I swear this video only wound up being so long because I knew I was gonna have to explain those two opinions lol. I've spent so much time picking them apart and talking about them and I have so much I could say (I even had to cut a bunch out in editing). But yeah, Tellius is good!
Great video Im surprised you didnt mention the other issues like Byleth having these pointless 1 choice dialouge options all throughout the game it just slows everything down even more Shez also has this issue too to a degree..Shez's main issue i think Ive said to me is they just dont feel like a mc like they never really establish really strong motives for Shez really caring about whats going on since even they said they didnt mind the other mercs in his band dying and since Byleth in 3Hopes mostly doesnt matter neither does the rivalry either.In most of their supports they talk about their mom who does nothing.then they have these powers that are never really explained I just dunno what they were going for with Shez Vee lol
I feel like you’re not holding other games to the same standard as you are 3H, specifically it’s story, because of how loved it was? I’m all for criticism of 3H and generally agree with a lot of what you say about it, aside from the fact that you don’t see the main theme of 3H being how perspective changes your beliefs and is exactly why so much is missing from or shown in a different light in different routes, like the “trauma” theme you saw in the characters. I don’t really know what you mean by “trauma” theme either. You can’t just say a word and say that’s a theme, what does it say about it? That’s because there’s a further core layer to 3H’s theme which the characters’ “trauma” connects to. I agree that themes are the most important part of a story, and that’s why I would apply the “missing/misrepresented/not properly explored theme” to Engage as well as being very incomprehensible instead, because of its lack of worldbuilding and relevant characters aside from a handful that have to many plotholes and contrivances connected to them which prevent general audiences from understanding what their motives and beliefs are. Like you said, the scenes and dialogue are just so bad in that game that they can’t convey any sort of theme subtly until a scene must provide its own context the instant of its climax, and so you basically just get 60 hours of nothing with 10 minutes randomly interspersed with characters shouting what the game is supposed to be about from the rooftops with no prior buildup or connection to any of the actions or dialogue that happened prior. 3H’s dialogue and scene-by-scene writing is a huge proponent of its extremely good reception, because although there are issues on a deeper level, it actually conveys its ideas in extremely subtle yet clear ways to most people. Fates is good tho and overhated you’re real for that
I never understood letting online interactions influence your opinions on things so deeply either 🤔 I think it’s awesome how deep you can go back and forth about 3H’s characters and lore, it shows just how thoughtfully crafted it all was specifically for that impression, and viewing it through that lens always created the most interesting conversations. I feel like the people who got so genuinely pressed and involved about 3H politics weren’t actually talking about 3H past a certain point, they were using it as an excuse to talk about the real world lmao.
Hey thanks for commenting! I do want to give this response a bit of attention. Three Houses and Fates are two games where I just have a lot more to say wrt their stories. This is because I've spent multiple years at this point discussing both of their stories in a lot of depth. Part of the reason why I'm much harsher on 3H is *because* I've spent a LOT of time picking apart its story. I spent so much time picking apart its story that even now, to this day, you could probably give me a line from 3H and I could probably tell you with reasonable accuracy where you can find it in the datamine. I think there can be the tendency to assume, you know, if there's a lot of discussion surrounding a story, then it must be an inherently deep, well executed, etc. If you had asked me in 2019 what I thought of 3H's story, I probably would have told you that I enjoyed it quite a bit and I would have rated it highly. However, I was finding that the more discussion of 3H's story went on, the more obvious a lot of its flaws became. It was like seeing a beautiful dress in the store and buying it on sight, only to get a closer look and find that it's full of skipped stitches, tears, mismatched fabrics, and shoddy workmanship. In my opinion, that's because 3H is a very confused narrative. Sometimes, if something is difficult to understand, it's not because it's inherently deep and too complicated for your average person to understand. Sometimes it's just because the writers didn't do a very good job of constructing it in the first place, though that might not be apparent on first glance. You say that the theme of 3H is "different perspectives" but I just don't see what that has to say. Yes, the story is ostensibly told from four different perspectives, but are you REALLY demonstrating how perspectives change things when all of your perspectives are telling roughly the exact same story in roughly the exact same way with roughly the exact same plot beats (especially in White Clouds), and all four routes conclude with the exact same conclusion (Fodlan under the banner of one country, a monarch or monarch-like singular ruler in charge of everything, etc.), with the primary difference being which exposition dump you get right before the final boss battle? If the theme really is supposed to be "different perspectives" then they did not do a very good job of demonstrating that, because everyone winds up in the exact same place doing the exact same things anyway. I didn't go further into the themes because I'm not doing a huge dissertation on the plot of any of the games, just giving my general opinions. And I don't think I have the stamina to do that lmao. I just identified a potential theme and, in the case of 3H, used one potential theme as an example for why I don't think 3H is a very cohesive work. As for Engage, I disagree with your assessment. It was not incomprehensible in its themes, especially not the one I used as an example in the video. Unless people somehow managed to miss that Sombron is an abusive PoS to his children and Lumera is a representation of a loving chosen-family dynamic, and the two are explicit foils. I'll go into this a bit more since I didn't really explain it in the video. Engage's story is that it has SOME problems with its dialogue and presentation, but not NEARLY enough to tank it to being incomprehensible. My criticism has always been that, sometimes, it OVER explains things that were ALREADY evident and communicated adequately. For example, I think Lumera's death scene adequately conveys Alear's sadness, and then I think it tries to OVERSELL Alear's sadness by having a bunch of extra fluff dialogue about how sad Alear is over Lumera dying. It's funny that you argue that Engage is "incomprehensible" though, because the common criticism I see is that Engage is "too simple and straightforward". I think what you criticize Engage for here could almost certainly be applied to 3H's issues as well, but I won't go too deep into that since this is already getting long. Fates is overhated though, we can agree there. Also, the effect of the fandom is really only relevant for the last section about my overall feelings. Broadly speaking, my fandom experiences tend to skew my opinions more positive in most cases, at worst it's usually a null effect. The only outlier is 3H because of the sheer volume of vitriol and projection the fandom brings with it. I didn't go into it, but I've literally been stalked for multiple years by some weirdos who obsess over my 3H opinions. But anyway, I disagree that the amount of discussion means it was well crafted. Going back to the dress analogy from earlier, I feel like 3H discussion is more about ripping out all the seams and re-sewing the dress from scratch. I think 3H gets a lot of attention because people have an inherent desire to bring the final product into line with what their first impression of it was. How much of 3H discussion is people actually discussing what we got, and how much of it is people coming up with fix-it scenarios, headcanons, re-writes, or talking about the "potential" or "ambition" of the game? Because I was finding about 95% of the 3H discussion I was getting into, even back in 2019, was NOT actually about the game. It was about what people *wanted* the game to be or what it *could have been*.
@@veestreams Yeah I don't disagree that the routes needed more differences, but that's a problem isolated from the themes of the game. The themes are still crystal clear and very much *there* because...that's how most people know of and discuss the game. It's in every element of every character. Dimitri struggles to accept Edelgard's war because of his perspective as a victim of war. Edelgard can't accept Rhea's staunch desire for slow or even stifled change because of her shortened lifespan, in which she and others have been oppressed by the systems Rhea propagates. Rhea can't accept Edelgard's motives because, in all her endless years, she experienced a similar atrocity and sees as a mirroring of Sothis' murder in the current war on the church, and conflates the two. You could even go as far as the Blue Lion's different perspectives on the Tragedy of Duscur, and how that causes differences and arguments among them, the characters of different ethnicity who ended up in Fodlan like Claude, Petra, Cyril, Shamir and Dedue being understood by and understanding the others from Fodlan, the commoner vs nobility differences in all of the houses, it's a theme that is *everywhere*, not just one or two climaxes that are disconnected from the rest of the game. Those things being very clear isn't interrupted by the lack of differences in the tides of the war (perhaps with the exception of Crimson Flower), because they are already rooted in each character and past event that is explored outside the flow of the war (which, mind you, I still agree would be better if it were drastically different in each route especially, again, Crimson Flower, but that was a budgetary and time limitation, not just bad judgement on their part, and I know if they got the chance to try again with a stronger budget and schedule they'd strive for better). I feel like I could accept the same of Engage's theme, that yes, that is what they were going for, but it's so rarely relevant except when it wants you to feel sad about it, or explored in any meaningful way, that few connected the dots much less felt influenced in any way by its messaging. I also disagree that a simple story can't be confusing or contrived, especially when the descriptor "simple" in regards to stories is thrown around so loosely, which in the case of Engage I believe is more in regards to how hard you're meant to think about the content presented to you than the structural flow and logic of the actual material. I'd also like to add that I'm also hugely engrossed in the story and lore of 3H and know it back to front, I just never put myself into political debate about those things (at the time I feel like most people, myself included, were just in the general like...fandom spaces where people make fan art/fic and memes and stuff) and so I disagree ig. I don't mean this in bad faith, the way you feel is sound, but I wonder if maybe a lot of the niche internet debate could skew someone in the direction of feeling like 3H's story is pointless or so disastrously confused so as the ruin it just from sheer frustrating, over saturation to its more complex factors and an inability in others to see another point of view which is, ironically (or perhaps intentionally), the embodiment of what the game warns against. My point being, if a big part of writing is to convey those things to your audience in a convincing and impactful way, and one thing succeeded exceedingly and the other generally failed because audiences could not see it represented in much of the content or connect with it whatsoever, then I think it's important to acknowledge why one succeeded in that despite where it has other flaws or where our personal outside experiences may have soured us to it, and think of ways that the latter could be improved to make it so the majority of people can feel the same way about it that the people who liked it did. Thanks for being chill btw!✌all love
@@EXchoco I just don't agree that "different people have different opinions on things" is a particularly hard hitting or interesting theme in 3H. No one can accept Edelgard's war because of their perspectives per your analysis, but they consistently bend over completely backwards to try and forgive and justify her/her actions in canon. Even going so far as to blame *themselves* for fighting back (especially in Hopes) at points? If the goal was to highlight different perspectives, then the work is NOT saying what the authors wanted it to say. And the routes being so same-y adds to that criticism. The lords of 3H are by and large completely homogenous in their opinions of things, they just vary ever so slightly on their execution. That is not a particularly good demonstration of "different perspectives", assuming that was meant to be the theme. We'll just have to agree to disagree on Engage, but I don't think it's fair to make the assessment that people couldn't connect with it while they could to 3H, therefore 3H "succeeded" and Engage "failed". I very much connected with Engage's themes and I still hold the opinion that there's not much in 3H to connect to. Just because you might not have doesn't mean no one did. I think, frankly, the online FE community has gotten a bit too insular and circlejerk-y when it comes to assessing Engage (especially how Engage compares to 3H). Anyway yeah, good convo, no hate
@@veestreams I would say the same thing of Engage, that I think “found family” is so overdone so as to be uninspired and rarely explored in-depth or in any unique way at this point, but it can still very much be what they wanted the game to be about, or at least, what the people who connected with the story saw in it. Who is the “they” you’re talking about in 3H that bends over backwards to justify El tho? Rhea never agrees with Edelgard’s cause or means at any point. Claude at times sympathizes with Edelgard’s motivations because her desired radical change for Fódlan (which he sees as being stifled by the church El is fighting) is something comparable to what he seeks to achieve, although he, also, doesn’t accept her means, so much so that he…goes out of his way to stop her! Dimitri takes an entire game to come to terms with Edelgard’s beliefs-is manically obsessed with brutally killing her because he thinks she’s so terrible-and believes Edelgard’s war to be unjustified the entire time. They then have a long, thorough debate about how he believes her war is unjustified, and Dimitri kills her even after he comes to terms with the fact that this person who is doing something he sees as unjustifiable is still a human being, his sister, doing the things she is to achieve ends he wishes to see in the world as well. The main characters believing in the same general concepts-the “ends”-like equality between commoners and nobility, foreigners and natives, crest bearers and the crestless, or in the case of Claude, Rhea and Dimitri, that the war shouldn’t have happened, doesn’t mean they have the same beliefs on *how to achieve* those ends (which are the things that are dictated by their own life experiences and perspectives), just that they are all nuanced people with reasonable moral codes that the player can understand. Hence the core conflict. Rhea believes the systems should stay as they are, and so they do in SS, regime swap aside. Claude believe things should change by introducing new perspectives to Fódlan in Almyra and other foreign countries, like the Golden Deer did for each other, and so he works toward that integration in VW. Edelgard believes things need to change now, even at the cost of current lives, and so they do in CF. Dimitri believes things need to change in Fódlan slowly and diplomatically, even at the cost of lives hurt overtime by the current systems, and so they do in AM. It’s a very tangible and relevant conflict; finding empathy for political enemies. It’s not just “people think different things” it’s an optimistic tale encouraging players to find peace with other ideas, and showing them what it looks like when we *can’t* accept those things, to the point of violence. I think we might find common ground in pointing the finger of underrepresenting that theme at Crimson Flower rather than the game as a whole, which I would be more willing to concede is not done nearly as well as it is in Azure Moon, or even VW and SS. But the reason for that is specifically because it doesn’t give time for its antagonist-Rhea-to be sympathized with and understood, as Edelgard is given in the other routes. Lastly, yes, I understand some people found enjoyment from Engage and that’s totally their right, but from the perspective of a writer if I wrote something that the large majority of my audience/people in general did not like or connect with-so much so that the general consensus about the game even by many of its biggest fans is “just ignore the story/skip the cutscenes”-then yes, I would consider it a failure on my part and strive to figure out how I could improve it. And if I wrote something that the large majority of my audience did like and did connect with in the ways I wanted them to, I would consider it a success, even if there are areas I would still inevitably want to improve upon. Not that I am saying one is objectively good and the other isn’t, because I of course don’t believe that’s possible to measure. Again, idk, I just try not to let outside discourse influence that and get a birds-eye view of intent vs reception, even if I were to also believe the criticism of Engage is insular or undeserved in some way, and not just the reception. Same with 3H discourse. I’m in alignment with Dimitri’s character and believe his outcome is the best one for Fódlan, but I’m more interested in what the game wants to say with its characters, and how that was then received by audiences, than who I think is “right” because that’s the intent the story was made with ig.
the bad placement of 3 Houses is whatever, it can be a very love it or hate it kinda game, no the real head scraching part is putting ALL 3 Fates games as having an S tier story on the same level as Tellius, that's one I havent heard from even the most vivid Fates fans
It’s not just “is the story objectively good” it’s also “did I enjoy the story” and yes, I did enjoy the story of Fates quite a lot. A tier list is an inherently opinion based endeavor. I think Fates’ story gets a disproportionate amount of flack for what it is, I could probably make a six hour analysis video breaking down what I think was interesting and cool and what I enjoyed, AND I had a lot of fun with it. Don’t take it too seriously.
@@nintendosoundtracks yep it’s on my list! I’m playing DMC 4 and 5 for the month of October and then I’m gonna go back to chipping away at the FE games I haven’t played yet We’re down to FE4+5 and FE11+12 as the last sets to finish!
Solid tier lists. I have my disagreements, mostly over Awakening being relentlessly mediocre for me in just about every respect, but nothing too major. I have an easier time splitting up the Tellius games as well, because even if they're part of the same continuous story their execution is different enough to where I view them quite differently (with FE10 > FE9 on most parameters). It'll be interesting to see how you feel about those two after you've played through them. And yeah, I do think fandom experience absolutely ought to factor into overall impressions of a piece of media. Houses/Hopes fandom is just *such* a mess that it drags even their good points down...and I actually like FE16's gameplay for my weird niche 100% interests!
Admittedly Awakening might be bumped a bit higher for me because it was also my first introduction to the series and I haven’t played through it completely in a while PoR and RD probably could be talked about more independently for sure, like there’s definitely stuff one does better than the other and vice versa! At this point I’ve only gone through them once each so it’s just easier to do them together tbh
Disagreements over the Fates and 3H story placements aside i'm glad both Tellius games are in S tier
I swear this video only wound up being so long because I knew I was gonna have to explain those two opinions lol. I've spent so much time picking them apart and talking about them and I have so much I could say (I even had to cut a bunch out in editing). But yeah, Tellius is good!
@@veestreams i know the feeling of having to justify an unpopular opinion don't worry, I have many as well, it was nice hearing your thoughts
I'm MALDING
GOOD! I LIVE TO UPSET THE MASSES!
Great video Im surprised you didnt mention the other issues like Byleth having these pointless 1 choice dialouge options all throughout the game it just slows everything down even more Shez also has this issue too to a degree..Shez's main issue i think Ive said to me is they just dont feel like a mc like they never really establish really strong motives for Shez really caring about whats going on since even they said they didnt mind the other mercs in his band dying and since Byleth in 3Hopes mostly doesnt matter neither does the rivalry either.In most of their supports they talk about their mom who does nothing.then they have these powers that are never really explained I just dunno what they were going for with Shez Vee lol
Unfortunately the video was already long and I couldn’t cover everything 😭
Hey finally some birthright appreciation, imma sub to see new videos
FATES IS NUMBER 1 BABY!!!!!!!🎉
Is all seriousness it’s so cool to see someone else put it as their favorite.
Fates is always gonna hold a dear place in my heart! I know it gets a lot of flack but I still love it to death
I am beyond malding
I feel like you’re not holding other games to the same standard as you are 3H, specifically it’s story, because of how loved it was? I’m all for criticism of 3H and generally agree with a lot of what you say about it, aside from the fact that you don’t see the main theme of 3H being how perspective changes your beliefs and is exactly why so much is missing from or shown in a different light in different routes, like the “trauma” theme you saw in the characters. I don’t really know what you mean by “trauma” theme either. You can’t just say a word and say that’s a theme, what does it say about it? That’s because there’s a further core layer to 3H’s theme which the characters’ “trauma” connects to. I agree that themes are the most important part of a story, and that’s why I would apply the “missing/misrepresented/not properly explored theme” to Engage as well as being very incomprehensible instead, because of its lack of worldbuilding and relevant characters aside from a handful that have to many plotholes and contrivances connected to them which prevent general audiences from understanding what their motives and beliefs are. Like you said, the scenes and dialogue are just so bad in that game that they can’t convey any sort of theme subtly until a scene must provide its own context the instant of its climax, and so you basically just get 60 hours of nothing with 10 minutes randomly interspersed with characters shouting what the game is supposed to be about from the rooftops with no prior buildup or connection to any of the actions or dialogue that happened prior. 3H’s dialogue and scene-by-scene writing is a huge proponent of its extremely good reception, because although there are issues on a deeper level, it actually conveys its ideas in extremely subtle yet clear ways to most people. Fates is good tho and overhated you’re real for that
I never understood letting online interactions influence your opinions on things so deeply either 🤔 I think it’s awesome how deep you can go back and forth about 3H’s characters and lore, it shows just how thoughtfully crafted it all was specifically for that impression, and viewing it through that lens always created the most interesting conversations. I feel like the people who got so genuinely pressed and involved about 3H politics weren’t actually talking about 3H past a certain point, they were using it as an excuse to talk about the real world lmao.
Hey thanks for commenting! I do want to give this response a bit of attention.
Three Houses and Fates are two games where I just have a lot more to say wrt their stories. This is because I've spent multiple years at this point discussing both of their stories in a lot of depth. Part of the reason why I'm much harsher on 3H is *because* I've spent a LOT of time picking apart its story. I spent so much time picking apart its story that even now, to this day, you could probably give me a line from 3H and I could probably tell you with reasonable accuracy where you can find it in the datamine.
I think there can be the tendency to assume, you know, if there's a lot of discussion surrounding a story, then it must be an inherently deep, well executed, etc. If you had asked me in 2019 what I thought of 3H's story, I probably would have told you that I enjoyed it quite a bit and I would have rated it highly. However, I was finding that the more discussion of 3H's story went on, the more obvious a lot of its flaws became. It was like seeing a beautiful dress in the store and buying it on sight, only to get a closer look and find that it's full of skipped stitches, tears, mismatched fabrics, and shoddy workmanship. In my opinion, that's because 3H is a very confused narrative. Sometimes, if something is difficult to understand, it's not because it's inherently deep and too complicated for your average person to understand. Sometimes it's just because the writers didn't do a very good job of constructing it in the first place, though that might not be apparent on first glance.
You say that the theme of 3H is "different perspectives" but I just don't see what that has to say. Yes, the story is ostensibly told from four different perspectives, but are you REALLY demonstrating how perspectives change things when all of your perspectives are telling roughly the exact same story in roughly the exact same way with roughly the exact same plot beats (especially in White Clouds), and all four routes conclude with the exact same conclusion (Fodlan under the banner of one country, a monarch or monarch-like singular ruler in charge of everything, etc.), with the primary difference being which exposition dump you get right before the final boss battle? If the theme really is supposed to be "different perspectives" then they did not do a very good job of demonstrating that, because everyone winds up in the exact same place doing the exact same things anyway.
I didn't go further into the themes because I'm not doing a huge dissertation on the plot of any of the games, just giving my general opinions. And I don't think I have the stamina to do that lmao. I just identified a potential theme and, in the case of 3H, used one potential theme as an example for why I don't think 3H is a very cohesive work.
As for Engage, I disagree with your assessment. It was not incomprehensible in its themes, especially not the one I used as an example in the video. Unless people somehow managed to miss that Sombron is an abusive PoS to his children and Lumera is a representation of a loving chosen-family dynamic, and the two are explicit foils.
I'll go into this a bit more since I didn't really explain it in the video. Engage's story is that it has SOME problems with its dialogue and presentation, but not NEARLY enough to tank it to being incomprehensible. My criticism has always been that, sometimes, it OVER explains things that were ALREADY evident and communicated adequately. For example, I think Lumera's death scene adequately conveys Alear's sadness, and then I think it tries to OVERSELL Alear's sadness by having a bunch of extra fluff dialogue about how sad Alear is over Lumera dying. It's funny that you argue that Engage is "incomprehensible" though, because the common criticism I see is that Engage is "too simple and straightforward". I think what you criticize Engage for here could almost certainly be applied to 3H's issues as well, but I won't go too deep into that since this is already getting long.
Fates is overhated though, we can agree there.
Also, the effect of the fandom is really only relevant for the last section about my overall feelings. Broadly speaking, my fandom experiences tend to skew my opinions more positive in most cases, at worst it's usually a null effect. The only outlier is 3H because of the sheer volume of vitriol and projection the fandom brings with it. I didn't go into it, but I've literally been stalked for multiple years by some weirdos who obsess over my 3H opinions.
But anyway, I disagree that the amount of discussion means it was well crafted. Going back to the dress analogy from earlier, I feel like 3H discussion is more about ripping out all the seams and re-sewing the dress from scratch. I think 3H gets a lot of attention because people have an inherent desire to bring the final product into line with what their first impression of it was. How much of 3H discussion is people actually discussing what we got, and how much of it is people coming up with fix-it scenarios, headcanons, re-writes, or talking about the "potential" or "ambition" of the game? Because I was finding about 95% of the 3H discussion I was getting into, even back in 2019, was NOT actually about the game. It was about what people *wanted* the game to be or what it *could have been*.
@@veestreams Yeah I don't disagree that the routes needed more differences, but that's a problem isolated from the themes of the game. The themes are still crystal clear and very much *there* because...that's how most people know of and discuss the game. It's in every element of every character. Dimitri struggles to accept Edelgard's war because of his perspective as a victim of war. Edelgard can't accept Rhea's staunch desire for slow or even stifled change because of her shortened lifespan, in which she and others have been oppressed by the systems Rhea propagates. Rhea can't accept Edelgard's motives because, in all her endless years, she experienced a similar atrocity and sees as a mirroring of Sothis' murder in the current war on the church, and conflates the two. You could even go as far as the Blue Lion's different perspectives on the Tragedy of Duscur, and how that causes differences and arguments among them, the characters of different ethnicity who ended up in Fodlan like Claude, Petra, Cyril, Shamir and Dedue being understood by and understanding the others from Fodlan, the commoner vs nobility differences in all of the houses, it's a theme that is *everywhere*, not just one or two climaxes that are disconnected from the rest of the game. Those things being very clear isn't interrupted by the lack of differences in the tides of the war (perhaps with the exception of Crimson Flower), because they are already rooted in each character and past event that is explored outside the flow of the war (which, mind you, I still agree would be better if it were drastically different in each route especially, again, Crimson Flower, but that was a budgetary and time limitation, not just bad judgement on their part, and I know if they got the chance to try again with a stronger budget and schedule they'd strive for better).
I feel like I could accept the same of Engage's theme, that yes, that is what they were going for, but it's so rarely relevant except when it wants you to feel sad about it, or explored in any meaningful way, that few connected the dots much less felt influenced in any way by its messaging. I also disagree that a simple story can't be confusing or contrived, especially when the descriptor "simple" in regards to stories is thrown around so loosely, which in the case of Engage I believe is more in regards to how hard you're meant to think about the content presented to you than the structural flow and logic of the actual material. I'd also like to add that I'm also hugely engrossed in the story and lore of 3H and know it back to front, I just never put myself into political debate about those things (at the time I feel like most people, myself included, were just in the general like...fandom spaces where people make fan art/fic and memes and stuff) and so I disagree ig. I don't mean this in bad faith, the way you feel is sound, but I wonder if maybe a lot of the niche internet debate could skew someone in the direction of feeling like 3H's story is pointless or so disastrously confused so as the ruin it just from sheer frustrating, over saturation to its more complex factors and an inability in others to see another point of view which is, ironically (or perhaps intentionally), the embodiment of what the game warns against.
My point being, if a big part of writing is to convey those things to your audience in a convincing and impactful way, and one thing succeeded exceedingly and the other generally failed because audiences could not see it represented in much of the content or connect with it whatsoever, then I think it's important to acknowledge why one succeeded in that despite where it has other flaws or where our personal outside experiences may have soured us to it, and think of ways that the latter could be improved to make it so the majority of people can feel the same way about it that the people who liked it did. Thanks for being chill btw!✌all love
@@EXchoco I just don't agree that "different people have different opinions on things" is a particularly hard hitting or interesting theme in 3H. No one can accept Edelgard's war because of their perspectives per your analysis, but they consistently bend over completely backwards to try and forgive and justify her/her actions in canon. Even going so far as to blame *themselves* for fighting back (especially in Hopes) at points? If the goal was to highlight different perspectives, then the work is NOT saying what the authors wanted it to say. And the routes being so same-y adds to that criticism. The lords of 3H are by and large completely homogenous in their opinions of things, they just vary ever so slightly on their execution. That is not a particularly good demonstration of "different perspectives", assuming that was meant to be the theme.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on Engage, but I don't think it's fair to make the assessment that people couldn't connect with it while they could to 3H, therefore 3H "succeeded" and Engage "failed". I very much connected with Engage's themes and I still hold the opinion that there's not much in 3H to connect to. Just because you might not have doesn't mean no one did. I think, frankly, the online FE community has gotten a bit too insular and circlejerk-y when it comes to assessing Engage (especially how Engage compares to 3H).
Anyway yeah, good convo, no hate
@@veestreams I would say the same thing of Engage, that I think “found family” is so overdone so as to be uninspired and rarely explored in-depth or in any unique way at this point, but it can still very much be what they wanted the game to be about, or at least, what the people who connected with the story saw in it.
Who is the “they” you’re talking about in 3H that bends over backwards to justify El tho? Rhea never agrees with Edelgard’s cause or means at any point. Claude at times sympathizes with Edelgard’s motivations because her desired radical change for Fódlan (which he sees as being stifled by the church El is fighting) is something comparable to what he seeks to achieve, although he, also, doesn’t accept her means, so much so that he…goes out of his way to stop her! Dimitri takes an entire game to come to terms with Edelgard’s beliefs-is manically obsessed with brutally killing her because he thinks she’s so terrible-and believes Edelgard’s war to be unjustified the entire time. They then have a long, thorough debate about how he believes her war is unjustified, and Dimitri kills her even after he comes to terms with the fact that this person who is doing something he sees as unjustifiable is still a human being, his sister, doing the things she is to achieve ends he wishes to see in the world as well.
The main characters believing in the same general concepts-the “ends”-like equality between commoners and nobility, foreigners and natives, crest bearers and the crestless, or in the case of Claude, Rhea and Dimitri, that the war shouldn’t have happened, doesn’t mean they have the same beliefs on *how to achieve* those ends (which are the things that are dictated by their own life experiences and perspectives), just that they are all nuanced people with reasonable moral codes that the player can understand. Hence the core conflict. Rhea believes the systems should stay as they are, and so they do in SS, regime swap aside. Claude believe things should change by introducing new perspectives to Fódlan in Almyra and other foreign countries, like the Golden Deer did for each other, and so he works toward that integration in VW. Edelgard believes things need to change now, even at the cost of current lives, and so they do in CF. Dimitri believes things need to change in Fódlan slowly and diplomatically, even at the cost of lives hurt overtime by the current systems, and so they do in AM. It’s a very tangible and relevant conflict; finding empathy for political enemies. It’s not just “people think different things” it’s an optimistic tale encouraging players to find peace with other ideas, and showing them what it looks like when we *can’t* accept those things, to the point of violence.
I think we might find common ground in pointing the finger of underrepresenting that theme at Crimson Flower rather than the game as a whole, which I would be more willing to concede is not done nearly as well as it is in Azure Moon, or even VW and SS. But the reason for that is specifically because it doesn’t give time for its antagonist-Rhea-to be sympathized with and understood, as Edelgard is given in the other routes.
Lastly, yes, I understand some people found enjoyment from Engage and that’s totally their right, but from the perspective of a writer if I wrote something that the large majority of my audience/people in general did not like or connect with-so much so that the general consensus about the game even by many of its biggest fans is “just ignore the story/skip the cutscenes”-then yes, I would consider it a failure on my part and strive to figure out how I could improve it. And if I wrote something that the large majority of my audience did like and did connect with in the ways I wanted them to, I would consider it a success, even if there are areas I would still inevitably want to improve upon. Not that I am saying one is objectively good and the other isn’t, because I of course don’t believe that’s possible to measure. Again, idk, I just try not to let outside discourse influence that and get a birds-eye view of intent vs reception, even if I were to also believe the criticism of Engage is insular or undeserved in some way, and not just the reception. Same with 3H discourse. I’m in alignment with Dimitri’s character and believe his outcome is the best one for Fódlan, but I’m more interested in what the game wants to say with its characters, and how that was then received by audiences, than who I think is “right” because that’s the intent the story was made with ig.
the bad placement of 3 Houses is whatever, it can be a very love it or hate it kinda game, no the real head scraching part is putting ALL 3 Fates games as having an S tier story on the same level as Tellius, that's one I havent heard from even the most vivid Fates fans
Same, I thought the general consensus was that dates is all gameplay, no story
It’s not just “is the story objectively good” it’s also “did I enjoy the story” and yes, I did enjoy the story of Fates quite a lot. A tier list is an inherently opinion based endeavor.
I think Fates’ story gets a disproportionate amount of flack for what it is, I could probably make a six hour analysis video breaking down what I think was interesting and cool and what I enjoyed, AND I had a lot of fun with it. Don’t take it too seriously.
You should play shadow dragon and new mystery cause Tiki is in those games and she is cute and perfect
@@nintendosoundtracks yep it’s on my list! I’m playing DMC 4 and 5 for the month of October and then I’m gonna go back to chipping away at the FE games I haven’t played yet
We’re down to FE4+5 and FE11+12 as the last sets to finish!
Fates and Engage enjoyer? Literally just found you and you’re my best friend now, please keep cooking.
Sacred Stones W
Epic. Liked and subbed
Oh damn someone really like fates story.... nah nevermind unpopular opinion always weird in good way
Where is the definitively best fire emblem game Berwick Saga?
Y'all are gonna have to let me finish playing Peak Kaga(TM) Thracia before I even consider Berwick 😭
Solid tier lists. I have my disagreements, mostly over Awakening being relentlessly mediocre for me in just about every respect, but nothing too major. I have an easier time splitting up the Tellius games as well, because even if they're part of the same continuous story their execution is different enough to where I view them quite differently (with FE10 > FE9 on most parameters). It'll be interesting to see how you feel about those two after you've played through them.
And yeah, I do think fandom experience absolutely ought to factor into overall impressions of a piece of media. Houses/Hopes fandom is just *such* a mess that it drags even their good points down...and I actually like FE16's gameplay for my weird niche 100% interests!
Admittedly Awakening might be bumped a bit higher for me because it was also my first introduction to the series and I haven’t played through it completely in a while
PoR and RD probably could be talked about more independently for sure, like there’s definitely stuff one does better than the other and vice versa! At this point I’ve only gone through them once each so it’s just easier to do them together tbh
tss tss tss F3H est le meilleur de très loin et Fe4 est 2e
I don't like 3H much either. Those are some seriously bland maps.