The following post aims to be as spoiler free as possible, and only contains spoilers for the first six chapters of Fire Emblem Fates. As a result, I will be alluding to certain things stated in the game up to Chapter 6 that may or may not turn out to be false in plot twists taking place in later chapters. I have played all three routes to completion, so just to save everyone some time, no, I don't need to be informed ofr hte plot twists in Revelations and later parts of Birthright and Conquest.

The video game industry has recently been pushing for deeper and more complex stories in their titles. Deus Ex: Human Revolution, The Last of Us, Bioshock Infinite, and Spec Ops: The Line all contain critically acclaimed stories that try to tackle either some major topic that is somewhat relatable, or to place us in a world where we're not simply enjoying the gameplay, but getting invested in the narrative as well. One aspect that the industry has yet to get the hang of, however, is implementing meaningful choices into narratives. While some, such as Telltale's games, have succeeded, a number of others haven't been so successful. Mass Effect's 3 ending was widely despised for not being significantly different despite the magnitude of the choice, Until Dawn received criticism for not having many notable choices until the very ending of the game, and Heavy Rain...was a mess in a number of places, choices included. It's in this light that the premesis of Fire Emblem: Fates was extremely intriguing during its initial announcement, and it's also why it's such a shame that the game's major "decision" turned out to fall so flat when it had the potential to be a genuinely interesting twist on the standard FE SRPG formula.

So what went wrong, exactly? Well, first, some background. The major "choice" in Fates is that, roughly a fifth of the way through the game, the player created character (whom I'll be referring to Corrin for simplicity's sake) is required to choose a side at the start of a full blown war between two nations; Hoshido and Nohr. They were born in Hoshido, abducted by the Nohrian king Ganon at a young age, and then raised in Nohr with no real memory of their past. Corrin has family members on both sides, so when he's required to choose a side (or tell them both to piss off), it should be a fairly difficult decision. It should be, but it isn't, at least, not on an emotional level. By the time in the game that Fates is forcing Corrin to choose a side, the player has established no connection to any of the characters, and, as such, what should be a tough choice between two families we care about is instead a choice about everything but those characters.

This isn't to trash Fates too much; the story writers were certainly put in a tough spot, and I'm not sure it would have been possible to do too much more with the format they were given. The decision Corrin has to make happens pretty early on, which means that the game would have had trouble making us feel connected to just one set of characters, let alone two. With that said, though, Intelligent Systems certainly didn't help themselves with the way the missions were designed. Any game that is trying to make us care for a group of characters needs to let us spend time with said characters, but Fates consistently misses opportunities to do so. The Nohrian siblings suffer the worst from this; during the three missions that Corrin spends with Nohr before the decision, they never allowed to fight alongisde any of their siblings. The closest they get is having a practice battle against their older brother, Xander. Mission 3 doesn't even allow us to see Corrin interact with their siblings, save for a few lines at the very end. So what we as players are ultimately left with when we think of our Nohrian siblings is a couple of cutscenes where their personalities are glossed over but never truly elaborated on. At the very least, having them fight alongside us might have given us some pause as to abandoning them, as these are genuinely people who have risked their lives to fight with us. As it stands, we hardly know these people before we're kidnapped and whisked away to Hoshido.

And Hoshido's siblings don't fare that much better. While Corrin does get the chance to fight with younger brother Takumi, as well as having eldest brother Ryoma as a NPC ally, Hoshido only gets two chapters, meaning that we have even less of a chance to get to know them. It doesn't help that much of the interaction Corrin has is not with their siblings, but with their real mother, Queen Mikoto, who reveals that Corrin was kidnapped as a child. Hinoka and Sakura, the two sisters, go woefully undeveloped as well, with only a few lines at the end of Chapter 4 that do little to elaborate on their personalities besides expressing happiness to see us. Which is at least something, but again, we're missing much in the way of reasons to care for them. Ryoma gets a bit more characterization in Chapter 5, which is good, but it's largely overshadowed by Corrin's dragon transformation, and the fact that he spends his entire time on the battlefield getting destroyed by a ghost with a sword doesn't help matters.

So by the time Chapter 6 rolls around, we don't have much reason to care about either family, but that doesn't mean it's an even split. As someone who played through the game and decided to make their choice by which side I thought I would have joined if I was in Corrin's position, I picked Birthright in one of the easiest choices I've ever made. The Nohrians are portrayed as almost comically evil. Again, like Hoshio, Corrin's most memorable interactions are with the ruler, in this case, King Garon. The problem is that all of these interactions (and, really, all interactions ever) portray him as nothing short of comically evil. Garon asks us to kill some defenseless prisoners, threatens to punish us for failing to do so, is revealed to have murdered Corrin's father before abducting him, and is then heavily implied by the game to be responsible for Mikoto's death. By contrast, Mikoto parades Corrin around the city after meething them, and is such a peace loving queen that her strategy is literally setting up a barrier that makes soldiers who pass through it not want to fight anymore. When the decision comes around, the characters that the player is deciding between will be the ones who stick out as the most memorable. In this case, the way Fates' story is constructed means that the player won't be focusing on the families, but the rulers instead. And that's not an interesting moral dilemma at all, it's choosing between Saint Mary and a guy who is one letter and a Triforce of Power short of being Ganon.

What's disappointing about all this is that the trailers leading up to the game's release seem to heavily imply that this would be an emotional choice between the two sets of siblings. "Is your destiny tied to your bloodline, or is your fate bound by loyalty?" goes the April trailer for the game, before zooming in on all eight of the siblings individually. All of this seems to heavily indicate that this was supposed to be a decision between two sets of people, as opposed to simply choosing whether you want to grind or not in your version. Which isn't a bad difference to include; having one route play more like Awakening and the other play more like past Fire Emblem games is an excellent way to try and appease both fanbases, but given the way the game was advertised, it's a shame to see the difficult moral dilemma aspect of it tossed aside entirely. As it stands, they might as well replace the cut ins of the siblings with a shot of Corrin's dead mother that just sacrificed herself for them and Garon laughing manically on his throne. What was once advertised as a compelling decision is reduced to an almost laughable choice of good vs absurdly evil.

So what could have been done to fix this? Well, ideally, take the spotlight off Mikoto and Garon, for one thing. Probably avoid killing Mikoto off as well, at least until later in the game. Put the siblings in the spotlight more; going to as great of lengths as possible to show that they really care for Corrin. Leo fooling Garon by "killing" the prisoners in chapter 2 is a good start, but there needs to be more like this. Preferably, let us fight alongside the full sets of siblings for at least two chapters. Fates seems pretty resigned to these chapters not being much of a challenge, so if it wasn't intended to be difficult, it should have dropped all pretense and let us command the royal units. At the very least, having units in your army would give the player some pause at rejecting them entirely. It builds some familiarity and makes it tougher to turn them down, which is what a choice mechanic like this should be aiming for. Or, going in a completely opposite direction, if Mikoto has to die, perhaps make the Hoshidan siblings seem very unhospitable and the Nohrian siblings be quite likeable, so it winds up being a decision between siding with justice and people you dislike or not doing the right thing but remaining loyal to your friends.

None of this is to say that Fates is a bad game; I enjoyed it quite a bit, but it's a game that missed out on the chance to really capitalize on a unique story mechanic that hadn't been tried before. Hopefully developers continue to try to implement meaningful choices into games, but for now, the industr'ys track record of success behind that concept remains pretty limited.

I'm not sure Fire Emblem's choice can be seen as the attempt to revolutionize the choice system in videogame narrative, but more like a really good way to capitalize onto two (three?) different game versions; hence the flaws that are underlying become the product of a monetary -not narrative- focus. I sure get your point as to why it could be disappointing, but really, you should have seen this coming from the start, as I'm not sure at any point the developer was trying to really make you feel a meaningful plot point rather than the justification to chop the game in three different parts. Mind you, I haven't played the games, though, so my opinion here might not really reflect how truly goes within it, but that's the impression I've always had and your critique kinda confirms it.

Lack of impactful choices, despite the media hyping them up, is nothing really new. You already pointed out Mass Effect 3 example, which we were promised something along the lines of "there will be tons of endings based upon what you've made" that ended up being "choose your favourite colour"; unlike Fates, though, I think ME3's problem was a lack of time to properly deliver on this end rather than, as I said earlier, a plot point made purely for monetization. You also talked about Telltale's games as meaningful choices, but this is rarely the case on the long run (static endings, at least in the case of The Walking Dead 1 and The Wolf Among Us), for some reason, their consequence system ends up losing steam in the final moments, and I'm pretty sure most people got the same ending in both games regardless of the diverse amount of choices they had to make beforehand.

The way you described Fates' lack of impact when it came to actually make the decision reminded me of Wolfenstein: The New Order. A great game, but one that suffers from the same thing: you have to make a choice very early on, one that supposedly changes the whole timeline of your game, but at that point you haven't been invested enough to really feel any weight in the choice you make.

Personally, I found they did a pretty good job in establishing the characters on both sides in Fates. The siblings were all interesting and likeable from the start and I was interested in learning about both sides. When Fates was revealed I already decided to do Birthright because of the setting and scenario of that game, but once I played it and got to that point, I felt bad making a decision. I really didn't want to join either side because I liked both sides, not the rulers mind you.

One of the problems in Fates is King Garon (who you mentioned), who is too much of a typical villain, as well as the whole story scenario in Conquest just... not working at all. There are other issues with Fates as well, such as some story bits falling flat and just not even making sense, but strangely, making the choice in chap 6 was not one of them I had. The characters clicked really fast with me and making that decision hurt more and more as each game delved further and further.

The choice was made more of a way to alter difficulty than anything. To give Awakening fans something like Awakening while giving old school fans something more old school. Considering that the choice had to be made fairly early in the game (otherwise there would have been no point), I think they did a fairly good job establishing the relationships. It just seems like you were expecting something that wasn't really realistic or promised.

Going to refer back to my third to last paragraph in the OP, which was written largely to counter the line of thinking that it was either never intended or never promised. Along with the fact that every single trailer focuses on choosing between two families, as opposed to two different gameplay systems, as well as the fact that the game forces you to make the choice with all of your siblings surrounding you and then immediately follows whatever choice you make with either Ryoma or Xander (depending on your choice) calling you a traitor (with the game's saddest track playing in the background, no less). I think the game does plenty to suggest that, at least initially, it was trying to make the choice about story more than anything else. Add that to the fact that we knew about the diverging story paths well before we even knew that they would be sold as separate games altogether, and I don't think my expectation is particularly unreasonable at all.

I will say, though, that I did anticipate a not so difficult choice when I picked up the game; just from the trailers themselves, I had a hard time picturing myself choosing Nohr. I certainly saw it coming, at least before launch date, so it's not that I'm disappointed that I bought something expecting a much deeper story. It's more of I saw something with the potential for a unique take on storytelling, and I'm disappointed that it didn't deliver. Even if you don't think that was ever the intention of the developers, I'd still argue it's disappointing that a golden opportunity to do something new with player choice wasn't capitalized on.

Considering that you had to make the choice at the point of sale (unless you bought the special edition of the game) then I'm not sure how you could have expected them to have a huge build up to a major choice. Considering how early you had to make the choice, I'm not sure what you could have expected. 

Trailers are meant to give an overview and to harp on a game's selling point.  In this case, the selling point was simply that there were two different versions of the game.  That is all.  In developer interviews, it was made clear that players should choose based on gameplay preferences.  It was never billed as a moral choice system in the same way as Mass Effect, Deus Ex, or Catherine, which you actually have control over the narrative.   It was simply "hey there are two different versions of this game".  

It's clearly the writers fault. Have you seen the story of Conquest?

You actually don't have to make the choice at the point of sale. Yeah, you have to purchase either Birthright or Conquest, but the path you choose at launch is not locked in; you can still choose Conquest if you purchase Birthright as long as you're willing to pay the $20 right there (and vice versa). In other words, if you're an FE fan and plan on playing both routes, then which version you buy makes no difference besides which game box gets displayed on your shelf. Setting that to the side, though, much of my excitement was from the trailer(s) released before we even knew that it was a dual release; the decision mechanic was announced several months before we were aware that the game would be sold in two editions. It's more than reasonable to be excited about a concept billed as a difficult decision by its own trailer when the separate release thing isn't made public yet.

And I would argue that it was most certainly billed as a moral dilemma, again, considering that we were informed of the decision before we even knew it was being sold in two separate versions. It's certainly not the same kind of moral choice system that Mass Effect or Deus Ex is, but it is a choice that is at least meant to be somewhat founded in an emotional response, and the fact that that was so shallow is what disappoints me.

Yes, you do have to make the decision at the point of sale.  You have already paid for whichever version you wanted.  You own that version.  You are free to buy the other version if you want, and you could even play that one first.  Doesn't change the fact that you already decided to purchase one version over the other.  

You keep bringing up "before we knew it was being sold in two separate versions" and I don't have the slightest idea why that's relevant.  By the time the game was released, you had much more clarification.  By then it was well established that the purpose of the dual releases was to have a game to appeal to more hardcore fans and one for more recent fans who started with Awakening.  It was also established by that point that the choice is made fairly early in the game, so I don't know how you expected them to form deep and meaningful relationships by that point in the game.  Aside from that, I'm not sure why you would think of an advertising slogan as gospel anyway.

Regardless of what you thought based on the first trailer, it was clear by the time the game released that this would not be what you had in mind, could not be what you had in mind, and was not intended to be what you had in mind.  You can be disappointed if you want, but that's entirely your fault. 

You do not understand correctly.  It's not like Sacred Stones where you can actually choose after the first few missions.  

If you buy Birthright, you have Birthright and you have access to that path which is on the cartridge.  Even if you digitally downloaded Fire Emblem, you can only play the path of the version you purchased.

After Chapter 5, you can make your choice, but that choice is limited.  If you bought Birthright, you can only choose Hoshido.  If you bought Conquest, you can only choose Nohr. 

If you really want, you could go to the DLC shop and purchase the other quest before Chapter 5.  If you bought Birthright but you decide you like Nohr better, you can pay an extra 20 bucks and play that one first, but you've still already paid for the Birthright quest. 

So yeah, if you really want to play Conquest when you purchased Birthright you can.  But when one option is locked behind a paywall, I think it's accurate to say you chose at point of sale.