Should Casual Return?

[Topazd]

@SoC

To be fair, at this point this topic has a lot more semblance to a discussion rather than the vulgar debate is was earlier. I, for one, made some really arrogant posts which in hindsight I really shouldn't have.

Despite what I might want, in the eyes of IS, there is no reason for them to omit Casual from FE14 and (like many have pointed out) doing so might even fire back at them at this point. If Casual positively had to be made, it just could have been executed by different means, I feel.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Topazd255

[Magical Glace]

Tbh when I started playing in 2007 I probably would have gone casual if it existed in FE10. However, now that I have played most of the series, I want others to be able to try to achieve the skill I have now. When I first played FE10, I got upset over things like hitrates and missing. I stand my ground that Classic should be incentive-ized.

Rather than being intimidated by people who do LTCs, never lose a unit, etc., People should try to work toward that level. I say this as a non-LTC'er. They should realize that nobody is good at something they just picked up. That we, at one point, were in the same level of skill.

If something that is central to a game is removed in a mode, then you can try that first, keep working to better yourself, then move on to the way everyone is used to, with the game promising reward for your graduation of sorts.

(This post probably made no sense but hey!)

[xdxturx]

I say yes...

Because not everyone is a hardcore fan like the members of this site are. some people want to enjoy a non-stressful decisions making game. as long are the game modes are like awakening i'm fine.

[Ownagepuffs]

IIRC, Awakening needed to reach global sales of 250K for it to be considered successful, i.e. inspiring confidence for the development of future Fire Emblem titles. As Awakening sold well over a million copies, it's quite possible, even likely, that the inclusion of Casual Mode did not save the series from cancellation.

You don't think casual brought a single person in? Seriously? Of course I can't be bothered to do a survey of every single person who bought Awakening asking "how many of you bought this because of casual mode?" and give you an exact figure but a large majority of the people I know who bought Awakening, if not all of them, who don't go on SF prefer casual. What good do you think will be accomplished by removing casual? Forcing the new players to see things your way?

[Irysa]

Thats not what he said, he said that the amount of people brought in by casual is probably insigificant to the amount brought in by the marketing they threw at the game.

[Ownagepuffs]

Casual mode was one of the things that was marketed, though. It's part of the marketing package.

[feplus]

No. By "marketing" I meant media exposure.

How much less do you think Awakening would have sold without Casual? Ballpark it.

[Irysa]

I really don't want to argue over this, it's too tangentially related to actually be interesting to pursue, and we can only pull anecodotal evidence out our ass. I do think he is correct in saying that Casual Mode is not what saved the series though, the marketing did. I'll just try to make this really clear, and then I'm not going to really go over this particular point again since it's pretty irrelevant.

Casual Mode minus the Marketing = Definitely not getting anywhere near the same level of sales, 1 mil is impossible. However I'm of the opinion that Awakening would have sold at least the same amount as Shadow Dragon did (about 500k) given that it was on a handheld, where FE has consistently preformed better. The 250k figure is straight from Intelligent Systems themselves, and considering New Mystery and Shadow Dragon actually beat that despite only counting Japanese sales, I seriously doubt it wouldn't have at least sold that much again. Even Radiant Dawn, the worst preforming title in the series did better than 250k (it needed worldwide sales to do so though).

Marketing minus Casual Mode = Definitely less sales, but higher than the above scenario? Very likely. Breaking the 1 mil mark? Probably not, FE7 got close but didn't manage it at the peak of exposure. I think expecting at least 500k as the benchmark is not unreasonable though. I mean, Awakening sold over 250k in it's first week in Japan alone.

EDIT: Added SD sales for Japan since I forgot FE12 had Casual Mode. Derp.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Irysa

[saifors]

One thing I want to add to what I previously said, I didn't mean to say remove casual mode altogether, changing it (maybe if the one's whose dead caused a game over were able to still die after a few chapters) or replacing it with a tutorial that really can get a newcomer into it like the easy mode in FE8 or the map-saves from FE4 (granted it was already in casual).

Also Irysa on the not marketing and still reaching 1 mil subject: It can still happen especially nowadays when the internet is a big part in a game's popularity. It wouldn't be the first time a game got over a million sales without any marketing at all. And that's one of an even more niche franchise then Fire Emblem (at least video game wise).

[Ownagepuffs]

What is in media exposure? What the game has to offer. Casual mode was in the media exposure, it makes no sense to separate it. Casual mode did not save the series alone, it was a cog in the marketing machine.

It would have done worse without casual mode than with it. That's all that matters. How much worse is irrelevant. I still need to be told what IS stands to gain by removing casual mode, from a business standpoint. Y'know, aside from a round of applause from like seven people on this forum.

[arvilino]

No. By "marketing" I meant media exposure.

How much less do you think Awakening would have sold without Casual? Ballpark it.

Perma-death has acted as anti-marketing towards the game in the west ever since Blazing Sword(which we know is below 1 million but above 700,000) came out. Personally I would have never expected a title to ever sell as much let alone more than Blazing Sword did if the series did keep it in.

So far Fire Emblem Awakening's official numbers has been 1.43 million as of Dec 31 2013 and was still selling at a pace, but unknown in 2014(there's VG chartz which suggests it sold 0.29 million in retail worldwide in 2014 but that's unreliable and doesn't count digital and was behind the official numbers by 0.2 million) so potentially 1.72 million.

I think if permadeath was in far fewer new people would be willing to even try the game, if that 290,000 sales 2014 is anything accurate I'd suggest it would be in the tens of thousands with permadeath.

Edited February 17, 2015 by arvilino

[feplus]

do you really believe that casual mode brought in upwards of 900% extra sales

do you really believe that

do you

[arvilino]

do you really believe that casual mode brought in upwards of 900% extra sales

do you really believe that

do you

In 2014 after the marketing stopped and no new releases in any region yes. Why else would it continue to sell so well still at full price when the niche RPG model usually has most sales from fans on the release years/months and then plummeting(to 10-20%) afterwards? Attracting more casual users(who usually buy in later) would be crucial for prolonged sales and "The game where if your character die they're gone forever" isn't a casual draw.

Edited February 17, 2015 by arvilino

[Gradivus.]

note that this is no evidence; you're stating that permadeath works against the way of a casual player, which is false. I started FE with FE11 and was perfectly fine with having to watch out that my units don't die, despite playing casually a ton. and note that my units did die on many of my first runs, but I stayed motivated to improve that. maybe those broken generic Generals (17 Def on FE11 C5, haha) were what kept me playing though, until I was okay enough to not let my strong units that have existent growths die.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Gradivus.

[NekoKnight]

While I think perma death is an essential part to the "true" Fire Emblem experience, I still think an optional casual mode is good for the series. More accessibility equals more sales, which equals more money for IS, which equals more Fire Emblem for me to play.

Casual mode is better than an easy mode because it lowers the difficulty in a way other than lowering enemy stats or number of units. The game should have extra incentives to play classic mode such as additional characters or maps.

[Vascela]

Only read through to page 10, but man

Casual mode is the primary reason for some of my close friends to get into FE. Personally, I don't care if they don't get the "intended FE experience" that veterans or the devs want. The only thing I did care about was that my friends enjoyed a series I've always loved and we can share the experience together. As cheesy as that sounds, friends joining in on a series is actually a really cool thing.

How can a "skip mode" be even compared to casual? That's like comparing a wrong warp to credits glitch to using explosives to jump a large distance. Their both glitches, but my god they are not remotely close to being related except in name alone.

I do believe that casual mode increased sales of Awakening. Did it increase 900% because of it? Absolutely not. But it is the reason why some people entered the series which is good enough for me.

[Topaz Light]

note that this is no evidence; you're stating that permadeath works against the way of a casual player, which is false. I started FE with FE11 and was perfectly fine with having to watch out that my units don't die, despite playing casually a ton. and note that my units did die on many of my first runs, but I stayed motivated to improve that. maybe those broken generic generals were what kept me playing though, until I was okay enough to not let my strong units that have existent growths die.

The mistake you're making here is assuming that every newcomer will see/approach things the same way you do. Permadeath is actually a very rare mechanic in games, and I can see even some hardcore RPG fans being put off by the mechanic of any character who falls in battle being dead for the remainder of the game, if for no other reason than that that's just not in hardly any RPGs.

The only standard-style RPG I've played with permadeath is Makai Toshi SaGa/Final Fantasy Legend I, and even in that game your characters only die when they lose all their "hearts". The hearts are lost by being KO'd in battle, but each character starts with three of them and you can buy more, although they're fairly expensive. (You can also make new party members to replace the dead ones but I think those new party members come with base-level stats). Even considering that that's a very different game in many ways (although less different than you might think; it has a similar inventory system), that's still way more forgiving than Classic!Fire Emblem's "one strike and you're out" rule.

I realize that one can only truly speak for one's own perspective, but do try to do so with respect for the fact that your perspective is not the only one.

Also, although Casual greatly alleviates the threats present in allies being defeated, it doesn't eliminate them entirely, since there's still no way to revive fallen allies in mid-battle; if you lose someone who's integral to your strategy, they're still gone for the remainder of the battle, so you still want to take care to make sure that doesn't happen. Admittedly, the tension isn't the same as the risk that your character will be lost for the rest of the playthrough, but it's not entirely absent.

I do understand and sort of agree with the viewpoint that permadeath is an important aspect of the Fire Emblem experience, but- and I think I said this before- I think that anyone who says that's the only thing distinguishing it from other SRPGs is selling Fire Emblem's other unique quirks and traits woefully short. Are people who play without permadeath on maybe not getting the full intended Fire Emblem experience? Perhaps, but as long as they're enjoying it, I don't see the need to deride them for it. Maybe suggesting, "Hey, if you'd like to bump the challenge up a notch, maybe try playing Classic on your next playthrough!" or something would be just fine, but even then you'd have to respect their decision on the matter, whether or not it's the one you personally would have made.

I personally am on board with the idea of advocating for some gameplay incentive to play Classic, like, maybe special goodies or trial maps/bonus scenarios (think the BSFE and on-cart DLC chapters in FE12) that can only be unlocked on Classic playthroughs. Because the developers themselves pretty much said that Casual is supposed to be a sort of "training wheels" mode for people just getting into the series to lessen the penalty for allowing a character to fall in battle. However, it's also true that learning about Casual mode probably helped to solidify a number of people's decisions to purchase the game, so I pretty much think that the player shouldn't be penalized for playing Casual mode as much as they should be rewarded for playing Classic. And if the things are one-time unlocks (as in, you only need to unlock the thing once and you have it for good, not "per each file"), then they can always go back to Casual afterwards if they didn't like Classic, but at least they tried it. Offering rewards for doing a thing often works better than inflicting penalties for not doing it, I think.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Starlight36

[Florete]

I've seen some people refer to Classic as the "true" way to play Fire Emblem, and I have to wonder: is it really? Sure, perma-death is something that has given Fire Emblem an identity, but few, if any cases of death in the games actually have any effect at all.

And I think that's why I just don't mind Casual mode. If character death actually had significant impact, then obviously removing that possibility could be considered a pretty bad thing. That's just not the situation, though.

[Baldrick]

Do you mean permadeath doesn't have any effect on the plot/dialogue, or on the player?

[shadowofchaos]

note that this is no evidence; you're stating that permadeath works against the way of a casual player, which is false. I started FE with FE11 and was perfectly fine...

Stop right there. You are using yourself as a standard. "If I can do it, anyone can do it" is immediately the aura you give off. Not everyone approaches it the way you do.

Provide evidence that you were one of the worst people ever to start playing Fire Emblem and then provide the amount of time you spent being frustrated and compare it to the threshold of tolerance the average newcomer would have. Then we can start using you as an example.

Edited February 18, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Baldrick]

I suppose the 7 people who relax by playing Lunatic Casual are the quintessential newcomers?

[Irysa]

Stop right there. You are using yourself as a standard. "If I can do it, anyone can do it" is immediately the aura you give off. Not everyone approaches it the way you do.

Provide evidence that you were one of the worst people ever to start playing Fire Emblem and then provide the amount of time you spent being frustrated and compare it to the threshold of tolerance the average newcomer would have. Then we can start using you as an example.

Not to say that using oneself as a standard is neccessarily appropriate, but my god, you should have seen my first run of FE7, so awful. We're talking like maybe triple digit figures on some maps, never using a single prepromote (EXP HOGGERS!) maximum arena abuse, and still having problems sometimes. lol.

I was obcessed with keeping everyone alive and training everyone, but I sucked so I spammed savestates all the time. That's why I think battle saves are a helpful substitute. But even with savestate abuse to try to get through stuff I still got really attached to keeping everyone alive and wanted to do it from the start, just because I knew they were dead/gone forever if I failed, and felt compelled to at least figure out some way to do it.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Irysa

[shadowofchaos]

I suppose the 7 people who relax by playing Lunatic Casual are the quintessential newcomers?

No, but the 24 people I got into it at my college (which include those 7) are good examples of the newbiest newbies. Considering at least 2 tried Normal/Classic and had only Chrom, MU, their MU spouse, and Morgan left alive.

Edited February 18, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Bankai]

Casual should remain mostly because it might not have been by much it did get more people into the series. So how about to compensate they add an Ironman mode that auto saves after each turn.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Bankai

[Baldrick]

@Soc So your anecdotes are evidence, but other peoples' aren't? Alright then.