Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Von Ithipathachai

Chaz's 5 Reasons Not to Play FE4 (and my reactions to them)

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

Saying it's the worst doesnt excuse the rest at all. That's just trying to justify that they're poorly designed as well. Do people really think SOV's knights are good compared to dread fighters? I dont. Broken prfs... have you played Thracia? It's got tons of em. Uses doesnt matter I. The silver weapon argument, since what you said was "Sigurd gets a silver sword in the prolouge", which Seth does as well.

I could just as easily ask if people really think that Binding Blade's axe users, which you yourself brought up, are good compared to just about any other class besides armors (I'm exempting armors because this game is one of the worst for them). Personally, I don't think they're good. And no, I haven't played Thracia, nor do I plan to. The silver weapon argument is fair, I suppose.

Edited by Shadow Mir

Share this post


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

I could just as easily ask if people really think that Binding Blade's axe users, which you yourself brought up, are good compared to just about any other class besides armors (I'm exempting armors because this game is one of the worst for them). Personally, I don't think they're good. And no, I haven't played Thracia, nor do I plan to. The silver weapon argument is fair, I suppose.

I don't think people would say Ward is as good as Rutger, not even close to as good. But anyway, the site has weapon stats, look them up, they're pretty broken. FE4 has it's charms, but it also has it's flaws just like any FE game. And sure it's not for everyone, but to dismiss it as terrible? I don't really think that's right, either. I would tell people to give the game a fair shot, at least, no harm in that at all. The game has a lot of unique things to offer, something the GBA FE's can't say for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, the Chaz is actually posting here, and like, more than once? That's pretty neat.

I have not actually played through FE4, I'm in the very early phase of a first playthrough. Though I won't claim to have a lot of experience, I think the part about the pawn shop does a good job to highlight the difference between having a complaint about a game and wanting it to be a different game. A lot of things people say they don't like about FE4, from what I understand, are really not liking the basic ideas of FE4.

Share this post


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

A lot of things people say they don't like about FE4, from what I understand, are really not liking the basic ideas of FE4.

there's people that started with FE titles from the GBA era onward that will probably have a different mentality and approach to the gameplay of older titles from the NES/SNES era, compared to those who played every main entry in the franchise from the 80s/90s.

every title from FE1 to FE5 always had different gameplay mechanics, so they never followed the same fixed formulas because each game had its own unique concepts, be them with flaws or good points.

 

the main aspects that some people consider negative in Genealogy are the size of the maps, and the movement of horseback units compared to normal units that usually would be left behind when moving around.

however, that's not really a problem of the game itself, but rather a lack of understanding how the game really works from those who have played it. as it was mentioned before in the video too, players are supposed to move to the main targets of the map with normal units, while letting horseback units do secondary encounters on the more stretched traits of the map.

yet there's people who pretend to move the entire army to the opposite side of the map, and then get angry when they can't keep up with multiple threats showing up at once. return rings, return/warp staffs are also there for a good reason, but apparently planning battle formations and strategic deployment of each unit in order to do things in the right way has become a thing of the past.

that's also why i laugh when i read stuff about "units with better contribution", because its so obvious that every character has its own role and utility, and yet there's people that will just look at movement range because "hurr durr, horse emblemurr".

 

then again, if someone doesn't like Genealogy for different reasons, it's fine. you're not being forced to appreciate every single entry in the franchise for what it is, everyone has its own different tastes and that's all right.

just don't go around telling everyone that the game is terrible, because it really isn't when it's played as intended.

Edited by Fenreir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NOTchazbc24 said:

hahaha

Pretty good contribution right here, thanks for the info! Doesnt tell us a whole lot, but please, inform us! Not sure what your trying to prove here, other than your on the FE4 hate train.

 

10 hours ago, Fenreir said:

there's people that started with FE titles from the GBA era onward that will probably have a different mentality and approach to the gameplay of older titles from the NES/SNES era, compared to those who played every main entry in the franchise from the 80s/90s.

every title from FE1 to FE5 always had different gameplay mechanics, so they never followed the same fixed formulas because each game had its own unique concepts, be them with flaws or good points.

 

the main aspects that some people consider negative in Genealogy are the size of the maps, and the movement of horseback units compared to normal units that usually would be left behind when moving around.

however, that's not really a problem of the game itself, but rather a lack of understanding how the game really works from those who have played it. as it was mentioned before in the video too, players are supposed to move to the main targets of the map with normal units, while letting horseback units do secondary encounters on the more stretched traits of the map.

yet there's people who pretend to move the entire army to the opposite side of the map, and then get angry when they can't keep up with multiple threats showing up at once. return rings, return/warp staffs are also there for a good reason, but apparently planning battle formations and strategic deployment of each unit in order to do things in the right way has become a thing of the past.

that's also why i laugh when i read stuff about "units with better contribution", because its so obvious that every character has its own role and utility, and yet there's people that will just look at movement range because "hurr durr, horse emblemurr".

 

then again, if someone doesn't like Genealogy for different reasons, it's fine. you're not being forced to appreciate every single entry in the franchise for what it is, everyone has its own different tastes and that's all right.

just don't go around telling everyone that the game is terrible, because it really isn't when it's played as intended.

I agree with this, right here. It's not a terrible game, it's just not for everybody. Picking apart its flaws cause you hate it is pointless. 

Edited by lightcosmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

Pretty good contribution right here, thanks for the info! Doesnt tell us a whole lot, but please, inform us! Not sure what your trying to prove here, other than your on the FE4 hate train.

 

Please watch the actual video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Flee Fleet! said:

Please watch the actual video.

I will say it did convince me to give Genealogy of the Holy War another chance.

I'll play either it or Radiant Dawn next after I beat Path of Radiance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2019 at 8:05 AM, lightcosmo said:

I don't think people would say Ward is as good as Rutger, not even close to as good. But anyway, the site has weapon stats, look them up, they're pretty broken. FE4 has it's charms, but it also has it's flaws just like any FE game. And sure it's not for everyone, but to dismiss it as terrible? I don't really think that's right, either. I would tell people to give the game a fair shot, at least, no harm in that at all. The game has a lot of unique things to offer, something the GBA FE's can't say for themselves.

And I suppose they'd also say that Lot and Gonzales aren't as good as Rutger as well. Anyway, as I see it, while they're obviously not on the level of dread fighters, I could find a use for knights in SoV (fwiw, they're my first choice when it comes to facing opposing dread fighters since not much else can take them on without worry). I would have a much harder time getting any use out of knights in Binding Blade, all because of the maps (well, that, and the fact that one part of the game is axe-heavy). Ditto for the axe users, since they're so inaccurate. Anyway, personally, I don't mind a game being unique unless it crosses the line into being hard to play or even outright unplayable, and as far as I'm concerned, FE4 takes a running leap over that line.

12 hours ago, Fenreir said:

there's people that started with FE titles from the GBA era onward that will probably have a different mentality and approach to the gameplay of older titles from the NES/SNES era, compared to those who played every main entry in the franchise from the 80s/90s.

every title from FE1 to FE5 always had different gameplay mechanics, so they never followed the same fixed formulas because each game had its own unique concepts, be them with flaws or good points.

 

the main aspects that some people consider negative in Genealogy are the size of the maps, and the movement of horseback units compared to normal units that usually would be left behind when moving around.

however, that's not really a problem of the game itself, but rather a lack of understanding how the game really works from those who have played it. as it was mentioned before in the video too, players are supposed to move to the main targets of the map with normal units, while letting horseback units do secondary encounters on the more stretched traits of the map.

yet there's people who pretend to move the entire army to the opposite side of the map, and then get angry when they can't keep up with multiple threats showing up at once. return rings, return/warp staffs are also there for a good reason, but apparently planning battle formations and strategic deployment of each unit in order to do things in the right way has become a thing of the past.

that's also why i laugh when i read stuff about "units with better contribution", because its so obvious that every character has its own role and utility, and yet there's people that will just look at movement range because "hurr durr, horse emblemurr".

 

then again, if someone doesn't like Genealogy for different reasons, it's fine. you're not being forced to appreciate every single entry in the franchise for what it is, everyone has its own different tastes and that's all right.

just don't go around telling everyone that the game is terrible, because it really isn't when it's played as intended.

Define "as intended", since it looks like you're emphasizing it. Because needing to constantly slow down just to play "as intended" doesn't sound like a good thing (and in fact isn't, from my perspective). Especially when you're talking about a game that is already so damn slow to begin with... Also, I honestly fail to see how the foot units would be better for moving on the main targets when that would likely put them on a collision course with the main force - and I shouldn't have to say how likely it is that won't end well for them if said force is cavalry...

Edited by Shadow Mir

Share this post


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

Pretty good contribution right here, thanks for the info! Doesnt tell us a whole lot, but please, inform us! Not sure what your trying to prove here, other than your on the FE4 hate train.

 

I have watched the video. If we're gonna be keeping score, then by default I have contributed more to this thread than you.

Edited by NOTchazbc24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I myself don't support the "play as intended" argument. If a game had a tendency to lead players to play in a way that's not fun, even if it's unintentional, that's a failing of the design.

That being said, if a player plays in a blatantly dumb way then that's not a failing of the design. Tendencies like hoarding (i.e not using warp) are habits that a player going in totally blind will probably not have. I don't think people playing a Fire Emblem game for the first time think about Jeigans "stealing EXP," for example.

3 hours ago, Flee Fleet! said:

Please watch the actual video.

1 hour ago, NOTchazbc24 said:

I have watched the video.

Wait, isn't misinterpreting the video based on the title an in-joke?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NOTchazbc24 said:

I have watched the video. If we're gonna be keeping score, then by default I have contributed more to this thread than you.

Why? Every FE has serious flaws, just like FE4? It's okay to admit it, you know. Balance-wise, they are all a complete disaster, really. FE is not a series designed around flexibility like they want people to think.

 

4 hours ago, Shadow Mir said:

And I suppose they'd also say that Lot and Gonzales aren't as good as Rutger as well. Anyway, as I see it, while they're obviously not on the level of dread fighters, I could find a use for knights in SoV (fwiw, they're my first choice when it comes to facing opposing dread fighters since not much else can take them on without worry). I would have a much harder time getting any use out of knights in Binding Blade, all because of the maps (well, that, and the fact that one part of the game is axe-heavy). Ditto for the axe users, since they're so inaccurate. Anyway, personally, I don't mind a game being unique unless it crosses the line into being hard to play or even outright unplayable, and as far as I'm concerned, FE4 takes a running leap over that line.

And you would be right, cause the game isn't balanced! If you can't find a use for other classes in FE4, I think it comes down to a player issue, not really the games fault. Cause I could argue I can find a use for them, easily, doesn't make it right, does it? Also, maybe they wanted to try something new, props for trying different. Also, moving doesn't just win the game, last time I checked at least. As far as SoV goes, I don't ever remember using a knight, so I suppose by your logic, that makes them  100% unviable and might as well throw SoV under the "this game is trash" train" along with FE4.

5 hours ago, Flee Fleet! said:

Please watch the actual video.


I don't have to watch the video too see the absurd amount of FE4 hate, really. I guess I don't get what justifies every other FE game being broken to hell and back, and not this one.

Edited by lightcosmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

I don't have to watch the video too see the absurd amount of FE4 hate, really. I guess I don't get what justifies every other FE game being broken to hell and back, and not this one.

Ooh, boy.

See, the title is actually a joke/clickbait and the actual content of the video sees Chaz try to debunk these 5 reasons not to play the game.

Edited by Von Ithipathachai

Share this post


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

Ooh, boy.

See, the title is actually a joke/clickbait and the actual content of the video sees Chaz try to debunk these 5 reasons not to play the game.

I can play that game, as well.

5 reasons not to play Path of Radiance:

1: bad character balance

2 bad weapon balance

3 slow gameplay

4 boring cast

5 horrible skill balance.

now, is PoR a horrible game? by people's logic, I guess so! Obviously I don't believe this, but read it and tell me it doesn't sound ridiculous. Sure, it's all true, in my opinion, that doesn't make PoR awful, at all! I guess that's what people don't understand or it's just me, who cares if it's not perfect! No FE is! Get over it or play a different series. Don't get me wrong, I can easily name things wrong with FE4, or any of them for that matter, it's pretty easy to find huge flaws in their designs, and having an opinion is fine, but where do you draw the line? I wouldn't want to force you to play FE4 if you don't enjoy it, but to hate it after the prologue only is just near-sighted. Cause if this were the case, everyone would hate FE7. Cause that tutorial is a complete nightmare and 90% of the people would skip it if the option presented itself without having to complete the game once.

Edited by lightcosmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what the hell? ^hahaha this guy.


It's a video talking about 5 reasons people think they shouldn't play this game. Hence It's titled 5 Reasons You Should not play FE4. Perhaps "FE4 is Good in General" would be a more acceptable title for the pedant mindset of this community. It's a compelling video and I think it deserves a compelling title.  Just watch the video. you'd probably enjoy it based on the tangents here.

Edited by NOTchazbc24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NOTchazbc24 said:

what the hell? ^hahaha this guy.


It's a video talking about 5 reasons people think they shouldn't play this game. Hence It's titled 5 Reasons You Should not play FE4. Perhaps "FE4 is Good in General" would be a more acceptable title for this community. It's a compelling video and I think it deserves a compelling title.  Just watch the video you'd probably enjoy it. based on the tangents here.

People and videos... wouldn't it be nice if I could actually watch videos. Not that you would know, obviously. Not sure how many times I have to say this, but my internet can't run videos, period. it's way to slow and it takes oh... maybe half a day for it to load one video! And that's on a good day, so no i'm not going to watch your video, and besides i'm saying all facts, you just choose to ignore them, which is fine. Tell me, do you think every other FE game is 100% balanced? if so, prove it then. Cause people here say "FE4 is bad cause it's unbalanced" which would mean, every FE is bad, correct? Also, don't say good things about FE4 here, people don't appreciate it at all. If you have something good to say about the game, you're apparently wrong no matter what your argument is. Does that really sound right? Honestly asking you, here.

Edited by lightcosmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

People and videos... wouldn't it be nice if I could actually watch videos. Not that you would know, obviously. Not sure how many times I have to say this, but my internet can't run videos, period. it's way to slow and it takes oh... maybe half a day for it to load one video! And that's on a good day, so no i'm not going to watch your video, and besides i'm saying all facts, you just choose to ignore them, which is fine. Tell me, do you think every other FE game is 100% balanced? if so, prove it then.

Now might be a good time for me to bail out of this thread, seeing as you don't appear to trust either me or Chaz.

Edited by Von Ithipathachai

Share this post


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

Now might be a good time for me to bail out of this thread, seeing as you don't appear to trust either me or Chaz.

Sure, anybody would say that when they don't want to trash any other FE game, like they're on some pedestal of perfection, or something. FE4 is the only FE with flaws, got it, thanks for the info. This doesn't have anything to do with trust, it's just unfair to hate on one game that has flaws when they all do. That's it, really, if your going to tear one down, please be fair and rip them all apart, please. And seeing as nobody has an answer to my, prove me wrong on the other FE's being 100% balanced post, I suppose they are just as poor off as this one. Whenever I bring that up, people switch the topic, kinda strange, right?

Edited by lightcosmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

I wouldn't want to force you to play FE4 if you don't enjoy it, but to hate it after the prologue only is just near-sighted.

i find much irony in this statement within the context of this thread. anyways here's the complete script for you. 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11RDKF9qXAikyIMigw2O_SzwiRmO8x7zax-m4cZHYEH8/edit?usp=sharing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, NOTchazbc24 said:

i find much irony in this statement within the context of this thread. anyways here's the complete script for you. 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11RDKF9qXAikyIMigw2O_SzwiRmO8x7zax-m4cZHYEH8/edit?usp=sharing

This probably isn't a fault on your end, but nothing's happening past the first portion of the script. But thank you for giving me an alternate option, at least. Instead of saying, "watch the video" constantly, I appreciate that. So you say you enjoy FE4, then, pretty much or am I not understanding here. EDIT: okay I checked my phone and it worked that way, sorta, anyway. Your replies are the ones not in red, I think? So you agree with what I said, then. FE4 isn't "poorly designed", from what you said there, that's what I gathered.

Edited by lightcosmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is getting locked.

@NOTchazbc24 I'm still not watching this, and you can thank your title for it.  If you have to rely on clickbait, then I'm going to assume it's because you don't feel that the video's content is good enough without it.  Also, you're free to put your channel in your sig.

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...