Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ThatOneWeakArcher

Would you like to see a enforced classic mode?

Would you like to see a enforced classic mode?  

58 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like to see a enforced classic mode?

    • Yes
      4
    • No
      54


Recommended Posts

What if, In classic, when the game detects that someone is going to die (or just at the end of the turn) , the game saves over their death, and if your lord dies the entire play though is deleted.

Causal mode would just be the Echoes's classic mode without the saving from above but with the turn wheel. 

Do you think this is a good idea?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like a lot of folks would hate that. I know I personally would. I don't mind a classic mode, I tend to play them after a full casual run in Echoes and Awakening. But I think it should just keep the Casual and Classic modes. The thing I really take issue with is the saving over a characters death or your run being deleted after the lord dies. What if someone got a bad bit of rng like that enemy's 1% crit chance? I don't want to hit chapter 22 and suddenly have my file gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don`t mind classic mode, but forcing it on the player is a no-go for me. Also, entire file is deleted when Lord dies? You can`t be serious, that is just needlessly evil. Not only do yoy have to replay the chapter you died on, but also the rest of the game up until that point. How does this sound like a good idea to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds too ridiculous, especially the idea of deleting the file if your lord dies. Fire Emblem should be difficult at times, but not that difficult. We don't need to make it the next Dark Souls.

Even forced classic is a bit too far, because it'd severely limit getting new people into the franchise. If I wanted this theoretical game as my first FE, I'd get extremely turned off by its difficulty. Casual mode is important because it makes the games and stories within them accessible to a wider audience, such as younger people who could get easily frustrated and those who aren't interested in permadeath but want to try the series. Imo, classic mode is something you work your way up to. You play casual for a file, and if you think it's too easy or want to play it again, you try it in classic after, or try one of the older games. Realistically, classic and casual work in tandem to please both audiences to the franchise. Casual appeases the casual audiences who aren't interested in such a level of difficulty, while classic sates the veterans and hardcore players who want to have a bigger challenge on the first run. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Vespinae said:

That sounds too ridiculous, especially the idea of deleting the file if your lord dies. Fire Emblem should be difficult at times, but not that difficult. We don't need to make it the next Dark Souls.

Even forced classic is a bit too far, because it'd severely limit getting new people into the franchise. If I wanted this theoretical game as my first FE, I'd get extremely turned off by its difficulty. Casual mode is important because it makes the games and stories within them accessible to a wider audience, such as younger people who could get easily frustrated and those who aren't interested in permadeath but want to try the series. Imo, classic mode is something you work your way up to. You play casual for a file, and if you think it's too easy or want to play it again, you try it in classic after, or try one of the older games. Realistically, classic and casual work in tandem to please both audiences to the franchise. Casual appeases the casual audiences who aren't interested in such a level of difficulty, while classic sates the veterans and hardcore players who want to have a bigger challenge on the first run. 

Perma death =/= difficult, look at FE 8 (Except no grind run, hahah frick). I think that casual has stuck and should stay, I don't think that now a days, especially with how a lot of gamers expect to be hand held ever other second in their little CoD and other trash. And can we stop the notion that Souls/Borne is hard, cuz it isn't. Deleting saves is completely stupid, 

Edited by Kazuya
Forgot to add stuff in, oops :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Kazuya said:

Perma death =/= difficult, look at FE 8 (Except no grind run, hahah frick). I think that casual has stuck and should stay, I don't think that now a days, especially with how a lot of gamers expect to be hand held ever other second in their little CoD and other trash. 

I'm just saying that forced permadeath isn't a concept a wider audience can get behind. If it was truly something audiences didn't like, it wouldn't be around now. It adds an extra level of difficulty, but doesn't make the game difficult in itself.

Also, "hand holding" in games isn't that much of a problem, even in shooters (one that comes to mind as not holding your hand is Overwatch). Games are made for all audiences now. We are no longer in the days when the only beta testers were developers who knew the games inside out, and made them much harder because of how well they understood them. Games aren't like the days of the NES and SNES because they caught on and got much bigger audiences, so they slowly became easier.

Side note, I've never played a CoD game, please explain to me how it holds your hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Losing your file in an enforced mode? If that gets implemented I would never play that FE game, even if I love FE games! Losing a file over a bad luck with rng is just like... Worse idea ever!  Not everyone have the time to play a lot, ot at least I don't have it thanks to my job, so, restarting a game over and over and over because of bad luck, would make the game boring for replaying the same parts again and again, that's not cool :/

Add it as a new option that is not forced, so people will know what they are getting into and choose it if they want. Something like:

  • Casual mode
  • Classic mode
  • Insane mode or whatever name you want to give it

Make it optional, but not forced

 

Edited by SniperGYS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pointless when the player can impose a no-reset rule upon himself. I don't play Casual mode but it adds more to the game than what you're proposing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goofy idea for an insane mode, but that's not "classic" Fire Emblem. 

However, if you ask me, there should only be classic mode. Instead of having Casual as a separate setting, just put the Turnwheel in. People can use it with whatever restrictions they want, rather than making a crucial choice they'll later regret before they've even started playing. In fact, I'd even give the turnwheel infinite uses for maximum freedom. I think everybody should be able to beat a fire emblem game, but only by means of correcting their mistakes, not by resetting from the start of a chapter, and certainly not by playing a no-stakes version of the game. 

Still said no to the poll though, because that's a bizarre idea for an enforced classic mode.

Edited by Glennstavos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be a neat mode so long as it's optional (obviously).

You don't need to detect that someone is going to die, just have the game delete its own save file at the beginning of a stage and save over the empty slot only once the player wins. That way if the player tries to reset the game to cheat death or gets a game over, their save file is gone. Give them a quicksave feature if they need to suspend their gameplay for some reason, and throw in a cautionary note about shutting down the system or running out of battery power.

It wouldn't add anything that a self-imposed resetless run doesn't already add, but it would be a nice option to have it game-enforcible instead of trusting the player to hold up their own rules, plus then you can, like, give them a bragging-rights medal on their save file if they complete it, or something.

So we'll have Casual Mode, Classic Mode, and... Hardcore Mode? Ironman Mode?

Edited by Anomalocaris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, no. That's honestly ridiculous. Deleting a whole playthrough if the lord dies is absurd and honestly would be as indefensible as Phoenix mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Azz said:

Ha, no. That's honestly ridiculous. Deleting a whole playthrough if the lord dies is absurd and honestly would be as indefensible as Phoenix mode.

Both this hypothetical mode and Phoenix Mode are defensible on the grounds that they're completely optional. Nobody's pointing a gun to your head and demanding you play those modes. They're there for people who want a little more or a little less challenge.

Share this post


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

Both this hypothetical mode and Phoenix Mode are defensible on the grounds that they're completely optional. Nobody's pointing a gun to your head and demanding you play those modes. They're there for people who want a little more or a little less challenge.

Yes I know they are/would be optional. However, I'm personally looking at it from its concept alone, which I find absurd and indefensible, the same as I do with Phoenix mode. I don't take into account whether it is optional or not, because of coarse it would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

Goofy idea for an insane mode, but that's not "classic" Fire Emblem. 

However, if you ask me, there should only be classic mode. Instead of having Casual as a separate setting, just put the Turnwheel in. People can use it with whatever restrictions they want, rather than making a crucial choice they'll later regret before they've even started playing. In fact, I'd even give the turnwheel infinite uses for maximum freedom. I think everybody should be able to beat a fire emblem game, but only by means of correcting their mistakes, not by resetting from the start of a chapter, and certainly not by playing a no-stakes version of the game. 

Still said no to the poll though, because that's a bizarre idea for an enforced classic mode.

There is no reason to remove classic mode to be honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was a choice option along with classic and casual mode then fine, but if the only way to play the game is in the mode the OP is talking about then no thanks.  I always play classic mode, but a mode where if my lord dies my save data is wiped would make me raving mad since I sometimes make mistakes and my lord bits the dust a few times during my first playthroughs of every FE game I have played.   I don't even want to think about playing an FE game when I am a bit tiered and making a dumb move and having several hours of playing end up in the trash, that would be a nightmare and I have more then enough of those as is. 

Edited by EricaofRenais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

Goofy idea for an insane mode, but that's not "classic" Fire Emblem. 

However, if you ask me, there should only be classic mode. Instead of having Casual as a separate setting, just put the Turnwheel in. People can use it with whatever restrictions they want, rather than making a crucial choice they'll later regret before they've even started playing. In fact, I'd even give the turnwheel infinite uses for maximum freedom. I think everybody should be able to beat a fire emblem game, but only by means of correcting their mistakes, not by resetting from the start of a chapter, and certainly not by playing a no-stakes version of the game. 

Still said no to the poll though, because that's a bizarre idea for an enforced classic mode.

I really don't understand the reasoning behind this.

1) Casual is not no-stakes. I don't want to start the whole Classic/Casual debate here but casual is not no stakes. You are still penalized as you lose your unit for the remainder of the chapter and thus lose out on any exp you could have gotten for them. While in the likes of Awakening and Birtrhight, it didn't work the best cause grinding and just being easy games, in Conquest, with limited resources and no grinding, it could very well be a detriment and a character could fall behind, thus making the game more difficult.

2) Giving the turnwheel infinite uses is way too much and cheeses the game. I mean, even with 12 uses, the turnwheel in SoV was pretty abusable. But also, I don't see how giving the turnwheel infinite uses would justify the removal of casual.

3) The exclusion, story wise, of the Mila's turnwheel in SoV was already contrived enough, so how the hell are you gonna explain its inclusion in every title plus future potential remakes without it sounding more contrived and just there for the sake of being there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Azz said:

I really don't understand the reasoning behind this.

1) Casual is not no-stakes. I don't want to start the whole Classic/Casual debate here but casual is not no stakes. You are still penalized as you lose your unit for the remainder of the chapter and thus lose out on any exp you could have gotten for them. While in the likes of Awakening and Birtrhight, it didn't work the best cause grinding and just being easy games, in Conquest, with limited resources and no grinding, it could very well be a detriment and a character could fall behind, thus making the game more difficult.

2) Giving the turnwheel infinite uses is way too much and cheeses the game. I mean, even with 12 uses, the turnwheel in SoV was pretty abusable. But also, I don't see how giving the turnwheel infinite uses would justify the removal of casual.

3) The exclusion, story wise, of the Mila's turnwheel in SoV was already contrived enough, so how the hell are you gonna explain its inclusion in every title plus future potential remakes without it sounding more contrived and just there for the sake of being there?

1. Well then you'd have to agree it's pretty low stakes. Somebody did an Auto Battle only playthrough of Awakening on Hard/Casual. The game had only been out two months by the time that was finished with about 100 deaths. Guess the exp loss wasn't that big of a deal. Also, don't you think Casual is a little harsh when your lord dies? Everybody else can die, but if your main guy dies you have to start over at the beginning? That's like if you were asked to do a spelling test and you could get the word wrong any way you want - but not if you put an incorrect C in your answer, that's an automatic fail. Lords causing a game over makes a bit more sense in the setting of Classic.

2. Turnwheel justifies itself because unlike Casual, the player can correct their mistakes and in doing so become a more proficient player. Or, if they don't care about that unit, just continue playing without them. It's a difficulty system that focuses on player choice and how hardcore they want to get as they play. And if they want to break their own rules, and start using the turnwheel, they can just do it while continuing that same playthrough. Meanwhile the Casual/Classic decision is made before the player has played even a second on the game to know if they want the training wheels or not. 

2.5. Also, I think the turnwheel can potentially add another layer to difficulty. Because it's the Lord who uses it. If the Lord dies, don't game over the player right there. Force the player to either accept a game over, or use the turnwheel to correct that death, then it breaks for the rest of the chapter, creating higher stakes.

3. You mean the inclusion? And if it was forgotten by that story, so what? Poor implementation of a macguffin in one game doesn't mean the concept will always never work in a story. It's not like this series has a passing grade when it comes to its macguffins to begin with. Speaking of, maybe they could combine the concept of the Turnwheel with a different, already recurring item in this series. Like, say, the Fire Emblem? 

Actually, just forget all these points and you deliberately starting the Classic/Casual debate. Why does it bother you when I say, in my opinion, that Classic mode and the Turnwheel are a great combination? You say you don't understand, but I don't remember asking you to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's an optional mode separate from classic, sure. But no way should it even replace classic mode as it normally is. Even if we got a rewinding option, making forced saves like that when a unit dies is cruel in not allowing a chapter reset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No to the idea presented. Unless the game warns you beforehand, and is already short and replayable (such as Punch-Out Wii), deleting a save file for failure is just plain cruel. Also, taking away casual mode would be a step backwards. Sure, some people are used to permadeath being prevalent in tactical games and will probably never touch the mode, but it's optional and a great tool for easing newcomers into the gameplay mechanics. Besides, it still punishes players for their mistakes (those defeated units aren't earning any experience or support points, after all) without permanent consequences.

That being said, I do have my own ideas on the subject. The modes I would implement would be:

Casual: Defeated units return after the battle is done.

Classic: Lost units are gone forever. The player has the option of soft-resetting if they wish to undo their mistakes.

Ironman: The game constantly autosaves, so soft reseting won't undo any deaths. However, if the player has lost too many of their best units, or just plain lost too many units period, the game could determine that continuing would be much more difficult than it should be, and offer them the chance to try the mission again. This will not be a common occurrence; this choice will only appear when the player really needs it.

Ironman+: The game constantly autosaves, so dead units stay dead. Unlike the above, the game will not be merciful, and you cannot to undo of your mistakes, no matter what.

Perfectionist: If any unit dies, game over. End of story. Meant to save time for people who have this sort of playstyle anyhow.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...