Return of Casual

[SaltyPearl]

^^ I don't feel like looking through 300+ comments just to find where you addressed this. ;w; ( I'm sorry if that sounded rude..xc )

[euklyd]

You still fail to explain how it's the player's fault for the player for finding portions of the game lacking (this is an opinion), just because you believe (opinion) the same parts are "quality".

Bc the common arguments are grinding, story quality, character quality, casual mode, reclassing.

In this case however, the main things being addressed were story and characters. These things are subjective. [3] Therefore how can you blame a game as having a "Bad" story or "Characters" if the viewpoint is subjective in truth. Therefore if a player doesn't like a story or characters, matters which are often based on Subjective bias, it is not the game who is at fault but the player themselves because they are basing their opinion as fact and therefore more correct than others.

But saying that "you don't understand how objectivity and subjectivity work" in response to "You need to understand that the quality of all of those moments you described? Yeah, that's not objective, it's subjective." is ridiculous.

The quality issue here was once again referring to characters. If I believe Awakening's characters are high quality and fleshed out but he doesn't how is that not subjective? It is an opinion and therefore based on bias, not fact. It's like saying you think Batman is a better character than Superman. Depending on your experiences, personal tastes, and situation your answer could change. It's laced with bias and to call it objective is ridiculous.

And it makes you look ridiculous, especially when you end your post with the text equivalent of

Please. He said I was being subjective in my first post but he claimed that I was trying to seem objective. My entire first post was about how people take different things from Awakening. Some like the emotional moments, others just plain groan. But my main point was that Subjective statements are not fact. And that "purists" sometimes attack Awakening, newcomers, and its optional features bc of pride that comes from this subjectivity.

Don't make accusations or call me ridiculous without reading the material you are commenting on. It makes you look ridiculous.

First off, you reread my post, and Refa's post, and tell me how either of us presented our views on Awakening as being Objectively True. The entire point is that all views are subjective. I did read this entire thread, and tbh I regret doing so.

Second, how are opinions on characters / story / etc. any more subjective than opinions on mechanics?

Third, I'm not Refa but if I had to guess, the point about subjectivity would be in your post, you presented the issue as roughly "people choosing not to appreciate objectively <positive> traits found in Fire Emblem: Awakening"

If you need me to spell things out for you:

You can be critical of its Narm moments or you can focus on its touching moments such as Emmeryn's death, Lucina meeting her father, and the Avatar's sacrifice. You can appreciate its enhanced support/pair up system or complain because its not like previous games of 1v1 with invisible support. You can love or hate its supports and their characters.

You are talking about these things as if they were objectively positive parts of the game, when in fact there are perfectly legitimate reasons to view them negatively. Which you seem to accept.

Not calling a game on its faults does not make it a good game, and it's not the player's fault that the game contains traits that they dislike.

Fourth, is it really necessary to end your posts with :sm‌ug:?

...I doubt anyone wants to see me go back and rewrite out "Why Casual Mode detracts from the experience of playing Fire Emblem" again just to see if anyone will challenge any claims.

I suppose I should just give up in this endeavor though, seeing as I literally had a hypothetical argument with myself on the last page about what I think people seem to be supporting with the assertion that "Casual Mode is good".

idk I feel like at this point there's not a lot of hope for this thread anyways

I think it could be a good discussion to have, but probably in its own thread, where it's possible to frame the discussion in a less distracting way

[Vascela]

You claim that casual makes the person in question have a less full experience of FE.

I claim that is incorrect--the FE experience is everything and not just limited to one factor. A skill floor imposed by older mechanics just for the sole purpose of being an older mechanic doesn't really hold any water to a player. Casual players don't have less FE experience because they are suddenly allowed to not have strategy. Because you can play through casual the exact same way as through classic and potentially see no difference (read: casual players don't see a difference, but apparently non-casual players see a difference... I find that kinda weird tbh).

What does perma death have to do with the story? What does perma death have to do with identifying high priority targets? What does perma death have to do with calculating doubling? Perma death is only one mechanic that's been passed down, but there's no reason to say that perma death is actually tied to a player's wholesome experience. There's so much more to FE than having a unit die and not come back. I don't see many people praising how difficult Path of Radiance Normal Mode is (especially thanks to perma death at that). The only person's experience you can actually describe is your own. Casual doesn't detract a person's FE experience just because you think perma death is some raw defining moment of FE. It's only one quality of many that really doesn't play an important role. Especially to newcomers who don't want to deal with it. Why should they have to worry about a mechanic that you like but they don't?

[weso12]

You guys realize that the way fire emblem handles perma death is not only "not important" to the core design it is in fact actually a poorly designed and poorly thought out feature that effectively changes the lose condition from "If your lord dies its game over" to "If anyone dies it's game over". Be honest, when was the last time you actually DIDN'T restart when a character died, unless you never intended to use that character period (a draft or some) or in a self-imposed challenge run. Because of the fact that everyone restarts when someone dies character death in Classic mode is functionally as meaningless as death in casual mode, casual just prevents the BS having to do 30 minutes of gameplay all over again to fix that decision. Unless the game designers prevent you from reseting the game to start over again to negate the death by doing something which most other video game communities would call "save scumming" any emotional impact that death may have had on the player is lost. Extra credits talked about this problem of permanent death in one of theres video recently and I think what they said is especially true for fire emblem: https://youtu.be/aJCEQaSlvHE?t=4m58s

Edited April 28, 2015 by weso12

[NekoKnight]

For example, the subtopic of methods of achieving accessability and the limits of accessability are both compelling design concerns.

I know you don't think the game needs to be more accessible but if you did want to make it so without resorting to a casual mode, what would you recommend? Personally, if I wanted players to experience what I regard as the definitive Fire Emblem experience, I would provide a casual mode with incentives to play classic like extra chapters/characters.

Because of the fact that everyone restarts when someone dies character death in Classic mode is functionally as meaningless as death in casual mode, casual just prevents the BS having to do 30 minutes of gameplay all over again to fix that decision. Unless the game designers prevent you from reseting the game to start over again to negate the death by doing something which most other video game communities would call "save scumming" any emotional impact that death may have had on the player is lost.

It's not the same. It's true, that no one will ever 'stay dead' because the player will just start over but the point is, you're invested enough in the character that you want to start over. In casual, no matter how badly you play, as long as you beat the chapter, everybody lives. Classic reverses that to "You beat the chapter when everybody lives." It's like in stories that feature time travel in order to save someone's life. They aren't any less dramatic, just because everyone lives at the end. It was the drive for the perfect ending that gets you and the characters invested. That's the classic experience! (I'm pro-inclusion of casual btw)

Read the thread now and you might find out!!!!! Unless you have better things to do with your time, I GUESS.

R-right, yes! Well, don't mind me. I'm off to do ... things.... in my very socially fulfilling life. I'm posting this from the symphony.

Edited April 28, 2015 by NekoKnight

[Jedi]

I wonder if the return of Casual will shut people up, or if it will just make everything worse.

I have a simple answer

Yes.

[euklyd]

I have a simple answer

Yes.

until FE15!

(and even then it wouldn't scuttle discussions about "is casual a good thing" - nobody is arguing that casual is 99% gonna be in FE14)

[goodperson707]

^ Don't some people say that Fire Emblem-if is FE 15

Just saying it makes your post actually pretty funny when you read it that way though if makes it say that awakening might not have casual which I'm pretty sure it does (unless we all are having a massive shared dream/nightmare)

Edited April 28, 2015 by goodperson707

[euklyd]

^ Don't some people say that Fire Emblem-if is FE 15

Just saying it makes your post actually pretty funny when you read it that way though if makes it say that awakening might not have casual which I'm pretty sure it does (unless we all are having a massive shared dream/nightmare)

luckily we do not live under the tyrannical rule of Nintendo of Japan's numbering schemes

(well, most of us don't)

also afaik there have still been discussions about "is casual ruining FE" post-Awakening

[eclipse]

Im going to confess something. As one of the OGs, i havent played Classic mode in FE13 since my very first run through the game. (Normal/Classic) And its likely to be the same story with FE14. Why? Well, i do feel like i gotta go through an FE in Classic mode the first run through it. But after that, its all about what i want to do. That, and the harder modes are actually more fun. Yet, i dont want to pull my hair out during parts of the game. Early game in Lunatic is actually really tough for me. Even with the Casual mode, it can be a bit hard in those wee chapters. But i finished a run in that mode because of Casual mode. If that wasnt around, id likely never have tried Lunatic mode. I dont feel like im alone in that either. My default mode in FE13 is Hard/Casual. Its just right for me. Im actually not going to judge another person for having their default mode be Normal/Casual. While i'll encourage that person to try Normal/Classic, im sure as hell not going to be mad if they say "nah im kinda scared about doing that."

I have read your post, and I have come to the conclusion that you're not a true FE fan because logical fallacies are fun you've found a cool way to enjoy your purchase.

That's interesting, because they're very likely to be wrong about the skill part, but easier modes, especially when their name implies that they're easy, tend to do that to you. They make higher difficulties look overwhelming if you have yet to experience them. The reality is that almost every Fire Emblem is fairly easy to beat in normal mode as long as you have a basic understanding of the game, which they'd obviously have at this point. Would they enjoy them? No idea. But I'm pretty sure they could beat them without much trouble.

I started with the biggest hand-holding of all - FE7. The first run through Lyn Mode will literally tell you what to do, right down to "go here, and use this weapon". Yet none of the casual haters in this thread, so far, have addressed that.

I'm still waiting for the following:

1. An illustration of the group of people that hates on Classic - as in, either a statement of "I'm surrounded by this in real life", or a link to where they hang out. So far, I have seen three unquantified groups.

2. The place where it's acceptable to complain about the inclusion of Casual without fear of reprisal.

[shadowofchaos]

That's interesting, because they're very likely to be wrong about the skill part, but easier modes, especially when their name implies that they're easy, tend to do that to you. They make higher difficulties look overwhelming if you have yet to experience them. The reality is that almost every Fire Emblem is fairly easy to beat in normal mode as long as you have a basic understanding of the game, which they'd obviously have at this point. Would they enjoy them? No idea. But I'm pretty sure they could beat them without much trouble.

Did you know that a lot of people got turned off the forums because of this attitude?

People who got Radiant Dawn (obviously that wasn't the best choice) got responses like "Blah blah blah chapter isn't hard... you just have to do X".

Which doesn't help them at all.

From the perspective of a veteran that's all they need to say and handholding is done.

So... has anyone yet to link to the "Classic-haters"?

Please, I want to see this group being used as justification for "revenge" by certain people here.

Like seriously dislike Classic Mode for itself rather than refusing to play it because of the elitist reputation of people who do?

Because honestly, the only "hate" I've ever seen is that they don't like to reset every time and don't like being crapped on for not using the mode.

Did anyone ever produce this, by the way?

1) You could like, show an example. Or not, I guess. Whatever you want.

While I don't like the way he was presenting it, this forum's general view of Awakening has that reputation.

It's not "hating Awakening for being Awakening"... it's "use your dislike of Awakening pretty much everywhere".

Do you know how that feels for the newcomers who visit the forums looking to get into the rest of the series?

For example:

I'm so exited that I haven't watched the trailer yet.

It's really weird to find myself in a position were I have to force myself to watch a trailer of my favorite series of anything ever.

But this is after the game that was among other things, so desperate to kiss the player's ass, that it would have you

burn hundredths of thousands of people and sing your praises of it, and so sociopathic that it never even considered the possibility that you might be fucking horrified by all of that. This is after the game were not only does the supposed average guy says "I like this part" about the act of killing someone but it also forces them and their personality substitutes down your throat at every opportunity, to the point were you can't even buy something without them butting in to make some stupid pun about money or sweets as if it could take it for granted that one likes these assholes.This is after the game that thinks war, killing and death can never feature panties. This is after the game which was created by people whose universally favorite character is the one who is trying and may have succeed in raping the player character and then can somehow delude themselves into believing that their sex fantasies have something to do with love, romance and family.

And most important of all, this is after the game that, according to the people currently in charge, is the "Ultimate Culmination of Fire Emblem". So if you still remember that RD interview were Nahiro was were comparing Fire Emblem to Gundam, and share the sentiment of him that the "overarching theme" of the series is "how the world isn’t simply as black and white as you might think" and that "this kind of worldview is the reason that the series has maintained it's appeal over all these years", you know jackshit about the series. Jerking of towards killing people is what the series is all about. Die with magnificence, motherfucker! Empathy is reserved for your colleagues and the people who share your blood, no matter how abusive they are to you. What? We made two whole games about family bonds that go beyond blood? Fuck that shit!! ButheyifyoulikethosegamesyouwillenjoyourspotpassbonuscontentandourDLCwhichtotallyhasIkeandalltheothercharactersyoulove! Thank you for playing!

After all of this, I just can find the faith to believe that this game could not end up being disgusting, let alone "enjoyable". The side separation sounds like a good concept, but it's still an assumption on my part that it could mean that the modern series has suddenly found a respect for the life and dignity of sentient beings and after the pre-release phase of the previous I am fucking tired making of making assumptions in it's favor just for it to mock my trust and to one-up my worst predictions.

Did the trailer maybe contain something that would help in that regard? How did IS and Nintendo decide to present the new Fire Emblem game and it's themes to the public? What is it that was so important that they thought we needed to know to gain interest into their new creation and the fruits of their hard labor? We got boob jiggling now? Yay! Truly something great and awe-inducing is coming our way. Can't wait for 2016.

So yeah, not exited at all. ...and I hate feeling that way.

Brightbow tends to bring up their disappointment of Awakening... everywhere.

Just look at how people outside our forums feel:

"Buddy buddy buddy. This is a serene’s forest thread."

"There’s nothing inherently wrong with making up tier lists and doing all kinds of fiddly math to figure out what the most optimal party is. Lots of people play these games for lots of different reasons, and all of them are fundamentally legitimate. The problem comes when someone decides that their reasons are better, purer, or more rational than other peoples’ are. And that’s what happened with some very vocal people on the fan forums back in the day, and Serenes does not appear to have ever outgrown it."

"There were just a few people in that thread: me, and those like me, who were curious to see what this tier list was like and maybe contribute something, and the ones who were trying to build a list of god-level and no-fly units so that they could cite it as fact later. There were maybe five active participants, but that was enough to turn me off from the forums indefinitely."

"idk. It’s silly, but very common of human nature imo xD; People just… generally like feeling superior over other people– Regardless of whatever little thing it is."

"I’ve been in and out of that thread and I love your post cause it hits the nail on the head with all that stupid shit happening in there; I haven’t even played 13 and I’m ashamed at how these FE “fans” are treating those who like casual, goddamn"

The core FE community English forum in general... feels pretty crappy.

Edited April 28, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Cysx]

Did you know that a lot of people got turned off the forums because of this attitude?

People who got Radiant Dawn (obviously that wasn't the best choice) got responses like "Blah blah blah chapter isn't hard... you just have to do X".

Which doesn't help them at all.

From the perspective of a veteran that's all they need to say and handholding is done.

Your criticism is misplaced, so let me clarify myself. The point is to encourage players who'd be doubting themselves, not trivialize the difficulties they'd be going against. Letting them believe they're bad when they didn't even try and are likely wrong, that is the problematic attitude to have in my opinion. Also, the context of someone asking for help is completely different so I won't adress that.

Now if I'm the one wrong and completing Awakening didn't teach them enough to deal with the other entries, maybe there is more of a problem with casual mode than most of you guys want to admit. I stand by what I said, most Fire Emblem games aren't difficult as long as you know what you are doing.

Just as a side-note, what is the perspective of a veteran when there are so many diverging opinions around here? What is this forum's general view of Awakening when a lot of people have it on display as their favorite? I won't deny that we have a community issue on our hands, but I completely disagree that this is anybody here's fault. Awakening was a very different game that brought a lot of very different people to the community of a niche series, read small and recluse. None of the veterans are responsible for any of that, or entitled to making efforts to adapt to the new crowd, just like none of the new people have to make any effort to try and understand the veteran's stance in this. There is no bad guys here, except perhaps IS, but what they did is perfectly understandable to me, so I can't even blame them.

Case in point, I think you should stop the finger pointing.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Cysx

[shadowofchaos]

Your criticism is misplaced, so let me clarify myself. The point is to encourage players who'd be doubting themselves, not trivialize the difficulties they'd be going against. Letting them believe they're bad when they didn't even try and are likely wrong, that is the problematic attitude to have in my opinion. Also, the context of someone asking for help is completely different so I won't adress that.

Now if I'm the one wrong and completing Awakening didn't teach them enough to deal with the other entries, maybe there is more of a problem with casual mode than most of you guys want to admit. I stand by what I said, most Fire Emblem games aren't difficult as long as you know what you are doing.

The first thing I'll state is that SF and the general hardcore FE community isn't as encouraging as you'd like to believe.

Tier-list dominated discussion and the like are a general turn off. I rarely get out of the FE4 thread and FE13 hacking thread besides posting FE:if info and arguing in threads like this.

This is probably another reason VincentASM even stays away from everything and just lurks unless it's new info or issues with the site.

I'm not siding with the casuals who criticize the other titles for not having casual mode.

I side with the ones who want to try the other titles but simply are in that rut of time investment and frustration.

Casual's point is accessibility.

As a white knight of casuals, but also an FE veteran, I know both sides' arguments.

People seem to forget that while it might have been easy for you (or hell it might have been frustrating for you) at the beginning, you have to take into account that using yourself as an example for others to "graduate" to the same level isn't your goal.

Games are made to be enjoyable.

Classic is STRESSFUL because of the tension. Which is FE's core mechanic. Cool.

But sometimes people want to just play a game without the looming feeling of death.

Failing a level in FE is defined by most people as using a unit. It's just been an established culture, I guess.

Restarting the whole map you spent 45 minutes on because you lose a unit, maybe because you had a slight moment of lacking focus?

That's FREAKING DAUNTING.

I have an insane amount of patience for FE... I spent 500+ turns for one result on the Ferox Arena.

But I don't hold my own "hardcore" standards to those others playing the game.

Sometimes, people don't want to worry.

It's been added as an option.

People have enjoyed it.

Seeking to take that away with some of the motivations I've seen in this thread is cruel.

Just as a side-note, what is the perspective of a veteran when there are so many diverging opinions around here? What is this forum's general view of Awakening when a lot of people have it on display as their favorite? I won't deny that we have a community issue on our hands, but I completely disagree that this is anybody here's fault. Awakening was a very different game that brought a lot of very different people to the community of a niche series, read small and recluse. None of the veterans are responsible for any of that, or entitled to making efforts to adapt to the new crowd, just like none of the new people have to make any effort to try and understand the veteran's stance in this. There is no bad guys here, except perhaps IS, but what they did is perfectly understandable to me, so I can't even blame them.

Case in point, I think you should stop the finger pointing.

The general view of Awakening, if you look through the section is pretty well received in the gameplay department.

That is ignoring all their issues because they're involved in playing the game or discussing what they like about it.

But when they start criticizing it, they blow it out of proportion.

While it is not clearly a majority, that itself isn't a welcoming feeling.

I am not blaming anyone specifically, unless you count the "joke" of "Green Mark of Cowardness", simply it embodies that ill will towards the people I consider my friends.

or entitled to making efforts to adapt to the new crowd, just like none of the new people have to make any effort to try and understand the veteran's stance in this. There is no bad guys here, except perhaps IS

I disagree completely.

Both groups need to make an effort to understand each other.

They are both at fault.

Just more often than not, I see veterans (outside or inside this forum) being the instigators to hate on Awakening and what it brought to the table.

Whether it be the art style, the game's design, or Casual Mode.

"Cool, you finished Awakening. Go play the other games, they're better."

That's no way encouraging the newcomers to be more than they think they are.

Edited April 28, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Irysa]

You claim that casual makes the person in question have a less full experience of FE.

I claim that is incorrect--the FE experience is everything and not just limited to one factor. A skill floor imposed by older mechanics just for the sole purpose of being an older mechanic doesn't really hold any water to a player. Casual players don't have less FE experience because they are suddenly allowed to not have strategy. Because you can play through casual the exact same way as through classic and potentially see no difference (read: casual players don't see a difference, but apparently non-casual players see a difference... I find that kinda weird tbh).

I may have written most of this better before.

Firstly, I did not claim it was limited to one factor. I made the claim that by offering a mode with an important aspect removed, said mode functions as "less complete" experience than the other one. There are obviously superfluous aspects that can be removed without having a significant impact, but I'm of the opinion (and so are the developers) that permadeath does actually have a significant impact on the overall experience. I think by the fact that some people feel like they don't want to play the game because of it's presence, it is empirically observable beyond my own experience that permadeath impacts the experience of playing Fire Emblem. Even disregarding that, the mechanic isn't there for the sake of it, it had an intentional purpose and function that can be observed and explained. Rather than rewriting out that explanation, I refer you to the third and fourth answers I make in the previous link, which goes into detail on the subject.

Secondly, doing the exact same motions does not result in the exact same experience. For example, lets say I'm playing a stealth game where if I'm seen, I'm pretty much screwed. I perfectly stealth through the mission. Another player plays a mode where being seen is not as big a deal, but he also perfectly stealths through the mission. We do the exact same things, but I can pretty much guarantee that I'll have had a much more tense experience than the other player, due to the tension of the situation being heightened by the risk of being seen.

What does perma death have to do with the story? What does perma death have to do with identifying high priority targets? What does perma death have to do with calculating doubling? Perma death is only one mechanic that's been passed down, but there's no reason to say that perma death is actually tied to a player's wholesome experience. There's so much more to FE than having a unit die and not come back. I don't see many people praising how difficult Path of Radiance Normal Mode is (especially thanks to perma death at that). The only person's experience you can actually describe is your own. Casual doesn't detract a person's FE experience just because you think perma death is some raw defining moment of FE. It's only one quality of many that really doesn't play an important role. Especially to newcomers who don't want to deal with it. Why should they have to worry about a mechanic that you like but they don't?

Permadeath obviously doesn't relate to every mechanical nuance, but this isn't refuting how important it is to the complete experience. There's more to the game than just permadeath, but equally, there is more to the game than just pure strategy. The "added difficulty" that it creates is more like a secondary facet rather than a primary one. The primary facet is to achieve a degree of investment in the game that is more aesthetical and emotional than purely logical. Whilst it's true I can't explictly describe an experience that is not my own, once again I can point to fact that numerous people admit that they find Casual "less stressful/tense", and to the developers talking about how they attempt to invoke particular sensations via permadeath. The conclusion that it fundamentally changes a player's experience with the game is not an unreasonable one, and is in fact, pretty hard to refute all things considered. To say that this feature is "not important" is akin to trying to say that there's no importance in a game's graphics because they aren't directly tied to all mechanics - this is nonsense, aesthetics within games clearly matter and help influence our investment within games, AND help developers convey their vision to players.

Last point, refer to answer 4. And to expand, because games are not simply products, they are a culimination of artistic ideas and concepts. As such, any player is free to dislike or disagree with any concepts within any work, as they are free to not indulge in them. However, when the developers themselves believe firmly in the importance of a particular aspect (permadeath) and wish to instigate particular responses from players via utilising that aspect, I believe that their vision and desire to convey something to their players is all the justification that is neccessary.

You guys realize that the way fire emblem handles perma death is not only "not important" to the core design it is in fact actually a poorly designed and poorly thought out feature that effectively changes the lose condition from "If your lord dies its game over" to "If anyone dies it's game over". Be honest, when was the last time you actually DIDN'T restart when a character died, unless you never intended to use that character period (a draft or some) or in a self-imposed challenge run. Because of the fact that everyone restarts when someone dies character death in Classic mode is functionally as meaningless as death in casual mode, casual just prevents the BS having to do 30 minutes of gameplay all over again to fix that decision. Unless the game designers prevent you from reseting the game to start over again to negate the death by doing something which most other video game communities would call "save scumming" any emotional impact that death may have had on the player is lost. Extra credits talked about this problem of permanent death in one of theres video recently and I think what they said is especially true for fire emblem: https://youtu.be/aJCEQaSlvHE?t=4m58s

This is false. Before we restart the game, players already have the inclinlination towards not wanting to have to restart. As such, any situation that creates the possibility for a restart (PC unit dying) adds to the tension, and modifies the experience. The fact that the player is not forced to restart is in fact, what makes it unique - a player may have to decide if they can afford to go on without that character (you can usually), or whether their attachment to the character (or even the ideal "perfect playthrough" with everyone alive) is strong enough to outweigh the frustration and effort that they'll have to go through in order to realise said goal.

The core FE community English forum in general... feels pretty crappy.

I can only disagree, since I think it is absoloutely fantastic that there are so many people present with different opinions who feel passionately enough to want to discuss and argue about them. Discussion with vigor is definitely more stimulating for many people. Also your specific example with BrightBow is sort of unfair, the thread was asking "are you excited for the new FE game" and he adequately explained why he wasn't.

To expand a bit, this is the only section on the internet that I've found that has the capability for nuanced discussion about Fire Emblem. Like, properly detailed, explict, interesting discussions where opinions can clash, things can get a bit heated and the mods don't step in and say "HEY NO ARGUING", and I like it for that. In my experience, other outlets tend to have less thoughtful posts by users, or tend to have strict moderation teams.

Restarting the whole map you spent 45 minutes on because you lose a unit, maybe because you had a slight moment of lacking focus?

That's FREAKING DAUNTING.

Sure, which is why I'm in favor of battle saves as a feature within an optional mode to alleviate this issue. I just don't want permadeath gone period since that removes the aspect entirely. Honestly, I'm really not sure why the DSFE tile saving system wasn't kept, it adds strategic depth as well as helping with issues like this.

I know you don't think the game needs to be more accessible but if you did want to make it so without resorting to a casual mode, what would you recommend? Personally, if I wanted players to experience what I regard as the definitive Fire Emblem experience, I would provide a casual mode with incentives to play classic like extra chapters/characters.

Actually I'm alright with increasing accessability, just not at the cost of things I think are fundamental to the game (like your Dark Souls example). I'm perfectly comfortable with battle saves being a thing, even going so far as to make them automatic at the start of every turn, going back for 10 turns. The ability to undo mistakes is not bad, and it is definitively subjective how much tension someone wants to have, but the option of having battle saves doesnt remove permadeath but it also alleviates frustration. If you don't want to fix a mistake, you take the consequences. If you do, you are incurred a penalty, even if it is small. Resource based battle saves like DSFE save tiles also work well for this, but I'm not entirely sure how far we need to go in order to make people feel capable of dealing with permadeath. I personally think one every few turns is enough, but some people may feel differently.

Actually come to think of it, Codename STEAM has map save tiles too, but they also made you have to pay gold to use them. Perhaps something similar could be done for Fire Emblem?

Edited April 28, 2015 by Irysa

[Refa]

Just more often than not, I see veterans (outside or inside this forum) being the instigators to hate on Awakening and what it brought to the table.

Whether it be the art style, the game's design, or Casual Mode.

"Cool, you finished Awakening. Go play the other games, they're better."

That's no way encouraging the newcomers to be more than they think they are.

Why is it wrong to hate on Awakening any more than it is to hate on Sonic 06? Just because more people happen to like it?

I also don't see what's wrong with the below quote; as long as newcomers aren't being insulted themselves, what's the problem? It's not even insulting Awakening, just showing the person's preference towards the other games.

[shadowofchaos]

Why is it wrong to hate on Awakening any more than it is to hate on Sonic 06? Just because more people happen to like it?

I also don't see what's wrong with the below quote; as long as newcomers aren't being insulted themselves, what's the problem? It's not even insulting Awakening, just showing the person's preference towards the other games.

If you took my words to mean "no, we should censor you for disliking Awakening", that is not my intention.

As for the second thing, the problem is lack of caring for what they just did. It's the tone. It's essentially disregarding what someone just enjoyed.

Encouraging them to try a different game in the series requires more effort on both parties.

The general feel I have for this forum is that people are blunt and proud of their opinions and evaluations. Discussion has that "jagged" feeling rather than a welcoming one.

...It's honestly has the same feeling as newcomers climbing the uphill skill threshold the fighting game community has.

"I don't see what's wrong with saying this game is crap."

You have that right, and yet the act of "hating on it" from my definition is taking every opportunity to share that the game is crap to you.

When I hate on something, I take the time to also find its merits.

More often than not, people here focus on their dislike, ESPECIALLY of what the Casuals do.

...I still can't get that phrase "Classic-haters" out of my head.

If I don't make much sense to you logic-wise, I apologize.

I'm pretty emotionally invested in defending the Casuals.

Edited April 28, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Jagged Jagen]

Actually come to think of it, Codename STEAM has map save tiles too, but they also made you have to pay gold to use them. Perhaps something similar could be done for Fire Emblem?

You also had to pay to revive units for the map, and to heal. It worked pretty well actually, STEAM can be brutally difficult at points. If they changed this to, say pay X Gold to recover units for the next 5 maps (doesn't have to be the whole game) or what have you, I think it could be balanced and work well. Similarly, Kid Icarus Uprising and Sm4sh has a great system of paying for lower difficulty, and paying for higher with additional risks and rewards. It wouldn't be perfect and I like STEAM's system better, but I'm quite fond of both. Also, given the fact that the Hoshido path will have 'additional opportunities to earn Gold" it may not be as punishing to newcomers and could provide an ample challenge on the limited-resource orientated Nohr path. I still oppose Casual, but as a whole, these alternatives teach the risk and reward system of Classic FE, without being overly punishing. Again, this is my opinion, to each their own. This is just coming from someone who completed said games and grew accustomed to their mechanics.

[Vascela]

"but I can pretty much guarantee that I'll have had a much more tense experience than the other player, due to the tension of the situation being heightened by the risk of being seen."

This is where I completely disagree with you. Because you can't guarantee anything other than what you think. Casual players still have tension, casual players still have to think on strategy, casual players still have to.... do everything that classic has.

Casual players don't like losing units and protect them nonetheless. Just because they're on casual doesn't mean they throw away units as fodder and say "a ha, I'm not scared of anything!" That's just silly. They play just as hard as classic players. At its worst, you're just being arrogant. Being on casual means they just don't want to deal with the permanent punishment on a mistake here and there. Feeling no comparative tension? That's just being an ass.

[Irysa]

You're completely missing the point. I've made no claim that you can't have tension at all on Casual Mode, I've made a claim that greater implications of failure lead to greater degrees of tension. I've also pointed out evidence that demonstrates this. Even just looking at the function and role of difficulty settings is enough to ascertain as such, people don't just pick lower or higher difficulties for absoloutely no reason. Again, the fact people opt to play on Casual and cite a less intense experience as to why provides a very reasonable axiom to work with.

Opting to protect units can be done without permadeath, but the sensation of "If someone dies here, then they're gone forever, so if I want to keep them alive, I have to restart" is unique. It is not concievably possible to feel that exact way without the factor of permadeath being present.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Irysa

[arvilino]

2) Honestly, you're probably right about Awakening characters having more depth than people give them credit for, especially since I've spent like zero effort analyzing them. I just wish their surface hinted at that more.

3) My point is if Awakening had the same narrative flaws as every FE game, people wouldn't complain about it as much.

7) It's never the player's fault. They can dislike a game for the most trivial of reasons and are well within their right to do so.

You're not alone in spending little effort analyzing it and only going off "hinting at more" yet the game's script is being casually stated as objectively poor by people who don't even know what is or isn't in it. Some of the threads about the plot turn into an succession claims where someone says the narrative bad because they've claimed something is missing. People(including myself) posted the script where it's explained and quickly they've already determined something they didn't think was in the script is poor anyway, demanding an explanation for an explanation or start asking about another plot point being missing, basically to fish for a problem by attacking every plot point until they find something.

Awakening could have more/less narrative flaws than the other games but if the criticism involves not referring to the script and basically calling everything faulty until they get something that sticks, it isn't really fair. Does a game really deserve a bad reputation from the words of people who in cases literally aren't sure what they're complaining about is true or not?

This can extend to gameplay mechanics including casual and even the difficulty modes. The claim "Lunatic mode is impossible without grinding" or "The game is balanced around grinding" go around quite a bit even from veterans of the series. Is it really ok for people to mislead others about the game or make objective statements about something they couldn't be bother to look up(the script, whether Lunatic mode is possible to beat) but still want to push out there to persuade people into thinking a certain way about the game?

In terms of point 7) I'd blame a player for deceptively trying to push a critcism that they don't even know is true. Saying it's never the player's fault suggests supporting dislike with outright lies about the game is fair game.

Edited April 28, 2015 by arvilino

[Cysx]

The first thing I'll state is that SF and the general hardcore FE community isn't as encouraging as you'd like to believe.

When I spoke of a wish to encourage people, I was speaking for myself. I realize how it is, since I feel intimidated by it as well, believe it or not. But on the other hand, I enjoy the amount of knowledge and passion I can feel when I come here. I'd be sad were it to go away.

People seem to forget that while it might have been easy for you (or hell it might have been frustrating for you) at the beginning, you have to take into account that using yourself as an example for others to "graduate" to the same level isn't your goal.

Oh I have not forgotten my very first playthrough, FE4, in japanese, which I couldn't read(at least now I know katakana, that would have been helpful). And admittedly, I have never played casual. But if it didn't teach them the basics in an entire playthrough there is a problem somewhere.

I also happen to have taught a friend of mine how to play FE a few months ago, which helps a lot with perspective. And yet I still said what I said.

But sometimes people want to just play a game without the looming feeling of death.

Then they can. I don't see where the problem is. If they cannot enjoy games without casual mode, then it's just not for them and that's perfectly okay. My issue was about them not trying because they don't think they're good enough, and I think I made that fairly clear.

It's been added as an option.

People have enjoyed it.

Seeking to take that away with some of the motivations I've seen in this thread is cruel.

Admittedly you may have missed my input on this matter since we're, like, 170 posts after that(edit: 20 posts per page uh? Make that 340), but otherwise you'd know that I agree.

The general view of Awakening, if you look through the section is pretty well received in the gameplay department.

I don't think this is relevant, considering people who hated the game probably won't go on its forum.

I am not blaming anyone specifically, unless you count the "joke" of "Green Mark of Cowardness", simply it embodies that ill will towards the people I consider my friends.

That's good, but blaming an entire group of people(veterans, core FE community) is not acceptable when most of them have no faults in the matter, either.

Both groups need to make an effort to understand each other.

They are both at fault.

I can agree with that. My issue was that your previous posts sounded way too biased.

Just more often than not, I see veterans (outside or inside this forum) being the instigators to hate on Awakening and what it brought to the table.

Whether it be the art style, the game's design, or Casual Mode.

That is another consequence of Awakening being very different. Obviously it will displease people who liked the series as it was, and that's one of the shapes that frustration may end up taking; although I admit that they could keep it to themselves in some situations.

"Cool, you finished Awakening. Go play the other games, they're better."

It's funny because, I once stumbled upon someone saying that Awakening was "by far the best game of the series". I took some time to write down an admittedly lengthy, but not hostile post explaining why I didn't agree, but it received no response, and got deleted instead.

... uh, so, yes, people throw out bold statements like that sometimes. It sucks, but it's not specific to the veterans and as such shouldn't be used to criticize them precisely.

I cannot really find a point to make because I didn't feel like most of what you said applied to me at all, and should probably refrain from speaking too much for others, so... we're pretty much still at the same point of the debate as far as I'm concerned.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Cysx

[Vascela]

Who are you to tell people what they can and can't feel?

Why is it that casual players tell you that they are getting this great, equivalent FE experience, but you are the one telling them "no, you aren't really getting it; trust me, I know your emotions better"?

[Irysa]

Who are you to tell people what they can and can't feel?

I haven't done as such. I think you need to reread my posts.

Here's the starting point - Casual Mode is less tense than Classic Mode. Do we agree on this, or are you telling the numerous people in this very thread who say just that, that they are actually wrong? Aren't you the one telling them how they are feeling instead of listening to them?

Why is it that casual players tell you that they are getting this great, equivalent FE experience, but you are the one telling them "no, you aren't really getting it; trust me, I know your emotions better"?

It can't be entirely equivilant though. It may well be great, but trying to claim it as exactly equivilant is like trying to claim that playing FE11 is exactly equivilant to playing FE1. They're not functionally the same thing, and I've demonstrated why.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Irysa

[Vascela]

I'll say casual mode has an equivalent tension. You can flip it however you want. You can pretend like you know exactly how casual players feel. But you shouldn't impose what you think is the "correct" emotions onto someone else.

[Irysa]

Do you not see the hypocrisy in you telling me not to impose onto others how they should feel (which I haven't done), whilst simulteanously telling people who say that they find Casual Mode to be less tense that they are actually wrong, and that they are in fact, equivalent, according to you?

Edited April 28, 2015 by Irysa