Does anybody else find it a bit weird how one of the biggest complaints about last game was the abundance of Sword-Fighters, yet people still wanted the likes of Lloyd, a character who uses swords, to be a playable character. Narrowing the scope a bit more, a lot of the backlash was predominantly from Fire Emblem characters, yet there was still backlash that Lyn, another sword who is also from Fire Emblem, was an Assist Trophy instead of being playable. Not to mention, the whole “Give Gannon a sword” thing.
So my question is, why? I feel like the statement that there are “too many sword s” or “too many Fire Emblem characters” is at odds with the wanting of characters such as Lloyd and Lyn. Gannondorf I can kind of see since it was more a case of distancing from Captain Falcon, but the latter two, again, seem to directly go against the underlying complaints. It’s as if I’m missing something. As if it’s not just the fact someone like Corrin is a Fire Emblem character and happens to use a sword. My current theory is bias to the Sixth Console Generation, perhaps a demand to get such games more noticed in favor of the newer installments alongside a high amount of nostalgia, but I guess that I don’t know until I get some definitive answers.
But on the topic of Corrin, do you think that they would have been more well-received if Roy wasn’t also a DLC character, or do you think that the backlash would still remain, compounded by the fact that such a character “wasn’t Roy”? If so, I think that my Sixth Console Generation theory might actually be going somewhere.
Just a thought that got into my head.
Comments (9)
I think it's not the swords that people don't like, but the lack of variety in their movesets
As somone who has nothing against swordfighters I can not say :/
Also trying to understand the intricacies of this very fandom, as I wasn’t online during any major turning points.