Meow-Professor
Getting back into the swing of things
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,241
- Reaction score
- 423
- Points
- 83
- Steam
- Meow-Professor
- PSN
- Meow-Professor
Easy. Canon wise out of all of Noel's group in the academy she had the 2nd most combat prowess with the 1st being Makoto. She is apart of one of those great families like Kagura and Jin. Remix Hearts wasn't just pure RomCom there was some interesting lore relevant stuff revealed with cameos everywhere.
And I would like a cat that fights with a pair of samurai swords, but whatever. It isn't like I'm mad about that or anything.
well it's a good thing that you aren't mad about it because that would be pretty embarrassing to be mad over a video game
I have read a large portion of Remix Heart and I think it is really bad. I find her extremely uninteresting and grating and I feel like there are much better people to add. I also don't like the idea of adding anyone from the manga as I feel like they aren't very good and come off as very fanfic-y. I much prefer them being their own thing instead of part of the main games.Easy. Canon wise out of all of Noel's group in the academy she had the 2nd most combat prowess with the 1st being Makoto. She is apart of one of those great families like Kagura and Jin. Remix Hearts wasn't just pure RomCom there was some interesting lore relevant stuff revealed with cameos everywhere.
She would have an interesting playstyle that would be a mix of Linne/Shiki/Rouge, doesn't have "plot reasons" to keep her out, and doesn't have a hitbox issue. She is also hardly the most insignificant either out of the current cast. Would easily rather have her then another Muru unit, another "I can't really fight, but I can still fight" character, or people that were barely introduced in CP as an npc suddenly get promoted to playable. Notice I didn't even get into the whole "it's a dude, but not really" angle.
Which is all subjective taste that your entitled to have.I have read a large portion of Remix Heart and I think it is really bad. I find her extremely uninteresting and grating and I feel like there are much better people to add. I also don't like the idea of adding anyone from the manga as I feel like they aren't very good and come off as very fanfic-y. I much prefer them being their own thing instead of part of the main games.
I don't see why her being a "I can't really fight, but I can still fight" character is relevant to you if her personality (even arguable the "it's a dude, but not really" angle) isn't relevant. The personality/lore of a character is just as important to me as the gameplay. Even if I found Noel one of the most fun characters in the cast, I still wouldn't play her as I find her to be a charisma black hole that ruins everything around her. Her personality and story is silly and I really would've preferred if her manga was somewhat separate from the main game.
Part of this is why I dislike Naoto as well. I hate the manga he is from (although less so than Remix Heart) and I really dislike him as a character. I really don't think he deserved to be playable when there are much more interesting and substantial characters to be made playable.
There's no need to be so passive aggressive. I was being very negative, yes, but it was a legitimate question about why someone would want her to be playable, hence the "seriously".I personally don't give a fuck about the little Yoda cat becoming playable for a variety of reasons, but I understand he has fans so I'm not gonna make a "no idea WHY he is requested" type remark and just respect that everyone has different tastes on what appeals to them and move on. Hell I might even be happy for them.
Well, people can disagree about the specifics of the character (for example someone might find a character's personality annoying while someone else might find it unique or interesting), but personally I feel like some things can be objectively bad. A character not being developed or having any backstory/lore at all can be argued to be bad not on an opinionated level. If a character is very plain or is basically a blank slate nobody can really argue they are interesting or compelling. If someone is very trope-filled or has physically nothing original about them, that is something I'd say is bad on a basic level. I feel like Mai isn't a good character by the definition of what makes a character "good" (interesting, good development, whether they are actually unique, etc). "Good" does not also imply opinion, while it is usually the case, just like something being "bad".
It got really bad in ChronoPhantasma, where 90% of the gag reels were literally just "REMEMBER WHAT WE DID LAST GAME? LET'S DO THAT AGAIN".BB has a few gems, but it kinda fails at times to tread that line of serious and funny. Thanks to how it designed certain characters, there's a lot of comedic relief that bogs the actually decent chars down. Platinum is funny to an extent, but when all she does is call Ragna a peso and fawn over Jubei, all her possibilities get waylaid and she becomes annoying. This applies to the running gag with Noel and her flat chest and Murakumo outfits as well. Honestly BB would be tons better of they focused on making new jokes and comedy between characters instead of just following the jokes they've already made
Honestly Kagura and Tao are hilarious, just because of his unique banter and Tao being exclusively comedic relief.
Note that this is also the problem with the Persona 4 and Hyperdimension Neptunia saturation....
Personally I liked Continuum Shift as well (that was really where the gameplay started to become something interesting [still not the best, I really disliked the guard primer system]) and while the plot was kind of just a bridge between CT and CP (I know a ton happens there but it feels so boring and forgettable), I feel like it was the game that introduced the most interesting characters.I mentioned this recently on another forum, but the biggest flaw in Blazblue's story IMO is the same as in Kingdom Hearts:
They had something decent, then they turned it into a franchise.
I think CT was a charming little visual novel/fighter mash up (adimttedly, Guilty Gear did it first, though not nearly as well). If BB's story had been a self contained affair, maybe spanning a trilogy of three games and wrapping itself up neatly, I think it would have been pretty entertaining.
But when you're constantly adding new characters, plot points, conspiracies, and other assorted bullshit for every single yearly release (whilst always promising an awesome conclusion later) it turns into a complete clusterfuck pretty fast.
Same with Kingdom Hearts. First game was charming, sweet, and well done. After that it became an endless soap opera of nonsense.
Even that is an opinion.Well, people can disagree about the specifics of the character (for example someone might find a character's personality annoying while someone else might find it unique or interesting), but personally I feel like some things can be objectively bad. A character not being developed or having any backstory/lore at all can be argued to be bad not on an opinionated level. If a character is very plain or is basically a blank slate nobody can really argue they are interesting or compelling. If someone is very trope-filled or has physically nothing original about them, that is something I'd say is bad on a basic level. I feel like Mai isn't a good character by the definition of what makes a character "good" (interesting, good development, whether they are actually unique, etc). "Good" does not also imply opinion, while it is usually the case, just like something being "bad".
People can like bad things, though. Take a look at video games; a lot of people like and play games that are objectively bad on basic levels but still enjoy them for one reason or another. I'm saying someone can have an opinion on something and like it even when it isn't actually a good character/game/whatever without their opinions being invalidated.
Kamina has a lot of personality to him and is interesting. He comes from an interesting place, is very humorous and over the top, and just is very defined. He's a static character, yes, but that isn't the only thing that makes a character "good". Lots of characters aren't dynamic and still are interesting or memorable. Jubei is not a good character based on what I consider makes a character "good", but he's interesting. A cat that stands on two legs, wields a sword, and raised/trained the main character? I've never seen that before. He doesn't have the other traits I think makes a good character, but he's very new and interesting and is something I've not seen before.Even that is an opinion.
Static characters aren't bad just because they're static, or Kamina and Jubei would be awful and they're not.
Tropes in of themselves aren't bad, tropes are tools, and whether you like it or not, there's thousands of years of literature behind you. Both Kamina and Jubei are painfully unoriginal trope filled characters. We know next to nothing about Jubei, even his actual personality is a mystery.
While all of BB's writing is pretty much shit,(objectively) at least Mai is a flesh out character with things, Jubei is nothing.
Also you're using "objective and subjective" a little loose there.
Things with Empirical evidence and held standards can do the "good and bad" thing, everything else is relative.
So while you can have a "good" and "bad" character, "trope filled" and "good development" and "uniqueness" aren't really factors. Those aren't on "the" checklist of good and bad, those are on the checklist of "innovative and interesting", and not everything that is innovative and interesting is good.
Also a blank slate character also isn't inherently bad. Almost nothing in a vacuum in literature is awful.
Because your subjective opinion on what should be considered objective is subjective. Can you give me a definitive amount of particular traits to say a character is good, and I mean concrete and definite, no saying "enough to" if not it's still subjective. Something like a character can't be objectively bad.Kamina has a lot of personality to him and is interesting. He comes from an interesting place, is very humorous and over the top, and just is very defined. He's a static character, yes, but that isn't the only thing that makes a character "good". Lots of characters aren't dynamic and still are interesting or memorable. Jubei is not a good character based on what I consider makes a character "good", but he's interesting. A cat that stands on two legs, wields a sword, and raised/trained the main character? I've never seen that before. He doesn't have the other traits I think makes a good character, but he's very new and interesting and is something I've not seen before.
Mai is fleshed out somewhat but is no way interesting and is very generic. She really does nothing to make herself memorable.
I don't see how a character with no personality, no development, or anything at all wouldn't be "objectively" bad. They have physically nothing to them. Yes, people might still like them, but I wouldn't call them good by any stretch of the word.
Personally I really don't find a character's "goodness" relative, and I don't see why it would be. There are things that make a character good or bad on a basic level, and then you have opinions. Even if I don't like a character in some kind of form of literature/media, I can still recognize they might be well-developed, interesting, or something else, and I don't like them because of opinion, or vice-versa.
You just did it again.Kamina has a lot of personality to him and is interesting. He comes from an interesting place, is very humorous and over the top, and just is very defined. He's a static character, yes, but that isn't the only thing that makes a character "good". Lots of characters aren't dynamic and still are interesting or memorable. Jubei is not a good character based on what I consider makes a character "good", but he's interesting. A cat that stands on two legs, wields a sword, and raised/trained the main character? I've never seen that before. He doesn't have the other traits I think makes a good character, but he's very new and interesting and is something I've not seen before.
Mai is fleshed out somewhat but is no way interesting and is very generic. She really does nothing to make herself memorable.
I don't see how a character with no personality, no development, or anything at all wouldn't be "objectively" bad. They have physically nothing to them. Yes, people might still like them, but I wouldn't call them good by any stretch of the word.
Personally I really don't find a character's "goodness" relative, and I don't see why it would be. There are things that make a character good or bad on a basic level, and then you have opinions. Even if I don't like a character in some kind of form of literature/media, I can still recognize they might be well-developed, interesting, or something else, and I don't like them because of opinion, or vice-versa.
I'm just going to end this discussion by saying yes, this is what I'm trying to say. While I do think there are some things that will make a character "bad" in every situation (mainly the "nothing to them" argument), it can vary with context. A character can be bad objectively, just like a lot of things.I think a character CAN be objectively bad, but the parameters for such vary from work to work. Context is important. A character that is shit in one work can fit perfectly in another. Or even from position to position. Kamina would be an awful protagonist, he would be awful in Texnolyze or Lain or FF 12, but he's fine where he is.
Oh, really? What I remembered was him mentioning it was something they would possibly explore if they can do it with the limitations of the PS3. He was very vague about it, which is why I was wondering if they ever elaborated.