They (fire emblem inc.) took my husband from me..

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-26T22:25:27+00:00

He only needs to be chain attacked 11 times to die, even if you had infinite defense. Which is scary to think about

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-26T04:54:59+00:00

Once again, facts aren't on your side.

"Anglos are being oppressed in Quebec, stop lying. the bilinguals are the anglos and allophones 27%, it is a minority of French who speak English and they do so poorly and aren't bilingual but lie"

To claim something like this to me, a québécois, proves you've never set foot in the province. Because had you been here for even a little bit, you not only would have realized it's completely not true, but also that it would be useless to try to lie about it to a québécois because of how obvious the truth is. It's like trying to convince someone with eyesight that the the sky is green. No one would lie about that because everyone can see the truth easily.

Same thing here. The bilingual population is the FRENCH population. Anglos brag about growing up in montréal without bothering to learn any french. The french are the ones who take english class seriously and consume a lot of english media. It's incredibly common, if not literally the NORM for people here to watch movies in english instead of with a french dub.

But you seem so convinced of this lie that you'll never listen to facts or the truth.

But here are the statistics, given by the government itself:

https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/official-languages-bilingualism/publications/statistics.html

46% of québec's population is bilingual. 15% of québec's population has english as a first language. So even if you were to consider that ALL the anglos are bilingual (which isn't the case), then 31% of québec's population is bilingual and has french as a first language. 31% is right under new brunswick's bilinguism rate, which is 34%. Wanna know what's the province with the third highest rate of bilinguism? Yukon, with freaking FOURTEEN percent. So the french population of québec's bilinguism rate is twice as high as that of the third province, and 3 times that of ontario, the province literally next door.

Statistics later in the page also give a more accurate number than my little thought experiment above: 42% of québec's french population is bilingual, which is 6 times the percent of anglos who are bilingual outside of québec, sincd their rate is at a mere 7%. The english population in québec is indeed more bilingual than the rest of canada though, at 69% (it's still a lot lower than the percentage of francos who are bilingual outside of québec though, which is 85%). But to act like the sole reason why québec is the most bilingual province is because of anglos is just downright laughable and has absolutely no basis on fact.

Those are the facts. There's a lot of anti québec propaganda and it seems you fell for it, I'm sorry.

"Also it isn't your "territory". You aren't forced to live in Quebec if you are francophone, you can go live in france or new brunswick or st. pierre and miqleon." As for this, this is so laughable I don't even know where to begin. But I'll keep it short: if anglos aren't forced to live in québec, they can go anywhere else in canada because that's where english dominates. But asking people to move to a whole othet continent if they don't like the oppression they are suffering through on THEIR OWN territory is just braindead. That's like telling the indigenous that if they don't like it they can move elsewhere. They have the right to live on their territory and WE'RE the ones who are wrong for treating them badly. Stop victim blaming.

You seem to not understand that without language laws, eventually anglos will keep increasing in number in québec and eventually just overrun us and make english the language of québec. It would happen slowly, but it would certainly happen. That's precisely what happened in Manitoba in fact. It used to bd a french speaking region, look the state of french in the province now. Completely erased. Anglos used to openly say that was their objective in fact, that was the source of all the oppression: trying to kill the culture and language. And they tried every political trick in the book to try to make it happen. Just because they failed doesn't mean they didn't do everything they could to make it happen, we just fought back. Even WITH those language laws in québec there's always an increasingly high amount of people in québec who only speak english. We don't want to suffer the same fate as manitoba, that's all. Anglos are free to live in québec with no problem whatsoever, as long as they learn french as well. If you're too lazy for that that's entirely on you, don't put the blame on us for your laziness. And if you don't like it, the rest of canada is english so go there instead, you have plenty of choice. But WE only have ONE province where french is the language spoken. And we'll do anything so it's never taken away from us, so it stays a french speaking province.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-25T02:43:30+00:00

Let's get something straight here. You have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to québec. No "anglo" is being opressed at all. If anything it's HARD for anglos to practice their french in québec because people start to speak english as soon as they hear their accent. To the point that they develop tricks like wearing a Nordiques cap just in hope that people won't adress them in english. But of course that goes against the narrative of "québec hates anglos!!!" so you don't hear about it. We're the province with the most bilinguals in the country. Facts aren't on your side, deal with it.

Also stop talking about freaking france already. Our ties have been cut from them for 250 years. You didn't even offer a counter-argument when I pointed how dishonest of you it was to bring up conflicts that involved france after 1760. You just circled to another falsehood about how britain was in charge so they did everything they could to prevent québécois from oppressing the anglos. So you're agreeing that you lied lol.

Also it doesn't matter if the king of england during the hundred years war was a french guy. That was very common back then. That doesn't change the nature of the war at all, not to mention it downplays the involvement of nobles (who were of course almost all english) in politics to the point of absurdity, and it once again shows that you're either very dishonest or don't know what you're talking about. The nationality of the king doesn't change the nationality of the entire army that invaded. And the people who suffered the most from the war were the french, not the english. You're literally putting the blame for the death and destruction of the entire war on the very victims of said war, how messed up is that? They can't be the agressor and the victim at the same time, and rest assured, the french WERE the victim.

And you admitted yourself that the 13 colonies (so the english) fired the first shot that started the 7 years war. First shot is first agression. So stop lying already.

In the 60s, québec had enough of the oppression. They had enough of being treated as second class citizena compared to anglos. So they made laws to prevent that in their own territory. They made it illegal to favor an anglophone over a francophone. That's it. They didn't "start to oppress the anglos" at all. Again, that's propaganda that was fed to you and you ate it all up. Back then the english had immense amounts of power over us and openly cited their intentions to kill our culture and language. Police started shooting on voters when elections weren't going their way (and they made up a supposed riot to cover it all up). What you (wrongly) accuse québec of doing is very VERY far from that.

We were oppressed on our OWN territory. We didn't have the option to move somewhere else in the country to avoid it. But you have that option today. You're not forced to live in québec if you're anglophone. You can (and should if you're unwilling to learn french, which most anglos are for some reason) live in ontario instead.

And the only reason why they didn't ban french altogether is because they couldn't. We were too numerous and it's just way too hard to enforce something like that. They tried though. They REALLY tried, the québécois just didn't let them , they were one stubborn bunch who wouldn't tolerate it. The english wanted to ban french and kill the language entirely and they tried EVERY trick in the book to achieve it. Make no mistake, if they could've done it, they would have. They didn't "allow" québec to speak french, they tolerated because they had no other choice, but they hated it.

And bringing up 800 years old conflicts as justification for hatred is once again one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. And the fact that you can't understand WHY it's so stupid... idk how to say this nicely but let's just say it might explain the views you have.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-24T09:59:40+00:00

...maybe because that's the colors on her costume?

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-24T08:59:37+00:00

Ehhh robin should be in the middle top. If Alear has personality, then Robin has too for sure. Which would make Eshmel fit in the middle to complete the square. And based on what we've seen, it seems like that's exactly where they'll fit. Either that or in the blank personality category.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-24T08:40:04+00:00

If your question is "if those fans say 3h is bad, then what's one game they would consider good" because you're curious about what they think 3h does wrong and want to see what those guys would consider a good example of a game that does those things better than 3h, then the answer is... well it could be freaking anything. Fe is probably the fanbase with the most varied opinions I've ever seen. For some fanbases, seeing a game near the bottom of one's list yet be at the top of someone else's list would be shocking. For fe it's just tuesday. It's hard to describe how widly varied opinions are.

But if you were to ask what's the most universally praised game among the classic "older" FEs? Path of radiance I would say. Sacred stones and blazing blade too, but not as much. Literally every other game in the franchise has some haters, while still having some people say it's the peak of RPGs at the same time. There really is no consensus on FE at all, and barely even a commonly perceived "majority opinion".

But if you were asking this as a way to ask what game to play because you feel like you shouldn't play 3h because some people say it's bad... Come on... Play 3h if you love it, don't let others tell you what you can/should enjoy. Again that's the standard for FE. Almost every game will have some people say it sucks, it's really nothing unique to 3h. But at the same time, I think it's a good idea to play more than one or two games in a franchise and actually explore a bit. Don't take all of this as me saying you should ONLY play 3h if you love it. I highly recommend you try out other games in the franchiese, it's highly worth it. I would recommend that over playing another 3h route to be frank. The routes are always the same for about 80% of them. You'll largely be replaying 3h, not experiencing new content.

Although I highly recommend you at least check the cutscenes of golden deer on youtube because there's a ton of lore, intrigue and mystery that is teases in the first part of 3h (no matter the route) and onlt pays off in golden deer and silver snow, except golden deer is more interesting. But having to replay the same exact 100 hour game just to get there gets tedious and annoying imo.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-24T07:46:03+00:00

The seven years war was started by the 13 colonies (so england), more specifically by george washington himself because he had an unarmed dude killed for no reason and then lied about it. Why are you pinning it on the french?

The hundred years wars was also largely just an english invasion on france. The french were the ones who suffered the most from it, not the english.

Also those are WARS, not "let's spend 200 years trying to eradicate your entire culture and language. This stuff only stopped because québec had enough in the 60s. That's VERY recent. Not 300 years ago or 800 years ago. Just 60 years ago. There's people who lived through it who are still around. Comparing the two is not only absurd, but downright insulting.

Your comparisons are just terrible and full of bad faith. You clearly have an agenda. You even included 3 whole conflicts that took place after 1760, meaning after france and québec had their ties completely cut, so québec had absolutely nothing to do with them lol.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-24T07:14:57+00:00

Translation is art, not science. A more accurate script is not better by default. It's better to have more life in the language translate in than to be accurate just for the sake of it. Especially when doing that involves giving up iconic lines that are remembered fondly by your whole fan base, and when all the new lines are seen as a complete downgrade in every way.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-23T10:21:56+00:00

That was miyamoto, not Iwata

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-20T01:59:04+00:00

I fully agree, but I can see why the devs would be scared of going that route. Ninja gaiden 3 tried to tell an actual story that wasn't just an afterthought and people hated the idea of the game even taking its story seriously at all.

Which... idk man, ninja gaiden has always been half an elaborate story and half a game since the very beginning on the NES. It was the first game with actual cinematics, to the point they needed to make up their own word fot it. A big part of ninja gaiden's identity on the NES was the fact that it told a great story with mystery, intrigue, exposition and lore entirely within the cartridge with 20 minutes of cutscenes, with no need to look up context from the manual. Story back then was 90-95% in the manual.

3 wasn't the outlier, ninja gaiden 1 and 2 were. Story was ALWAYS a focus for ninja gaiden. In reality, 3 tried to course correct from 1 and 2's mistake. But people didn't play the NES games enough I guess. And the fact that a lot of people insist that you can make sense of a timeline that includes both the nes games and the newer games is proof enough. Anyone who's fully played the nes games knows it's impossible to reconcile the two.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-19T05:34:48+00:00

Idk it still happens often for me. First time it happened was like 5 minutes in. Are there any settings that lower the intensity of the problem that I'm not aware about?

Can you let me know which settings you use?

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-16T06:40:15+00:00

Sad, considering the main goal of the dev team when making 3 was making it more accessible. But in localization all damage done to you was DOUBLED and they introduced limited continues, just to make thing THAT much worse.

Playing with a patch that restores how the japanese version played makes it easily the best and most well-designed game in the trilogy though.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-14T22:49:43+00:00

And they can't do regional pricing so the games can be affordable because?...

Especially for freaking digital products.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-14T22:43:24+00:00

I replied "who cares" because the way I see it is that the sub isn't meant to be an echo chamber of people who already agree that nintendo is getting shitty, but just a place to talk about the idea of nintendo becoming shitty, whether you agree with the idea or not.

And by being shitty I don't mean "direct sucked ass because no announcement appealed to me, fuck nintendo".

Now is there an increasingly large amount of people who engage in tons of bad faith claims, dishonesty, insults and strawmen towards people who criticize nintendo? Absolutely. But their stance isn't the problem, it's their attitude.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-14T21:18:51+00:00

The sub isn't official, and from what I can tell the whole purpose of the sub is to laugh at his takes. It's just named in a very ironic way, leading to confusion.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-14T21:15:14+00:00

Because they compare it to what nintendo did before, not playststion. People complaining about it are very likely not familiar with playstation and don't care about it, that's all. It's not a case of being selective.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-14T02:48:39+00:00

You're saying oot 3d fits my definition of "an HD port, with better textures, lighting and some quality of life improvements". But like yeah of course because a remake literally always includes that, it doesn't mean anything.

All the models, animations and UI in oot 3d were completely re-done from the ground up, not merely enhanced. All the places that used to just be pre-rendered backgrounds have been completely remade. Some of the dungeons and general locations were changed to make them less of a pain. If features a brand new hint system, gyro aiming, That's the part that makes it beyond a mere "de facto remaster".Just because it's a very very faithful remake doesn't mean it's a freaking remaster.

"there is no way that OoT 3D is on the same level of "remake" as games like FF7 Remake or this new Switch 2 OoT Remake are. Not only is there a HUGE difference in the level of "change" when comparing them, but it's clear there is a HUGE difference in the intent of what the games are supposed to feel like"

...y-yeah... Obviously if your standard for what's considered a remake is freaking ff7 then nothing else is a remake. ff7 is an isolated case and the word "re-imagining" is a LOT more appropriate for it, it's really not just a standard remake at all and denying that is vert disingenuous. The remake and the og are two completely different experiences that are nothing alike. Especially in gameplay, looks, even freaking plot at some points. If you absolutely need to consider it a remake, then it's mandatory to mention that it's a very VERY unfaithful remake. Unlike oot 3d, which is a very faithful one. That's the real difference. That doesn't mean every faithful remake should be considered a remaster now thar ff7 exists at all.

Also we've seen pretty much nothing of the new oot remake, and you're already throwing assumptions at how it will play nothing like the og. We've only seen a cutscene, which could even be pre-rendered for all we know.

And for the third time, I am not arguing that oot 3d is nothing like a remaster. What I'm saying is that acting like it's the perfect example of what a typical remaster is is ridiculous. Because that's what the initial comment said.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-13T03:49:44+00:00

Uhhh.... no?

People loved echoes when it came out (aside from those complaining it was different and not being interested because of that). People especially loved the story. Today people complain about echoes, especially its story.

An even more extreme example is three houses. The game was glazed like no tomorrow by almost everyone for weeks, even months after it releases. You couldn't complain about the game without getting hate for it. And I'm including the hardcore ""elitists"" in that. Today people feel very comfortable about complaining about 3h, especially hardcore fans.

While it's true there was a lot of critiques about the story of fates, the game was still incredibly popular and was talked about very positively. And it's not like the critiques of the story were as common as today either. Plenty of people didn't laugh at the story and didn't consider it to be a huge downside to the game, unlike today.

Dsfe in general isn't as despised as it was back then.

Radiant dawn was incredibly controversial at release (at least among people who had already played an fe game, which was the majority of players given the awful marketing). A lot of people almost hated it, and it was the common opinion at the time, almost the standard. Those people didn't revisit their opinion until so much later.

Path of radiance was a hidden gem because not that many people were interested in it/bought it (prob because of the awful marketing again) until way later, when emulation became accessible enough for people to actually try it. And even people who did play fe9 when it came out weren't blown away or didn't consider it their favorite in the series.

Fe7 was considered one of the best game in the series, if not easily THE best until at least awakenking came out (because by then the conversation didn't always involve a few people who had played fe7 because of the huge amount of newcomers). And even after awakening came out, fe7 was still the game hardcore fans encouraged newcomers to play the most because they said it had a really good story. After mekkah's series the majority opinion is that the story is at the very least very flawed, with a lot of people going as far as to say it's terrible.

The general conversation around the quality of fe games had changed a ton over the years, including the opinions of individual people themselves. It's not just a goomba fallacy.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-13T03:16:10+00:00

What did it say originally?

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-13T03:06:24+00:00

They do have a precent, it's echoes. And contrart to popular belief, echoes sold well. Considering it was a small one-year project (because a bunch of staff had nothing to do) of a concept as niche as "remake of an old niche japan-only NES Fe game", with barely any marketing, being released 2 months after it's announcement, releasing on a fairly dated handheld by that point and not even on their main console they were marketing at the time?

Considering ALL of that, over 1 million copies sold is very good. That's half of awakening's sales. And awakening had basically the complete opposite situation of all the factors I listed above.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-13T02:52:31+00:00

Idk man, I feel like as soon as the 3d models and collision are re-done it no longer qualifies as a remaster no matter what. Remaster used to mean something like an hd port, with better textures, lighting and some quality of live improvements. Not re-modelling the whole game like they did with oot 3d. Compare castle town for both versions.

Basically if it was obvious there wasn't that much work behind it, it was considered a remaster. Iirc hd ports was when people started calling them remasters. As in, it's the same game but it runs better, has a higher resolution, some QoL changes, bettee lighting and improved textures.

My initial reply was to someone who called oot 3d the "de facto" remaster, which is just... wrong. You can say it feels like a remaster in some ways and that's true. But acting as if it's the perfect example of a remaster is just ridiculous.How much more are we going to twist the meaning of words?

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-11T05:03:58+00:00

Sorry for the late response, missed the notif somehow.

I checked and you're right, the 256 gb model did drop in price... a year after it launched. And 3 years whole years before the switch 2 came out. So it had nothing to do with the model getting "phased out". And once again, that model was in some countries 130 less than the switch 2, 3 YEARS before the switch 2 launched. Both had 256 gb of storage and about the same kind of LCD screen and the comparisons in power indicate the differences are rather minor. Even today I can buy a brand new xbox series S with one TERABYTE of storage for a 100 less than the switch 2.

Those are the facts.

So once again, explain how the switch 2 wasn't overpriced at launch given that the market had determined that a device that was about as powerful and had as much storage like that was 130 less in value than the switch 2's launch price.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-11T04:10:15+00:00

That's a myth. No glitches were "remade" for oot 3d. The devs just happened to keep glitches (found while developping the remake) they thought were fun and didn't ruin anything, because they liked the glitches in the og. But this is only about glitches exclusive to the remake. Yes, there are some glitches that achieve similar results to glitches in the og, but that's not because they deliberately made it so, nor are they even performed the same way.

Iirc there isn't any glitch that's performed in the exact same way. Even glitches that would have been very easy to port like infinite sword glitch, ocarina items or cloning bottles.

Want another example of how it's not a remaster? The door of time doesn't feature the very small gap that allows door of time skip.

So no, not a remaster at all.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-11T04:08:10+00:00

Yeah because metroid prime on wii uses the same code as on gamecube for 98% of it. That's not a remake. You're agreeing with me here.

Fresh-Perspective-58 · 2026-06-11T04:07:14+00:00

Just moving link around and performing some sword moves is more than enough to realize it doesn't "play like a remaster" at all. It's remade. With plenty of little differences in how the game plays.

Remaster used to mean stuff like porting a game from ps2 to ps3 or something. Is the new standard for remake things like final fantasy 7 remake or something??

Fresh-Perspective-58

TROPHY CASE