Should Casual Return?

[Mighty Kamina]

Localised Radiant Dawn normal mode was Japanese Hard Mode, and Easy Mode was Japanese Normal mode. This is why it was kinda difficult by comparison. Easy mode existed regardless though so I don't think that was really a problem.

I do remember a number of people complaining that the game was too brutal even on Easy (Japanese Normal) mode though. That being said, in the end I just hope whatever future decisions IS takes pleases both Hardcore and Casual fans alike.

Edited February 14, 2015 by Monado Boy

[The Geek]

My problem with battle saves is that you can still screw yourself over and have to restart the chapter if you accidentally save yourself in an unwinnable situation.

[Irysa]

Hence why I suggested an automatic system of saving where it saves at the start of every turn, and keeps that those for up to 10 turns. You can't fuck yourself over there unless you willingly are trying to.

I do remember a number of people complaining that the game was too brutal even on Easy (Japanese Normal) mode though

Then we can yet again make it easier by lower enemy stats and density.

[eclipse]

Doesn't have to be that way though.

I totally agree with you, and wish it wasn't. However, reality doesn't seem to agree, and that's what we're both bound to.

I think you'll find that I vehemently disagree with Extra Credits on basically everything and consider James to be one of the most egotistical and poisonous sources of information about game design widely circulating the internet.

But that aside, both of those are about interpretations of difficulty and fun, which aren't really exactly tied to my points that I've raised repeatedly in this topic. Making the games easier and having options isn't the issue I'm contesting at all, it's about what values are being compromised to achieve it when they don't need to be compromised to do so.

Didn't know you didn't like him, but that's fine~!

It sort of is - your idea of fun is a game where taking too many risks results in very negative consequences. That's perfectly fine. However, that's not the idea of fun for my mom - she freaks the hell out if she feels that her units are in any sort of mortal danger. One solution would be to never let her play FE (and if anyone thinks that this is the right answer, kindly keep it to yourself). Another is to introduce a mode that isn't as punishing. Still another would be to dumb down easy to the point where it's near-impossible for units to take fatal damage, but that sort of mimics the "no permadeath" thing IMO (instead of a unit not staying dead, a unit won't die, period).

It's not a particularly easy problem to solve, as there's a broad spectrum of people in this world, but I won't fault IS for implementing what they did.

[Mighty Kamina]

In regards to screwing oneself over with battle saving, just give both a resume chapter and start chapter option on the main menu,

[eclipse]

Oh, no. Not screwing myself over. Abusing the everliving daylights out of battle saves. As it stands, Awakening's Casual version of battle saves is extremely forgiving. Kinda want something similar in Classic (so I don't have to do X things over again), but a little stricter (so I can't snapshot my way through a chapter).

[Irysa]

It sort of is - your idea of fun is a game where taking too many risks results in very negative consequences. That's perfectly fine. However, that's not the idea of fun for my mom - she freaks the hell out if she feels that her units are in any sort of mortal danger. One solution would be to never let her play FE (and if anyone thinks that this is the right answer, kindly keep it to yourself). Another is to introduce a mode that isn't as punishing. Still another would be to dumb down easy to the point where it's near-impossible for units to take fatal damage, but that sort of mimics the "no permadeath" thing IMO (instead of a unit not staying dead, a unit won't die, period).

It's not a particularly easy problem to solve, as there's a broad spectrum of people in this world, but I won't fault IS for implementing what they did.

I'm not really talking about what's fun though, if anything I don't think all games have to be fun (but that's a different tangent yet again).

The consequences of failure aren't really what I was getting at either, it was more the consequences and the influence you as a player have over the lives of your units. Regardless, I'll entertain the idea. The consequences are massively reduced (but still present) with battle saves. Would your mom be so upset about the notion of her units dying if she had the ability to undo it easily? How about I hypothetically introduce a straight up rewind feature, by activating it the game starts rolling back actions one by one? If she actually do not want to feel under ANY PRESSURE whatsoever, even if the situation can only warrant going back at most one minute, then yes, I would say that perhaps this game (and an awful lot of games) are simply not for her. Once again I'd come back to my pacifist example; if someone really hates violence and wants to be able to talk down every enemy in the game, all of them, should we be accomodating that notion by making it so nobody has to fight anyone ever to advance in a Fire Emblem game? I'd say no, because that's compromising what Fire Emblem is as a game.

But being realistic, like rey pointed out, we can't really just "remove" Casual Mode, so I've repeatedly said I'll settle for some kind of encouragement to play Classic instead. I just hypothetically think we don't even need to remove permadeath to address the accessability problem.

Edited February 14, 2015 by Irysa

[Crimson Red]

honestly I can't really comprehend how this would be a... controversial topic, and I don't think I really want to know how/why it is (assuming it is based on what I've skimmed where people seemed to have gotten... slightly heated up about it)

it's more options

options

as in they're optional

and you're given both choices at the beginning it's not like you have to unlock classic mode or something

I just... can't

maybe people should be more open-minded or something *shrugglez*

[eclipse]

The consequences of failure aren't really what I was getting at either, it was more the consequences and the influence you as a player have over the lives of your units. Regardless, I'll entertain the idea. The consequences are massively reduced (but still present) with battle saves. Would your mom be so upset about the notion of her units dying if she had the ability to undo it easily? How about I hypothetically introduce a straight up rewind feature, by activating it the game starts rolling back actions one by one? If she actually do not want to feel under ANY PRESSURE whatsoever, even if the situation can only warrant going back at most one minute, then yes, I would say that perhaps this game (and an awful lot of games) are simply not for her. Once again I'd come back to my pacifist example; if someone really hates violence and wants to be able to talk down every enemy in the game, all of them, should we be accomodating that notion by making it so nobody has to fight anyone ever to advance in a Fire Emblem game? I'd say no, because that's compromising what Fire Emblem is as a game.

But being realistic, like rey pointed out, we can't really just "remove" Casual Mode, so I've repeatedly said I'll settle for some kind of encouragement to play Classic instead. I just hypothetically think we don't even need to remove permadeath to address the accessability problem.

My mom's a very interesting case - yes, she can do numbers, but actually getting to the point where she can see beyond "well I screwed that up, and now there's a dead unit on my hands" is the issue. It's pretty complicated, which is why simply making the game easier, numbers-wise won't help her, IMO, but making it so that she'll feel the sting of losing a unit for a single map will. As for whether or not a game is for a person. . .I'd rather said person decide that for themselves! For example, I don't do well with FPS (due to severe motion sickness for whatever stupid reason), but if someone told me that I'm supposed to be bad at FPS because I'm a girl, I'd be pretty upset!

Some people will give Classic a try. Some won't. In the end, it's their decision, and it's cool that you're willing to respect that.

[The Geek]

Hence why I suggested an automatic system of saving where it saves at the start of every turn, and keeps that those for up to 10 turns. You can't fuck yourself over there unless you willingly are trying to.

So, what FE4 had?

Because I can distinctly remember being screwed over by the auto save at several points in my first playthrough. Luckily I had savestates set up after each castle.

[Irysa]

I don't know what FE4 has so I can't comment on that. I don't see why we can't just facilitate those battle saves to be in the same manner as your savestates, so you can bounce back to points that you want to as you will. Also FE4 maps are extremely large and very long, far more so than any other Fire Emblem game, so the expected amount of turns and possibility of screwing yourself over are exponentially larger.

I'd rather said person decide that for themselves! For example, I don't do well with FPS (due to severe motion sickness for whatever stupid reason), but if someone told me that I'm supposed to be bad at FPS because I'm a girl, I'd be pretty upset!

Well, haven't they? I mean, if they've played it, and go "I can't handle this" or "I don't like this", and don't want to try to get over that, that is them rejecting the game. I can understand why your mother would feel that way about previous titles, but if she still felt that way with features that I've suggested then it isn't me trying to say "she shouldn't play the game", that's me saying, "she apparently doesn't like the experience of playing the game despite our efforts to make it accessible to her, so what reason does she have to keep playing it?"

Edited February 14, 2015 by Irysa

[Topazd]

Haha, I get pretty emotionally invested to this topic, so apologies to anyone who felt that I came across as an asshole.

We can declare almost certainly that FE14 will have a Casual mode, thus the advocating of an incentive to play Classic. It's been done in the series before, there's no reason it couldn't be implemented now. If such means feel inconceivable, though, you could at the very least encourage players to play Classic with some other means than degrading the Casual mode experience.

So, what FE4 had?

Because I can distinctly remember being screwed over by the auto save at several points in my first playthrough. Luckily I had savestates set up after each castle.

You probably missed the "keeps those for up to 10 turns" part.

Edited February 14, 2015 by Topazd255

[eclipse]

Well, haven't they? I mean, if they've played it, and go "I can't handle this" or "I don't like this", and don't want to try to get over that, that is them rejecting the game. I can understand why your mother would feel that way about previous titles, but if she still felt that way with features that I've suggested then it isn't me trying to say "she shouldn't play the game", that's me saying, "she apparently doesn't like the experience of playing the game despite our efforts to make it accessible to her, so what reason does she have to keep playing it?"

For her (and Yours Truly), the person voicing the decision is really important. On the outside, it looks the same. From our standpoints, if it's someone else trying to tell us what to do, expect fireworks (her moreso than me. . .and believe me when I tell you that she is the last person on this planet you want to tick off). This stems from a lot of nonsense that has to do with being told to do something BECAUSE. I'm not sure if I've done a good job of explaining it, but it's part of the reason why my second post in this thread was a wall of quotes.

[Irysa]

Well I apologise if I came across that way but my statement is more of an observation and conclusion based on what someone has decided or would have hypothetically decided in the given situation in the first place. I'm not the one telling them not to play it, I'm saying if they don't like it even with all those extra concessions, then the reality is that the game is probably not their cup of tea. Like, what about the people who currently still don't like Fire Emblem for XYZ reasons despite Casual Mode existing, like the pacifist case? I'm not going to tell them not to play the games, but I would tell them "You appear to have an incompatability with some of the principles of design within this series".

[eclipse]

It's fine~!

I can see how it's the logical conclusion. However, not everyone operates on pure logic, so knowing how to approach them, and talk to them, is really important if you want them to listen. Sort of like how this thread kind of failed at it (as evidenced by the yelling matches). I'm perfectly okay with your opinion, and how you're expressing yourself.

[DeadGame]

Let's just take the casual mode and put it in another series. Win/win, haha.

C'mon people, don't fight.

[Magical Glace]

His skills have nothing to do with it. Would you respect that decision?

Like I said, I don't mind if he ends up disliking it. Just so long as he gives it a shot.

I'm pretty much advocating not-knocking-before-trying here.

Which is why I want there to be incentives for him to try classic.

...Maybe I should promise him a box of cookies if he starts a Hard/Classic file

[omega zero]

Maybe someone should make a new poll titled "Should the devs create an incentive to play Classic over Casual."

The reason I allow this exception is the alarming rate with which complacency has overtaken my peers on this forum. I came to a Fire Emblem community to find people who had similar interests to me, people who understand why the game appealed to me and felt the same way. If I suddenly find myself a part of a minority with very specialized and rare interests, I become upset for the two reasons I mentioned before. I would probably feel much less disgruntled if I felt that my niche in the market was more secure and inviolable.

I'm new to SF, but I don't get this comment. I do not know for sure, but I would wager that almost everyone here has played FE games on Classic. If that is true, then almost everyone here HAS enjoyed the game the same way you did. The only difference being, they have also played the game in a different way (Casual).

Is there really a large number of people on SF that have only played a particular game on Casual?

Off-topic: FoW should only come back if it were designed as in AW: Days of Ruin.

Edited February 14, 2015 by omega zero

[GrySun]

No.

I expect "Yes" to run away with this poll, so I'm curious how you all would feel about the following modes being included- all optional, all intended to improve accessibility.

1. Skip Mode: if you're struggling with a map, you can press Start three times in rapid succession to skip to the next map; unit levels will increase to account for lost experience.

2. Buff Mode: playable units start with +5 to all base stats.

3. Nerf Mode: enemy units start with -5 to all base stats.

4. Rich Mode: the player has access to unlimited gold.

5. Casual+ Mode: not only will defeated units not stay dead, but they will respawn with full HP in three turns.

If we're so willing to give players options in the name of accessibility, why not make things even more accessible?

Why do you care? You can still play on classic and let the sissies play it on girl mode. As long as it increases sales and extends the series in the west/europe, shouldn't everyone be happy? I don't understand people like you, as your own gameplay won't be impacted in any way...

[Sentacotus]

Just gonna pose a quick question out of curiosity's sake. I think I'm in the minority, but am I seriously the only one of the veterans here actually invested in casual mode and actually have fun with it?

No you're not the only one. Started playing since FE7 when it came out on the GBA, then Shadow Dragon, and Radiant Dawn and I throughly enjoy casual mode for the reasons that I can unlock supports easily without worrying about my units dying and being super strategic like in Luna Classic. I found that even with casual on I still soft reseted when a unit "died" and I did everything I could to keep them alive (then again that may have been out of habit too).

Lunatic casual is actually pretty enjoyable since its punishing enough to be challenging but not brutally so with trying to keep everyone alive (There were times I just had to accept that someone died in the chapter because I was so far along in the chapter) I did a Lunatic Classic run and I'm never doing that shit again or even going to touch + thats too much for me.

Hard Classic is probably my favorite mode and the one I prefer to play on most of the time but casual definetely has its merits and I don't see how it really takes anything away from the game.

[Topazd]

Why do you care? You can still play on classic and let the sissies play it on girl mode. As long as it increases sales and extends the series in the west/europe, shouldn't everyone be happy? I don't understand people like you, as your own gameplay won't be impacted in any way...

His tone may have been rude, but 1. the argument was not against easier difficulties, but rather the pointlessness of removing permadeath 2. the question why do you care was established a multitude of times throughout the topic. Regardless, the discussion has basically dried down at this point.

Edited February 14, 2015 by Topazd255

[Respite&Nepenthe]

Yes, there should be an optional casual mode, because some players (myself included) will be too intimidated to take on Permadeath. In games before Awakening, the possibility of losing a character permanently made me nervous during every map, and resetting gets frustrating! Permadeath should be available, but optional.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

I think I'm not the only one, who thinks that casual mode ruined / ruins a treadmark of Fire Emblem.

Permadeath was one of the things, which made this series so popular. Fallen units never come back. So you always have to play as much carefully as possible.

This franchise defused this via intodrucing the quick save option in Radiant Dawn. It was a great feature especially for newcomers to test out each turn to learn about the strategy. It helped me a lot in FE10 to understand this complex game system.

And since FE12 deaths (except for the maincharcater) don't have consequences anymore. It misleads the player more to gamble, which isn't a good strategical approach in a round-based-strategical franchise as Fire Emblem is.

Seriously this is also one of the trends I really don't like.

Casual mode should if any only exist on lowest difficulty for newcomers. Same goes for quick save.

Edited February 14, 2015 by The Taninator

[Gradivus.]

The resetting frustration is a thing I really like on FE. It makes me create love-hate relationships and that stuff with various maps for example. Permadeath isn't just a "thing that induces difficulty" but more like an important feature that makes the gameplay feeling different from CAS mode. If you manage to enjoy it, I can't fathom it, but have fun. I personally still think it should be removed. It wouldn't be a big issue anyway given that 11 games were perfectly fine without it too. Most people seconding and frequently playing CAS are spoilt over 1 game with CAS mode (FE12 is like: higher difficulties are tendentiously played with CLA, on lower difficulties you can just literally be roflstomping with only Sirius and Palla who won't die, whereas players that play FE13 only because of no permadeath are basically rendered presumptuous by its existence and some of those tend not to experience that CLA gameplay is way better. I'm not saying it's not their fault, it's due to CAS.)

Edited February 14, 2015 by Gradivus.

[feplus]

His tone may have been rude, but 1. the argument was not against easier difficulties, but rather the pointlessness of removing permadeath 2. the question why do you care was established a multitude of times throughout the topic. Regardless, the discussion has basically dried down at this point.

Rude? A little snark never hurt anybody. I feel I've been quite cordial!

But yes, the lines have been drawn the argument's played out. Doubt any minds are going to change.