Jump to content

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Blade Lord Lyn said:

Ouch...I hope the direct aftermath didn't kill off this topic yet yes it really sucks right now...but no hope should be lost yet it'll be E3 sooner than we realize!

What do you think of my suggestion of Fire Emblem X Elder Scrolls? Just need to get a conversation going. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ElectiveToast said:

What do you think of my suggestion of Fire Emblem X Elder Scrolls? Just need to get a conversation going. 

That game is going to look like Fates intro CG. It would be interesting to see a western styled FE, but I feel the devs aren't that interested to pander to overseas audiences (from what I judge by the game themselves and some interviews). Open World SRPG Fire Emblem when.

As for the Direct dissapointment, well...that sucks. Doesn't hit me that bad, honestly, I learned not to ride the hype train. Even I didn't catch the Smash bait since I don't trust Sakurai.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the lord is non-avatar I hope they have blue hair 

 

I known irs still and everyone makes fun of it but it makes me happy when they have those little tradition things and I don’t want them being made fun of to make them change it 

 

plus Chrom, Ike, and Marth look very distinct from each other and look really good (Chrom’s new hero’s art is cool) 

 

and lucina is super cute ))((

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ElectiveToast said:

What do you think of my suggestion of Fire Emblem X Elder Scrolls? Just need to get a conversation going. 

I don't think an open world would fit with Fire Emblem to be honest. Fire Emblem has always involved you and your army going form destination to destination to advance the story. The main issue here is that you aren't traveling alone but with your army some of whom include royalty. It just doesn't mesh well in my head. It probably doesn't help that I haven't played an Elder Scrolls game, but I've seen videos on it and it looks just like every Western open world game out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hope hey reveal something soon. I can wait but all the "leaks" make it all difficult. I thought i see something in the direct but nothing happend.

what is the problem to say:" hello fellows! we know there is no info about the fire emblem but u hear something around april or E3!"or" sorry we cant make it in 2018, so we give you infos in january 2019 direct!" but noooooo...waiting.....waiting......ouh! minidirect!.....ouh there was nothing...waiting....waiting...OUh march direct i hope there is somehting.....(after 30 min direct).....silence....

I know its just a game but the game they playing with us about no infos is cruel :(

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dreamyboi
3 hours ago, senior firehood said:

i hope hey reveal something soon. I can wait but all the "leaks" make it all difficult. I thought i see something in the direct but nothing happend.

what is the problem to say:" hello fellows! we know there is no info about the fire emblem but u hear something around april or E3!"or" sorry we cant make it in 2018, so we give you infos in january 2019 direct!" but noooooo...waiting.....waiting......ouh! minidirect!.....ouh there was nothing...waiting....waiting...OUh march direct i hope there is somehting.....(after 30 min direct).....silence....

I know its just a game but the game they playing with us about no infos is cruel :(

 

I honestly would have no problem with the wait if something were said or some info were given in the meantime.

I've already said all this though so :/

Edited by Dreamyboi
Fixing a "one line post"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's possible that Fire Emblem Switch is gonna get a Xenoblade 2 release date. Smash is likely September/November. If Pokemon is this year then that one is November..

Edited by Arvin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, YingofDarkness said:

I don't think an open world would fit with Fire Emblem to be honest. Fire Emblem has always involved you and your army going form destination to destination to advance the story. The main issue here is that you aren't traveling alone but with your army some of whom include royalty. It just doesn't mesh well in my head. It probably doesn't help that I haven't played an Elder Scrolls game, but I've seen videos on it and it looks just like every Western open world game out there.

If I see anything "open world" for FE16 it'll likely be a My Castle Sandbox area where we move our character around to other characters and upgradable buildings or it'll still stay mostly Sprite icons top down based.

Edited by Blade Lord Lyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem was that they anounced it way too early. The switch was not even out yet. If we didn't know about it then I'm sure that people could wait to get a great game. Pokemon and metroid got teased at E3 and it was confirmed that people had to wait. Smash is for this year and will propably get released somewhere near September. So what was the point of teasing the game so early with two games in development (echoes and warriors)? So I can wait to get a great game.

Edited by SuperNova125

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SuperNova125 said:

So what was the point of teasing the game so early with two games in development (echoes and warriors)? So I can wait to get a great game.

To pad out the Direct's running time.  It gives the impression that there's more coming in the near future than there really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the “open world” subject. I don’t think it’ll happen, but if it did, I’d imagine it would be similar to Echoes dungeon sections except applied everywhere (villages, castles, overworld, etc). Whenever there’s a battle it would just switch to the traditional FE grid turn-based battles. I’d be down for it. It isn’t really necessary for something like FE but it would be interesting to say the least, but like I’ve stated, I doubt it would actually happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, NegativeExponents- said:

Regarding the “open world” subject. I don’t think it’ll happen, but if it did, I’d imagine it would be similar to Echoes dungeon sections except applied everywhere (villages, castles, overworld, etc). Whenever there’s a battle it would just switch to the traditional FE grid turn-based battles. I’d be down for it. It isn’t really necessary for something like FE but it would be interesting to say the least, but like I’ve stated, I doubt it would actually happen.

I really don’t want this. I feel like they’re just running the risk of overcomplicating the things thst don’t matter and not spending time on what does matter (story, characters, skills, fun level designs) 

 

echoes was a lot of levels that were the same couple backgrounds and just a large square nothing in it 

 

i prefer the awakening style movement for fire emblem 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kiaxxl said:

Again, all I can hope is that long silence = ambitious game. Whether ambitious is good or bad remains to be seen XD

See, the thing about this is, it makes me worried that the game is going to be too huge and ambitious for its own good like Fates was.  How far can we go before things collapse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see an "open world" Fire Emblem game working, although I question if I'd want the main game to be based around it.

The player character would be a mercenary, and would hire both named and generic units into their army. You would take jobs from villages and towns, or from the lords of several different kingdoms on the continent. Missions would range from things like fending off bandit attacks, or joining in a war against an enemy nation, to leveling up trainee/villager units to promote into more useful classes, or escort duty. The player could engage in less noble behavior as well, such as raiding towns, kidnapping/assassinating lords, or working for less savory individuals. If the player works for a nation long enough, they could become a lord with their own land and army, but would have greater responsibilities to handle.

The game could also have multiple plots. There could be longer and unique side-quests that result in you getting better equipment and/or a new unit. Mount and Blade has Ruler and Claimant story-lines for each kingdom, where both the current ruler and a claimant have their own side of the story of who deserves the throne, and you decide which side to support, or whether or not to get involved in the first place. Pirates: Live the Life! also added a story-line where you have to find and rescue your family who has been captured by the big bad, before eventually fighting him yourself, before the main character grows too old. I think both of these story ideas could work for a Fire Emblem game.

As for movement, I think that that a combination of Awakenings and Echoes hub world would do. I also think that having a world map made up of a grid where you can travel a limited amount of spaces each turn, with free roam in villages and castles and such, could also work.

Essentially, Mount and Blade or Pirates as a turn-based strategy game, and honestly I'm perfectly fine with that.

Edited by Hawkwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Von Ithipathachai said:

See, the thing about this is, it makes me worried that the game is going to be too huge and ambitious for its own good like Fates was.  How far can we go before things collapse?

I think they learned their lesson with Fates, and will try not to bite off more than they can chew from now on. That being said, I'm hopeful, yet cautious about the game being silent for so long. On the one hand, I have no doubt that they've been working hard since day one, and have plenty of good ideas of how to evolve the gameplay and improve the characters and story. On the other hand, I could also see them wasting time implementing features that aren't needed, and I do wonder if the game is impressive enough to hold its own at E3 (unless it's revealed earlier, which is very possible).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SuperNova125 said:

The problem was that they anounced it way too early. The switch was not even out yet. If we didn't know about it then I'm sure that people could wait to get a great game. Pokemon and metroid got teased at E3 and it was confirmed that people had to wait. Smash is for this year and will propably get released somewhere near September. So what was the point of teasing the game so early with two games in development (echoes and warriors)? So I can wait to get a great game.

It seems to be a running thing with Fire Emblem and its related stuff.  TMS was announced a couple years early, and the resulting reveal blew up pretty spectacularly.  IIRC, Fates had a pretty big gap between its teaser and more info.

3 hours ago, kiaxxl said:

Again, all I can hope is that long silence = ambitious game. Whether ambitious is good or bad remains to be seen XD

What would be ambitiously bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, eclipse said:

What would be ambitiously bad?

As people have said, Fates. I think a lot of people think the core gameplay is solid, but it's absolutely caked with bad ideas that reek of "You tried way too hard here and ruined whatever it was you were going for". And it reeks for what basically amounts to three games, because again, ambitions took over the development.

Ambitiously bad doesn't mean people have ambitions to be bad, it just means that you tried to bite off way more than you can chew. Which is the worry I think is being brought up here.

Also, Fates was revealed 4 months before the game released, so not really a huge gap between "Tease" and "New info". Wasn't even really any gap whatsoever between "Tease" and "The full game's out".

Edited by Slumber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IEatLasers said:

I really don’t want this. I feel like they’re just running the risk of overcomplicating the things thst don’t matter and not spending time on what does matter (story, characters, skills, fun level designs) 

 

echoes was a lot of levels that were the same couple backgrounds and just a large square nothing in it 

 

i prefer the awakening style movement for fire emblem 

That’s why I said it wasn’t really necessary. If done well I feel it could be good but IS needs to focus on improving plot, characters, and especially balancing, before even thinking about doing such things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Slumber said:

As people have said, Fates. I think a lot of people think the core gameplay is solid, but it's absolutely caked with bad ideas that reek of "You tried way too hard here and ruined whatever it was you were going for". And it reeks for what basically amounts to three games, because again, ambitions took over the development.

Ambitiously bad doesn't mean people have ambitions to be bad, it just means that you tried to bite off way more than you can chew. Which is the worry I think is being brought up here.

Also, Fates was revealed 4 months before the game released, so not really a huge gap between "Tease" and "New info". Wasn't even really any gap whatsoever between "Tease" and "The full game's out".

There was a super-early release trailer - not quite as vague as TMS, but it had people talking for a while.

The worst aspect of Fates IMO were things that other games had (kids, dumb maps, weird characterizations, weirder story), but it was cranked up to 11.  About the only "bad" ambitious things IMO were the handling of the route split and Corrin's room.  Stuff like the new weapon types, triangles, and weapon skills didn't seem that bad to me.  Special shout-out to how Javelins and their ilk were handled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, eclipse said:

There was a super-early release trailer - not quite as vague as TMS, but it had people talking for a while.

The worst aspect of Fates IMO were things that other games had (kids, dumb maps, weird characterizations, weirder story), but it was cranked up to 11.  About the only "bad" ambitious things IMO were the handling of the route split and Corrin's room.  Stuff like the new weapon types, triangles, and weapon skills didn't seem that bad to me.  Special shout-out to how Javelins and their ilk were handled.

I mean, that's the "caked with bad ideas" I was talking about. The weapon triangles and weapon types(Though I personally really dislike the new "secondary" triangle) fall under "core gameplay". The one thing I'd say probably doesn't work is how the new weapon system was handled, which again, I'd put down to ambitions. For the first time since FE2, they decided to change how weapons are handled, and it ended up boiling down to uber Iron weapons.

The story, THREE GAMES OF CONTENT, amped up bad maps and kids were all victims of ambition. If they could have scaled everything back to fit into one game, I can almost guarantee the game wouldn't be nearly as divisive as it is. The only things that probably wouldn't change are the weird/bad characterizations, since... well, that was more just following Awakening's example of just having zany characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...