Jump to content
Dinar87

What sort of Fire emblem game would you like Three Houses to be?

What sort of Fire emblem game would you like Three Houses to be?  

121 members have voted

  1. 1. Avatars in Three Houses?

    • Yes please!
      18
    • Yes, but don't make them anything like corrin or feel too much like player pandering
      70
    • Nope.
      33
  2. 2. Marriage and Child units?

    • Yes, since I really enjoy the replay ability they offer!
      22
    • Yes, but not to the point where they're the main focus of the entire game, along with the avatar.
      32
    • No, I prefer traditional fire emblem stories and marriage can be saved for the game's endings.
      67
  3. 3. Are you a "gameplay" or "story" type gamer in general?

    • Gameplay, I really don't care about story at all.
      12
    • Both are important to me.
      89
    • Story, as I enjoy video games mainly for the world and characters rather than mainly the gameplay.
      19
    • Neither.
      1


Recommended Posts

As someone who almost tried making his own fire emblem game out of my own sheer disappointment with fates (before echoes was announced), I care a lot about what will happen in Three Houses. I don't think any type of fan is superior and if you like fates or awakening that's completely fine, but I DO want to know what you all value in games (so I can make my own game better), and I DO feel quite disappointed still with those two games.

I'm worried about the future of the fire emblem series and what it will focus on in later games, especially since apparently Fire emblem echoes didn't sell very well (admittedly it's vgchartz but there's no other info I'm aware of http://www.vgchartz.com/game/154085/fire-emblem-echoes-shadows-of-valentia/), the game without an avatar and marriage mechanics...while the games that did have them sold like hotcakes. Sure it was released once the switch practically stole the 3ds' momentum away while the others were before that, but IS might not see it that way.

Because of this, I want to truly understand gamers as a whole, and what they actually value in fire emblem and games generally. And also because I could then use this information to help me prioritise my own game in general. If gamers don't care about story very much, and really only care about gameplay only, then I'll know what to do with my own game going forward.
https://www.deviantart.com/dinar87/art/Starting-production-of-Sector-2-770028017
here it is also

I really hope Three Houses will be a nice middle ground between fates/awakening and echoes/path of radiance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I already stated already what Byleth is a million times so last option is completely worthless and in denial but my choice anyway is(Yes Please!).

2. I think you should've put Marriage and child units as 2 seperate choices since it's not guaranteed that child units will always stick with the marriage feature all the time I know its not a main game but Heroes's Summoner/(lots of crack ships aside) Ally Support feature shows you can "marry" a unit without the need of having kids while adding much needed benefits in battle so it could be a sign that's what they might be going for. But honestly it kinda annoys that I can't make my avatar my personal way in Boon/Bane because either depending on my chosen partner or modifiers I choose it'll make an optimal child or not a good child I guess that makes the repeatability great in that way. But for other non-avatar pairs however some of the relationships could sometimes feel wrong or fake since some pairs that work great together but could lead to a bad child unit while some that are just terrible that could lead to a great optimal one so it kinda sucks. I also think the problem with that is from the(everyone can marry everyone thing except Avatarsexuals) I feel the non avatar supports should limited to a small degree and have sets that work and that would keep the great repeatability in tact. I'm overall fine with the kids IF they are like Awakening but if a alternate doom future is part of the storyline or non canon DLC that reads your pairings and unlocks after beating the game. I know some will say timeskip but I'm positive they won't off the main cast where you'll likely get WAY attach too just to add it especially the Avatar and our picked lover or make the Waifubandos very old either. So just either a REALLY good reason they exist and (even small) have some story connections or none at all. 

 

3. Honestly I choose gameplay over story. I feel story is subjective and people can like it or not like it. I feel that's less consequential if the gameplay is good. Its not to say story isn't important it helps having flavor in the worldbuilding, character growth and just plain knowledge. But to me if the cast is great like Awakenings imo and the gameplay is very good I'm content if the story is great as well that's candy to me at that point.

Edited by Regal Edelgard Axe Master

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Regal Edelgard Axe Master said:

1. I already stated already what Byleth is a million times so last option is completely worthless but my choice anyway is(Yes Please!).

2. I think you should've put Marriage and child units as 2 seperate choices since it's not guaranteed that child units will always stick with the marriage feature all the time I know its not a main game but Heroes's Summoner/(lots of crack ships aside) Ally Support feature shows you can "marry" a unit without the need of having kids while adding much needed benefits in battle so it could be a sign that's what they might be going for. But honestly it kinda annoys that I can't make my avatar my personal way in Boon/Bane because either depending on my chosen partner or modifiers I choose it'll make an optimal child or not a good child I guess that makes the repeatability great in that way. But for other non-avatar pairs however some of the relationships could sometimes feel wrong or fake since some pairs that work great together but could lead to a bad child unit while some that are just terrible that could lead to a great optimal one so it kinda sucks. I also think the problem with that is from the(everyone can marry everyone thing except Avatarsexuals) I feel the non avatar supports should limited to a small degree and have sets that work. I'm overall fine with the kids IF they are like Awakening but if a alternate doom future is part of the storyline or non canon DLC that reads your pairings after beating the game. I know some will say timeskip but I'm positive they won't off the main cast where you'll likely will get WAY attach too just to add it especially the Avatar and our picked lover or make the Waifubandos very old either. So either a REALLY good reason they exist or none at all. 

 

3. Honestly I choose gameplay over story. I feel story is subjective and people can like it or not like it. I feel that's less consequential if the gameplay is good. Its not to say story isn't important it helps having flavor in the worldbuilding, character growth and just plain knowledge. But to me if the cast is great like Awakenings imo and the gameplay is very good I'm content if the story is great as well that's candy to me at that point.

Thank you for your feedback! It's quite helpful to know that gameplay is what most people care about when it comes to games (it should've to me been obvious that videoGAMES need good gameplay but w/e). I'm going through a creative block atm with my own metroidvania, struggling to think of how to make the atmosphere better and trying to find motivation to continue it after two years, so I find these opinions helpful as it gives me a better idea of what's truly important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) I don't mind avatars, so I decided to go for the middle option, but I really hope Byleth isn't an avatar. He has a fantastic design, and his name just brings up so much potential.

2) I'd rather marriages take a back seat this time around. From what I can tell, we're in a school setting, at least for a short period of time, so I'd rather not have them. If S-supports occur after, say, a time skip, then I'm fine with them, but I'd rather just have it be an endgame thing. Child units can bog off. Awakening made sense as they were integrated into the story(Well, Lucina was...), but Fates was just a mess. I'll also reiterate myself, so far, our main three Lords, Edelgard, Claude, and Dimitri, appear to be in school. I know, they're young nobles so they're just being educated, but still.

3) I'm hoping for a good story. I don't care too much for gameplay unless they completely overhaul it into like...I dunno...a real time battle system. Nope, no thanks. I would like pair-up to take after Fates if it returns, but that's my only concern. Story wise...I would like a nice, fleshed out story. It doesn't have to be deep, as long as it isn't the trash heap Fates was, I'll be happy.

So really, I just want it to be a good entry in the series, hopefully going beyond 'good' because it's the first console FE since Radiant Dawn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care whether or not if avatar units return. I've seen avatars used brilliantly in some games, while in others they were just 'there'. I never treated Fire Emblem any differently. I never thought that Robin ever overstepped their boundaries in the story, and the moments where they were praised made sense. Corrin was needless player-pandering, though, and that's more annoying than rewarding. If avatars return, cool. If they don't, I won't care.

I'd rather marriage not make a return, but that's more for writing reasons. I'd rather they not overload themselves on thinking "how can we make these past conversations lead into marriage?" and instead just focus on making the conversations themselves good. It wasn't uncommon in Awakening (I haven't played Fates) for two characters have a solid support chain and seem like good friends, but have the S-support seemingly come out of nowhere. That, and I'd like platonic endings to return. Gameplaywise, I never cared for S-Supports, so from that angle, I don't care whether or not they return.

I like knowing beforehand if a game is focused more on gameplay or story, just so I can set my expectations reasonably. Since Fire Emblem tends to have a pretty even focus on both, I'd like for both the story AND gameplay to be solid and fun to go through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dinar87 said:

Thank you for your feedback! It's quite helpful to know that gameplay is what most people care about when it comes to games (it should've to me been obvious that videoGAMES need good gameplay but w/e). I'm going through a creative block atm with my own metroidvania, struggling to think of how to make the atmosphere better and trying to find motivation to continue it after two years, so I find these opinions helpful as it gives me a better idea of what's truly important.

It's no problem! I like to give a good outlook on this as positive as possible.

Edited by Regal Edelgard Axe Master

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First question:

A: Avatars are a feature I appreciate, but I think there is a balance to be had, which is difficult to hit. If they are too central to the story, they hijack it from the actual main characters, and you get a situation like the final arc of Awakening. Too distant from the story and you get an awkward situation like White Knight Chronicles in which all of the actual characters ignore the existence of your avatar.

However, I would also be lying if I said it was impossible to make a good avatar main character, because we already have examples of great player avatars, such as Mass Effect's Colonel Shephard. 

So, tl;dr, the avatar should either be the main character or an important but not dominant mentor character. The problem with Corrin wasn't that they were an avatar, it's that they were poorly written.

 

Second Question:

None of the above choices. I LIKE marriage and relationships as a feature in games. However, I wholeheartedly dislike child units as a feature as they are either pointless (not effective enough to justify using over their already-trained parents) or they unnecessarily render the characters you've already grown attached to obsolete. They also encourage you to pair units together not on the basis of support conversations and compatibility, but rather eugenics, and that's more than a little bit fucked up. 

If child characters are to be a thing, two criteria must be met. The story must satisfyingly justify their existence (ala Geneology of the Holy War or Awakening) and the child units must be entirely separate from the parent units (ala Geneology of the Holy War, though a Radiant Dawn like structure in which you swap back and forth between two separate parties could also work).

 

(Oh, and no more allowing the player, or any other character, to marry characters that are clearly not physically and emotionally mature enough to morally marry. The mere existence of Nowi, Nah, Donnel, and Ricken in that context is abhorrent. Sorry, but I'm not sorry) 

 

Third Question:

Both are mandatory for a RPG of this nature.

 

I don't want to play a great game with a poor story, ala Shadow Dragon, because I won't care about the context of what is going on or grow attached to the characters in a game that is all about getting attached to the characters and keeping them from suffering permadeath.

 

The reverse is even worse. Echoes: Shadows of Valentia has a pretty solid story, but I barely forced myself through it once (and decided against playing the post game content entirely) because the game that story was attached to was boring, tedious, and shallow, despite some genuinely innovative mechanics that I hope to see return in a better designed game. 

Edited by Etheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly indifferent to an avatar being in the game, but I'd rather not have children in this game. I would, however, be happy to see children and inheritance in a hypothetical sequel, using Tellius style data transfers. That would allow them to tell a focused narrative in each game, while still allowing people to play matchmaker, if that's what they're into.

Share this post


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

(Oh, and no more allowing the player, or any other character, to marry characters that are clearly not physically and emotionally mature enough to morally marry. The mere existence of Nowi, Nah, Donnel, and Ricken in that context is abhorrent. Sorry, but I'm not sorry) 

Nowi, Nah, and Ricken I get, but Donnel?  He doesn't look that young.

Share this post


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

Nowi, Nah, and Ricken I get, but Donnel?  He doesn't look that young.

Donnel I believe is younger than Lissa actually(who at the start of the game is roughly 14-15 and 16-17 after the timeskip) as shown in their supports though I could be wrong. Regardless I honestly don’t really care so much about being able to S-support those kinds of characters so long as it isn’t so obviously trying to pander to that “oniiii-chan!” Fetish. Like you can do that but just don’t shove it in my face constantly.  

Share this post


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

Nowi, Nah, and Ricken I get, but Donnel?  He doesn't look that young.

Donnel looks like he might be old enough to meet the Japanese age of consent. Not the western one for sure. But he does look significantly younger than most of the cast. 

 

Of course, I'm also not the best person to impartially judge Donnel because I realllllly dislike him. He's one of my top 5 most disliked characters in the entire franchise behind only Nowi, Meg, and Elise. 

Edited by Etheus

Share this post


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

(Oh, and no more allowing the player, or any other character, to marry characters that are clearly not physically and emotionally mature enough to morally marry. The mere existence of Nowi, Nah, Donnel, and Ricken in that context is abhorrent. Sorry, but I'm not sorry) 

Sending them out to war to die is okay though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, anikom15 said:

Sending them out to war to die is okay though.

Who actually lets characters stay dead in a Fire Emblem game?

Edited by Etheus

Share this post


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

The reverse is even worse. Echoes: Shadows of Valentia has a pretty solid story, but I barely forced myself through it once (and decided against playing the post game content entirely) because the game that story was attached to was boring, tedious, and shallow, despite some genuinely innovative mechanics that I hope to see return in a better designed game. 

Personally, I would've mentioned Genealogy of the Holy War - it's often praised for its story, but the gameplay, on the other hand... Yeesh. Simply put, it's a massive exercise in tedium that I would practically have to force myself to play through, which is a shame because it has some great music.

As for the questions, I don't really care if it has an avatar or not, and while I may not mind it, I'd prefer them to give marriage and children a break. As for story and gameplay, I'm more of a gameplay over story guy. I could ignore a bad story if the gameplay is good enough, but the reverse does not apply (case in point: the aforementioned Genealogy of the Holy War. It's just too boring and tedious).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:

Personally, I would've mentioned Genealogy of the Holy War - it's often praised for its story, but the gameplay, on the other hand... Yeesh. Simply put, it's a massive exercise in tedium that I would practically have to force myself to play through, which is a shame because it has some great music.

As for the questions, I don't really care if it has an avatar or not, and while I may not mind it, I'd prefer them to give marriage and children a break. As for story and gameplay, I'm more of a gameplay over story guy. I could ignore a bad story if the gameplay is good enough, but the reverse does not apply (case in point: the aforementioned Genealogy of the Holy War. It's just too boring and tedious).

I could have also mentioned Geneology, yes. But at least it was trying. At least it felt like an actual strategy game, as opposed to Gaiden maps looking and feeling like it was procedurally generated. Too ambitious and grandiose for its own good (to the detriment of the player experience), but an actual strategy game with actual maps. 

But really, both fit this, and whichever was worse is a matter of preference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll share my thoughts in each section.

Avatar

As much as I lack an ego and generally don't care much about myself, I do like having avatars.  I like being able to create an original character, as it feels like even if they're nothing like me they're still somewhat of an extension of me (moreso than a predetermined protagonist).  However, I think the avatar needs to take a backseat in the story; they should certainly feel like a part of the story, but that's all they should feel like.  I think making the avatar a lord or some other extremely plot important character is detrimental.  However, if they were merely an adviser, tactician, or general, they can have a part in the story without ruining it with the crap that Corrin brought to Fates.

Marriage and Children

This comes with a huge caveat; I would only really like it if it was handled like Genealogy's two-generation system.  I mean, the bonding method sucked - I much prefer getting S-supports over whatever the hell garbage marriage system Genealogy had - but the transition for Gen 1 to Gen 2 in that game was the best introduction to a 2nd generation the series has ever done.  That's not even an exaggeration; there's so much catharsis and general good feelings I got out of taking control of Seliph's army and destroying everything with him and the ridiculously OP kids of Ayra and Lex.

The option I picked is the top one.  It should not be middle of the road; that's what Fates did, and it was the worst iteration of children in the series because they just felt shoehorned in and merely an attachment to the game.  So it should be all or nothing; either give them plot significance, or don't include them at all.

Gameplay/Story

I've always been a guy who thinks these two should go hand-in-hand.  That's why I'm such a strong advocate for a support system; supports are a way of integrating storytelling into gameplay in a meaningful way.

That's the thing for me; telling a story through the gameplay.  Games like Call of Duty only do the bare minimum; they just feel like games with cinematics attached to them.  That's not telling the story through player interaction; that's just slapping a story gimmick onto a game.  And I hate this prevailing notion among a lot of gamers that it has to be one or the other.

There's always room to innovate and expand.  They don't need to get overly ambitious, but they ought to think long and hard about how the game will translate into entertainment for the players and how every aspect of the game makes the players feel.  Quite simply, the most I want from the game is just for it to be entertaining.  And I feel like directing this to you specifically, @Dinar87, since you're wanting to make a game; above all else, it should simply be entertaining, and you should try to put yourself in the player's shoes.  And you should get other opinions, so this topic is a step in the right direction.

2 hours ago, Etheus said:

Who actually lets characters stay dead in a Fire Emblem game?

People who do Iron Man runs.

2 hours ago, anikom15 said:

Sending them out to war to die is okay though.

That's how they felt in the Early Middle Ages.  Squires would often put their lives on the line - maybe not as much as knights, but still to the extent which would be deemed unacceptable by today's standards.  You wouldn't often find people like Roy in the army - young adolescent lords who lead entire armies to fight powerful kingdoms - but people like Donnel or Ricken taking to the battlefield to prove themselves to their lordships was fairly common.  In fact, Ricken's story is a very typical squire story, verging on the point of parody with how straight they play it.  All that's missing is Ricken polishing Chrom's armor and weapons and carrying his crap into battle.

Funny how children fighting in wars isn't even the darkest subject matter FE has covered regarding minors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'd like to throw in my opinion here. I started with awakening and I will say it's my personal favorite of the series. Fates was something I was incredibly excited for during the buildup. I was part of the Nowinstock tracker community that sprang up and even to this day am still part of two of the communities that split from that initial tracker. Anyways I was severely disappointed with Fates. I did manage to get through all three routes but I'm guessing I got burned out of fire emblem for a while. Anyways Nintendo switch happened blahblahblah Fire Emblem Warriors and Heroes happened (still play heroes daily though, every day since launch) and then Echoes. I really really enjoyed Echoes. Maybe it was the contrast of the past games that made me like it more than fates, but I have a theory if you'll bear with me. The reason I like Awakening and Echoes better than Fates is due to one thing. Heart. By that I mean the heart of the developers and the game itself. Let me explain. Awakening was originally intended to be the last of the series when it was being produced. The developers knew that and tried to incorporate as many elements from past games into this one as a final sendoff to the series. Well low and behold it paid off and was a smash hit. Next we have Fates. A game that was very much hyped up by everyone. However, the reasons I personally don't like Fates is that it's heart was wrong. By that I mean it tried to copy Awakening's success while still doing changes so it wouldn't get backlash over repeating content. Additionally I do feel that treehouse altering dialogue while mostly for appropriateness, I still feel that at that point they're just trying to make the game as accessible as possible so they get more sales. I fully understand that, but combined with near rehash of awakening but edited to make it seem different just made me feel they were just going after money. Disagree if you want that's just my opinion. Anyways, onto Echoes. So Echoes has less features than the previous two games, like a lot less. But I still find it enjoyable. The reason I think so is Echoes heart was set on being the best Gaiden remake it could possibly be. It took itself and the source material seriously and while had to make some changes, they felt like they fit and added to the experience for me. Echoes never tried to be anything else but itself, a great remake of Gaiden.

So as long as Three houses or any future game have heart I'll play them. Nah I'm kidding just make every fire emblem game exactly like radiant dawn that game was fun to play. Don't take this part seriously. Though the soldier line definitely needs more love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 & 2) I don't mind an Avatar in the game, but I'd rather they have less of an impact on the story. The last two we got were interesting from a gameplay standpoint, but they both got a lot of player worship. Maybe it's due to their huge role in the story. Maybe it's the whole "friendly bonds of friendly friendship" shtick that made everyone love them. I don't mind them being liked, just tone it down a bit. The closest to an ideal Avatar, imo, would be a mix of Kris and Robin
        - They could have starting class options, which could be explained as simply as 'trained to be x when they were young' or some generic backstory explanation
        - Supports. Royals, non-royals, different species and people from different places all over the FEverse have all had supports with each other in the past. They don't need to be a main character in order to support with everyone. That's how normal interactions work.
        - They don't need to have a major role in the story. I wouldn't be against it, but if they're going to gush all over the player again, then I don't want to see it. Have them make an impact, to make them feel needed, but not to the point that the fate of the world hinges solely on their survival and success

3) I enjoy both a good story and good gameplay, but I see it this way: The first playthrough of a game leaves quite the impression. It's your first experience. You don't know how it plays, but are eager to learn and to try things out. You don't know where the story will go next or the twists that lie ahead, but you eventually see it and you're mind will be blown, it'll knock your socks off and it'll blow your mindsocks away. This continues until the game ends. It's a pretty even experience on both sides. Then, maybe somewhere down the line, be it a few months, a few days or 5 seconds ago, you decide to play again. Playing involves active participation. It's something you have to think and react to in order to continue the game. Then, you start to read the story and begin to get excited, until you realize that you've seen this dialogue already. In fact, you've seen all the dialogue already (for the purpose of this explanation the story is assumed to be linear). There's nothing new. There are no surprises. Granted, some games have a level of writing that are emotionally gripping on every playthrough, but I don't expect it with every game. If I wanted to re-experience a game with great gameplay, but a bad or otherwise uninteresting story, a story is easy to skip past or ignore in order to get right back to the action. If I wanted to re-experience a game with an amazing story, but bad or boring gameplay, I'd still have to trudge through that slog. At that point, I'd prefer watching someone else play it. That way I could enjoy the story while getting to see someone else's reactions and particular gameplay style. I play games to play the game, but if a story happens to be interesting to some degree, than I simply see it as an enjoyable added bonus.

Edited by Kurrin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not fond of the avatar and id prefer they not be there but of what we know so far it seems very likely they will be there, so all i ask for is that they stay in the fucking background and not detract from the main characters arc or growth like some fuckers i could mention, like robin.

im not fond of the marriage system either personally, since atleast in awakening and fates it basically meant locking half of your recruitable characters behind a grinding wall and just wasting so much god damn space with gaiden chapters that were 50% boring and 50% annoying (seriously, all of those paralouges could have, and should have, gone to chapters in the main stories, or atleast the resources used to make them should have). if its done in a similar fashion to geanology though id be up for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started with Fates and my next game was Awakening. I love avatars.

I have also played Blazing Blade, Shadows of Valentia, and am currently playing Path of Radiance, so I realize they aren't needed.

I have also seen a lot of opinions on avatars that made me notice their flaws.

Avatars still have grown on me, but I do feel that they might limit story telling as well as the Avatar's character in a bad way if done wrong.

I want an avatar to return, but either fit more into Robin's role as a supporting character at most (the whole Grima aspect being overlooked) or at the least a custom unit with minor to no impact on the story.

If an avatar returns,  I want his or her support conversations to resemble Persona Social links in that he or she will have dialogue options that the conversation partner will respond to accordingly. I'd be fine with this limiting supports, that is as long as marriage is not in the game. (People would be upset not being able to romance their waifus and all, lol). I didn't mind Fates and Awakening's kids, although the latter definitely failed to make sense from a story perspective and definitely made the first generation look like bad parents. That being said, selective "breeding" added complexity to the game that wasn't necessary IMO in hindsight, lol.

For me story and gameplay are two parallel tracks for a game. I love lore. I also love gameplay. If the gameplay is atrocious, however, the story might not be enough to motivate me to keep playing. (I guess they really aren't that parallel since the gameplay can impede story progression. Regardless.)

Edited by Arcphoenix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.)TBH I like designing my own character. I don't see them as a necessity for FE though. However, I voted yes to keep them if there's less pandering to them. I don't care for player pandering, mainly because it makes the avatar a Mary Sue. Corrin is the worst case for this, but that's not the focus of this topic. I do think, with the right amount of attention and writing, the avatar CAN work well with FE. I think Byleth is an avatar, so I hope their integration (or lack of) in the story is good.

2.)I'm OK with Marriage. Romantic Love has always been a part of Fire Emblem, and has been a major plot point a few titles (Mystery, Genealogy, Blazing Blade). I do think marriage should be reserved for the endings like the GBA games though. It's weird for soldiers to get hitched in the middle of a war camp.

3.)Both are important. A story could be great, but the gameplay is so slugglish or unfun that you lose motivation to listen to the story. And vice-versa; the gameplay can be great, but story is so garbage that it only makes you wonder why the characters are doing what they doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to Avatars,

Please Dear Lord and Sweet Baby Jesus, no!

In regards to Marriage/Children,

Eh, I'm kinda 50/50 on this one. Marriage itself isn't necessarily bad, I just think it's mishandled. I think it should be limited to a few supports if you ask me. The child units, on the other hand, have got to go.

In regards to Story and Gameplay,

I think both are equally important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woah...so I've just checked back on this poll I made..."54 members have voted" 0.o that's a lot!

I personally think that there needs to be a balance between what fans of the older games want, and what fans of the newer games like. I don't think we can just ignore one or the other.

Anyways, I'm also glad that you guys have given me helpful feedback on what you value in games, as now I realise my game can't be lacking in either gameplay or story since both are quite important for you all. Sure it's harder to develop, but it's not like it wouldn't be appreciated having both of them instead of just one.

I also realise that game's should be about a balance of various different elements, as having a game where if only the story or gameplay is good, then it's a death sentence for actually wanting to pick up, play and enjoy any game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/27/2018 at 12:33 PM, Etheus said:

Who actually lets characters stay dead in a Fire Emblem game?

I do. It saves a lot of time, especially on the first playthrough.

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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...