What Are Your Unpopular Gaming Opinions? (Ver. 2)

[FallenHero]

Remember I'm talking about the first 2 gens of 3D, not now.

I know, but without the first two gens of 3D everything that came after wouldn't exist. Even some 2D games would not exist without them for many different reasons.

Sticking to 2D isn't the answer. It was a style that was mastered in the early 90s, had 3D never came around game would have just stagnated.

Exactly my point. You can only master something so much until you get to the point where it can't really be improved that much anymore. 3D games have come a long way and are still improving.

 

[Ten of Nine]

finalark you condradict yourself...using a Zelda game as a compare point for story is apples and oranges. The stories in most Nintendo games as we discussed are afterthoughts. Doesn't matter what the year or generation of console...Zelda will never be a good example for story or character.

And using the Sega Genesis as a example doesn't make sense either. That whole console was made for games that have no story, just flash and speed - Sonic being the ultimate example. Style over substance. I wouldn't put Genesis anywhere near my side of the argument (even with the few great RPG examples). That's like me using Ouya for 3D story examples.

Again speculation and hindsight about 3D somehow keeping games from becoming stagnant. 2D games still exists in abundance today (as does pixel art and obsolete styles), many of the modern games with the best stories/gameplay are actually 2D or indie 2D (remember fighting games like smash are 2D as are a lot of modern genres). In every other art form which have used 2D mediums for MUCH MUCH longer (painting, drawing, animation, movies, etc) they still use 2D and excel at it because each of those mediums had very little forced change or gimmicks allowing a mastery of the art and by extension allowing the artist to focus on the subject and the creation. 3D animation and CGI had a very long learning curve that is still in the uncanny valley if not done under massive budgets. But 2D animation is still sought after and almost all films are a 2D medium. 3D TVs and movies were a fad that has died (or should). Most people still prefer practical effects and most 3D or CGI hasn't aged well unless it was made recently.

Videogames are tied closely with technology so there is this constant forced change for new gimmicks and usage of new tech to be shoe horned in. Most other art-forms have mediums and set ways of delivering something to an end user. This allows for seamless creation once the craft is mastered, it's easier to teach and learn, and there is push to be creative in the finite ceiling of the art instead of relying on a new gimmick or mechanic to make something by default "new". This in part is a reason why videogames aren't as respected among those other traditional artforms.

 

[finalark]

finalark you condradict yourself...using a Zelda game as a compare point for story is apples and oranges. The stories in most Nintendo games as we discussed are afterthoughts. Doesn't matter what the year or generation of console...Zelda will never be a good example for story or character.

You know what? That's fair. That being said, I still think that story oriented games from the first two 3D eras like Persona 4, Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy X complete blow absolutely every old story oriented game out of the water.

And using the Sega Genesis as a example doesn't make sense either. That whole console was made for games that have no story, just flash and speed - Sonic being the ultimate example. Style over substance. I wouldn't put Genesis anywhere near my side of the argument (even with the few great RPG examples). That's like me using Ouya for 3D story examples.

I never once used the Genesis as an example when talking about story. I'm just saying the obession with graphics is nothing new.

Again speculation and hindsight about 3D somehow keeping games from becoming stagnant. 2D games still exists in abundance today (as does pixel art and obsolete styles), many of the modern games with the best stories/gameplay are actually 2D or indie 2D (remember fighting games like smash are 2D as are a lot of modern genres).

Could you drop some examples?

In every other art form which have used 2D mediums for MUCH MUCH longer (painting, drawing, animation, movies, etc) they still use 2D and excel at it because each of those mediums had very little forced change or gimmicks allowing a mastery of the art and by extension allowing the artist to focus on the subject and the creation. 3D animation and CGI had a very long learning curve that is still in the uncanny valley if not done under massive budgets. But 2D animation is still sought after and almost all films are a 2D medium. 3D TVs and movies were a fad that has died (or should). Most people still prefer practical effects and most 3D or CGI hasn't aged well unless it was made recently.

3D films and 3D games are completely different things. Most animation is CGI these days, or makes good use of it to clean things up. Even traditionally animated things. Painting and drawing are just one of many forms of art, this completely ignores the artistic merits of things like stationary or pottery. CGI in movies only sucks when used poorly.

This whole paragraph feels like a really, really big stretch to try and prove a point.

Videogames are tied closely with technology so there is this constant forced change for new gimmicks and usage of new tech to be shoe horned in. Most other art-forms have mediums and set ways of delivering something to an end user. This allows for seamless creation once the craft is mastered, it's easier to teach and learn, and there is push to be creative in the finite ceiling of the art instead of relying on a new gimmick or mechanic to make something by default "new". This in part is a reason why videogames aren't as respected among those other traditional artforms.

This just isn't true. ALL forms of art are constantly evolving and changing, yes even something as old as painting. Not to mention that film is also closely tied to technology but is still considered art, although it took a while to get there. The reason why video games aren't considered art in wider circles has nothing to do with tech. Don't forget that only twenty five years ago or so video games were pretty universally seen as kid's stuff. And when you're talking art, that's not a very long time.

 

[Ten of Nine]

Okay, here's a huge example that has seemed to slip past your bias -

Regardless of your personal opinions about the game either way Undertale has had one of the largest impacts on gaming as of late. The amount of penetration and inspiration in the form of art/video/animation/discussion doesn't really even have anything close from a 3D counterpart.

A game that is very primitive 2D, uses chiptune...really a game that could have been made on NES hardware almost completely.

There are so many other examples as well; like Braid, Shovel Knight, Cave Story, Ori and the Blind Forest, Limbo, Inside, Axiom Verge, Super Meat Boy, all of the modern Kirby/Yoshi/Mario/DKC 2D platformers and yarn games, Rayman Origins, Trine 2, GBA and DS Castlevanias/Metroids, Muramasa TDB, Odin Sphere, any SHMUP or fighter game, etc

The point that you've brought up twice now is pure speculation. If 3D never happened you'd be none the wiser and you'd still be playing awesome games. Even 3-4 generations now into 3D; a lot of 2D games are still being made, that's significant. Videogaming wouldn't get stagnant, the artform itself is strong enough to not need gimmicks and such. I'm not opposed to 3D where it's at now, but it sure did take a while for game makers to become competent with the medium, and for the majority of games to age well.

 

[FamilyTeam]

Are we talking about 2D games vs. 3D games and if they somehow relate to the quality of the storyline?

I am going to preach this game as having the smartest and most creatively executed storyline in media until they make some spiritual successor to it.

 

[Ten of Nine]

I would agree that is a fantastic game and story, I think it was talked about in the previous version of this thread.

But no we are not talking about 2D story vs 3D story.

Even though you guys seem to acknowledge it and get flustered everytime, I will have to remind you once again that I was specifically talking about the first 2 gens of 3D and how for the most part the story, gameplay, and other aspects suffered.

For the past 2 gens 3D has had enough usage and practice that it's at the point where it's no longer a strain or burden, and it's now a learned mechanic that can carry well made stories and characters (and the proper time and money can be allotted to those aspects).

The same was the case for start of 2D and the beginnings of gaming in general, that's why earlier the point about FF1 not having a good story or gameplay that aged well didn't make any sense at all. Bad examples if you want to make a point, cherry-picking.

And then finilark's earlier post about Chono Trigger and FF6 having great graphics....yea but they also had amazing story and characters. He basically just proved my point but thought he was proving his side. 2D gaming at that point was near it's peak, it had progressed for long enough to be learned so well that we started seeing amazing things like those 2 games plus Earthbound and others. Then the reset happened and the push for everything 3D gives us a lot of games that really weren't that great and definitely don't hold up today unless you're blinded by nostalgia.

 

[finalark]

Even though you guys seem to acknowledge it and get flustered everytime, I will have to remind you once again that I was specifically talking about the first 2 gens of 3D and how for the most part the story, gameplay, and other aspects suffered.

Every 3D game I have mentioned has been from the first two 3D eras. The games you keep bringing up are from beyond that.

Chrono Trigger and FFVI were the exception, not the rule. I'm not even willing to say FFVI had that great of story or characters compared to some of the games that came after, it was just good given the context of its time.

Okay, here's a huge example that has seemed to slip past your bias -

Regardless of your personal opinions about the game either way Undertale has had one of the largest impacts on gaming as of late. The amount of penetration and inspiration in the form of art/video/animation/discussion doesn't really even have anything close from a 3D counterpart.

My sister and I just started playing Undertale together about a week ago. We haven't gotten that far since we've both been busy with Persona 5. I hear Undertale is great so I've purposely avoided all info on it.

That being said, to just hail Undertale as a game with a big impact is myopic in and of itself and ignores other games that were also popular and widely talked about out. Since you only want to talk about the first two gens of 3D games, the first three Metal Gear Solid games, Final Fantasy VII, Ocarina of Time, Silent Hill 2, the Resident Evil series and God of War are all example of popular games with big impact that were widely talked about back then. Of course, given how non-existent and not wide spread the internet was its not as noticeable as it is today.

 

[DarkAuraful]

Fire Emblem Fates - No one in real life would actually choose Hoshido if they were in Corrin's position. Not my personal opinion. Just from a gamefaqs board from the Conquest Fates that I thought could be interesting to discuss.

Basically according to the topic creator of this subject: Years and memoties with adopted family > Real biological family

 

[FamilyTeam]

Fire Emblem Fates - No one in real life would actually choose Hoshido if they were in Corrin's position. Not my personal opinion. Just from a gamefaqs board from the Conquest Fates that I thought could be interesting to discuss.

Basically according to the topic creator of this subject: Years and memoties with adopted family > Real biological family

Actually... I don't know, it depends.
The first 6 chapters before the path split go absolutely relentless on Nohr, and makes them look like nothing but a bunch of barbarians with no sense of morality while Hoshido is this sea of roses that is noble and politically correct and also your real family.
(Also, if you play Conquest... for whatever reason they still try to make Nohr look like **** even though that is the side you just picked. While playing that game, it felt like the game was still going like "Nohr is ****, mate, unless said Nohrian is working for Corrin, they they're good)

Fates story is just a trainwreck anyway.

 

[DarkAuraful]

The first 6 chapters before the path split go absolutely relentless on Nohr, and makes them look like nothing but a bunch of barbarians with no sense of morality while Hoshido is this sea of roses that is noble and politically correct and also your real family.
(Also, if you play Conquest... for whatever reason they still try to make Nohr look like **** even though that is the side you just picked. While playing that game, it felt like the game was still going like "Nohr is ****, mate, unless said Nohrian is working for Corrin, they they're good)

This is why Fire Emblem Fates failed. It had a interesting and unique story premise (choosing your own ending, villains and different perspective of the opposing kingdom). But done poorly, ESPECIALLY in this particular route.

Chapter 6 gives you the option to mark your own destiny from two different decisions. But by choosing Nohr, the game is punishing you for siding with the "bad kingdom" when the "good kingdom" known as Hoshido shouldn't be any different either.

The decision in Ch 6 is incredibly powerful. Choosing between morality and loyalty; but there needs to be pros and cons for both kingdoms before that point.

I would understand Corrin if he wanted to stay with the family he made memories growing up. That's a valid reason; something I'd also probably so if it were up to me. But apparently the way he handles it throughout Conquest is through a guilt trip because that's how the game likes to constantly reminds you the mistake of doing.

Also if I were Conquest!Corrin, I would go tell Takumi's whining ***** *** to shut up. He's perfectly reasonable the way he is in Conquest, but like I already pick who I'm siding with. We're enemies, so you might as well accept it and fight.

 

[Ten of Nine]

Every 3D game I have mentioned has been from the first two 3D eras. The games you keep bringing up are from beyond that.

Chrono Trigger and FFVI were the exception, not the rule. I'm not even willing to say FFVI had that great of story or characters compared to some of the games that came after, it was just good given the context of its time.



My sister and I just started playing Undertale together about a week ago. We haven't gotten that far since we've both been busy with Persona 5. I hear Undertale is great so I've purposely avoided all info on it.

That being said, to just hail Undertale as a game with a big impact is myopic in and of itself and ignores other games that were also popular and widely talked about out. Since you only want to talk about the first two gens of 3D games, the first three Metal Gear Solid games, Final Fantasy VII, Ocarina of Time, Silent Hill 2, the Resident Evil series and God of War are all example of popular games with big impact that were widely talked about back then. Of course, given how non-existent and not wide spread the internet was its not as noticeable as it is today.

Well we've probably beat this horse dead by now and should move on, it at least sparked some conversation.

I guess I look at Nintendo as the perfect example of what I caution against. They used to be about the games, the system was a means to an end, they didn't worry as much about cutting edge tech or over the top gimmicks and such. This served them very well. I'm not sure what happened but they became desperate to separate themselves using things like motion controls, gamepad screens, lenticular 3D, and now the Switch (which I think is a great idea that was half baked and poorly executed). Basically a completely different company from what the NES, SNES, and N64 seemed to project. I'm just glad we have other companies that are a bit more resilient to the ADHD nature of "innovation" Nintendo keeps failing at. It's more of a clickbait strategy to get people talking about something weird or new rather than something just being quality and attracting developers who would yeild a large quality library.

 

[finalark]

I'm not sure what happened

This thing was a domestic failure and this thing was a global failure. Two consoles that focused on solid tech and good games, just like the SNES, but both didn't do so hot. Then they took a chance on a gimmick with the DS and later the Wii and both became some of the best selling hardware in gaming history.

So there you go. That solves the mystery of why Nintendo focused on gimmicks.

 

[Ten of Nine]

I get it you're sassy and snarky finilark, but really your answer isn't as correct or all encompassing as you think it is....

The N64 and Gamecube had VERY small libraries and both lacked serious elements that their direct competitor had.

PS1 having over 10 times the memory on disc (plus multiple discs), superior sound, ability to play CDs, not needing expensive exapansion paks and addons just to play games properly.

The PS2 could play DVDS! It didn't have tiny proprietary dumb discs. Remember...the ability to play DVDs was a massive selling point around that time.

It's very strange how you think A connects to B so simply, but you forget about important facts like these.

Plus Nintendo continued down the road of gimmicks even after realizing how much of a software failure the Wii was, the attach rate was one of the worst in console history.

 

[finalark]

The N64 and Gamecube had VERY small libraries and both lacked serious elements that their direct competitor had.

And this would be a big reason why those consoles failed, thus causing Nintendo to move on to gimmick consoles.

It's very strange how you think A connects to B so simply, but you forget about important facts like these.

If anything, these facts just support my statement.

Plus Nintendo continued down the road of gimmicks even after realizing how much of a software failure the Wii was, the attach rate was one of the worst in console history.

Which doesn't change the fact that the Wii sold 100 million units world wide.

 

[Joel_Tarkus]

Simply for the sake of tossing my opinion out there. I think that none of the sonic games (yes even the genesis ones) are good casually. I think they are good as speed running games, even Sonic 06 (maybe not boom. But as a casual experience things happen to fast for someone who didn't know what was coming to even react, and without knowledge of routes and that jazz the game just slows down to often to really get a feeling of going fast.

 

[Rizen]

Final Fantasy XII is my favorite FF game and I've played, 6, 7, 10, 10-2, 12 and 13 all the way through (plus Mystic Quest and the Crystal Bearers but lol @ those). 12 had such a rich world of cultures and lore, even if it started slow and took waaay too long to level up. I ended up doing everything except the stupid river fishing mini-game because screw that. It's like a good book; you have to put time in and see it through before you notice how deep it is. All the minor characters had their own lives and stories and everything had so much lore behind it, especially the espers.

edit, are images disabled on this forum? Can you guys see that? It looks broken to me.

 

[Minato]

Final Fantasy XII is my favorite FF game and I've played, 6, 7, 10, 10-2, 12 and 13 all the way through (plus Mystic Quest and the Crystal Bearers but lol @ those). 12 had such a rich world of cultures and lore, even if it started slow and took waaay too long to level up. I ended up doing everything except the stupid river fishing mini-game because screw that. It's like a good book; you have to put time in and see it through before you notice how deep it is. All the minor characters had their own lives and stories and everything had so much lore behind it, especially the espers.

edit, are images disabled on this forum? Can you guys see that? It looks broken to me.

Strange, looks fine when I see it in the quotes (but gone when I paste). But yes, XII's pretty underappreciated. Can't wait for XII HD, game's going to get even better with the additions.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Skyward Sword was best Zelda.

 

[FamilyTeam]

If you think Ike is the strongest lord in FE
well this isn't even an unpopular opinion of you're objectively wrong...

 

[Diddy Kong]

If you think Ike is the strongest lord in FE
well this isn't even an unpopular opinion of you're objectively wrong...

I still think he is. He's accomplished the greatests feats easily, Ragnell and Aether are probably the best weapon and skill in Fire Emblem (outside of FE4's ridiculous stuff like +20 Speed Wind Tomes) and the fact that crossover Fire Emblem titles tend to regard him as the strongest. FE Heroes for example, and Awakening IIRC.

 

[FamilyTeam]

I still think he is. He's accomplished the greatests feats easily, Ragnell and Aether are probably the best weapon and skill in Fire Emblem (outside of FE4's ridiculous stuff like +20 Speed Wind Tomes) and the fact that crossover Fire Emblem titles tend to regard him as the strongest. FE Heroes for example, and Awakening IIRC.

Awakening Lucina likely is stronger than he is and she wasn't even the strongest unit in Awakening.
Ragnell is OP in PoR (Mt 18 and RNG1-2 is nothing to sneeze at, but that became Mt 15 in Awakening) but P. Falchion and E. Falchion trade RNG1-2 to be effective against beasts and dragons and they can heal 20HP for free, which to me almost compensates.
I feel like the reason why IntSys makes him bonkers in every game he's been in after PoR and RD is exactly because this reputation he somehow built and now IntSys wants to feed and keep.

 

[DarkAuraful]

I still think he is. He's accomplished the greatests feats easily, Ragnell and Aether are probably the best weapon and skill in Fire Emblem (outside of FE4's ridiculous stuff like +20 Speed Wind Tomes) and the fact that crossover Fire Emblem titles tend to regard him as the strongest. FE Heroes for example, and Awakening IIRC.

Story wise in his games? Sure. I haven't played Radiant Dawn (and I probably won't either), so I'll take you up to that.
Game mechanics wise in terms of stats? Ehh not really.

Still, I wonder how he is in heroes? Apparently he's a top 5 red unit but I'm curious myself to see in person.

 

[FamilyTeam]

It's basically waht I said there: Ike built this reputation of being powerful within the community. Whether or not that is really justified, IntSys has been doing t heir hardest to try to keep this going, since they made Ike actually ridiculous in every FE game he's appeared in since his own games. He's ridiculous in Heroes.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Awakening Lucina likely is stronger than he is and she wasn't even the strongest unit in Awakening.
Ragnell is OP in PoR (Mt 18 and RNG1-2 is nothing to sneeze at, but that became Mt 15 in Awakening) but P. Falchion and E. Falchion trade RNG1-2 to be effective against beasts and dragons and they can heal 20HP for free, which to me almost compensates.
I feel like the reason why IntSys makes him bonkers in every game he's been in after PoR and RD is exactly because this reputation he somehow built and now IntSys wants to feed and keep.

Yeah but Ragnell in Awakening is in a terrible state, close to breaking in fact. Pretty similar to the Master Sword in Breath of the Wild honestly.

Also he kills a Goddess.

 

[Rizen]

Remember when the 'Master' Sword was actually a powerful weapon? Good times, good times.

 

[SaikaGaleforce]

my unpopular gaming opinion is that turn-based games are horribly unpleasant.
also, i do not like shovel knight.

 

[FamilyTeam]

Well... you have Fire Emblem in your avatar and signature.
FE is a turn based SRPG.

 

[SaikaGaleforce]

i do not actually play fire emblem. i just play the FE characters in smash. i kind of want to see the stories of FE:A and fates, but to do that i will probably buy them for my girlfriend who likes turn-based games so that she can play them while i watch

 

[FamilyTeam]

They're fun games to play, but maybe not exactly to see as a story, to be honest. They're fun stories but nothing anybody would boast about for having written. Fates' story is universally seen as being a disaster, though.
They basically just play like superevolved chess matches.

 

[finalark]

i kind of want to see the stories of FE:A and fates

TBH the story is pretty universally the weakest part of FE. Most of the series' draw is the infamous ball-crushing difficulty, the fun character building and coming up with clever strategies to overcome challenging maps.

 

[SaikaGaleforce]

TBH the story is pretty universally the weakest part of FE. Most of the series' draw is the infamous ball-crushing difficulty, the fun character building and coming up with clever strategies to overcome challenging maps.

i am terrible at wording, the character building is more of what i was talking about

 

[finalark]

i am terrible at wording, the character building is more of what i was talking about

I don't mean character building as in character development. I mean it in the old school DnD kind of way.

Looking at stats, figuring out which options are the best to build powerful characters, figuring out the optimal combination of skills and abilities to create an effective army. That sort of thing.

 

[SaikaGaleforce]

I don't mean character building as in character development. I mean it in the old school DnD kind of way.

Looking at stats, figuring out which options are the best to build powerful characters, figuring out the optimal combination of skills and abilities to create an effective army. That sort of thing.

oh, i misunderstood, i am sorry

 

[FamilyTeam]

Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn have the best stories imo. Even then, those are alright.
The rest of the series (except Fates) have cool little stories but nothing that special.
Fates' story is anti-writing.
.
.
Speaking of Fates, I had this discussion a few days ago. I've been wanting to try to pick up Conquest again before Shadows of Valentia releases this Friday. I asked some people around in a discord in how I could possibly try to enjoy CQ (which I just really disliked) and I got laughed at by them because I play on Normal?
This is not the first time I've seen this mentality (puh-lease, I came from the Touhou community), but is it really that uncommon to think that changing the difficulty isn't necessarily going to make things better?
I didn't like Conquest! How am I going to like it any better if I make it harder? My feelings are not this extreme, but just for comparison's sake, if I didn't like a turd, I'm not gonna like that turd any more if it's harder.
I didn't even understand this mentality of "the game's quality is relative to the difficulty" even back in Touhou where Easy/Normal are completely different games to Hard/Lunatic, with much different bullet patterns and more/different enemies.
I liked every single other FE game, even Binding Blade and Birthright to an extent (which I'm always complaining about) playing on Normal. Why is CQ the special snowflake that I have no right to judge on Normal?

 

[Rizen]

These opinions are unpopular because the games aren't well know. Metal Arms: Glitch in the System (Gamecube), Beetle Adventure Racing (N64) and Lost in Shadow (Wii) are some of my favorite games. If you like unconventional takes on each genre and get the chance, I highly recommend them.

 

[DarkAuraful]

I've been wanting to try to pick up Conquest again before Shadows of Valentia releases this Friday. I asked some people around in a discord in how I could possibly try to enjoy CQ (which I just really disliked) and I got laughed at by them because I play on Normal?
This is not the first time I've seen this mentality (puh-lease, I came from the Touhou community), but is it really that uncommon to think that changing the difficulty isn't necessarily going to make things better?
I didn't like Conquest! How am I going to like it any better if I make it harder? My feelings are not this extreme, but just for comparison's sake, if I didn't like a turd, I'm not gonna like that turd any more if it's harder.
I didn't even understand this mentality of "the game's quality is relative to the difficulty" even back in Touhou where Easy/Normal are completely different games to Hard/Lunatic, with much different bullet patterns and more/different enemies.
I liked every single other FE game, even Binding Blade and Birthright to an extent (which I'm always complaining about) playing on Normal. Why is CQ the special snowflake that I have no right to judge on Normal?

That easily sounds like typical elitist FE veterans (courtesy of Gamefaqs) that look down on newer, casual fans and worship Genealogy of the Holy War 24/7. Conquest is suppose to appeal to the older FE games in terms of challenge. Or at least that's the assumption I make if observation of a trend of FE fans looking down on newer ones are to go by. So I'll just go along with it.

Those are the people I don't admire / respect because whether you're a veteran or a new player, you're a Fire Emblem fan. That's what matters. Yes, they even go to that extent. And from what I've seen, that term seems to be way more complicated than it already needs to be seeing how it's used. I mean, I consider myself a veteran because I liked the series for 10 years and welcome any newcomer to the series.

I don't think there's anything wrong with you playing on normal mode. You're just trying to enjoy the game, not stress yourself by going on the hardest mode on the first try (which by the way, is a pretty dumb thing to do).

Oh, just because you've gone through Chapter 10 Lunatic that everyone considers the hardest part of Conquest, you think you're better than me? I'm playing on Binding Blade Hard Mode right now and you're not any different from me tough guy. That's right, the game with no second generation children or the broken Castle mechanic where you can go to other castles and inherit skills, and the game where a lot of people suck.

Sorry you had to experience that. Those definitely sound like elitist FE veterans considering you're being laughed at from though since they would do that though. But Touhou? That ****'s bullet hell!

Back on topic though. Um uh... Let's see...

Kagero > Takumi in FE Heroes. I can easily vouch for her being the best colorless unit in FE Heroes. All I have atm. I'll have to think of more haha.

 

[FamilyTeam]

I thought most of the older FE games didn't even have a difficulty switch? Gaiden had it, and all it did was ironically make the game better by making it less grindy. I heard about that mode countless times.

When I played Awakening for the first time, I thought "Hmm, this game isn't all that hard and I have really strong units with flashy powers. The appeal is probably building your characters to make them as strong as possible and see how far you can push them and how quick you can run through all the enemies."
Then I played Binding Blade where going aggro was a massive risk. So I thought "Hmm, this game is really difficult and I can't rush as much. The appeal is probably to find the safest way to the end with your limited resources and only engaging in battles if either absolutely necessary or if the odds are stacked on your favour."

The FE games just in general all seem to have different appeals depending on how you look at them. It's totally fine to like one but not the other, but my problem with CQ that those people didn't get wasn't that I was "making it too easy" by playing on Normal. Nothing would be fixed if I changed it on Hard. I just didn't like it as a game period.

People always complain that Awakening and Birthright lacked objective variety since it was all Rout or Defeat Boss. Other FE games I played like Blazing Sword and Path of Radiance pulled off many other kinds of objectives really competently. Conquest had a very wide variety of objectives, but looking at how they were done in that game... they made me miss the game being all Rout objectives. It feels like the devs didn't have competency to make non Rout objectives without making them obnoxious. It honestly gave me the feeling Awakening's enginge doesn't lend itself to anything but Rout.

 

[jamesster445]

Why do people like Tharja?

I get that she's hot, but I think people are grossly ignoring her negative traits. Negative traits such as...
- Child Abuse
- Spousal abuse
- Stalking
- anti-social tendencies.

But the one problem I have more than anything else is that there's no pathos to her actions. I beg the question. Why is she obsessed with Robin again?

This is the biggest reason why I can't get behind Tharja but I can get behind someone like Camilla as there is a reason for her actions.

 

[finalark]

Why do people like Tharja?

I get that she's hot, but I think people are grossly ignoring her negative traits. Negative traits such as...
- Child Abuse
- Spousal abuse
- Stalking
- anti-social tendencies.

Because the anime community has found a way to fetishize mental disorders.

 

[FamilyTeam]

The only reason I kind of had issue with Tharja, Camilla and even Lucina winning the gauntlets is because I am not innocent and I know most people voted for them simply because they are pretty girls that look hot rather than who they are as, you know, people.
I voted for Lucina and Camilla because they are characters I liked. I used to like Tharja too, but that was concidentally before I actually played FE with any commitment. Some people are complaining that it's an offensive generalization to say that most people who voted for Tharja in the ballot and in the latest gauntlet probably have no idea who they're voting for other than "a girl with large **** wearing a thong"... but I have a hard time thinking that is not the case.
If I went up to anybody and described Tharja as "Secluded sadistic obsessive sociopathic Dark Mage that's an abusive spouse and wife and also tests all of her new spells on her fellow soliders to make their lives hell", I'd have to probably talk to an entire city before finding anybody that wouldn't find that kind of personality disgusting.
But she has big **** and wears a thong so it's totally excusable.
Camilla is also obsessive and creepy but her actions have far more meaning behind them.