By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Fire Emblem's new anime direction (RANT)

NoirSon on 11 April 2015
noname2200 said:
Pineapple said:

You're making an error in assuming that the Tellius games are the norm for the series. There's a good case to be made that each Fire Emblem game has a specific area it focuses especially on, and the only ones that have serious emphasis on the characters are Genealogy of the Holy War (FE4) and FE9.

Fire Emblem is an RPG that is very light on text. The simplest way to introduce characters without a lot of text, is to introduce them with a stereotype. The series has even introduced its own archetypes that later games follow.

You draw a lot of conclusions about what a "proper" Fire Emblem game is like,  but most your complains have already existed in previous games. Stereotype characters have been the vast majority in every game, with something of an exception of the Tellius games.

 The "hard to get" pair-up mechanic shares its low percentage game-altering mechanics with the tier 3 skills from Radiant Dawn, as well as the low percentage hit rates from all the first 5 Fire Emblem games (due to the hit rates being the actual hit rates, as opposed to 6-13 in which the hit rates are false due to the 2 rolls average system).

The randomness is part of what makes the game interesting. With very few exceptions (the only ones I know of being Lunatic + in awakening, parts of Radiant Dawn Hard and parts of Thracia 776), you can always make a strategy that will work regardless of chance. But you can also run different strategies that are only possible because of the randomness.

 

I have to say that I'm also very confused by your claim that the characters from previous games look realistic. The only games in the series this is even remotely true for are the Tellius games, and even that is stretching "realistic" quite a bit.

 

Overall, your complaints are nearly all misinformed. You think that your complaint is that Awakening is different from all previous Fire Emblem games, but it's really a complaint that Awakening is different from the Tellius games.  Most the differences have plenty of precedence in the Fire Emblem series.

Well said.


I agree but I came to the conclusion after arguing a similar point with ToraTiger that we are dealing with a troll. There is no point in trying to educate a troll.



Around the Network
SanAndreasX on 11 April 2015
Airaku said:

 


That is true. I suppose once those characters branch out into other forms of media and people really related to them, then yes I guess they need to have some kind of name. I would never say Zelda is less story driven, it's more like Elder Scrolls or Fable where the story occurs around you. Zelda has a very deep plot once you get into the universe and play multiple games. You'll start to see the connections on how each game is separate and stands on its own while actually being connected into a whole larger story. The big difference with Zelda is that Link is an established character and cannot be edited. He generally carries the same general look in every game with minor difference. In the older games he has had brown hair, hell in A Link to the Past he had purplish pink hair. Though he is essentially the same person again and again as explained through his "reincarnation".

I am pretty sure Bowser was Bowser in the very first Super Mario Bros game. I could be wrong but I am pretty sure of it. At least in the English North American version. From my understanding I've heard that in Japan his name is Daimao Koopa. Apparently also sometimes Koopa is written as Kuppa. Also apparently Lord Bowser somewhere. So Bowsers name seems to be a bit of a clusterf*ck.

You are correct. He was called Bowser in the first SMB game ("Bowser, King of the Koopas.") People probably called him King Koopa mostly from the Super Mario Bros. Super Show, where he was called King Koopa.

Like most other entertainment companies, Nintendo has gone through periods of standardizing the looks and names of its trademarked characters. They didn't have the standards they do now for their IPs until the late 1990s, and until the 1990s, Mario didn't even have a standardized appearance like he does now. In Super Mario 64, the Princess's name was being transistioned from "Princess Toadstool" to "Princess Peach", which is her official name now.



Airaku on 11 April 2015
SanAndreasX said:

You are correct. He was called Bowser in the first SMB game ("Bowser, King of the Koopas.") People probably called him King Koopa mostly from the Super Mario Bros. Super Show, where he was called King Koopa.

Like most other entertainment companies, Nintendo has gone through periods of standardizing the looks and names of its trademarked characters. They didn't have the standards they do now for their IPs until the late 1990s, and until the 1990s, Mario didn't even have a standardized appearance like he does now. In Super Mario 64, the Princess's name was being transistioned from "Princess Toadstool" to "Princess Peach", which is her official name now.


Well actually believe it or not Princess Peach was always named Princess Peach in the Japaness version. It is true she was named princess Toadstool in the English version. That is actually even stated on her wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess Peach. I've actually heard a lot of fans simply call her Peach Toadstool and people treat it as her last name. Though I don't think that has ever been referred in the canon. Then there is the Paulina debate as well of course. A totally different character or complete character overhaul?




qwertyDANIELqwerty on 11 April 2015

If anything, it is not Fire Emblem becoming Anime at all. Blame ATLUS if you are seeing this through the SMT x Fire Emblem thing.



SanAndreasX on 12 April 2015
Airaku said:
SanAndreasX said:

You are correct. He was called Bowser in the first SMB game ("Bowser, King of the Koopas.") People probably called him King Koopa mostly from the Super Mario Bros. Super Show, where he was called King Koopa.

Like most other entertainment companies, Nintendo has gone through periods of standardizing the looks and names of its trademarked characters. They didn't have the standards they do now for their IPs until the late 1990s, and until the 1990s, Mario didn't even have a standardized appearance like he does now. In Super Mario 64, the Princess's name was being transistioned from "Princess Toadstool" to "Princess Peach", which is her official name now.

 


Well actually believe it or not Princess Peach was always named Princess Peach in the Japaness version. It is true she was named princess Toadstool in the English version. That is actually even stated on her wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess Peach. I've actually heard a lot of fans simply call her Peach Toadstool and people treat it as her last name. Though I don't think that has ever been referred in the canon. Then there is the Paulina debate as well of course. A totally different character or complete character overhaul?

I knew that, but I was talking about the US, which was an example of how Nintendo didn't have the same standards for consistency in its IP as far as names and such go that they do now. I imagine Nintendo of America called her Princess Toadstool to keep with the theme of the Mushroom Kingdom and so it would make more sense to Americans. The last game I know of where she was consistently called Princess Toadstool was Super Mario RPG, and in Super Mario 64, she was called both in the intro.

Pauline... back in that day, Mario was simply called Jumpman in Japan. Miyamoto only intended him to be an all-purpose plug-in character like Pac-Man and never had any intention of calling him anything but Jumpman. He got his "Mario" name from Minoru Arakawa after Mario Segale (Nintendo's landlord in Washington) came storming into a Nintendo board meeting demanding overdue rent. I'm guessing that Pauline was a prototype for Peach and became a princess when Mario moved into fantasy territory.

On-topic, Awakening is more consistent with the overall design of Fire Emblem than people think it is. But because a lot of people were introduced to the series through the Gamecube and Wii games, it looks radically different and they perceive it as following in the "moe" direction a lot of RPGs have taken in recent years.



Around the Network
Airaku on 12 April 2015
SanAndreasX said:

I knew that, but I was talking about the US, which was an example of how Nintendo didn't have the same standards for consistency in its IP as far as names and such go that they do now. I imagine Nintendo of America called her Princess Toadstool to keep with the theme of the Mushroom Kingdom and so it would make more sense to Americans. The last game I know of where she was consistently called Princess Toadstool was Super Mario RPG, and in Super Mario 64, she was called both in the intro.

Pauline... back in that day, Mario was simply called Jumpman in Japan. Miyamoto only intended him to be an all-purpose plug-in character like Pac-Man and never had any intention of calling him anything but Jumpman. He got his "Mario" name from Minoru Arakawa after Mario Segale (Nintendo's landlord in Washington) came storming into a Nintendo board meeting demanding overdue rent. I'm guessing that Pauline was a prototype for Peach and became a princess when Mario moved into fantasy territory.

On-topic, Awakening is more consistent with the overall design of Fire Emblem than people think it is. But because a lot of people were introduced to the series through the Gamecube and Wii games, it looks radically different and they perceive it as following in the "moe" direction a lot of RPGs have taken in recent years.

Yeah I knew Jumpman was Mario's original name and he was really just meant to be an arcade experience. It's funny how times change, Donkey Kong is anything but bad these days. Mario is still Mario, he is a man who jumps a lot. I didn't actually know about how he got his name though. That is definitely pretty interesting. Btw on the subject of NoA, when was NoA formed? I know it started to get some real power to make bigger decisions during the N64 era. That was due to the fact the N64 sold roughly 60% of all it's consoles in North America alone. That system was a huge success in this region, so that put Nintendo in a position to give the NoA more pull. These days it doesn't seem to be like that anymore. They are still doing well here but not dominating over other nations.

I agree with you 100% on the Fire Emblem art style. I was trying to point that out to people. It always had a Japanese flare and only the era of the style of the artwork makes it different. Sure some can argue that character art looked more realistic back then. However if you look at the actual art of the characters of the new game (not in game) it really isn't different. Just updated.... The games add a bit of a flare to it in the cut scenes. I love the depth range on the characters, it is really unique in my opinion.




SanAndreasX on 12 April 2015
Airaku said:
SanAndreasX said:

I knew that, but I was talking about the US, which was an example of how Nintendo didn't have the same standards for consistency in its IP as far as names and such go that they do now. I imagine Nintendo of America called her Princess Toadstool to keep with the theme of the Mushroom Kingdom and so it would make more sense to Americans. The last game I know of where she was consistently called Princess Toadstool was Super Mario RPG, and in Super Mario 64, she was called both in the intro.

Pauline... back in that day, Mario was simply called Jumpman in Japan. Miyamoto only intended him to be an all-purpose plug-in character like Pac-Man and never had any intention of calling him anything but Jumpman. He got his "Mario" name from Minoru Arakawa after Mario Segale (Nintendo's landlord in Washington) came storming into a Nintendo board meeting demanding overdue rent. I'm guessing that Pauline was a prototype for Peach and became a princess when Mario moved into fantasy territory.

On-topic, Awakening is more consistent with the overall design of Fire Emblem than people think it is. But because a lot of people were introduced to the series through the Gamecube and Wii games, it looks radically different and they perceive it as following in the "moe" direction a lot of RPGs have taken in recent years.

Yeah I knew Jumpman was Mario's original name and he was really just meant to be an arcade experience. It's funny how times change, Donkey Kong is anything but bad these days. Mario is still Mario, he is a man who jumps a lot. I didn't actually know about how he got his name though. That is definitely pretty interesting. Btw on the subject of NoA, when was NoA formed? I know it started to get some real power to make bigger decisions during the N64 era. That was due to the fact the N64 sold roughly 60% of all it's consoles in North America alone. That system was a huge success in this region, so that put Nintendo in a position to give the NoA more pull. These days it doesn't seem to be like that anymore. They are still doing well here but not dominating over other nations.

I agree with you 100% on the Fire Emblem art style. I was trying to point that out to people. It always had a Japanese flare and only the era of the style of the artwork makes it different. Sure some can argue that character art looked more realistic back then. However if you look at the actual art of the characters of the new game (not in game) it really isn't different. Just updated.... The games add a bit of a flare to it in the cut scenes. I love the depth range on the characters, it is really unique in my opinion.


Don't know when NoA was formed, but its first chairman was Hiroshi Yamauchi's son-in-law (he was the guy who gave Mario his name), and then there was Howard Lincoln, who was pretty well-respected by Mr. Yamauchi as well.   Ken Lobb was responsible for a lot of the Nintendo/Rare collaborations but he went to work for Microsoft when Microsoft became the sole owner of Rare.  NoA doesn't really have anybody of that caliber anymore.



Airaku on 13 April 2015
SanAndreasX said:


Don't know when NoA was formed, but its first chairman was Hiroshi Yamauchi's son-in-law (he was the guy who gave Mario his name), and then there was Howard Lincoln, who was pretty well-respected by Mr. Yamauchi as well.   Ken Lobb was responsible for a lot of the Nintendo/Rare collaborations but he went to work for Microsoft when Microsoft became the sole owner of Rare.  NoA doesn't really have anybody of that caliber anymore.


To be honest I think Reggie fills those shoes very well. He is also a very fun guy and I love how he interacts with his fans. Unfortunately, Japan seems to make him more of a public figure than a leader. He had to fight to get Xenoblade Chronicles ported to the Wii. That really shows that NoA doesn't have the power or responsibilities placed on them that they once had. I know this is very debatable in many aspects and many will say that I am wrong. Though this is really how I see things these days. Nintendo is still a huge household name and still a giant, though don't seem like the behemoth back in the 90's. They marketed the way Microsoft and Sony do today, pushed games and power like their competitors do today. It's like they don't want to be that mainstream powerhouse of a company these days.

I respect Iwata, I really do. Though I feel like he tried to make the company smaller and distant to a huge market of the gaming industry. The Wii had such a mass market appeal and had great games. Nintendo went with a word of mouth approach to marketing that system. The Wii U is an amazing system and failed to pick up momentum because they are doing a poor job marketing it. I feel they need to be a lot more aggressive with the NX even if it costs them a little bit of their "play nice, reputation". Then again Nintendo wasn't very "play nice" in the 90's when Nintendo and Sega literally took turns punching each other in the face lmao. To be honest, we may need that Nintendo back. Even if it makes them look like arrogant dicks for a while. Sony was like that with the PS2 and look at where it got them today? Microsoft saw great success with the 360 with that attitude. Even if the Xbox One is not exactly the system we wanted, Phil Spencer is doing the best he can. I have the utmost respect for Phil Spencer. He respects the fans and the competition and is changing their brand image, but he has the image behind his product as the torch was passed to him. Call me what you will, but Nintendo may need to take 2 steps back to take a leap forward (and no I am not a Soviet lmao).

Also I will once again state that this is how I feel about Nintendo these days, and I say this as a fan who loves Nintendo. To be honest I literally went from the original PlayStation to GameCube and I never looked back. Such an amazing and irreplaceable console. Nothing but great games after great games, and TONS of underrated titles.