia]

13 minutes ago, Book Bro said:

Up there with reducing every female character to a waifu.

Well to be fair waifu culture is a little more complicated an issue than it may seem(well kinda in the way that there are three maybe four sides to it) but I don’t think this is the thread to get into that

[thecrimsonflash]

I personally feel that fire emblem is about a continent and a war on that continent, while it is primarily focused on one side, we still see other opposing and assisting factions as well as the two major players, before a chapter begins we have a narration, where we are brought up to speed on just how everything is going now, when the story begins we have a narration again about the continent's history and the current political state of affairs, we then are introduced to the protagonist after the world and setting are established, this includes primary borders of the main countries.

where awakening and onward falters is that it focuses on characters exclusively, awakening can be seen as less bad because it is already an established world (though given the changes it could use some establishment if you ask me), but fates really dropped the ball on that one, the continent is never established in any meaningful way, all we know is hoshido and nohr the only countries that seem to exist, the tribes mentioned in the story are just tacked on to make the world seem more interesting, but I don't even know where any of this is, but we know nothing of these other countries, no clear motives, no form of governance, not even a name that is worth remembering beyond one chapter and don't tell me it is because they are small, the merchant republic of carcino was more memorable than the wind, fire, and Ice tribes combined, because they were mentioned in the opening and were notable enough to have their own borders.

[NekoKnight]

5 hours ago, Book Bro said:

Pretending FE never had good stories is possibly my least favourite trend post-Awakening. Up there with reducing every female character to a waifu.

I'd agree that FE was never revolutionary in its storytelling (though it's certainly gone to ambitious places like in FE4 and Radiant Dawn), but to say the stories were "the bare minimum" after the NES days is mistaken.

This.

Another comment that irks me is the "go read a book if you want a good story". Acting like games can't or shouldn't have good stories just because there is a medium that focuses exclusively on writing is just bizarre. I don't expect a game to be able to go as in depth into developing its characters or world as a book is able to, but I will judge it based on what is possible in the medium and how much the game prioritizes having a story. Are Fire Emblem games comparable to the greatest epics of literature? Of course not, and no one expects them to be. A game story can still be competently told, have endearing characters and a well defined world. That's what makes a good story, regardless of how many pages the script could fill.

[Flere210]

6 hours ago, Book Bro said:

Pretending FE never had good stories is possibly my least favourite trend post-Awakening. Up there with reducing every female character to a waifu.

I am not pretending, i am comparing fire emblem with games like the Suikoden series(except 4, fuck 4) or the first Final Fantasy Tactic that are about the same themes, and imo those games are so much better that is not even a contest. 

[Interdimensional Observer]

2 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

Another comment that irks me is the "go read a book if you want a good story". Acting like games can't or shouldn't have good stories just because there is a medium that focuses exclusively on writing is just bizarre. I don't expect a game to be able to go as in depth into developing its characters or world as a book is able to, but I will judge it based on what is possible in the medium and how much the game prioritizes having a story. Are Fire Emblem games comparable to the greatest epics of literature? Of course not, and no one expects them to be. A game story can still be competently told, have endearing characters and a well defined world. That's what makes a good story, regardless of how many pages the script could fill.

My sentiments.

 

6 hours ago, thecrimsonflash said:

personally feel that fire emblem is about a continent and a war on that continent, while it is primarily focused on one side, we still see other opposing and assisting factions as well as the two major players, before a chapter begins we have a narration, where we are brought up to speed on just how everything is going now, when the story begins we have a narration again about the continent's history and the current political state of affairs, we then are introduced to the protagonist after the world and setting are established, this includes primary borders of the main countries.

 

Magvel is still one of the worst built worlds, but I do agree that I like world buildings. And to tie it to the above sentiment, I'm not expecting GRRM levels of world building, but I do appreciate all we can get here.

 

1 hour ago, Flere210 said:

i am comparing fire emblem with games like the Suikoden series(except 4, fuck 4) or the first Final Fantasy Tactic that are about the same themes, and imo those games are so much better that is not even a contest. 

I've played 1 & 2 in full, and in my opinion, I must disagree.

Suikoden 1 is awfully generic, and 2 is not what it is hyped up to be to me. The silent flavorless MCs are worshipped, Matthieu and Shu are god tacticians that make Robin and Soren look like dirt. Luca Blight is so very good from beginning to end; and the ideas sans execution weren't bad, but that can be said of a lot. Valm might be a filler arc in Awakening, but in both Suikos, Neclord, although taking up less time of the overall story than Valm, is still awful filler who didn't need to exist. Racial discrimination in Tellius isn't handled the best, but that one three-peoples village in S2 didn't do it all that well either, it was short and nothing really special. Joey's post-Luca plans aren't exactly the most amazing I think either. While S1's villains are wholly lacking.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Interdimensional Observer

[Flere210]

46 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

 The silent flavorless MCs are worshipped.

True, but 2 understand that worshipping a 15 year old boy and is going to put an enormous amount of pressure on his shoulder and he may decide to just say "screw this im out!" And i kinda agree that silent protagonist are lazy, at least they have some multiple choice dialogues.

 

46 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Matthieu and Shu are god tacticians that make Robin and Soren look like dirt.

Strategists winning battles by outmanuevering the other army happen all the time. I only have a problem when the opponents act like morons for no reason, wich admittely happened sometimes.

46 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Valm might be a filler arc in Awakening, but in both Suikos, Neclord, although taking up less time of the overall story than Valm, is still awful filler who didn't need to exist. Racial discrimination in Tellius isn't handled the best, but that one three-peoples village in S2 didn't do it all that well either, it was short and nothing really special.

Agree on both, they are the low points of those games. But one filler chapter is not the same as a filler arc that last one third of the story. 

46 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Joey's post-Luca plans aren't exactly the most amazing I think either. While S1's villains are wholly lacking.

Jowy was into a corner. He could not abbandon the country, was losing momentum in the war and had to contain the Beast Rune. And he was 15 year old, so he was going to screw up in such a situation. I have more of a problem with how easily he is forgiven (am i supposed to believe that the same guy that found a way to attain revenge on an immortal vampire would just not care about the murder of the woman he love?)

 

I have never said that those games were flawless, i find shortcoming even in my favorite stories. I just believe that on average they have less flaws than FE games.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Flere210

[Interdimensional Observer]

2 hours ago, Flere210 said:

I have never said that those games were flawless, i find shortcoming even in my favorite stories. I just believe that on average they have less flaws than FE games.

Sorry then if that was a little too barbed on my part, it probably was. Normally I try to be diplomatic, even when I perceive stings in another's comment, but that got me a little. -Bad case of years of hype failing me when I finally got to play Suiko II. I'm trying to get better with it, but here I though some detailed argument was okay.

 

And about Shu, I wish they had given him an imperfection by dying during his tactical choice to put himself on the line- a case outside of Blight who he couldn't defeat on his wit. I mean I get Leon(is that his name?- Matthieu's uncle who helps Joey) didn't want to kill a genius mind like his own, but it undermined what Shu was trying to do beforehand and made him just a wee too good.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Interdimensional Observer