Jump to content
Zihark11

Will Genealogy of the Holy War be the next remake?

Will Genealogy of the holy war be the next remake?  

60 members have voted

  1. 1. Will Genealogy of the holy war be the next remake?



Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Acacia Sgt said:

It was the first time being done. You don't always nail it at first try. Had the mechanic been reused, it would've been refined. Fire Emblem has done this many times before. Trading used to be a "Give" command where you could only pass items, not do actual trading. Thus, needing to waste both units turn to do proper trade. Now? Item trading can be done outright, not just giving items. To give another example, Awakening introduced Pair-Up to the series. Then later you had people mostly commenting that Fates improved Pair-Up. Same principle can apply here. Remake or not, if individual coffers are used again, then the mechanic will be refined, as it was done for many other Fire Emblem mechanics. I can easily see the restrictions being lifted. So instead of just lovers exchanging money with each other and thieves only giving it to anyone, for money to also be something that can be traded freely.

And yet it has never ever shown up again since. That's pretty damn telling, if you ask me. Now, it could be refined if it gets remade, but that ain't something I'm counting on since previous remakes showed IS would rather be faithful to a fault.

1 hour ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Well, not everybody is you. Plenty of people would play it again, just like how there'd be people that wouldn't. So for those that will play it again, it's not a problem past the first playthrough.

Perhaps, but even some people that like it admitted that it's among the worst games gameplay wise (or at the least, very polarizing).

1 hour ago, Acacia Sgt said:

This is once again experimentation. Genealogy was the first game that implemented a points system to supporting. Only Mystery of the Emblem had Bond supports before it, but Genealogy was the first to add the points gaining. Then later Binding Blade added support levels, and so on. A remake is going to modernize it. Just like how Shadows of Valentia added supports and support levels, which weren't in the original game, so can a Genealogy remake do the same to make the system easier to handle.

Fair enough, I guess. 

1 hour ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Well, that's something more on you. I've seen your posts. While you do bring up valid points at times, and others are just opinions, you sometimes go borderline irrational on the game; and at IS's hypothetical handling of it. I hope I'm just wrong; but you sometimes give the impression as if the game had personally done something to offend you. Which gets more mind boggling since you've stated you haven't even played it at all. Oh well, that's how it is.

I know I'm hardly the only one who thinks this, but IS has done nothing to inspire any confidence that they won't screw it up. This is the same IS that took a minimalist approach with Shadow Dragon despite the fact that that was the exact opposite of what the game needed to be relevant.

Share this post


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

And yet it has never ever shown up again since. That's pretty damn telling, if you ask me. Now, it could be refined if it gets remade, but that ain't something I'm counting on since previous remakes showed IS would rather be faithful to a fault.

Perhaps, but even some people that like it admitted that it's among the worst games gameplay wise (or at the least, very polarizing).

Fair enough, I guess. 

I know I'm hardly the only one who thinks this, but IS has done nothing to inspire any confidence that they won't screw it up. This is the same IS that took a minimalist approach with Shadow Dragon despite the fact that that was the exact opposite of what the game needed to be relevant.

Not really. Mechanics come and go. There can be many reasons. Take for example: Fatigue for a long time spent being a single-game mechanic, until Shadows of Valentia brought it back. Which, as a side-thought, shows IS doesn't keep remakes "faithful to a fault". There was no Fatigue in Gaiden, after all. Also, it's also an example of a mechanic being refined. As SoV's Fatigue is much more different from Thracia776's.

Perhaps in some aspects. Though I haven't seen inheritance being one of them.

Remakes themselves are also a thing to refine. Don't stay in the past with Shadow Dragon. IS has done two remakes after Shadow Dragon. Look more Shadows of Valentia, being the latest remake, and see how the approach to remakes has changed from Shadow Dragon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7-4-2019 at 7:23 PM, Shadow Mir said:

I said "all but" invalidated. Foot units might be able to get some use here and there. And Balmung is a sword, aka one of the best weapon types in the game. The speed boost, I already mentioned, but still, most other holy weapons that boost speed tend to be heavy enough that most, if not all, of the speed boost is cancelled out. Besides that, it's still a 30 might beatstick. As for other games having broken weapons, that's true, but how many of THOSE weapons give out insane stat boosts or have a disproportionate amount of might? The most I've seen a weapon have in terms of might in other games is in the 20s, and most weapons with might that high either tend to have downsides, are not relevant for very long, or both. To put things into perspective:

  • Aurgelmir in Fates halves your Strength until you attack again, and it's locked to Berserkers. In Conquest, you don't get it until endgame is around the corner too.
  • The Pursuer in the same game has massive defense drops and makes it easier for you to get double attacked; it's also locked to Snipers. Its availability isn't much better than Aurgelmir's in Conquest, even in Revelation.
  • The Dragonstone+ lowers your stats after attacking, and can't follow up.
  • The Hauteclere in Awakening requires you to do Double Duel OR go through a DLC map and get it from a randomized chest. In New Mystery, it comes with Minerva. Valflame is dropped by a lategame enemy.
  • Wishblade, Urvan and the Double Bow in Radiant Dawn all aren't available until endgame. The Vague Katti isn't much better off, requiring you to find Stefan.
  • The Renais twins' personal Sacred Twins aren't gotten until the last quarter of Sacred Stones. Garm isn't much better off. Gleipnir and Naglfar are heavy to the point of being unusable.
  • Durandal in Blazing Blade is mega-heavy to the point it's not worth using. Ditto for Gespenst. These, along with the Morph weapons, of which 5, Gespenst included, have 20 or more might, are only usable in endgame.
  • Apocalypse isn't as heavy as the other two S rank dark tomes, but it's still noticeably heavy. Durandal comes early, though you won't be able to use it until promotion.
  • Aura in Mystery is Linde only, and of the Three Regalia, only one of those comes early enough that you could use it for a good deal of the game.

Balmung doesn't offer anything that you can't get through other means and doesn't fix the issues that Shannan has. Broken weapons are weapons that either invalidate all other options or can achieve something no other weapon can (fe13 Nosferatu, Wing Spear, Rajinto and Siegfried come to mind). The only thing Balmung offers is great 1 range combat on a foot unit in a game that just as well be named Horse Emblem Genealogy of the Horse War (and Dew I guess), low enemy quality (with some exceptions), seize obectives for a mounted lord and more then enough mounted units with good combat. If Balmung was available in fe6 or fe12 then yes, it would be broken but in fe4 it simply isn't. Also Balmung is also exclusive to one unit unless you looked up a guide to use a glitch.

 

23 hours ago, Flere210 said:

Second. They remade fucking Gaiden, a game that is far, far less popular than genealogy, instead of skipping it for Elibe or Jugdral itself. Sure  there are some challenges in adapting certain mechanics, but i don't see them just plain ignore the Snes era, expecially now that dark fantasy is more popular than ever (i can see "this game has the Red Wedding 2.0 as a selling point).

1. Gaiden has way less fans so changing things would be way less contraversial.

2. Most of the problem that Gaiden have come from the fact that it's made for the Famicom. The problems that most people have with fe4 are intentionally there so fixing them would mean changing the game. Fixing Gaidens issues is just making the game faster, more appealing to look at and adding something to the story.

3. fe15 still has many issues that gaiden has so if they remade fe4 it will most likely have many of the same issues that people currently complain about. Only would there also be complaining from the Fe4 fans because...

4. IS can't write good stories. The last game with a good story was fe9 and that story seriously dragged at the end (also, I liked fe15's story, but that story had serious flaws that I can't overlook so couldn't call the story good).

5. Fe4 isn't Dark fantasy. It's a combination between Scandinavian folklore (mainly the Volsunga Saga) and Anime. Yes it's more mature then standard Fire Emblem (which means nothing) but it is about as mature as a Final Fantasy game, and last time I checked, people didn't call Final Fantasy Dark Fantasy (although that does sound really cool).

Edited by LJwalhout

Share this post


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

Remakes themselves are also a thing to refine. Don't stay in the past with Shadow Dragon. IS has done two remakes after Shadow Dragon. Look more Shadows of Valentia, being the latest remake, and see how the approach to remakes has changed from Shadow Dragon.

Now you're playing the "look at this thing that makes them look good, not this thing that makes them look bad!" card... which is honestly more desperate than anything else. Also, even that had some stuff that should have been fixed or changed stay intact. I do not consider that encouraging, since it means that odds are a FE4 remake will retain most of the issues people complain about currently.

Share this post


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

Now you're playing the "look at this thing that makes them look good, not this thing that makes them look bad!" card... which is honestly more desperate than anything else. Also, even that had some stuff that should have been fixed or changed stay intact. I do not consider that encouraging, since it means that odds are a FE4 remake will retain most of the issues people complain about currently.

What card? Sounds more like you're the one desperate to deflect accepting that one can make better a process or product. You don't complain about the faults of the v2 of a product when there's already a v6 on the market. At least, if you think that v7 will replicate the process the v2, instead of improving what led to the v6, but it's less likely than v7 simply being better than v6. You can't hold them to the standards of Shadow Dragon when their remake process has changed for New Mystery, then for Shadows of Valentia.

You can complain that they're not advancing at the pace you'd want, or that they still have to improve.

It's fine, though. Remain pessimist about it. It's also an option.

Edited by Acacia Sgt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 3:40 PM, Shadow Mir said:

First off, it's a 20 speed, 30 might weapon. If that alone doesn't scream "I'm OP as fuck" to you, what DOES??? Second, while it might be overkill for doubling purposes, it still renders you practically invincible (though that, admittedly, can backfire since enemies won't attack if they have a 0% chance to hit you).

I'm pretty sure I said this before, but most Fire Emblem games have weapons that are strictly just better, that's the way they seem to want it, so that's how it is.

 

20 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

I wouldn't quite say this.

They would have to change up Shannan and Patty near Yied if they nerfed the +20 Spd of Balmung. Already, Shannan has a ~20% chance of being hit in a 1 RN system (which I think they would preserve), which when he has to survive so many chances of getting hit, he can only kill the Loptyrians at one per turn, is a bit risky. Lower his evade, and then either Yied becomes a lot risker, or it becomes much harder to get to Yied before, since Shannan is looking at being ORKO'ed. And if you don't send him to kill the boss, there is a chance he'll find his Fenrir and now you'll have another little threat to kill.

I agree with this. It wouldn't be very fair to the player otherwise. If an issue with the game is purely balance, then you could complain about almost any game, nothing is perfectly balanced, expecting otherwise is just silly. That's why there are "good characters" and "bad characters" in every FE game. Killing the players fun options just makes the game linear and boring, to me. There isn't anything wrong with them designing it around that, honestly. Sure, you can say, "oh it makes it too easy!" But they also have to consider not everyone is a tactical genius.  Mistakes can be made, and in this specific situation, a lot is taken out of your control.

Edited by lightcosmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to put an outside bet and say FE9+10 for the next remake, but it would be more of a port with fairly minimal changes. Something like better graphics (14+'s battle areas matching where on the map the fighting is and better battle models for 9), 10's skill system in 9, an extra Dawn Brigade chapter in part 1 and part 3 so their XP curve works, buffs/nerfs in 10, and support conversations for special partners in FE10.

Edited by deuxhero

Share this post


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

What card? Sounds more like you're the one desperate to deflect accepting that one can make better a process or product. You don't complain about the faults of the v2 of a product when there's already a v6 on the market. At least, if you think that v7 will replicate the process the v2, instead of improving what led to the v6, but it's less likely than v7 simply being better than v6. You can't hold them to the standards of Shadow Dragon when their remake process has changed for New Mystery, then for Shadows of Valentia.

You can complain that they're not advancing at the pace you'd want, or that they still have to improve.

It's fine, though. Remain pessimist about it. It's also an option.

It's called "being realistic". The "v2" in this case was way behind the times - you can't just expect me to go "all is forgiven" just because they made two better remakes, especially since one of those wound up being Japan only. I do not consider that very logical at all.

Share this post


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

It's called "being realistic". The "v2" in this case was way behind the times - you can't just expect me to go "all is forgiven" just because they made two better remakes, especially since one of those wound up being Japan only. I do not consider that very logical at all.

There is a difference between "Idealistic Realism" and "Pessimistic Realism". I personally lean to the former. I keep myself grounded in reality but with a dose of optimism. It's okay if you're afraid they might take a leap backwards after taking a few steps forward. That chance is never zero. I just think it's not really that healthy to be so fixated on the worst-case scenario. Downgrading to SD-quality remake after SoV-quality remake just isn't logical either. You can hope for further improvement, or expect that they won't make a step forward big enough to satisfy you, but expecting them to roll back at the drop of a hat isn't realistic.

Edited by Acacia Sgt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect a binding blade remake next, simply due to Roy's popularity and to get the elibe story fully available in the US. It would make the most logical sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LJwalhout said:

1. Gaiden has way less fans so changing things would be way less contraversial.

2. Most of the problem that Gaiden have come from the fact that it's made for the Famicom. The problems that most people have with fe4 are intentionally there so fixing them would mean changing the game. Fixing Gaidens issues is just making the game faster, more appealing to look at and adding something to the story.

3. fe15 still has many issues that gaiden has so if they remade fe4 it will most likely have many of the same issues that people currently complain about. Only would there also be complaining from the Fe4 fans because...

4. IS can't write good stories. The last game with a good story was fe9 and that story seriously dragged at the end (also, I liked fe15's story, but that story had serious flaws that I can't overlook so couldn't call the story good).

5. Fe4 isn't Dark fantasy. It's a combination between Scandinavian folklore (mainly the Volsunga Saga) and Anime. Yes it's more mature then standard Fire Emblem (which means nothing) but it is about as mature as a Final Fantasy game, and last time I checked, people didn't call Final Fantasy Dark Fantasy (although that does sound really cool).

1) Based on this argument, Genealogy has less fans than Binding Blade. It's not guaranteed that a FE4 remake would change more than an FE6 remake, so FE6 changes would be equally controversial. For example the turnwheel is almost guaranteed in both remakes imo, and it would  be significantly less controversial in genealogy because you already can save every turn, and thus, savescum out of bad rng and mistakes.

2) Imo Gaiden problems comes from being the Fire Emblem version of Adventure of Link, but to each their own i guess.

3-4) This is just too pessimistic. And FE6 has it own slew of problems(hitrates, gaiden chapters,  Roy promotion and so on). Do you think that they will make a mess out of FE4 but they can do justice to FE6? Imo they are going to either nail both or fail both.

5) personally i'd call certain FF dark fantasy, such as 6 or Tactics. And no FF game has the protagonist getting killed in a completely unheroic way and not coming back iirc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the games run speed really that much of an issue? The gba FEs aren't much better at all, really. In a remake,  wouldn't they add quality of life changes like the skip turn function? Things like auto-play to get you from one destination to the other, and so forth. I personally don't think it's that bad, but I could see this make it a lot less annoying for players who like it more "fast paced".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Flere210 said:

1) Based on this argument, Genealogy has less fans than Binding Blade. It's not guaranteed that a FE4 remake would change more than an FE6 remake, so FE6 changes would be equally controversial. For example the turnwheel is almost guaranteed in both remakes imo, and it would  be significantly less controversial in genealogy because you already can save every turn, and thus, savescum out of bad rng and mistakes.

2) Imo Gaiden problems comes from being the Fire Emblem version of Adventure of Link, but to each their own i guess.

3-4) This is just too pessimistic. And FE6 has it own slew of problems(hitrates, gaiden chapters,  Roy promotion and so on). Do you think that they will make a mess out of FE4 but they can do justice to FE6? Imo they are going to either nail both or fail both.

5) personally i'd call certain FF dark fantasy, such as 6 or Tactics. And no FF game has the protagonist getting killed in a completely unheroic way and not coming back iirc.

1. Fe6's mechanics are a lot more similar to modern Fire Emblem and the game is way less contraversial. While there are things people disagree on, these disagreements aren't as big as the ones that people have over Fe4's mechanic. In point 3-4 you brought up problems that Fe6 has and these problems are widely agreed on (although I personally disagree with Gaiden chapters but that's just my opinion and not a popular one) and most people think that they need to be fixed. Most problems that people complain about in Fe4 are things not everyone agrees with and even if they agree, there are so many different opinions on how they should be fixed (like the giant maps. Some people want to cut the huge chapters in smaller chapters but there also people who strongly disagree with this opinion and just think that the maps should become more interesting). I agree with the fact that fe6 has more fans and if they made enormous changes those fans would be pissed, but most of the problems that people have with fe6 aren't things that people who like the game enjoy about it (except for seize objectives maybe).

2. Yeah, could also be the case (does that make fe4 the Majora's mask of Fire Emblem?)

3-4. Maybe I'm a bit pessimistic. It's just that I can't see IS making a good Fire Emblem Genealogy of the Holy War remake due to the fact that I haven't seen them showcase abilities that are needed to do such thing which is; Fixing problems that the original game has and writing a good story. I already elaborated on why I think that remaking fe6 is a better move (bigger demand and the fact that many of the problems that fe6 has are widely agreed on and often aren't things that other people like) so I won't repeat myself. 

5. Before I respond to this, I think it's important to define what Dark Fantasy is and the fact is that the term is very vague. Some people use it as a term for fantasy stories that use Horror elements and you used to describe it as Fantasy with adult themes since you used Game of Thrones as a example so I will simple assume you mean the latter. I think that we simply have to disagree on this point. While yes, Fe4 does have some mature moments, it also has many elements that you would never see in Game of Thrones or even Dune. It isn't the question who is right, it's more about on what part of the story do you focus the most and while I really like the fact that the story tries to be more mature and takes many elements from mature stories, It still to many silly things to make it feel like a mature fantasy story (This opinion I also share about Final Fantasy, Yes the games are mature at times but they also have many silly moments which makes the overall mood a bit more laid back). This isn't always a bad thing by the way as long as it's consistent which fe4 mostly is.

I also now realize what a bad idea it was to number my arguments since it looks like the arguments are separate from each other even though they're linked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Flere210 said:

5

 

8 hours ago, LJwalhout said:

5

You two are talking about Final Fantasy in number 5 but not FFV?? Blasphemous, also FFV isn't dark fantasy, by a longshot so would you call it a black sheep or something? No that wouldn't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

There is a difference between "Idealistic Realism" and "Pessimistic Realism". I personally lean to the former. I keep myself grounded in reality but with a dose of optimism. It's okay if you're afraid they might take a leap backwards after taking a few steps forward. That chance is never zero. I just think it's not really that healthy to be so fixated on the worst-case scenario. Downgrading to SD-quality remake after SoV-quality remake just isn't logical either. You can hope for further improvement, or expect that they won't make a step forward big enough to satisfy you, but expecting them to roll back at the drop of a hat isn't realistic.

Well, as I see it, IS has yet to demonstrate that they could possibly make a good FE4 remake because they have not demonstrated they have the abilities they need to be able to do so (primarily fixing problems the original game has). It doesn't help matters that the issues that people have with FE4 mostly are not things everyone agrees on, and even the problems that everyone agrees are in fact issues tend to have differing opinions on what should be done to fix them, meaning it's pretty much guaranteed that one side will end up disappointed.

Edited by Shadow Mir

Share this post


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

Well, as I see it, IS has yet to demonstrate that they could possibly make a good FE4 remake because they have not demonstrated they have the abilities they need to be able to do so (primarily fixing problems the original game has). It doesn't help matters that the issues that people have with FE4 mostly are not things everyone agrees on, and even the problems that everyone agrees are in fact issues tend to have differing opinions on what should be done to fix them, meaning it's pretty much guaranteed that one side will end up disappointed.

That always happens. It's rare to have an 100% approval rating. At this point it's more on us, the fans, to accept someone will be disappointed in the end. Whether or not we lash on the creators for favoring someone else over ourselves is up to, well, us. As much it's on the developers to find a way to satisfy as much fans as possible. It's a two-way street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, This boi uses Nino said:

You two are talking about Final Fantasy in number 5 but not FFV?? Blasphemous, also FFV isn't dark fantasy, by a longshot so would you call it a black sheep or something? No that wouldn't make sense.

Maybe because I haven't played FFV. And no I wouldn't call FFV a black sheep (FFII fullfills that role) because while the game is a bit more silly then standard FF from what I've seen, it isn't disliked or ignored by most FF fans (at least as for as I know because tbh I'm not very active in the FF-fanbase).

11 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

Well, as I see it, IS has yet to demonstrate that they could possibly make a good FE4 remake because they have not demonstrated they have the abilities they need to be able to do so (primarily fixing problems the original game has). It doesn't help matters that the issues that people have with FE4 mostly are not things everyone agrees on, and even the problems that everyone agrees are in fact issues tend to have differing opinions on what should be done to fix them, meaning it's pretty much guaranteed that one side will end up disappointed.

It's almost hilarious how much we agree on the subject of a Fe4 remake despite how different our opinion is on Fe4.

11 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

That always happens. It's rare to have an 100% approval rating. At this point it's more on us, the fans, to accept someone will be disappointed in the end. Whether or not we lash on the creators for favoring someone else over ourselves is up to, well, us. As much it's on the developers to find a way to satisfy as much fans as possible. It's a two-way street.

The fact that the divide is so big is the main reason I think Fe4 won't be the next remake. Remaking fe6, fe9 or fe10 is a way smaller risk because while you also can't please everyone, there is way more common-ground among most people. As someone who doesn't like fe9 I think that most things that I would add wouldn't be to contraversial when the game gets remade (quicker animations, being able to skip enemy phase and adding a hard mode that is actually hard in a fair way).  The thing is with those games that while yes, there are different opinions on the game and how it has to be remade, both sides often have something they agree on or at least acknowledge it. The only part I see people agree on with Fe4 is the story and even that is up for debate.

The reason I don't find it likely that they will remake Fe4 is based on my observations and then try to look from the perspective of IS, and look if it remaking Fe4 would be profitable. And based on my observation I don't consider remaking FE4 a good move from a financial perspective. Because whether you like it or not, IS wants to make money and remaking a game that is super polarizing doesn't seem like a smart move from a business perspective.

Edited by LJwalhout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this was posted on Saturday but:
 

On 4/6/2019 at 4:33 AM, Interdimensional Observer said:

Genealogy's movement issues is an issue for me. It didn't stop me from finishing the game, but it does make a 2nd playthrough of Genealogy seem a bit difficult.

Movement issue is definitely a problem, but in the end it also depends on your playstyle. You're not obligated to only use mounted units, nor are you obligated to use only footies.

 

On 4/6/2019 at 4:33 AM, Interdimensional Observer said:

but I feel FE3 Book 1 was also made without that much heart put into it, compared to Book 2.

to be fair snes constraints forced them to shorten Book 1.  But I agree that Book 2 is pretty much the main game.

 

On 4/6/2019 at 1:08 PM, Shadow Mir said:

Also, the big maps just do not work in a series like this, where all it takes is one mistake or bad RNG to permanently lose a unit.

To be fair you can save each turn in FE4 (granted you don't move a unit first).

 

On 4/6/2019 at 7:03 PM, Shadow Mir said:

And speaking of weapons, there's the holy weapons, which practically vault their users into Game Breaker territory, ESPECIALLY Balmung and Forseti, because +20 to the most important stat in the game is clearly fair and balanced.

I guess there's a chance to nerf those stat boosts in a remake, the same way starsphere shards were nerfed into giving 2+ stat boosts instead of growth boosts. 

 

On 4/8/2019 at 10:17 PM, Shadow Mir said:

And yet it has never ever shown up again since. That's pretty damn telling, if you ask me.

Yet something like fatigue that only appeared in FE5 returned several games later in FE Shadows of Valentia. But I'll admit, its unlikely for certain mechanics to reappear if they've been gone for so long. But I don't think its impossible.

 

-------------------------

 

Right, what do I think is the next remake. I'd like to say FE4, but I feel FE6 is more likely. Mainly because Roy seems popular enough in the fandom so a FE6 remake would likely sell more.

Then again, Gaiden got remade and that was fairly not well known. So who knows, FE4 may be the next remake.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think FE6 remake is going to be next. Roy is well known thanks to Smash and FE6 is an easy enough game to remake with a new coat of paint and simple touch ups as its relatively simple gameplay wise. Its also not all too complicated story wise, and with some added pieces it stands on its own quite well. Itd be a very safe option for a remake, and one that would be welcomed by many I would feel.

 

Genealogy on the other hand is a can of worms. Its very popular in Japan, but almost nonexistent in the West outside of the diehard community such as us, which quite frankly doesnt speak for most of the buyers.

This isnt inherently a bad thing at all, but Roy does have Smash recognition going for him. Jugdral does not.

There is also gameplay hurdles. Genealogy gameplay wise is very...rough to say the least. Its got a unique idea, but compared to current FE I would go so far as to say its even more out there than Gaiden/SoV. Gaiden at least was familiar in its look with a more medium sized map set up, a class changing system, routes, etc. Genealogy on the other hand is far more linear and restrictive imo. There's only about 12 chapters, because each chapter is about like 4 normal FE chapters in size. Which makes them have an epic feel to them, but it also makes them take a long ass time to complete. One that isnt exactly as easy as doing a quick map in any other FE in about 30 minutes to an hour and moving on. You'll take an hour on the tutorial map alone for a first playthrough.

There's also a lot of QoL features that just do not exist. Trading is gone, gold is an absolute mess, Quite frankly the entire preparation set up is a bit confusing and weird to anyone first walking into the game. Its really an odd title.

There's also the very clear balance issues with the game, considering its a very cavalry dependent game even moreso than any future FE title. And in general the way you tackle Genealogy isnt like any other FE. Its a very different title. So either that has to be put at the forefront that its a weirder title gameplay wise, completely separate from the rest of the series, or it gets some major changes. Both could work, but its something that would take time and effort to do. And isnt as simple as just grabbing FE6, and remaking it.

As far as gameplay touch ups go that they'd have to do, QoL features would be at the forefront. Everything I mentioned earlier are things that would have to be addressed. Trading, gold, preparation screen. There is also the inclusion of stuff like supports that would need to be considered, a facelift on the pairing system, if Mila's Turnwheel is going to be a series norm, how do we fit it in here, New character additions or redesigns/reworking certain characters is also a factor. The differences between Gaiden and SoV character wise is massive, just look at how much Boey changed over time. Its not like each and every character is going to just get picked up and placed in the game as is, there would be some touch ups for sure.

Story wise its mostly fine, though with the addition of things like potential memories like what was in SoV, supports, and fleshing out the game's story in general it wouldnt be simple either. Keep in mind this was a SNES title, it was much more limited in its capabilities, even bringing it to an SoV level would take a lot of work.

Genealogy's remake is a much larger undertaking than what BB is, or even any other title in the series. Id even say Thracia is an easier title to remake over Genealogy. That doesnt mean its really impossible, but it requires more work than the rest.

The one thing I will say is this though, the focus on added troops and what seems to be a troop system ala Langrisser that is being added to Three Houses, makes me wonder if Genealogy is being looked at as Langrisser is the one title I have always seen as most comparable to Genealogy in terms of what it was trying to do, replicate large scale battles. Langrisser doesnt have as large of maps, but it recreates large scale battles better than Genealogy could in some ways considering each character is surrounded by several squads of troops. You really do control an army in those titles, not just a group of adventurers. And including somekind of troop based system in Genealogy would go a long way to spice up its gameplay and potentially start balancing out the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

The one thing I will say is this though, the focus on added troops and what seems to be a troop system ala Langrisser that is being added to Three Houses, makes me wonder if Genealogy is being looked at as Langrisser is the one title I have always seen as most comparable to Genealogy in terms of what it was trying to do, replicate large scale battles. Langrisser doesnt have as large of maps, but it recreates large scale battles better than Genealogy could in some ways considering each character is surrounded by several squads of troops. You really do control an army in those titles, not just a group of adventurers. And including somekind of troop based system in Genealogy would go a long way to spice up its gameplay and potentially start balancing out the game.

Actually...

One radical idea was for the battle system to incorporate squad-based gameplay. Instead of moving single units on the map, like in typical Fire Emblem games, players would move units in squads of ten. This has direct parallels to the Wars series (also developed by Intelligent Systems), which features 10-men squads.

...taken from Making of Fire Emblem, Genealogy of the Holy War section. This idea was probably back when Genealogy wasn't going to be called Fire Emblem, rather it would be Holy Sword Elm Kaiser, wholly apart from the FE series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LJwalhout said:

Maybe because I haven't played FFV. And no I wouldn't call FFV a black sheep (FFII fullfills that role) because while the game is a bit more silly then standard FF from what I've seen, it isn't disliked or ignored by most FF fans (at least as for as I know because tbh I'm not very active in the FF-fanbase).

Going by the dark fantasy logic, FFII might as well be the true standard of them all! Even then the FF community said FFII and XIII are the closest to a black sheep and then VIII is above them a bit and then there's the main series.

Oh and yeah FFV is a bit more silly and I love it! Right now it is my favorite FF although to be fair I haven't played many. But I really love the job system, it's super cool! Once you play it I reccomend getting Blue Mage ASAP on anyone. The monster skills here are pretty cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this supposed to be a discussion about which game we think will be remade?  We can save the nonsense drivel about how the remake of FE4 would be done if it is actually confirmed.  

Few things, you can save every turn so the length of chapters is a complete non issue.  In fact one can play in much shorter spurts than most of the rest of the series.  I like how Shadow Mir is in every FE4 topic ever, calling everything about the game trash that is horrible design.  I also love how his opinions are stated as indisputable truths, on a game apparently he's never played.  Lol, just lol.  I don't know if it is just trolling, but seems like it.  Don't fall for it.

 

Edited by Lewyn

Share this post


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

I like how Shadow Mir is in every FE4 topic ever, calling everything about the game trash that is horrible design.  I also love how his opinions are stated as indisputable truths, on a game apparently he's never played.  Lol, just lol.  I don't know if it is just trolling, but seems like it.  Don't fall for it.

 

It's called having an opinion, and if you don't like it, tough luck. It's not my fault I find Genealogy hard to play. Anyway, IMO, Binding Blade would be a much easier - and safer - game to remake, since it's already pretty similar to modern FE games, and unlike is the case with Genealogy, people are actually in agreement on what would need fixing.

Edited by Shadow Mir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have to say FE6 too, by virtue of Roy being in Smash and Elibe already being well-known due to a Western release in the form of FE7. FE4-5 might come after that.

The long-winded maps for 4 can be addressed with Canto-compatible checkpoints, and maybe extra events involving battles etc. As for trading and the Pawn Shop, we could just simply abolish those - considering they were only in 4 and are clearly fake difficulty material - and adopt the current item trade/storage we have now.

Not sure what to do with the movement balance - though I think or maybe close the movement value gap between mounted and otherwise. And maybe nerf the horse units so that both you and the enemy have to use foot units for the actual fights. As for the bandits, maybe make them start at a further point from the villages.

The basic story should not change, I think, but some extra backstory/conversation material may be in order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

It's called having an opinion, and if you don't like it, tough luck. It's not my fault I find Genealogy hard to play. Anyway, IMO, Binding Blade would be a much easier - and safer - game to remake, since it's already pretty similar to modern FE games, and unlike is the case with Genealogy, people are actually in agreement on what would need fixing.

It's called having an uninformed opinion, which is worthless.  

Binding blade is easier and more similar to modern games, but that also works against it.  Gaiden might be the least popular FE of all time, or up there with Thracia, and is certainly one of the most obscure titles.  In the west most people weren't even aware of it.  However they chose that game likely cause of its differences from the rest of the series.  They could advertise, oh bows and magic work differently, it has 2 protagonists with 2 different routes.  It is a different Fire Emblem experience and thus worth your time.  

With promoting Binding blade, if the remake came like 10 years earlier they could really bank on most of the FE fanbase having played FE7.  There are quite a few characters that appear in both games.  At this point most modern FE fans haven't played FE7 so that connection isn't there so much.  Roy has that cross market appeal, and that would basically be all they could sell the game on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...