this was the weakest entry in the fe series.

#31Flamingace18Posted 3/2/2014 5:30:36 AM
This game is a top five Fire Emblem.

But with that said it is the worst in the series in terms of objective game play and difficulty. While Lunatic and Lunatic + are difficult, it's a false sense of difficulty. The plot & individual characters in this game are absolutely terrible. The worst they've put out in a very long time. They're all bland anime archetype characters.

Anyway I went off on a tangent it is still a very good and fun Fire Emblem. You just have to take it for what it is. When you do that it becomes very fun and a top five Fire Emblem.
---
Oklahoma City Thunder, Texas Rangers, St Louis Rams, and Oklahoma Sooners fan. http://cdn2.sbnation.com/assets/3914361/Russ-Troll_medium.gif
#32SilverZangoosePosted 3/2/2014 5:39:33 AM
RJWalker243 posted...
I never said the previous games completely lacked one dimensional characters.

Sully. All she ever does is challenge others to combat. Or train with them. Because women are not inferior to men or something.

Sumia. She's always messing up something in every one of her supports.

Cherche: MINERVA MINERVA MINERVA MINERVA

Inigo: Always flirting and failing with a female or trying to get his male buddies to be his wingman. And still failing.

Frederick: Always with the training.

Yarne: "I'm so scared!" Apparently, he learns not to be such a coward but the moment you initiate a conversation with another character, he's back to be a coward.

Kjelle: Always challenging others. Like her mother except 10x more of a jerk about it.

How's that? Let's take a few characters from another game as an example.

Innes:
With Vanessa: Discussing Duty and some backstory for Innes.
With Eirika: Comes across as a sexist pig is revealed to be more than that.
With Tana: Again comes off a sexist pig but only because of his genuine concern for his sister. He isn't sexist towards Vanessa since she's a trained knight for her life.
With Johsua: Getting swindled by Joshua repeatedly but keeps going because he doesn't realize it. Even when Joshua reveals that he wasn't cheating, Innes doesn't take his money back since he believes that he deserved to lose for not realizing the trick before, showing his character.
With Gerik: Discussing bonds between fellow soldiers, a mercenary's life, etc
With L'arcehel: WOw, this one is bizarre. Exposition about Frelia and Rausten basically.

That's just one character and he shows more personality than 3 or 4 Awakening characters.


The reason Yarne reverts back is because the way the game is designed, the supports can be read in any order, and as many of them can be seen on one playthrough as you want, so it would be impossible to make character development they have in one support stick in another. Call it bad writing if you want, but for the game to have the amount of characters and supports it does, I see no plausible alternative.

With that out of the way, you basically have named 5 one dimensional characters. And even then I'd say 4 really, because if you see Inigo's supports with his father, he actually shows a lot more depth than flirting and failing, and you see that he was actually more serious back in his own timeline.

There are characters in Awakening, whose supports cover as wide a variety of things as what you mentioned with Innes too, for example Gregor.

With Lon'qu: Shows that he can use his wisdom to outsmart opponents, as opposed to just relying on brute force to defeat them. Also reveals backstory about Gregor once wanting to become khan of Ferox.

With Sully: Similar to Lon'qu with the winning fights with wisdom thing, except he also shows good character, as when he essentially has the ability to completely humiliate Sully which is what they agreed on, he just jokes on with her instead.

With Tharja: Reveals backstory involving his brother, and his name.

With Maribelle: At first he seems like he is unruly and is only looking out for himself, but it is later shown he only disregards rules and commands in order to protect people he cares about.

With Cherche: Shows backstory involving Gregor and Cherche's wyvern. Also expands on Gregor's childhood, and his sense of morality.

I know Awakening has its weak characters, but all the games in the series do. It is pointless trying to say that all the Awakening characters have worse characterisation, that they're all one dimensional, or even that on average, there's more poorly written characters in Awakening than in any other game, since a lot of it is subjective.
#33RJWalker243Posted 3/2/2014 6:31:49 AM
SilverZangoose posted...
The reason Yarne reverts back is because the way the game is designed, the supports can be read in any order, and as many of them can be seen on one playthrough as you want, so it would be impossible to make character development they have in one support stick in another. Call it bad writing if you want, but for the game to have the amount of characters and supports it does, I see no plausible alternative.


Maybe not have so many supports? How about having fewer supports but better integrated ones like the previous ones had? No? The supports for characters in previous games are more varied and better written because they exist because the writers wanted to write those supports, not because they were forced to write because the system demanded it.

With that out of the way, you basically have named 5 one dimensional characters. And even then I'd say 4 really, because if you see Inigo's supports with his father, he actually shows a lot more depth than flirting and failing, and you see that he was actually more serious back in his own timeline.


I gave examples, not a comprehensive list.

There are characters in Awakening, whose supports cover as wide a variety of things as what you mentioned with Innes too, for example Gregor.

With Lon'qu: Shows that he can use his wisdom to outsmart opponents, as opposed to just relying on brute force to defeat them. Also reveals backstory about Gregor once wanting to become khan of Ferox.

With Sully: Similar to Lon'qu with the winning fights with wisdom thing, except he also shows good character, as when he essentially has the ability to completely humiliate Sully which is what they agreed on, he just jokes on with her instead.

With Tharja: Reveals backstory involving his brother, and his name.

With Maribelle: At first he seems like he is unruly and is only looking out for himself, but it is later shown he only disregards rules and commands in order to protect people he cares about.

With Cherche: Shows backstory involving Gregor and Cherche's wyvern. Also expands on Gregor's childhood, and his sense of morality.


Gregor is one of the few good ones. Along with Virion (read his support with Frederick or Avatar), Lon'qu (like many of the recent myrmidons, he doesn't fall into the stereotypical myrmidon characterization too much) and few others. In my opinion, it's the females who get stuck with terrible characterization

I know Awakening has its weak characters, but all the games in the series do. It is pointless trying to say that all the Awakening characters have worse characterisation, that they're all one dimensional, or even that on average, there's more poorly written characters in Awakening than in any other game, since a lot of it is subjective.


In my opinion, they're the worst because despite each character having 3 times or even 4 times as many support conversations as a character from games 6 to 9, barely a handful can match characters from previous games.
#34Wandering__HeroPosted 3/2/2014 7:01:52 AM
katella posted...
Wandering__Hero posted...
Hipser value. To(?) neets locked in their basements deriving worth from their ability to play Japanese only games, Awakening came out in english, and worse(?) of all was accessible to those filthy casual Gaijins. I mean if a casual plays this game, how are you supposed to derieve self esteem from it? Real life accomplishments? What are those?

This is direct at people who act like this is the worst game ever and fe 4 and 5 are flawless master(?) pieces, I know their(?) only a small minority, but they seem to be the ones who derive their identities from video game playing. But I don't think I've met one such person who hasn't derived at least some of their self esteem from the ability to play Fire Emblem Tharcia. Because when all else fails, video games.

Their(?) are those who can see the flaws in the snes games and this, and those who just don't like this game, and I do not include those people in the above, but to those who rabidly hate this game and view it as super terrible cancer probably have ulterior motives and defects.

Edit: Anyone who thinks this game is worse than the nes FEs or shadow dragon AND looks down on people for liking this game can put themselves in the same category.


You describe yourself so thoroughly. :/ Time to retake elementary school! ^o^ Nice try though, Wandering_Scrub.

Obvious butthurt and super-duper denial is 100% obvious. How do you even live with yourself?


Did I strike a nerve? Good, as tired as I was (i probably should have waited till the morning rather than 2am while I was sick, but I saw this thread and thought of certain people), I think I made my point well. Deriving your self esteem from a video game is not good for your envelopment as a human being.

The fact you were unable to refute anything I say and tried the elementary school tactic "I know you are but what am I?" also helps prove my point.
---
Click the sites these contain to donate to charity for free http://www.thenonprofits.com/
#35RJWalker243Posted 3/2/2014 7:04:05 AM
By saying that anyone who likes Shadow Dragon more is a hipster or whatever, you're only making yourself look like a fool.
#36Wandering__HeroPosted 3/2/2014 7:11:02 AM(edited)
RJWalker243 posted...
By saying that anyone who likes Shadow Dragon more is a hipster or whatever, you're only making yourself look like a fool.


No I said only those who love SD AND look down on people for liking this game.

For those searching for a good reason to look down on others for liking this game there isn't one . I don't give a dam which fes you do or don't like, but if you think your "master race" for liking certain games and think others are casual scum, its time to examine yourself. I don't want this BS showing up on the FE14 board.
---
Click the sites these contain to donate to charity for free http://www.thenonprofits.com/
#37HayashiTakaraPosted 3/2/2014 7:16:49 AM
Wandering__Hero posted...
RJWalker243 posted...
By saying that anyone who likes Shadow Dragon more is a hipster or whatever, you're only making yourself look like a fool.


No I said only those who love SD AND look down on people for liking this game.

For those searching for a good reason to look down on others for liking this game there isn't one . I don't give a dam which fes you do or don't like, but if you think your "master race" for liking certain games and think others are casual scum, its time to examine yourself. I don't want this BS showing up on the FE14 board.


It'll show up again, the minor few elitist purists will show up and ignore all the bad in the older FE games they love and just pound on what they don't like in the new one till the cows come home.
#38Veroxion(Topic Creator)Posted 3/2/2014 9:44:12 AM
HayashiTakara posted...
Veroxion posted...
i wasn't "just" referring to reviews on gamefaqs.

i haven't played the older fe games other then the gba series and i don't plan to finish all of them in one day/week/month so i just posted this. while i look for positive reviews i also check for negative just because of my brain is full of curiosity.....

whether its complaining or not i am the one reading since i made the thread and i won't question it, in the end it just opinions.


Instead of being vague, how about listing what you feel is disheartening? considering you haven't played it yet, what is it about the negative reviews that strikes home for you? did you bother reading the positive reviews too? of course everyone have different preferences it's what it means to be human.


seems like we just don't understand each other, i never said i never played this game i said i never played the fe games from 1-5, 9-11 . and after looking up reviews and comments i see thoughts about the older fe games being brought up that has gameplay mechanics surprisingly more than this game itself and so i wanted to see more confirmation why that is.
#39EndgamePosted 3/2/2014 10:06:36 AM
quality
---
I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight to the death for my right to fight you to the death. -Stephen Colbert
#40Bronze_StuffPosted 3/2/2014 10:49:12 AM(edited)
It's the weakest because it's clear that they cut corners. The maps being the biggest offenders. Like... Why are the optional maps generally better done than the storyline maps? That makes no sense. Like this game is lazy... Like FE6, SD, and RD levels of lazy.

Class imbalance may be at its worst in the series to date, and serves to further put mounted units ahead of unmounted units. Seriously guys, it's not hard to balance mounted units in a game. You have 12 games under your belt before this one. It's simply inexcusable at this point. Just the same, classes that were bad in the series before remain poor units. Archers need to be better, and they refuse at this point.

Design? Children characters are atrocious. You get them by doing a chapter that requires you to do it later when your parents are strong... Far stronger than the children are worth using. Even worse, is that to truly take advantage of skill passing for the children you have to grind or just play the game and not visit their chapter until you get a combination that is impossible for them.

Supports? So people hated the hugging system from earlier Fire emblems? Well now it's back! This time the characters have to actually interact with each other to make the support levels go up! What does this mean? More hugging! Does it take as long as FEGBA's? Maybe not, but there is considerably more effort than hitting left, A, Down, A 150 times. That's not even mentioning the stupid quirks that happen in this game as a result of the system. There are too many supports. Some of the characters don't even deserve to interact with each other-- like Sully and Sumia. What an idiotic support. They have nothing in common outside of loving their animal... That's hardly worth 3 supports. The end result is that most of the supports have these awkward breaks in them. People can all MU boring, but at least (s)he has a reason to talk with most of the characters. Even dumber is how limited some of them are. Basillo and Flavia? I get that they are the "late game units" that you get that fill in the void for units you might be missing, but there's a difference with them: THEY'VE BEEN THERE THE WHOLE TIME!!!

Basil's list should at least be: Olivia, Lon'Qu, Flavia, Chrom, Lucina, Robin
Flavia list should at least be: Chrom, Lucina, Basil, Sully, Chrom's wife (yes, I know Sully can be, but this one is different), Robin.

And don't even get me started on Say'ri. They really want you to use her when she can barely talk to anyone? Supports make people stronger, and Say'ri is one of the worst classes in the game, AND she joins after you have an established team, AND her stats aren't amazing? Why isn't she just an NPC? That's far kinder than making her pretty useless.

The story...? It's a mess. I don't think I need to drone on about it.

Gameplay? It would be good, if everything else wasn't holding it down like the method for learning skills, the terrible maps, the elevated enemy stats, the horrible supports and system... Ugh. The game is better than terrible games like Agarest Wars, but being better than that is like being better than being burned alive as opposed to tortured. The worst part is that if you explain everything to everyone for what this game has, it sounds awesome, and it would be if everything weren't so hastily done.

Oh, and the AI sucks too.
---
Jimbo.