Fire Emblem 4 Echoes Ideas

[BBM]

56 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Okay, so SD might not have been a straight remake, but nonetheless it was too faithful to the original, and the game quality suffered as a result. I fear that a straight FE4 remake would be a bust as well just on account of how polarizing it already is... and personally, I'd disagree on it having interesting mechanics and on it not being bland gameplay wise.

you might not like the mechanics, but saying it's bland is silly. fe4 has pawn shop stuff, unique gold, pairings and inheritance, holy blood, etc. FE1 is extremely vanilla in comparison, which makes sense since it basically just established core FE mechanics and little else. it makes sense that a game that outdated, even with reclass slapped on, wouldn't do well way later, especially in comparison to other main entry games.

FE4 echoes isn't going to be a bust. FE2 echoes made its money back in a few months. If they devote a similarly small amount of resources, there's no way a game that was more popular in Japan, was played by a lot more NA fans, and has Heroes lead-in will get less sales. not to mention that pairings and kids have been very popular in Awakening/Fates and this is where that mechanic originated.

They've hinted once or twice at wanting to do a FE6 Echoes first, and that's the one which I think might fall flat. fe6 is another pretty vanilla game, with the most memorable thing (for me anyways) being shitty accuracy weapons, high evade bosses on thrones, and low growths/stats. if they fix that stuff (and they probably will, given that they did for FE2), FE6 doesn't have anything beyond core FE mechanics to it.

Frankly I think there should be a lot more focus on story stuff in this thread. FE4 does a decent job on big picture narrative, but waaaay too much of the worldbuilding is in exposition and hinted at through one-liners in villages, particularly in Gen 2. They did a good job facelifting the FE2 story and filling in gaps and giving more attention to side characters. FE2, like FE4, had a similarly good big picture story but with a lack of detail, so I hope they can do something similar here. FE4 characters have a bit more to them than FE2 ones did, but there's still a lot that can be improved on that side.

This is where the big-picture army gameplay hurts storytelling capabilities a bit. It's tough to add those kinds of more personal touches, for example with regards to seeing how civilians were impacted by the brutality of Arvis's dictatorship.

[Lewyn]

6 hours ago, Jotari said:

 

Wow thanks for the link!  Interesting read.  Man I miss Shouzou Kaga so much, the guy was full of passion, ambition and creative thinking.  I mean the progression and advancement and variety from FE1-FE5 is immense and sweeping.  Far more than the games afterward in general.  True visionaries like him are rare, Nintendo really lost an irreplacable treasure.  

[Jotari]

6 hours ago, BBM said:

you might not like the mechanics, but saying it's bland is silly. fe4 has pawn shop stuff, unique gold, pairings and inheritance, holy blood, etc. FE1 is extremely vanilla in comparison, which makes sense since it basically just established core FE mechanics and little else. it makes sense that a game that outdated, even with reclass slapped on, wouldn't do well way later, especially in comparison to other main entry games.

FE4 echoes isn't going to be a bust. FE2 echoes made its money back in a few months. If they devote a similarly small amount of resources, there's no way a game that was more popular in Japan, was played by a lot more NA fans, and has Heroes lead-in will get less sales. not to mention that pairings and kids have been very popular in Awakening/Fates and this is where that mechanic originated.

They've hinted once or twice at wanting to do a FE6 Echoes first, and that's the one which I think might fall flat. fe6 is another pretty vanilla game, with the most memorable thing (for me anyways) being shitty accuracy weapons, high evade bosses on thrones, and low growths/stats. if they fix that stuff (and they probably will, given that they did for FE2), FE6 doesn't have anything beyond core FE mechanics to it.

Frankly I think there should be a lot more focus on story stuff in this thread. FE4 does a decent job on big picture narrative, but waaaay too much of the worldbuilding is in exposition and hinted at through one-liners in villages, particularly in Gen 2. They did a good job facelifting the FE2 story and filling in gaps and giving more attention to side characters. FE2, like FE4, had a similarly good big picture story but with a lack of detail, so I hope they can do something similar here. FE4 characters have a bit more to them than FE2 ones did, but there's still a lot that can be improved on that side.

This is where the big-picture army gameplay hurts storytelling capabilities a bit. It's tough to add those kinds of more personal touches, for example with regards to seeing how civilians were impacted by the brutality of Arvis's dictatorship.

I want to dispel the annoyingly persistent myth that Shadow Dragon wasn't a success. It performed better than both of the new, original and highly ambitious mainline titles that came before it.

[Shadow Mir]

11 hours ago, BBM said:

you might not like the mechanics, but saying it's bland is silly. fe4 has pawn shop stuff, unique gold, pairings and inheritance, holy blood, etc. FE1 is extremely vanilla in comparison, which makes sense since it basically just established core FE mechanics and little else. it makes sense that a game that outdated, even with reclass slapped on, wouldn't do well way later, especially in comparison to other main entry games.

FE4 echoes isn't going to be a bust. FE2 echoes made its money back in a few months. If they devote a similarly small amount of resources, there's no way a game that was more popular in Japan, was played by a lot more NA fans, and has Heroes lead-in will get less sales. not to mention that pairings and kids have been very popular in Awakening/Fates and this is where that mechanic originated.

They've hinted once or twice at wanting to do a FE6 Echoes first, and that's the one which I think might fall flat. fe6 is another pretty vanilla game, with the most memorable thing (for me anyways) being shitty accuracy weapons, high evade bosses on thrones, and low growths/stats. if they fix that stuff (and they probably will, given that they did for FE2), FE6 doesn't have anything beyond core FE mechanics to it.

Frankly I think there should be a lot more focus on story stuff in this thread. FE4 does a decent job on big picture narrative, but waaaay too much of the worldbuilding is in exposition and hinted at through one-liners in villages, particularly in Gen 2. They did a good job facelifting the FE2 story and filling in gaps and giving more attention to side characters. FE2, like FE4, had a similarly good big picture story but with a lack of detail, so I hope they can do something similar here. FE4 characters have a bit more to them than FE2 ones did, but there's still a lot that can be improved on that side.

This is where the big-picture army gameplay hurts storytelling capabilities a bit. It's tough to add those kinds of more personal touches, for example with regards to seeing how civilians were impacted by the brutality of Arvis's dictatorship.

When the gameplay is repetitive as it is in Genealogy, I dare say calling it bland is justified - traversing bloated maps can only go on for so long before it grows stale. And while it may have had much more mechanics, I don't necessarily consider that a good thing since most of them either weren't done well (pairings) or actively detract from the game (pawn shop, individual gold).

That's pretty optimistic, considering we're talking about a love-it-or-hate-it game here...

Perhaps, but when it comes to FE4, I think the most notable aspects are bloated maps, atrocious balance, and being THE Horse Emblem game. That isn't exactly a flattering picture, by my standards...

I think the gameplay has way more room for improvement, honestly - there's no way in the seven hells that I'll be able to appreciate the story when the gameplay being a massive trial of monotony drives me away.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Levant Mir Celestia

[DemolisherBPB]

16 hours ago, Lewyn said:

Could you give more details on the original plans for the game?

From what I can remember (I read all this years ago when I started playing the game and was a little disappointed at it not living up to any of the hype I'd seen) It was meant to be 3 games, Part 1 (Gen 1 but longer), Thracia 776, Then Light Inheritors (Gen 2 longer). Apart from that I can't remember much else, I can't even 100% remember if it was planed for a Disc drive attachment like so many dead Nintendo games, but there is a reason that Genealogy came out only a few months before the N64 was released. (How Thracia was released after the N64 had been on sale for 3 years and had games like Banjo Kazooie, Star Fox 64, and other such classics come out I don't know, hell even ogre battle 64 had come out so it wasn't like there wasn't a SRPG on the system, I think Nintendo felt sorry for IS.)

But sorry for the lack of info.

[Jotari]

5 minutes ago, DemolisherBPB said:

From what I can remember (I read all this years ago when I started playing the game and was a little disappointed at it not living up to any of the hype I'd seen) It was meant to be 3 games, Part 1 (Gen 1 but longer), Thracia 776, Then Light Inheritors (Gen 2 longer). Apart from that I can't remember much else, I can't even 100% remember if it was planed for a Disc drive attachment like so many dead Nintendo games, but there is a reason that Genealogy came out only a few months before the N64 was released. (How Thracia was released after the N64 had been on sale for 3 years and had games like Banjo Kazooie, Star Fox 64, and other such classics come out I don't know, hell even ogre battle 64 had come out so it wasn't like there wasn't a SRPG on the system, I think Nintendo felt sorry for IS.)

But sorry for the lack of info.

No, the original third part would have taken place after the main game, and would have featured the children teaming up with the parents, as the link I provided talks about.

[DemolisherBPB]

Just now, Jotari said:

No, the original third part would have taken place after the main game, and would have featured the children teaming up with the parents, as the link I provided talks about.

This just shows how long it's been since I read this. Thanks mate.

[BBM]

5 hours ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

When the gameplay is repetitive as it is in Genealogy, I dare say calling it bland is justified - traversing bloated maps can only go on for so long before it grows stale. And while it may have had much more mechanics, I don't necessarily consider that a good thing since most of them either weren't done well (pairings) or actively detract from the game (pawn shop, individual gold).

That's pretty optimistic, considering we're talking about a love-it-or-hate-it game here...

Perhaps, but when it comes to FE4, I think the most notable aspects are bloated maps, atrocious balance, and being THE Horse Emblem game. That isn't exactly a flattering picture, by my standards...

I think the gameplay has way more room for improvement, honestly - there's no way in the seven hells that I'll be able to appreciate the story when the gameplay being a massive trial of monotony drives me away.

Pawn shop is a pretty critical part of inheritance. If you open up trading between everyone, the entire inheritance mechanic becomes useless and pairings are basically just for skills and holy blood. Plus, pawn shop and individual gold make the game more balanced. Otherwise it would be even easier than it already is to stack everything on a couple characters. It makes training weak characters a bit harder but there are a ton of villages that you can use to get them money and whatnot (and besides, the lategame Est that's difficult to train is a FE archetype). Fixing combat balance would automatically make it easier to train weak characters too.

honestly, like... balance is a fair criticism of FE4's gameplay. But a lot of the actual mechanics you dislike are integral to what FE4 is. I'm open to some adjustments, but just flat out removing them like you suggest would only exacerbate balance issues and remove what makes the game unique. They should try to make FE4 the best possible version of itself, not a shitty version of other games.

what problem do you have with pairings? I think most of them take too long, so personally I would shorten time requirements for marriage (who needs to marry to have kids anyways), but make it something you can choose to activate rather than being automatic, so you don't need to worry about people who you recruited earlier in the game falling in love automatically or whatever. And then add more conversations to flesh out characters.

[Shrimpica]

2 hours ago, BBM said:

Pawn shop is a pretty critical part of inheritance. If you open up trading between everyone, the entire inheritance mechanic becomes useless and pairings are basically just for skills and holy blood.

Skills + Holy blood + stat (gains) should be plenty enough. No need to make the game tedious just to inherit weapons. If you are worried about Skill Rings, just make skills Rings non-tradeable and to transfer them you have to pay a specialist at base to do so.

Quote

Plus, pawn shop and individual gold make the game more balanced.

no it doesn't. It just leads to snowballing as those who already got the money can just buy weapons and continue snowballing while those who may have done better with a stronger weapon can't even get it.

 

I have no problem with the big maps themselves, and think they can be fixed (by fixing unit positioning and flat terrain for example), but that trading system has to go. The worst item Management system in the history of gaming.

[Tetragrammaton]

I know you just want FE4 remake to be a clone of other FE.

[Shadow Mir]

3 hours ago, BBM said:

Pawn shop is a pretty critical part of inheritance. If you open up trading between everyone, the entire inheritance mechanic becomes useless and pairings are basically just for skills and holy blood. Plus, pawn shop and individual gold make the game more balanced. Otherwise it would be even easier than it already is to stack everything on a couple characters. It makes training weak characters a bit harder but there are a ton of villages that you can use to get them money and whatnot (and besides, the lategame Est that's difficult to train is a FE archetype). Fixing combat balance would automatically make it easier to train weak characters too.

honestly, like... balance is a fair criticism of FE4's gameplay. But a lot of the actual mechanics you dislike are integral to what FE4 is. I'm open to some adjustments, but just flat out removing them like you suggest would only exacerbate balance issues and remove what makes the game unique. They should try to make FE4 the best possible version of itself, not a shitty version of other games.

what problem do you have with pairings? I think most of them take too long, so personally I would shorten time requirements for marriage (who needs to marry to have kids anyways), but make it something you can choose to activate rather than being automatic, so you don't need to worry about people who you recruited earlier in the game falling in love automatically or whatever. And then add more conversations to flesh out characters.

I find it annoying to have to constantly keep the pawn shop in mind when a unit gets an item. And frankly, it makes it annoying when a unit gets an item they either can't use or don't need since it means needing to backtrack with the unit who has it and the intended recipient back to a castle just to trade because the big maps just make everything worse. And I honestly think that pawn shop and individual gold making the game more balanced is BS. If anything, balance is made WORSE with those because the units that already have an easy time getting money, aka mounts, just get better because they can afford better weapons, as opposed to others, who struggle to contribute because they can't get money to afford better weapons or to repair theirs. Is it any wonder why I think it's "The Rich Get Richer:The Game"??? ...I would imagine not. Also, "Est" is less of an archetype and more of a buzzword that's gotten bastardized to the point I largely can't take its use seriously any more.

And I think those mechanics hurt balance in a big way. Also, I don't mind unique, but I draw the line at when "unique" gives birth to "unplayable", which I feel is the case with Genealogy.

How about both the speed and the fact that I don't have complete control over which units get hitched? Because I've seen a lot of complaints about Lewyn winding up getting married to Sylvia.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Lewyn]

 

18 minutes ago, hanhnn said:

I know you just want FE4 remake to be a clone of other FE.

Pretty much this. 

What is a remake?  Keeping the original vision and integrity while expanding on those concepts and updating/improving them.  It is not lifting the script and characters and dropping them in a completely different game.  

Why is it still popular and well loved in Japan, and the favorite of many people who have played it?  It may be unplayable to some young people who want everything to be like Fates or whatever, but if you prefer those games then play them.  Don't expect a remake to just drop everything and be a Fates clone with FE4's story and characters.  

For people who hate FE4 and think it is an unplayable mess or whatever, why are you even interested in a remake?  Maybe for the Fates remake, they could drop the avatar, and have huge maps/gameplay system of FE4 that would make it much better!  Of course it wouldn't be a remake now would it?

[Lewyn]

8 hours ago, DemolisherBPB said:

From what I can remember (I read all this years ago when I started playing the game and was a little disappointed at it not living up to any of the hype I'd seen) It was meant to be 3 games, Part 1 (Gen 1 but longer), Thracia 776, Then Light Inheritors (Gen 2 longer). Apart from that I can't remember much else, I can't even 100% remember if it was planed for a Disc drive attachment like so many dead Nintendo games, but there is a reason that Genealogy came out only a few months before the N64 was released. (How Thracia was released after the N64 had been on sale for 3 years and had games like Banjo Kazooie, Star Fox 64, and other such classics come out I don't know, hell even ogre battle 64 had come out so it wasn't like there wasn't a SRPG on the system, I think Nintendo felt sorry for IS.)

But sorry for the lack of info.

The disc system not coming to fruition is also why we got Secret of Mana with supposedly 40% of content cut so it could fit on cartridge.  It's sad we'll never get to see/experience how these games would have been if the original vision was followed.  

[Tetragrammaton]

18 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

I find it annoying to have to constantly keep the pawn shop in mind when a unit gets an item. And frankly, it makes it annoying when a unit gets an item they either can't use or don't need since it means needing to backtrack with the unit who has it and the intended recipient back to a castle just to trade because the big maps just make everything worse. And I honestly think that pawn shop and individual gold making the game more balanced is BS. If anything, balance is made WORSE with those because the units that already have an easy time getting money, aka mounts, just get better because they can afford better weapons, as opposed to others, who struggle to contribute because they can't get money to afford better weapons or to repair theirs. Is it any wonder why I think it's "The Rich Get Richer:The Game"??? ...I would imagine not. Also, "Est" is less of an archetype and more of a buzzword that's gotten bastardized to the point I largely can't take its use seriously any more.

And I think those mechanics hurt balance in a big way. Also, I don't mind unique, but I draw the line at when "unique" gives birth to "unplayable", which I feel is the case with Genealogy.

How about both the speed and the fact that I don't have complete control over which units get hitched? Because I've seen a lot of complaints about Lewyn winding up getting married to Sylvia.

If it unplayable for you, fine, get other game and play, you can stop caring about a FE4 remake from now

[Shrimpica]

29 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

What is a remake?  Keeping the original vision and integrity while expanding on those concepts and updating/improving them.

and keeping everything the same including bad game design is not ''improving'' the original. That's just a new paint. Might as well go play the original then. SoV would've been playable if it actually went and improved the maps, for example. But nah, let's leave it the same.

29 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

Don't expect a remake to just drop everything and be a Fates clone with FE4's story and characters.  

How does removing the item Management make FE4 a Fates clone lol. Might as well call every other FE a Fates clone then, starting with FE1 being FE Fates 0.1 Alpha to Awakening being Fates beta.

29 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

For people who hate FE4 and think it is an unplayable mess or whatever, why are you even interested in a remake? 

because we want good gameplay along with the Story. There is a potential for much more there.

29 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

Maybe for the Fates remake, they could drop the avatar, and have huge maps/gameplay system of FE4 that would make it much better!  Of course it wouldn't be a remake now would it?

It would still be a remake. Changing stuff does not stop a remake from being a remake.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Shrimperor

[Shadow Mir]

29 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

For people who hate FE4 and think it is an unplayable mess or whatever, why are you even interested in a remake?

Simple. Because I want it to be made into something that I can actually say "now that was worth playing", which I feel I can't say of Genealogy as it is because it's so damn flawed gameplay wise. And because I feel it tried way too hard to be unique and fell flat on its ass.

[Lewyn]

4 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Simple. Because I want it to be made into something that I can actually say "now that was worth playing", which I feel I can't say of Genealogy as it is because it's so damn flawed gameplay wise. And because I feel it tried way too hard to be unique and fell flat on its ass.

Considering your favorite game is fates, what you find worth playing would likely be garbage to many of us.  

[Shadow Mir]

1 minute ago, Lewyn said:

Considering your favorite game is fates, what you find worth playing would likely be garbage to many of us.  

Ditto. Except replace "Fates" with "Genealogy".

[Lewyn]

1 minute ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Ditto. Except replace "Fates" with "Genealogy".

Lol.  Well some have terrible taste.  

[Armagon]

13 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

Considering your favorite game is fates, what you find worth playing would likely be garbage to many of us.  

11 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Ditto. Except replace "Fates" with "Genealogy".

11 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

Lol.  Well some have terrible taste.  

Trashing each other based on favorite games. I respect people's opinions but once you start trashing each other like that, i'm not gonna take you seriously.

4 hours ago, BBM said:

Pawn shop is a pretty critical part of inheritance. If you open up trading between everyone, the entire inheritance mechanic becomes useless and pairings are basically just for skills and holy blood.

I would prefer that, actually. My issue with the Pawn Shop is just the backtracking it causes whenever you need to trade weapons with a unit. At the very least, i'll accept the compromise that couples can trade weapons freely.

[Shadow Mir]

18 hours ago, Lewyn said:

Wow thanks for the link!  Interesting read.  Man I miss Shouzou Kaga so much, the guy was full of passion, ambition and creative thinking.  I mean the progression and advancement and variety from FE1-FE5 is immense and sweeping.  Far more than the games afterward in general.  True visionaries like him are rare, Nintendo really lost an irreplacable treasure.  

Honestly, I think Mystery was Kaga's best work out of the FE games he worked on. I just can't see Jugdral as anything other than a step backwards in terms of gameplay, even if it did add some things that eventually became part of FE's core mechanics (primarily the weapon triangle, since the other notable addition, skills, is more of an on-and-off thing).

16 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

Lol.  Well some have terrible taste.  

If I may be frank, I want IS to better themselves. And I think Genealogy has a lot of potential to be something amazing if they can iron out the kinks.

[Tetragrammaton]

1 minute ago, Armagon said:

Trashing each other based on favorite games. I respect people's opinions but once you start trashing each other like that, i'm not gonna take you seriously.

I would prefer that, actually. My issue with the Pawn Shop is just the backtracking it causes whenever you need to trade weapons with a unit. At the very least, i'll accept the compromise that couples can trade weapons freely.

You can visit Pawnshop at every castle you captured, not just main castle, so you can sell/buy the items with a minimum few turns before you're ready to march to the next castle, backtracking is not required that much.

But tradeable between couples is a good idea, they should implement it.

 

[Shrimpica]

7 minutes ago, hanhnn said:

You can visit Pawnshop at every castle you captured, not just main castle, so you can sell/buy the items with a minimum few turns before you're ready to march to the next castle, backtracking is not required that much

Castles are not so close to each other. 3-4 turns just moving around with units just to trade an item is annoying af. Especially if it's an item the unit can't use/equip, and the one who can use it is nearby.

 

8 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

since the other notable addition, skills, is more of an on-and-off thing

This is offtopic, but i consider Skills to be an integral part of FE, and one of the reasons i can't stand GBAFE is the lack of skills tbh

Edited April 7, 2018 by Shrimperor

[Tetragrammaton]

3 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Castles are not so close to each other. 3-4 turns just moving around with units just to trade an item is annoying af. Especially if it's an item the unit can't use/equip, and the one who can use it is nearby.

really? Does it cost you so much time?

How much time you spent when changing equipment/deploying units before you start a chapter when you play other FE?

20 or 30 minutes?

[Shrimpica]

???

I fail to see what battle prep has to do with trading an item you found mid-chapter.