Alastor plays and ranks the whole series! Mission Complete! ...For now.

[Axie]

2 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

Current score: oh sweet Jesus Christ please no.

out of revelation's 14 points, 9 come from usability alone. you set yourself up to this, to be honest. i wouldn't give that category this much weight myself. i mean, it weighs the same as ironman-ability for something that basically follows release date with one exception or two.

i would also gladly put revelation down in the last category in balance and pacing, since you seemed to consider it, and personally i would put all of fates with the first two games in writing in the last category because it's just that bad and at some point zero has to beat negative. i think that would single handedly bring revelation down from first to something more acceptable even if usability propped it up still.

then again i did say i'd probably have revelation only above the first three games if i did this, so maybe i shouldn't be giving advice lol.

Edited February 12, 2021 by Axie

[Sunwoo]

16 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

That's interesting, but opens up a whoooooole new can of worms about what kind of language qualifies as "triggering the curse a little".

I was going for location more than language.

[Alastor15243]

4 minutes ago, Sunwoo said:

I was going for location more than language.

Yeah but like, if singing the song slowly kills her despite not mentioning Valla, that implies the curse can be triggered in degrees.

[Punished Dayni]

It's a bold move seeing this game tie first.

Well, things are going to be interesting from here that's for sure.

2 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

Yeah but like, if singing the song slowly kills her despite not mentioning Valla, that implies the curse can be triggered in degrees.

Isn't it that the magic from the song Anankos made combine with the pendant allow her to pull off most of the active changes?

I thought that was the case.

As for by degrees..... look forward to Birthright I suppose.

Edited February 12, 2021 by Dayni

[Alastor15243]

3 hours ago, Axie said:

out of revelation's 14 points, 9 come from usability alone. you set yourself up to this, to be honest. i wouldn't give that category this much weight myself. i mean, it weighs the same as ironman-ability for something that basically follows release date with one exception or two.

Well, I mean, those 9 points make the difference between Fates and the GBA games. That accounts for highlight selected, highlight all, having both things be in different colors, convenient buttonless menus where everything's on one screen, the ability to zoom out the map to see more at once... numerous other tiny things like buying in bulk and using items straight from the convoy... this stuff is a big deal to me. Range highlighting in particular. A lot of the challenge that Conquest in particular has to offer just would not be anywhere near as engaging if it had the usability of the GBA games. The challenge would risk being exhausting rather than engaging. I stand by that point value, it has a massive impact on how enjoyable a game is for me.

...But Christ I hope anyone who's checking this out for the first time looks at my reasoning for why Revelation is on top, because I know I'd want to know what the writer of this thread was smoking if I saw that on the OP. I still feel profoundly compelled to cheat in some way to get that thing lower down.

Edited February 12, 2021 by Alastor15243

[Jotari]

4 hours ago, Samz707 said:

Honestly I do hope that original massive script of Fates comes out, 'cause I wanna see how much of the absurd stuff (like the MyCastle Pocket dimension that gets introduced in one of the most whiplash inducing ways possible or the baby dimension) were actually part of the script or forced in by IS.

Was Revelations even a thing in that script? Did everyone still endlessly praise and want to fuck Corrin? Does Azula's singing still make no sense? Did the random Awakening Cameos exist?
 

I'm curious if the initial big script was a trainwreck too or if IS took a hacksaw taped to a chainsaw taped to a Circular Saw to the script.

Mikoto's name has me somewhat convinced that no, Revelation was not originally a thing. That and when we first introduced to Fates they really pushed the "There are two games guys!" angle with no hints of Revelation, it was probably planned by the time we started getting trailers given Revelation is obviously planned in the final game, but I expect the advertising wing had no time to adjust their material to suggest there was going to be a third adventure when they announced the project. Revelation being download only might be related.

3 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

Yeah but like, if singing the song slowly kills her despite not mentioning Valla, that implies the curse can be triggered in degrees.

Well as I mentioned before, the one example of the curse in effect, Arete, managed to work slow enough for her to explain everything in detail to Azura. So a slow burn death from the curse is the standard we have to go on (at least I think that's the singular example we have. Azama's dying anyway for nebulous unrelated reasons in Revelation so I don't think that counts). Trust Fates to be the story to have a massive impedement to the protagonists that is only present in a singular off screen example almost two decades ago.

[Venger_06]

55 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Mikoto's name has me somewhat convinced that no, Revelation was not originally a thing. That and when we first introduced to Fates they really pushed the "There are two games guys!" angle with no hints of Revelation, it was probably planned by the time we started getting trailers given Revelation is obviously planned in the final game, but I expect the advertising wing had no time to adjust their material to suggest there was going to be a third adventure when they announced the project. Revelation being download only might be related.

Revelation was a thing from the start.

Quote

Well, I thought that ultimate decisions of "do you ally with Country A or Country B" was really interesting, but thinking about it from the point of view of the players, I thought that they would definitely want the choice not to ally with either. It's really exciting to think about how the world would be if you didn't rely on either country's influence. For me, making three stories was a natural progression. ~ Maeda

Source: Iwata asks: Fire Emblem Fates

[Axie]

1 hour ago, Alastor15243 said:

I stand by that point value, it has a massive impact on how enjoyable a game is for me.

it's not that it doesn't have an impact, of course it does! but... of course the 2016 game will murder the 2003 game in usability. so much of it comes down to the hardware itself, and then the rest comes with hindsight (though rarely they decide to go back on some good ideas, which apparently happens a bit in three houses). the 2D games were physically unable to give us the usability revelation does, and i think that's why that category should weigh less, not because it doesn't matter. it's kind of unfair to the older games who paved the way, and it shows in how revelation benefitted from such categories (presentation is another such category, which you even recognize as a time and console-based category, but it's worth less points).

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, Axie said:

it's not that it doesn't have an impact, of course it does! but... of course the 2016 game will murder the 2003 game in usability. so much of it comes down to the hardware itself, and then the rest comes with hindsight (though rarely they decide to go back on some good ideas, which apparently happens a bit in three houses). the 2D games were physically unable to give us the usability revelation does, and i think that's why that category should weigh less, not because it doesn't matter. it's kind of unfair to the older games who paved the way, and it shows in how revelation benefitted from such categories (presentation is another such category, which you even recognize as a time and console-based category, but it's worth less points).

Unfortunately, I can't weigh the scores based on how much something is the game's fault. I have to weigh them based on how much it affects the experience of playing it.

As for presentation, that actually originally wasn't a category, and I can't for the life of me remember why I decided (or was convinced) to add it.

[Axie]

12 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Unfortunately, I can't weigh the scores based on how much something is the game's fault. I have to weigh them based on how much it affects the experience of playing it.

but is that weight adequate for your own feelings about these games? if usability is something that would make you play revelation again before a GBA game, more so than difficulty or balance or depth, then sure, but... does it?

this is your ranking, not my own, and since you expressed dissatisfaction with the end result, i am trying to offer a different perspective - i like the ranking part of the playlog a lot and want you to feel good about doing it. you gave revelation 9 points over the GBA games on usability and then at the end you went "wait, this is not how i actually feel about this game", so to me, the value of that category is what jumped out. it's up to you to figure out if that's the reason, or if it's something else. please don't give up on the ranking though! this new one survived awakening, it can do anything.

[Alastor15243]

3 minutes ago, Axie said:

but is that weight adequate for your own feelings about these games? if usability is something that would make you play revelation again before a GBA game, more so than difficulty or balance or depth, then sure, but... does it?

this is your ranking, not my own, and since you expressed dissatisfaction with the end result, i am trying to offer a different perspective - i like the ranking part of the playlog a lot and want you to feel good about doing it. you gave revelation 9 points over the GBA games on usability and then at the end you went "wait, this is not how i actually feel about this game", so to me, the value of that category is what jumped out. it's up to you to figure out if that's the reason, or if it's something else. please don't give up on the ranking though! this new one survived awakening, it can do anything.

That is an incredibly tricky question to answer. If I ask myself whether I'd rather have a game with +12 difficulty and a +0 usability or a game with +4 difficulty and a +9 usability, which is causing me to picture Binding Blade with Fates' interface and Conquest with Binding Blade's interface... honestly it's hard to decide.

I think a big issue is that the value of the interface to me actually goes up significantly the harder the game is. It's only thanks to Fates' incredible usability that Conquest's difficulty and depth are even merits rather than infuriating annoyances. But with other games where the difficulty isn't nearly intense, the fact that the game might be merely mediocre about how it delivers information and helps you make decisions... doesn't really matter all that much. Like, Revelation's got the usability of Fates... but if it had the usability of the Tellius games I have serious doubts I'd have complained anywhere near as much as I'd have complained if that happened to Conquest. But I have no idea how to score "it has this thing, but it barely matters".

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Maof06 said:

Revelation was a thing from the start.

Source: Iwata asks: Fire Emblem Fates

Yeah, but when did he decide that? 

[lenticular]

8 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

My Ranking

Alright, time for the main event of the day. Hopefully it won't take me all day with the new system.

Welp, time to see just how badly I disagree with you on this!

8 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

+9: Near perfection. You can ironman blind, confident that the game won't fuck you. No ambush spawns, no fog of war, and plentiful means to recover from your mistakes.

You know, I was ready to argue this based on my experience ironmanning Birthright, but after a bit more thought, no, this is fair. One of the big advantages that Revelation has in this category is that, by its nature, you inherently already know the basic Fates mechanics by the time you start playing it, which vastly reduces the possibility for fuckery. I will definitely be arguing this when we get to Birthright and especially Conquest though.

8 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

+9: Near perfection. No clunkiness, and no tedious busywork between you and your strategies.

This one, though. This one I really do disagree with. Not speaking to Revelation in particular since I've not played it, but Fates as a whole is full of what I would consider tedious busywork. Even the most basic of strategy needs to be backed up by calculation. If I'm planning my move and I think "if I move here and that unit attacks me, what happens?"  then I need to look at the enemy's stats, their weapons' stats, their weapon ranks, their skills, the skills of any other nearby enemies (eg rallies), all of the same things for my unit, and the effects of any dual attacks or dual guard. None of this is at all interesting or difficult if you know the mechanics. It's just time-consuming. I honestly felt that I was spending more time doing basic calculations than I was thinking about strategy and tactics, which is never a good thing.

8 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

-4: Technically a story, but distractingly impossible to take seriously due to copious writing flaws.

This is also far more generous than I would be. The writing of Fates fails on almost every level. The plot, the world building, the characters, the dialogue, all of it. As you pointed out, while Awakening has a nonsense plot and abysmal world building, it does at least have good quality support convertsations. Fates, meanwhile, has basically nothing when it comes to redeeming features. I'm asking myself, would the game be better or worse if I pressed start to skip through every single cut scene, line of dialogue or other story element, and treated it as if there was no story at all? And I have to say, it would be better. Not only would I save time by not having to sit through the utter dross, but it would also mean that characters like Camilla, Peri and Kana would be usable without making me want to throw up a little. For me, I hate Fates wirting enough that I'd make a new tier and this would be full on "-8: Technically a story but so bad I wish that it weren't."

 

9 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

The reason this position feels so wrong to me isn't because the game is terrible. The reason it feels so wrong to me is because Revelation is just... completely fucking pointless. That's the real takeaway I have. Ironically, the thing that's responsible for giving it such a high score, its relation to Birthright and Conquest... also strips it of any value or merit whatsoever. What conceivable reason could I have to play this game again, when merely possessing it means I already have one, probably even two games that are its equal in every way in which it was good, and its uncontested betters in nearly every way in which it sucked? It has nothing to offer. It has no value, no worth to the Fire Emblem franchise. There's no reason to go back to it! Nothing unique! Nothing special! There isn't a single positive experience I can get from this game that I couldn't duplicate with interest if I played Birthright or Conquest, except for the sheer technicality of what you can do with access to the full cast.

In theory, I guess that the main reason to play Revelation would be if you were really into the story and lore of Fates and want to get to the bottom of some of the mysteries of the first two games and learn what's really going on. Except. Well. Let's just say that there are probably not all that many people for whom that applies. Although, if anyone was that invested in the story, then I think they'd have a legitimate case to be pissed off with Fates' business model, since that's conceivably the one way that Conquest and Birthright aren't complete standalone games.

[Alastor15243]

2 minutes ago, lenticular said:

This one, though. This one I really do disagree with. Not speaking to Revelation in particular since I've not played it, but Fates as a whole is full of what I would consider tedious busywork. Even the most basic of strategy needs to be backed up by calculation. If I'm planning my move and I think "if I move here and that unit attacks me, what happens?"  then I need to look at the enemy's stats, their weapons' stats, their weapon ranks, their skills, the skills of any other nearby enemies (eg rallies), all of the same things for my unit, and the effects of any dual attacks or dual guard. None of this is at all interesting or difficult if you know the mechanics. It's just time-consuming. I honestly felt that I was spending more time doing basic calculations than I was thinking about strategy and tactics, which is never a good thing.

Yes, but that's not the fault of the interface. Maybe the description is poorly-phased and could use some tweaking when I say there's no busywork, but Fates has the absolute best the series has to offer in terms of making things convenient to figure out. The fact that the game is so complicated could be argued as a flaw from some perspectives, but I don't think you can really put that a the feet of the aspects the usability score is concerned with. You wouldn't fix these issues you're having by improving the interface, you'd fix them by taking away the gameplay depth that you see as overkill.

5 minutes ago, lenticular said:

This is also far more generous than I would be. The writing of Fates fails on almost every level. The plot, the world building, the characters, the dialogue, all of it. As you pointed out, while Awakening has a nonsense plot and abysmal world building, it does at least have good quality support convertsations. Fates, meanwhile, has basically nothing when it comes to redeeming features. I'm asking myself, would the game be better or worse if I pressed start to skip through every single cut scene, line of dialogue or other story element, and treated it as if there was no story at all? And I have to say, it would be better. Not only would I save time by not having to sit through the utter dross, but it would also mean that characters like Camilla, Peri and Kana would be usable without making me want to throw up a little. For me, I hate Fates wirting enough that I'd make a new tier and this would be full on "-8: Technically a story but so bad I wish that it weren't."

Oh man, words cannot express how much I would have agreed with you 4-5 years ago. This game's story inspired genuine volcanic rage within me back when I first played it. The game broke my heart, because I so desperately wanted it to be good. And as a result, I despised it, and it pissed me off to no end thinking about it. But... ultimately the years have burned me out with getting genuinely pissed about Fire Emblem stories. At least to the point where I'd seriously take points off. There's only so much a bad story can detract from a Fire Emblem game because, as you discussed, skipping it is always an option. Now, does throwing a terrible story into a game that previously had no story at all make the game worse? Yes. By how much? ...Not enough to take off as many points as I'd be inclined to in other categories. Hence why the "bad writing" category has such diminishing returns on decreasing tiers.

10 minutes ago, lenticular said:

In theory, I guess that the main reason to play Revelation would be if you were really into the story and lore of Fates and want to get to the bottom of some of the mysteries of the first two games and learn what's really going on. Except. Well. Let's just say that there are probably not all that many people for whom that applies. Although, if anyone was that invested in the story, then I think they'd have a legitimate case to be pissed off with Fates' business model, since that's conceivably the one way that Conquest and Birthright aren't complete standalone games.

Yeah, this has come up before, and I find it interesting. Gameplaywise, Fates' business model is beyond reasonable. As a business model for a story, however, the argument that it's malicious starts to get a lot more merit.

[lenticular]

32 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Yes, but that's not the fault of the interface. Maybe the description is poorly-phased and could use some tweaking when I say there's no busywork, but Fates has the absolute best the series has to offer in terms of making things convenient to figure out. The fact that the game is so complicated could be argued as a flaw from some perspectives, but I don't think you can really put that a the feet of the aspects the usability score is concerned with. You wouldn't fix these issues you're having by improving the interface, you'd fix them by taking away the gameplay depth that you see as overkill.

That's an interesting perspective. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with it, but I certainly respect it. I guess that part of the issue is to what extent it's really meaningful to separate a game into all these different categories. And I don't mean that as a knock against you or your rating system. It's both natural and useful to try to split things up that way, to try to articulate which aspects of a game are good and which are bad and how they contribute to our overall feeligns and impressions about the game. Of course this is how we should try to look at things. But at the same time, we do need to remember that it isn't that simple. That there is always overlap between different categories. I would say that it's not as important what the absolute quality of the UI is, but how good the UI is as a factor of how good it needs to be. Which is where Fates comes up short for me.

I think as well that part of why I disagree with you is that I can imagine ways the UI could be improved to cope with the added complexity. My ideas here are a little half-baked since I've not given this any real thought before, but I'm imaginging something along the lines of an analysis mode. Let me change into a mode where I can move pieces around without committing to anything, and let that include moving enemy pieces as well. So I can move my piece, then grab an enemy piece to come and attack it, see the combat forecast, and see immediately what sort of danger I'm in. Then if it's safe I can switch back to regular mode and actually make the move. At no point would analysis mode actually roll the combat dice to determine hits, crits, and skill procs, but you could tell it to show you the most likely outcome, the worst case scenario, etc.

1 hour ago, Alastor15243 said:

Oh man, words cannot express how much I would have agreed with you 4-5 years ago. This game's story inspired genuine volcanic rage within me back when I first played it. The game broke my heart, because I so desperately wanted it to be good. And as a result, I despised it, and it pissed me off to no end thinking about it. But... ultimately the years have burned me out with getting genuinely pissed about Fire Emblem stories. At least to the point where I'd seriously take points off. There's only so much a bad story can detract from a Fire Emblem game because, as you discussed, skipping it is always an option. Now, does throwing a terrible story into a game that previously had no story at all make the game worse? Yes. By how much? ...Not enough to take off as many points as I'd be inclined to in other categories. Hence why the "bad writing" category has such diminishing returns on decreasing tiers.

That's fair. Different priorities and all that. For me, I absolutely need Fire Emblem games to have story and gameplay working in harmony. Because if I try to judge Fire Emblem purely in terms of gameplay and treat it as if it were an abstract strategy game, then frankly, it's trash. If I imagine a version of Fire Emblem with no story, no characters, nothing other than pieces and stats and skills, and I ask myself would I ever choose to play that when I could be playing chess instead? Then no, not even close. Same way that if I look at only the story from a Fire Emblem game and ask whether it holds up against my favourite books, TV shows or movies, then once again, no, not even close. It's only as a union of all its disparate pieces that I love Fire Emblem, which is why writing is important for me. But, like I said, we have different priorities, and that's fine.

[Alastor15243]

9 minutes ago, lenticular said:

I think as well that part of why I disagree with you is that I can imagine ways the UI could be improved to cope with the added complexity. My ideas here are a little half-baked since I've not given this any real thought before, but I'm imaginging something along the lines of an analysis mode. Let me change into a mode where I can move pieces around without committing to anything, and let that include moving enemy pieces as well. So I can move my piece, then grab an enemy piece to come and attack it, see the combat forecast, and see immediately what sort of danger I'm in. Then if it's safe I can switch back to regular mode and actually make the move. At no point would analysis mode actually roll the combat dice to determine hits, crits, and skill procs, but you could tell it to show you the most likely outcome, the worst case scenario, etc.

Hmm... I half like and half dislike that idea. Part of me almost thinks that would be going TOO far, since that'd nearly be doing the battle prediction for you, but where exactly I'd draw the line is hard to say.

But I too can think of ways Fates' UI could be improved. I just can't conceive of a way in which it likely will be now that the series has walked away from dual screens, so certainly for the foreseeable future this game deserves to be at the peak of the scale.

Edited February 13, 2021 by Alastor15243

[Jotari]

7 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

 There's only so much a bad story can detract from a Fire Emblem game because, as you discussed, skipping it is always an option.

Well not always, only since Shadow Dragon if I recall correctly. Before that skipping the story involved mashing A through the cutscenes. Though chalk that up to modern presentation in Fire Emblem being excellent. Speaking of, Presentation, how different is this category to useability? Because I'm just thinking if Presentation is based on how the game looks graphically in addition to how it runs by convenience, then there's a lot of points to be lost for Three Houses which graphically is not a pretty game. On the other hand its still modern fire emblem so it has a lot of nice bells and whistles (including the new feature of rotating and angling the camera, which I find myself Fates wanting every now and then).

[ping]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Well not always, only since Shadow Dragon if I recall correctly. Before that skipping the story involved mashing A through the cutscenes.

??
You can absolutely skip cutscenes by pressing Start in GBA FE. At worst, you have to press it twice because there tends to be story before and after battle preps. Pretty sure it's the same for Tellius, too.

[Alastor15243]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Speaking of, Presentation, how different is this category to useability? Because I'm just thinking if Presentation is based on how the game looks graphically in addition to how it runs by convenience, then there's a lot of points to be lost for Three Houses which graphically is not a pretty game. On the other hand its still modern fire emblem so it has a lot of nice bells and whistles (including the new feature of rotating and angling the camera, which I find myself Fates wanting every now and then).

Yeah Three Houses is why I want to change the tier names, because it's not that cut and dry, and Three Houses' shitty visual polish really muddies the waters. But I don't understand what you mean about presentation and usability being connected.

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, ping said:

??
You can absolutely skip cutscenes by pressing Start in GBA FE. At worst, you have to press it twice because there tends to be story before and after battle preps. Pretty sure it's the same for Tellius, too.

Yeah...I actively edit gameboy Fire Emblem. So I am super well aware of that...So I'm really embarrassed about making that mistake.

1 hour ago, Alastor15243 said:

Yeah Three Houses is why I want to change the tier names, because it's not that cut and dry, and Three Houses' shitty visual polish really muddies the waters. But I don't understand what you mean about presentation and usability being connected.

Ah ignore that. Though presentation was the renamed usability category. I just wasn't thinking at all when I made that comment previously it seems.

[Shadow Mir]

19 hours ago, Axie said:

i would also gladly put revelation down in the last category in balance and pacing, since you seemed to consider it, and personally i would put all of fates with the first two games in writing in the last category because it's just that bad and at some point zero has to beat negative. i think that would single handedly bring revelation down from first to something more acceptable even if usability propped it up still.

Really? Because I don't think any game is worse in either balance or pacing than Genealogy of the Holy War, because it's that damn bad in both.

[Jotari]

14 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:

Really? Because I don't think any game is worse in either balance or pacing than Genealogy of the Holy War, because it's that damn bad in both.

Obligatory note for those not in the know that Mir's opinion comes with a disclaimer that he has not in fact played Genealogy of the Holy War.

[Shadow Mir]

2 hours ago, Jotari said:

Obligatory note for those not in the know that Mir's opinion comes with a disclaimer that he has not in fact played Genealogy of the Holy War.

Obligatory note that I don't need to play it to see how bad Genealogy's balance and pacing are, as it's as easy as going to YouTube. Hell, even this thread made me think "God, Genealogy is absolutely GLACIAL..."  when I was reading through the Genealogy playthrough (I know emulators have a speed up function, but if I have to heavily lean on one just for the game to be playable, that's a red flag). On balance, even a blind man can see that the big maps heavily favour mounted units, and the weapon balance is what I can only describe as shit.

...Anyway, is it just me, or does this series frequently have young people in leadership positions for one reason or another?

Edited February 13, 2021 by Shadow Mir

[Eltosian Kadath]

On 2/12/2021 at 9:09 AM, Alastor15243 said:

 

Current score: oh sweet Jesus Christ please no.

 

FINAL SCORE

1/2: Shadow Dragon/Revelation (14)

...Oh wow...that is a bit of an unexpected placement...

 

On 2/12/2021 at 9:09 AM, Alastor15243 said:

Presentation: I still can't think of good words for these tiers. I'll have to eventually, but coming up with words to describe what each one accomplishes just seems like a herculean and almost meaningless task. But at any rate, yeah, Revelation is the new best, because Fates is the new best. The new zoom-in feature, the addition of feet, the extra cutscenes, and even the addition of the comically ridiculous map model action scenes are all steps forward in enhancing the experience of playing this game. Not much more I can say about it, really.

 

+4: 3DS Tier.

Revelation, Awakening.

21 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

 

As for presentation, that actually originally wasn't a category, and I can't for the life of me remember why I decided (or was convinced) to add it.

With the temporary title of what console was it on still in place, I really am starting to question the value of this category in the current ranking method. It made more sense when the smaller differences between games on the same console had an impact on the rankings, but with this new version, less so. Its removal wouldn't cause a big change in any regard, its main impact would be in resolving the ties.

Spoiler

1 SD (15)
2 Rev (11)
3 PoR (9)
4 GotHW(5)
5 NM (4)
6 BindB (1)
7 BlazeB(0)
8 SS(-3)
9 RD(-5)
10 Awa(-8)
11 T776(-9)
12 MotE(-19)
13 Gai(-27)
14 MotE(-28)
15 DD(-54)

 

On 2/12/2021 at 9:09 AM, Alastor15243 said:

 

Ironmannability: Yep, you know what's coming. Fates, as a whole, is probably the most ironman-friendly game in the entire series. It is a criminally rare breed of Fire Emblem game that doesn't have ambush spawns, fog of war, or inescapable crits. Besides Fates, I think there's literally one other game (Echoes) that meets all of those qualifications. Two if you wanna stretch things and include Genealogy (it has ambush spawns, it's just nearly impossible for them to matter and they happen at ludicrously predictable moments).

Of course, not all three Fates routes are equal in this regard. Conquest is the only one that's perfect (or so close to it that any exception I encountered wasn't even worth registering in my brain). Birthright has a single ambush spawn that you'll never be in range of so it doesn't really matter, but more importantly, it also has an instance of tripwire reinforcements in one map that was pretty annoying. Revelation on the other hand has the tripwire reinforcements in that fake fog of war cave, and the odd bit of weird shit with its gimmicks (but not nearly as much as I remembered, as I found myself constantly finding Fates' design philosophy winning out when I cynically worried it wouldn't).

Are these enough to kick it an entire tier below where Conquest rightfully belongs?

No. No, they are not. Certainly not with Revelation. I'll have to check to see if I forgot anything extra in Birthright. So by virtue of being the first Fates game, it's our new winner for the moment. Congrats on the stupendous achievement of being part of Fates, Revelation.

 

+9: Near perfection. You can ironman blind, confident that the game won't fuck you. No ambush spawns, no fog of war, and plentiful means to recover from your mistakes.

Revelation.

That is a high Ironmanability for a game that you flailed to ironman. I feel this is a game that encourages one of the greatest dangers of ironmans, complacency. Not sure how well that can be judged, or integrated into the ratings, but it is something that comes to mind with this game in particular...

 

18 hours ago, lenticular said:

That's fair. Different priorities and all that. For me, I absolutely need Fire Emblem games to have story and gameplay working in harmony. Because if I try to judge Fire Emblem purely in terms of gameplay and treat it as if it were an abstract strategy game, then frankly, it's trash. If I imagine a version of Fire Emblem with no story, no characters, nothing other than pieces and stats and skills, and I ask myself would I ever choose to play that when I could be playing chess instead? Then no, not even close. Same way that if I look at only the story from a Fire Emblem game and ask whether it holds up against my favourite books, TV shows or movies, then once again, no, not even close. It's only as a union of all its disparate pieces that I love Fire Emblem, which is why writing is important for me. But, like I said, we have different priorities, and that's fine.

If you haven't already, you should play the Jugdral games then. One of the strongest points of them is how strongly they integrate the story and gameplay together (some may complain that is to the detriment of the gameplay...).

[Alastor15243]

Okay, in light of letting this shit stew for a bit, and listening to everyone's feedback, I'm making a few changes to my ranking:

* Demoting Revelation from +9 to +6 in ironmannability, because in hindsight the shitty early-game cast and the handful of maps with obnoxious gimmicks (including at least one instance I can remember of hiding the contents of a room until you unlock the door) are enough to make it not deserve to sit in the same tier as Conquest. -3.

* Removing the presentation category entirely. Honestly while visuals do matter to me, there's really only one game in the series I consider to be genuinely ugly, and considering how I can't even put into words what the benchmarks for tiers are, I don't think I can justify keeping this on, however much I'd love to use it as an excuse to shit on a certain game a bit more.

 

Here are what I think the new scores should be, can someone check this? Eltosian, unless I'm mistaken you made a mistake or two with your own, hence why they don't quite add up, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

1: Shadow Dragon (15)

2: Path of Radiance (9)

3: Revelation (7)

4: Genealogy of the Holy War (5)

5: New Mystery (4)

6: Blazing Blade (1)

7: Binding Blade (0)

8: Sacred Stones (-3)

9: Radiant Dawn (-5)

10: Awakening (-8)

11: Thracia 776 (-9)

12: Mystery of the Emblem Book 2 (-22)

13: Gaiden (-27)

14: Mystery of the Emblem Book 1 (-31)

15: Dark Dragon (-54)