Fire Emblem is one of those series that I remember Nintendo Power magazine teasing us Americans with back in the 90's. It made me very curious, so when Rekka no Ken got released over here on the GBA, I jumped on it. I enjoyed playing it, even tho I never managed to beat it. Ultimately, however, I think the structure of the game ended up being a little too rigid for me, so never really got into it.
Post by nocturnal YL on Mar 12, 2011 5:18:06 GMT -5
It's nice to see this kind of project done for this series.
Compared to games in this genre, Fire Emblem is quite easy. Compare anything with RPG elements (ARPG, SRPG, ADV...) to a non-Nintendo game in that genre, Nintendo's is usually easier. FE is also among the easiest-to-understand of these games, thanks to IntSys's philosophy to simplify everything (or rather, just being lazy - gameplay easiness instead of using tons of stats to make things realistic, small numbers instead of large ones, employ integer and percentages instead of fractions of 7 or 9 or 13 or other oddity...).
I don't think I'll have the time to watch everything before posting this reply, since I'm already super-late in responding now. I've been busy myself this week.
Post by Nester the Lark on Mar 12, 2011 13:07:13 GMT -5
The maker of these videos said he's planning on making it a 12+ part series, which I guess equates to at least one game per episode. He's also hoping to have them all done by April 20, in time for the series' 21st anniversary.
I guess the thing for me with Fire Emblem is that everything is tied to specific advantages/disadvantages and exact calculations. It seems so rigid that I feel like I'm supposed to be doing long mathematical calculations before making a single move.
I've since tried Shining Force on the Virtual Console since it has more randomness, and it's actually possible to level grind. I still didn't get all the way thru it, tho.
Post by nocturnal YL on Mar 13, 2011 6:36:46 GMT -5
Hmm, Fire Emblem is random in some places and fixed in others. What do you get from levelling up is random (making an all-maxed army possible - this is from a recent run of mine), whether your hit lands or not and whether it is a critical (3x damage) is random, but the damage done is fixed.
And the calculations isn't that difficult to perform. Other than trying to select the attack command repeatedly to see the damage you'll deal, the game does provide intermediate stats (Atk, Hit, Crit, Avo; also Ddg and AS in FE10) that you can use for subtracting the corresponding stat of your enemy (Dmg = Atk-Def or Atk-Res, Net Hit = Hit-Avo, Net Crit = Crit-Ddg or Crit-Luck; AS - enemy AS >= 4 will invoke a double attack, and so on) ... yeah. If you can stand normal RPGs, SRPGs wouldn't be that hard.
I'd say FE isn't difficult once you know what all those stats are about and how the game works. Figuring out how it works could have been the only difficult part.
I love Fire Emblem. I'll have to take a look at these when I have time. I like FE7 the most, personally. FE8 (aka Sacred Stones) may be a better choice for you, though, Nester, as you can level grind in that one if you so choose.
If you can stand normal RPGs, SRPGs wouldn't be that hard.
Actually, I don't care that much for normal RPG's, either. But then, Fire Emblem isn't that much like an RPG. (I would consider Shining Force closer to a regular RPG.)
And it's not that I'm eager to level grind (I hate it, in fact), but it's nice to have the option. Otherwise, experience is a finite resource, and if I get stuck somewhere with under-powered units, then I pretty much have to start over from the beginning.
Post by nocturnal YL on Mar 13, 2011 13:58:53 GMT -5
Having to restart is very possible in this genre, but Fire Emblem? Unless you play on the Maniac or Lunatic difficulties, it's not going to happen easily (unless you do it deliberately).
Also like the RPG type of games, you should see a whole playthrough as a session - not a single stage (on the bad side, if you happen to play a bad story-driven game, it's hours of your life wasted away). If you miss something that is permanently missable, it's gone for the rest of the game.
And like Wildcat said, if you are interested in getting into this series, FE8 is a good start. It kinda took away part of my soul (changed my stance over Japanese-style games in general) when I tried it, haha.
I wonder when will the next part come out. The first video has a lot of fan translation and hacked screens, and I don't know if the author is aware of that.
Post by Nester the Lark on Mar 13, 2011 21:38:45 GMT -5
I've started a new game of Path of Radiance on easy mode. Let's see if I stick with it.
I would expect new parts to the video series to come out fairly often since he's planning on 12+ parts, and it's less than six weeks from the anniversary. Then again, most video makers tend to be a little overly ambitious, so it's highly likely he won't meet the deadline.
Post by Nester the Lark on Mar 29, 2011 14:35:43 GMT -5
Here's part two of the retrospective. It's quite off pace, isn't it?
I got up to chapter 12 in Path of Radiance, then put the game down last week. It wasn't because I got stuck or anything; I just drifted to other games. I'll try to forge ahead with it, tho. After all, if previous save files are any indication, I've never been past chapter 11 before.
BTW, what are you guys' thoughts on Fire Emblem compared to other turn-based strategy games, like Shining Force, Final Fantasy Tactics and Tactics Ogre? (I'm pretty sure I know what YL thinks. )
Fire Emblem is fantastic, as I mentioned before. It's my second favorite SRPG behind Ogre Battle 64 (which works a bit differently than most SRPG's). Part of why I like it is the great character design and the tense gameplay, and I like the way battles take place. It's sort of like chess. I need to dive into Shining Force and the PS1 Final Fantasy Tactics a bit more, as I haven't really dug into those. I also don't care much for Advance Wars despite its similarity, mainly due to its lack of character depth and the troops being mere pawns to a greater organization (that isn't as interesting).
Scattershot reply there, but I hope it answers your question some.
Post by nocturnal YL on Mar 30, 2011 11:23:33 GMT -5
True. I found it strange at first, but despite my love for FE, I don't like Advance Wars at all. Unlike FE, Advance Wars is difficult without a set of few but focused characters (although this is what makes FE too easy), and the protagonist COs in the GBA/DS trilogy are just having fun at sending their own units to die - something you don't see in Fire Emblem.
I've looked at Shining Force a bit (to be honest, I just like Camelot's stuff better after they left Sega, with the exception of all three GC/GBA/Wii versions of Mario Power Tennis), and tried several turn-based Flash games, but I'll probably like Fire Emblem (especially the non-Kaga ones) best in this genre.
As of the movie.... whoa whoa whoa. Death isn't THAT permanent (you get 12 or so chanced to revive), and the battles aren't random (they are triggered at fixed points). And no, there aren't male sisters in that game. Male healers are not present at all.
FE2 is also not THAT obscure in gameplay term, with several elements making it back to later games, like the Double Bow with a weird range in FE9 (sorry for spoiler, Nester), monsters in FE8, three-tier promotion and alternating between groups in FE10. The famous HP-draining Nosferatu magic came from here too.
...But other than those issues, this is one of the best English language coverage of FE2 I've seen. You don't usually spend more than 10 minutes to talk about that game in English.
I've stalled on my Path of Radiance playthrough. Again, I'm not stuck, I've just drifted to other games. This seems to be a trend with me with strategy games. They're fun and I enjoy them, but they don't seem to hold my attention for the long haul. It'd be nice if I could just take a break and come back to it later, but then I find it difficult to reorient myself when I pick it up midstream.
Post by nocturnal YL on Apr 14, 2011 12:49:11 GMT -5
I'm getting to like this series even more. It's sticking close to the facts now. Can't wait to see the rest =)
Can't hold your attention and can't get back? In that case, a lot of long, story-based games won't be your thing. And for some reason, I'm growing to like those. Now I even think 40~50 hours per game (mostly adventure games, RPGs and SRPGs) is an acceptable game length. (For other genres, I'd say 15~25 hours for action (platformer) and racing games (in this aspect, all Mario games fail hard), and 30~40 hours for ARPG, adventure and puzzle games.)
Post by Nester the Lark on Apr 14, 2011 14:18:14 GMT -5
You're probably right. I've drifted away from traditional RPGs over the past decade (altho I still maintain a peripheral curiosity about them). I do still like games like Zelda and Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, but those are more action-oriented, and not usually super long.
Still, I hate to give up on Fire Emblem so easily. I do like the series, and it would be nice to be able to say I finished at least one of them. I'll try again to pick up where I left off when I get an opportunity.