|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 9, 2018 20:38:35 GMT -5
So, I've been playing a bit of Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon recently and I'm looking forward to learning more about Three Houses (which will eventually get its own thread), and I wanted to just talk about the series in general.
You guys may know I'm a fairly casual FE player (I've only played four games in the series, and so far only actually finished one), so I was hoping to get some perspectives from you guys (particularly YL and Leon, but anyone can answer).
I've noticed that the more recent games, from Awakening on, tend to be divisive among fans, which is ironic because those are the games that basically saved the series from cancellation. But I guess some fans haven't liked the inclusion of more "fan-service" elements (like clothing damage and dating/marriage aspects) and more casual game options (like disabling perma-death). Maybe there are more technical reasons, but this is the general impression I've gotten. I've never played anything beyond Shadow Dragon, so I don't really know specifics about later games.
Anyway, I'm just wondering how you guys feel about the current direction of the Fire Emblem series. Do you like the inclusion of these elements, and that the series is more mainstream now (even as far as being considered one of Nintendo's top franchises)? Did you have a favorite "era" of Fire Emblem, where the games had particular elements or a certain style that you liked the most?
Also, I got the impression that YL doesn't care as much for the earlier FE games that Shouzou Kaga was involved with. If that is indeed the case, I'm curious to know why that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Leon on Nov 10, 2018 13:39:10 GMT -5
I support the change, because the franchise desperately needed a shakeup. The aesthetic had basically been set in Mystery of the Emblem, and only changed marginally once Taeko Kaneda became in charge with Binding Blade. Kusakihara and Kozaki brought in a breath of fresh air that the franchise needed to be relevant. One think I do criticize however, is that by having marriage be a part of the gameplay, older characters are basically exiled from the playable cast, Genealogy also had that problem back in the day.
I also think when some fans act like fanservice was introduced in Awakening, they weren't really being honest about it. Even way back in the first game, a lot of the women had fanservicey outfits. Yes, there are characters like Camilla who are more sexualized, but women in sexy outfits long predated Awakening and Fates.
For my favourite era, I'm partial to the Archanean games just in general. I think the music, along with the character design and setting appearance gave it a very unique cultural feel compared to the others. I also really like how the large cast encourages replayability with many different units.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 10, 2018 15:32:14 GMT -5
I don't think it's necessarily the case that fans thought the fan service came out of nowhere as much as that it's simply been more emphasized in recent games. (There was that infamous "face petting" minigame in Fates that was entirely censored out of the international release.) I think it's more like some fans felt the series had "sold out," and was moving away from being a "serious" strategy RPG.
But again, the whole thing is a moot point when you remember that if Awakening hadn't been a massive success, the entire series would've gone the way of F-Zero.
Of course, the caveat with that is the assumption that it was the fan service that made the recent games successful. Personally, I think it was the addition of more casual game modes. The hardcore nature of perma-death was simultaneously the appeal for fans and the barrier that limited the audience. As I mentioned, I've only ever finished one Fire Emblem game, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying the series. However, I think there were a lot of people who stopped playing Fire Emblem simply because they never finished them. So, I think adding options that helped more people see the games through to the end is what dramatically increased their appeal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Leon on Nov 10, 2018 18:46:52 GMT -5
Don't underestimate the appeal of attractive characters. I have a friend who never played a Fire Emblem game, then she saw pictures of some of the guys from Fates on Tumblr and she went out and bought it the next day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 10, 2018 19:45:45 GMT -5
You're not wrong. I think Fire Emblem has long had attractive character designs, both male and female, though. Even as you pointed out, it's hardly new to the series. But I realize what you're saying is that the emphasis on fan service has made more of an impact than I'm giving it credit for. Meanwhile, the addition of casual gameplay options started in... FE12? And that was apparently the game that almost killed the series (and didn't even release outside Japan). So yeah, it's likely a combination of both that has increased its appeal. Come for the fan service, stay for the less-stressful gameplay.
It'll be interesting to see what direction Three Houses takes. The initial trailer seemed to focus mainly on the strategic gameplay, and didn't show off anything particularly fan-servicey. |
|
|
|
Post by Leon on Nov 10, 2018 20:51:43 GMT -5
FE12 isn't what nearly killed the series, the problem was the Tellius games drastically shrank the playerbase. Path of Radiance lost about 100,000 Japanese players from Sacred Stones, Shadow Dragon and New Mystery restored it to slightly above Sacred Stones levels.
I wouldn't be surprised if Three Houses did include marriage once again. It's a popular feature, and is generally shown off closer to release. I would also add that Three Houses has a secondary objective, which is to be a pillar for Heroes and Cipher and it can't really do that if the gender ratio too far away from 50/50.
|
|
|
|
Post by nocturnal YL on Nov 11, 2018 4:42:00 GMT -5
I'm not going to quote hard data; that's the kind of thing Leon does far better than I do. Any impression I have on the series history may be wrong, since I don't feel like citing everything like it's serious research. I'll talk about a few things: Series performance: I personally doubt the whole "cancellation" thing. The story went, as I remember: then-Nintendo manager Shinji Hatano talked about how "if the next game doesn't sell 250,000 copies, then perhaps the next game (Awakening) could be the last one." It was later clarified (in the Making of Fire Emblem book, I think) that such a (soft) metric is in place for a lot of games, and does not target any series. They didn't say if the 250,000 copies metric is for Japanese or worldwide sales, but if it's the latter, it's a really low-hanging fruit. They basically had to intentionally make a game more ill-received than Thracia 776 to get canned. As an aside, people like Ike (mostly because of Brawl), but his games are among the least popular. Funny, huh. Casual mode: Options are good. And don't forget that the same game that introduced casual also brought us Lunatic'. Awakening also had Lunatic+. They dialed back with Fates (Nohr Lunatic is the hardest, but I didn't face major difficulty beating it) and Echoes (Hard is the hardest, and you also get infinite grinding even without DLC), though. Graphics and presentation direction: Leon is right in that even earlier games had scantily-clad characters. Lene is a good example. I think the thing here is that you don't get to see full portraits in-game. You get head sprites. The old Fire Emblem games also give this 1980s/1990s old-school anime vibe, which just doesn't feel the same as the new games' "ugh, another 2010s style with (insert overused tropes here)?" It's not just graphical design, either. Awakening had a lot of overused clichés that feel like it's there to set a "standard" of sorts. A lot of characters feel rather easy to read. (One example that stands out to me: a character with red (well, ignoring hair colour inheritance) twintails and a disgruntled face; you can guess her personality without even reading a single line of dialog.) Some of them have more backstory than they appear, but you aren't going to find Renault-level of depth here. I think the series had two choices at this point. Stick with the old style and look outdated on arrival, or adapt to new trends and risk looking too clichéd. It chose the latter. It is the better choice, to be honest. Getting new fans to at least break a million is important in today's very competitive game market. Speaking of gaining fans… Shouzou Kaga: Let me first start by saying he's not my favourite director. It's really just a personal impression, but Kaga insists very hard of series tradition. He gives off a "my way or no way" aura, insisting games would be completed his way. I think (completely unbacked) this is also why Thracia 776 was a Super Famicom game. And you know what happens when you release one in 1999. I'd say that if he stayed, Fire Emblem would have died off even earlier. He'd drive the series to a smaller and smaller market, until he reached a point with a tiny fanbase that, no matter how dedicated, cannot keep a series (of single-purchase games with no microtransactions) afloat. I don't know whether IS fired him or he left on his own volition, but their split is the best thing IS and/or Kaga did to the series. As for the games he worked on, I didn't avoid them because they didn't suit my taste (although this much is true), but because they are old games. Shadow Dragon and Gaiden were on a system that doesn't even know what transparency is. Mystery was similarly too old, in terms of both UI design and game mechanics. Genealogy was when I started playing it; and there are parts in it and Thracia 776 I didn't like: the rather tedious… ugh, "family planning" in Genealogy (you have to monitor their status screens as marriage happens automatically), the inability to "collect" weapons (Axes? Dark magic? Why should you get the ultimate versions of those barbaric and outright evil weapons?), and a very, very cold protagonist in Thracia 776 (the lack of support conversations is partly to blame, but Leif feels like the kind of hero who collects partners, then leave them behind without a single hello afterwards). If there's an effort to remake and modernise either Jugdral game, I'd more than welcome it. Favourite parts of the games: Fire Emblem has always confused me. It's not in my favourite style, I don't even touch other SRPGs, and it certainly is full of flawed characterisation and story. Despite all these, it somehow ended up being my favourite game series. I like FE mostly for its core gameplay. It feels so good when you put an invincible unit to block a narrow passage and watch those fools get themselves killed. Besides that, my favourite part of the games is the individual interaction between the characters. In this aspect, I like the base conversations in the Tellius games. Other parts of the game is always some hit-or-miss. I like the character design in the Tellius games; Fates (Conquest) has good map design; music varies a lot, but Genealogy and Echoes music is excellent (I like ♯FE's even better though); I like Sacred Stones' story despite its flaws (Blazing Blade is more well-received in this aspect, but it was too complicated for my then-15-year-old brain to process). Favourite games: If spinoffs and crossovers count, my favourite is Tokyo Mirage Sessions ♯FE, without a doubt. Other than that, I can't say for 100% certainty, but I like Sacred Stones and Radiant Dawn. I probably like Radiant Dawn a tad more. I like Binding Blade more than Blazing Blade, and I like Awakening slightly more than Fates. Don't know how they compare to each other, though. (So: FE10 > FE8 > FE6 > FE7, and FE13 > FE14) I did not play Shadow Dragon and the Blade of Light (FC) and Shadow Dragon (DS). The former because of the aforementioned technical limitation, and the latter because hey look we got some new characters you can only get by killing your own units. That… doesn't sit well with quite a lot of Fire Emblem fans. I also played very little Gaiden (grinding seems to take forever, and without that the archers are way too powerful), Mystery (feels too old-styled for an SFC game, and I eventually played New Mystery), Heroes (played for the My Nintendo Platinum points, otherwise not interested) and Cipher (got myself some pretty cards, and… didn't want to open the package). Three Houses: Seeing an emphasis on units being actual "units" (and not just an individual character) makes me a bit worried, for some reason. Otherwise, there isn't enough information on that game, but I look forward to it regardless. |
|
|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 11, 2018 12:12:37 GMT -5
FE12 isn't what nearly killed the series, the problem was the Tellius games drastically shrank the playerbase. Path of Radiance lost about 100,000 Japanese players from Sacred Stones, Shadow Dragon and New Mystery restored it to slightly above Sacred Stones levels. By "killed the series," I meant that that's where Nintendo drew a line and said the next one better be more successful or the series is over. But yeah, Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn were less successful. If there's an effort to remake and modernise either Jugdral game, I'd more than welcome it. I feel like Genealogy of the Holy War would be the next remake. The first three games are covered, and Genealogy is one of the most popular in the series. I like FE mostly for its core gameplay. It feels so good when you put an invincible unit to block a narrow passage and watch those fools get themselves killed. Besides that, my favourite part of the games is the individual interaction between the characters. In this aspect, I like the base conversations in the Tellius games. To be honest, I'm not sure I "got" the appeal of the character relationships. I only really saw it as a game mechanic where you get a small stat boost when two characters are next to each other, but even then, I never considered it very important. On a related note, here's a recent article about Blazing Blade by Kat Bailey at US Gamer. She notes that even in Japan it's one of the more popular games in the series, and she thinks it's because it had the best balance of strategy and relationships. Three Houses: Seeing an emphasis on units being actual "units" (and not just an individual character) makes me a bit worried, for some reason. It does feel like they're trying to sneak a little Advance/Famicom Wars into Fire Emblem, but I think it'll just be an additional gameplay style rather than the main focus. Fire Emblem seems to be more open to experimentation recently, lest people get bored and start losing interest again. (Maybe that's what killed Advance Wars.) Anyway, of the four games I've played (Blazing Blade, Sacred Stones, Path of Radiance, and Shadow Dragon), I'm not sure I have a favorite. I do have a fondness for Blazing Blade, though, since it was my first. Path of Radiance, on the other hand, seems a little bland looking back on it. Ironically, that's the only one I've finished. Thanks, Leon and YL, for responding! |
|
|
|
Post by nocturnal YL on Nov 12, 2018 9:15:43 GMT -5
I feel like Genealogy of the Holy War would be the next remake. The first three games are covered, and Genealogy is one of the most popular in the series. Interesting trivia: Echoes' Nintendo-side director Nakanishi wanted to make a Binding Blade remake, because it's a Japan-only game that tells the story of Roy (who became known to the western audience through Smash). To be honest, I'm not sure I "got" the appeal of the character relationships. I only really saw it as a game mechanic where you get a small stat boost when two characters are next to each other, but even then, I never considered it very important. Individual character interactions often tell more about them than an overarching story does, especially in a game with tons of side characters who don't do much to the main plot. Even if they don't show any new traits, it's always good to see they don't get completely forgotten by the game. This applies to other RPGs too. The stat boosts can actually be quite useful. A single damage point increase could mean the difference between killing and not killing (and get counterattacked), and the hit and avoid bonuses could lead to combinations like the Faye tank (have her promote to a Saint or DLC Exemplar, pair with Alm, and Nosferatu enemies like crazy) or the untouchable Earth pair (give Ike and Oscar A support, and they (especially Ike) are practically untouchable). On a related note, here's a recent article about Blazing Blade by Kat Bailey at US Gamer. She notes that even in Japan it's one of the more popular games in the series, and she thinks it's because it had the best balance of strategy and relationships. Blazing Blade did a lot of things right. It has an interesting and complicated story (that doesn't resort to an over-reliance on romance), the game balance is done right (especially the balance between physical and magical weapons, which most games fail), and can get rather difficult (Hector Hard route) after complaints of Binding Blade being too easy (my favourite strategy: focus on raising the mage twins, oh and the final boss can't even attack at range). It's what a lot of Fire Emblem fans were looking for. Anyway, of the four games I've played (Blazing Blade, Sacred Stones, Path of Radiance, and Shadow Dragon), I'm not sure I have a favorite. I do have a fondness for Blazing Blade, though, since it was my first. Path of Radiance, on the other hand, seems a little bland looking back on it. Ironically, that's the only one I've finished. Path of Radiance is intentionally unfinished, leaving a lot of open questions (because they knew for sure another game was coming). It also feels kind of rushed. A lot of the weapon stats are directly taken from the GBA games, and the 3D models look bad (granted, between this and the Paper Mario series, I really doubted IS had any serious 3D expertise until the 3DS). Keep in mind that at that time, IS were split between Nintendo DS hardware development, WarioWare: Twisted!, WarioWare: Touched!, Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones and Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance (though they weren't exactly a single team). I usually recommend new players to try The Sacred Stones first, but you did already. I also recommend New Mystery of the Emblem over Shadow Dragon, if you don't mind the game's constant reminder of the existence of a "previous war" (not a problem if you played Shadow Dragon). |
|
|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 12, 2018 12:29:41 GMT -5
Individual character interactions often tell more about them than an overarching story does, especially in a game with tons of side characters who don't do much to the main plot. Even if they don't show any new traits, it's always good to see they don't get completely forgotten by the game. This applies to other RPGs too. The stat boosts can actually be quite useful. A single damage point increase could mean the difference between killing and not killing (and get counterattacked), and the hit and avoid bonuses could lead to combinations like the Faye tank (have her promote to a Saint or DLC Exemplar, pair with Alm, and Nosferatu enemies like crazy) or the untouchable Earth pair (give Ike and Oscar A support, and they (especially Ike) are practically untouchable). I understand the appeal as far as character development goes. I'm just surprised it was so popular as to become one of the main emphases of the series. It always just seemed like this minor side-thing to me. And I probably am underestimating the advantage of the stat boosts. It just always seemed to me that having two units tethered together would be less useful than being able to send them to separate places. But as far as I know, Shadow Dragon on DS has no supports, so it's of no concern for me right now. Anyway, in regards to Shouzou Kaga, I noticed that his indie game Vestaria Saga is planned for release on Steam next year with an official English translation. There's a free demo available right now. |
|
|
|
Post by Leon on Nov 12, 2018 16:04:10 GMT -5
Shadow Dragon actually does have supports. There are no conversations (because they were way too conservative remaking it), but characters do get stat boosts as they battle together.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 12, 2018 19:03:21 GMT -5
To be honest, I did get the impression that certain units were intended to go together. (Like Marth telling Gordon to stick close by. Or Cain and Abel.) But since no support conversations ever showed up, I didn't think it actually amounted to anything. Guess I should start paying closer attention. Then again, I've already gotten Cain killed.  |
|
|
|
Post by Leon on Nov 12, 2018 21:40:27 GMT -5
That's ok, Cain and Abel are just there to hold the fort until Hardin arrives.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 13, 2018 11:53:10 GMT -5
As it happens, Hardin was my replacement for Cain. Although, Abel is very able at this point, as well.  |
|
|
|
Post by Nester the Lark on Nov 17, 2018 20:28:01 GMT -5
Here's a silly question: do you guys ever put effort into building up a unit, not because they were necessarily a good unit or even that useful, but just because you liked the character? Playing through Shadow Dragon, I've found myself latching onto Gordin. I've spent a lot of time building him up, giving him stat boosters, and promoting him to sniper, despite the fact that I don't get a whole lot of opportunity to actually use him. (Sedgar the horseman has been FAR more useful in just about every way as far as characters that use bows.) I just kinda like him for some reason, like he's Marth's plucky sidekick or something. (Or maybe it's the green hair. ) |
|
