GameFAQs trying to be satirical amuses me.

#51LegendofLegaiaPosted 2/4/2013 9:42:33 PM
PlasmaCannon posted...
In a way it is because he exists. Of course then I think of the phrase out with the old and in with the new even if it is unjust sometimes...


I'd prefer Ike staying if only one of the two could be included, in all honesty. Ike has had major roles in two FE games, or so I've heard (I haven't gotten to playing Radiant Dawn yet). The only other lord that's accomplished that is Marth.

Interesting you bring up PSI as "magic" because I never did look at psychic power as "magic" but maybe that's me.


Well, Ness and Lucas's throws are close to how I'd imagine what psychic opponent would be like.

Other than that, their PSI attacks function pretty much the same way a magic does. You've got the basic fire, ice, and lightning attacks with status affecting attacks (paralysis and confusion) and the defensive powers (healing and shielding), along with the one ultimate offensive attack (PSI Rockin'/Love).

Despite getting a bit of an understanding here this still will not change my opinion of Chrom. I still do not like him or support him for SSB4.


That's okay. You don't have to like or support him, I'd just like people to be a little more open about his inclusion instead of just shutting it down automatically because of his primary weapon and hair color.

I could imagine him being very interesting and unique if they had him pair up with Robin to represent Awakening's focus on building relationships between units or something like that, especially since Robin has a lot of the job classes open to him.
---
Ninten/Giygas/Porky/Masked Man_Ridley_Black Shadow_Little Mac_Animal Crosser_Toad/Bowser Jr._Mega Man_Mewtwo_Palutena and Terra FOR SMASH! / = Either one
#52SpunkySixPosted 2/4/2013 9:50:40 PM
ViewtifulGene posted...
SpunkySix posted...
Except the theme would totally go against the entire battle system in FE and variety would objectively be increased by NOT all using the same weapon.

If we want to get technical, every character ever could have any moveset, so every part of what matters about them beyond sales for Nintendo is purely aesthetic.


Your definition of appropriate FE representation is a want, not a need.

If it's all aesthetic then stop using any of it as if it had an objective purpose.

Still no objective reason to choose the non-sword-user over the sword user.


So adding a person that uses a different weapon over a person that uses the same weapon is not an objective statement of variety? The same weapon adds as much variety as a different weapon aesthetically? I'm not sure I understand. Your opinion on whether or not this is good may be different, but as far as I see it, having a different weapon objectively adds more variety, and the subjective part is your preference for or against having this variety. Normally that would make this a moot point, but this is about my perspective. From my perspective, variety is important and I feel that I've shown plainly that other weapons would objectively add to it.

Let me ask this, and it ties in to Legaia's post:

If every Pokerep from the start was a water type starter, would you be satisfied despite the fact that this is totally nonindicative of how the Pokemon series works in terms of variety and in terms of extremely basic game mechanics as long as they had unique movesets?

If you can honestly answer yes to that, and if you can then go ahead, then I'll be willing to say that you've at least shown a strong consistency in your thought process.
---
Tissue to the extreme!
Sometimes we even manage to speak words.
#53LegendofLegaiaPosted 2/4/2013 11:27:45 PM(edited)
SpunkySix posted...
So adding a person that uses a different weapon over a person that uses the same weapon is not an objective statement of variety? The same weapon adds as much variety as a different weapon aesthetically? I'm not sure I understand.


Aesthetically speaking, Marth, Ike, and Chrom's swords all look different from each other, so I don't understand why having a completely different weapon is necessary for variety.

If every Pokerep from the start was a water type starter, would you be satisfied despite the fact that this is totally nonindicative of how the Pokemon series works in terms of variety and in terms of extremely basic game mechanics as long as they had unique movesets?


If water types were significantly more important to the Pokemon series than any other type, then no, I wouldn't whine about it, especially if the series only had 2 or 3 reps.

This comparison doesn't really work, by the way, as Pokemon generally doesn't put a special amount of focus on any single type. Fire Emblem, on the other hand, has pretty much always focused more on the lords than any other unit in the games.

A fairer comparison would be more along the lines of suggesting that Jeff or Duster should replace Lucas because they'd be more unique and represent the non-PSI side of EarthBound/Mother. No matter how much you think their movesets would be better than what Lucas has, they're still secondary characters. While you might argue that having characters with similar abilities rep a series is "poor representation" (which I'd argue is debatable), it's pretty much undeniable that the main character of a game will almost always be the best rep for the game they came from. Whether or not he'd be more unique, Waluigi would never be a better rep for the Mario series than Mario himself. Ganondorf, whether he's decloned or not, would never be a better rep for the Zelda series than Link. I don't see why Fire Emblem is so different, in that regard.

Also, for the thousandth time, Chrom doesn't have to only use his sword. Canon has been ignored in the past and it can be ignored again.
---
Ninten/Giygas/Porky/Masked Man_Ridley_Black Shadow_Little Mac_Animal Crosser_Toad/Bowser Jr._Mega Man_Mewtwo_Palutena and Terra FOR SMASH! / = Either one
#54ViewtifulGenePosted 2/5/2013 5:39:54 AM(edited)
SpunkySix posted...
ViewtifulGene posted...
SpunkySix posted...
Except the theme would totally go against the entire battle system in FE and variety would objectively be increased by NOT all using the same weapon.

If we want to get technical, every character ever could have any moveset, so every part of what matters about them beyond sales for Nintendo is purely aesthetic.


Your definition of appropriate FE representation is a want, not a need.

If it's all aesthetic then stop using any of it as if it had an objective purpose.

Still no objective reason to choose the non-sword-user over the sword user.


So adding a person that uses a different weapon over a person that uses the same weapon is not an objective statement of variety? The same weapon adds as much variety as a different weapon aesthetically? I'm not sure I understand. Your opinion on whether or not this is good may be different, but as far as I see it, having a different weapon objectively adds more variety, and the subjective part is your preference for or against having this variety. Normally that would make this a moot point, but this is about my perspective. From my perspective, variety is important and I feel that I've shown plainly that other weapons would objectively add to it.

Let me ask this, and it ties in to Legaia's post:

If every Pokerep from the start was a water type starter, would you be satisfied despite the fact that this is totally nonindicative of how the Pokemon series works in terms of variety and in terms of extremely basic game mechanics as long as they had unique movesets?

If you can honestly answer yes to that, and if you can then go ahead, then I'll be willing to say that you've at least shown a strong consistency in your thought process.


Non-sword users are not necessary for aesthetic variety when sword users also add variety. Therefore you cannot use aesthetic variety as a reason to prioritize non-sword-users without being subjective. You want non-sword-users not because they create variety but because they create a type of variety you subjectively want. If it was just about increasing variety then you would be unable to objectively prioritize one or the other, since both add variety. You would need other criteria for the tiebreaker or you would need to choose one through subjective preference.

Yes because accurate representation of source material is not necessary for enjoyment of the game. If it was then I would have to ***** about Falcon doing things outside his car. If it was then I would have to ***** about how Ness and Lucas don't heal themselves. If it was then I would have to ***** about Zelda being playable where she can be attacked by Link.
---
"Once again, ViewtifulGene's logic blows minds and crushes dreams." -TheGamingGolfer
"Supez teh king" -dedekong