Jump to content
Harvey

Would you like to see a Fire Emblem spinoff game that's pure JRPG?

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Zihark11 said:

Nope. i really hope that doesn't ever exist. Warriors is bad enough. 

What's wrong with Warriors, on a level at which it should not exist? I genuinely want to know.

 

It did not take resources from mainline games, was not developed by IS, and its engine was used to build the next mainline game. Meaning, it actually furthered the franchise.

 

No comment on Warriors as a game. We all have our different valid opinions. Mine are positive on gameplay, negative on roster.

Edited by Etheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Etheus said:

What's wrong with Warriors, on a level at which it should not exist? I genuinely want to know.

 

It did not take resources from mainline games, was not developed by IS, and its engine was used to build the next mainline game. Meaning, it actually furthered the franchise.

 

No comment on Warriors as a game. We all have our different valid opinions. Mine are positive on gameplay, negative on roster.

The Warriors series has a rather poor reputation in the west. It gets often dismissed as completely mindless and repetitive. I'd say that reputation is largely undeserved but since it does exist its understandable why some people would look down on a Warriors game. Then again that bad reputation did decrease somewhat as soon as the series moved away from obscure historical figures and used One Piece or Zelda characters instead. 

Share this post


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

Paper Mario blows most jrpgs out of the water with its satisfying gameplay and excellent world.

Had an excellent world at least. I skipped on Color Splash due to controller issues I never fixed despite having the part for it, so I can't judge that (I hear it does make a measure of improvement on SS's faults though). But we all know the "general" reputation of Sticker Star, and SPM wasn't quite what came before it in the world department either, I did like the Underwhere and Overthere though.

Point being, it's been nearly two decades since TTYD, the magic dev crew and mindset behind it could be well and truly gone by now. -Assuming you consider TTYD the high point of the series.

 

3 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

And I gag at the notion that a good story is somehow characteristic of the genre. If Xenoblade Chronicles 2 is what passes for good story these days, than maybe we are too hard on Fire Emblem plots.

Setting aside XC2, RPG often try to have good narratives.

  • RPGs aren't Interactive Novels or pure Adventure games, that are boom or bust based on narrative and narrative-esque immersion. However, compared to a lot of genres: Fighting, Platformer, Action, MMO, FPS, Shump, 4X, Strategy, RPGs can be very narrative heavy.
  • Can be- Not every game in the genre tries, Etrian Odyssey is a pure gameplay experience, FFV leans on gameplay over plot, but a larger number of RPGs try telling a good story than do than a significant number of other genres.

In an Interactive Novel, gameplay is diminished in favor of plot. In a 4X like Civilization, they'll never try to write a grand tale of how Gandhi nuked Peter the Great, who had neglected his army in order to construct Broadway, but Peter was avenged by his ally the Incans, and all of them failed to realize until it was too late that Australia had converted the world to Zoroastrianism. RPGs can give you the choice of one or the other, or both.

There have been failed plots intend to be good aplenty- see a recent fiasco in FFXV (I'm not actually judging this game myself). And, not all, more like none, are above fair and reasonable criticism. But a failure to do good is not the same as not having made the effort at all.

 

1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:

The Warriors series has a rather poor reputation in the west. It gets often dismissed as completely mindless and repetitive. I'd say that reputation is largely undeserved but since it does exist its understandable why some people would look down on a Warriors game. Then again that bad reputation did decrease somewhat as soon as the series moved away from obscure historical figures and used One Piece or Zelda characters instead. 

A positive for them though is for we the noobs who want to play something action-y like a God of Soul Devil Bayonetta Dies Twice, but who wouldn't want to play such an intense game on its "mommy mode" (to use Kamiya's term for the easiest Bayo 1 setting), can play Musou instead.

Musou is easy by Action standards, it must certainly be much more gratifying to earn the catharsis of godly destruction of countless mooks and bosses the hard way. But, not all of us are willing to put in the time and effort to attain that. Musou offers the same catharsis on its Normal setting much easier than an intense action title on its standard setting. Not only is it easier, but they tone down the button inputs and thus let us see the flashiness of the playable characters easier. 

Yes, some people might see me lumping Musou with their cherished crazy hard 3D Action games as sacrilege. But it isn't, they share a genre and simply cater to different tastes. Not even necessarily different people, perhaps the blindfolded Pure Platinum'er of Bayonetta 2 would like a spiked seltzer and Battle of Hefei Castle right after work.

Edited by Interdimensional Observer
Some clarifications that I wasn't trash talking certain games.

Share this post


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

Had an excellent world at least. I skipped on Color Splash due to controller issues I never fixed despite having the part for it, so I can't judge that (I hear it does make a measure of improvement on SS's faults though). But we all know the "general" reputation of Sticker Star, and SPM wasn't quite what came before it in the world department either, I did like the Underwhere and Overthere though.

 

Setting aside XC2, RPG often try to have good narratives.

  • RPGs aren't Interactive Novels or pure Adventure games, that are boom or bust based on narrative and narrative-esque immersion. However, compared to a lot of genres: Fighting, Platformer, Action, MMO, FPS, Shump, 4X, Strategy, RPGs can be very narrative heavy.
  • Can be- Not every game in the genre tries, Etrian Odyssey is a pure gameplay experience, FFV leans on gameplay over plot, but a larger number of RPGs try telling a good story than do than a significant number of other genres.

In an Interactive Novel, gameplay is diminished in favor of plot. In a 4X like Civilization, they'll never try to write a grand tale of how Gandhi nuked Peter the Great, who had neglected his army in order to construct Broadway, but Peter was avenged by his ally the Incans, and all of them failed to realize until it was too late that Australia had converted the world to Zoroastrianism. RPGs can give you the choice of one or the other, or both.

There have been failed plots intend to be good aplenty- see a recent fiasco in FFXV. And, not all, more like none, are above fair and reasonable criticism. But a failure to do good is not the same as not having made the effort at all.

 

A positive for them though is for we the noobs who want to play something action-y like a God of Soul Devil Bayonetta Dies Twice, but who wouldn't want to play such an intense game on its "mommy mode" (to use Kamiya's term for the easiest Bayo 1 setting), can play Musou instead.

Musou is easy by Action standards, it must certainly be much more gratifying to earn the catharsis of godly destruction of countless mooks and bosses the hard way. But, not all of us are willing to put in the time and effort to attain that. Musou offers the same catharsis on its Normal setting much easier than an intense action title on its standard setting. Not only is it easier, but they tone down the button inputs and thus let us see the flashiness of the playable characters easier. 

Yes, some people might see me lumping Musou with their cherished crazy hard 3D Action games as sacrilege. But it isn't, they share a genre and simply cater to different tastes. Not even necessarily different people, perhaps the blindfolded Pure Platinum'er of Bayonetta 2 would like a spiked seltzer and Battle of Hefei Castle right after work.

I think you and I would get along very well.

 

I'm not a difficulty kind of guy at all, and actually don't approve of developers/games that don't have an easy mode or mock people for playing on Easy. Let people enjoy your game at a level they are comfortable with, and don't patronize them for it.

 

28 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

The Warriors series has a rather poor reputation in the west. It gets often dismissed as completely mindless and repetitive. I'd say that reputation is largely undeserved but since it does exist its understandable why some people would look down on a Warriors game. Then again that bad reputation did decrease somewhat as soon as the series moved away from obscure historical figures and used One Piece or Zelda characters instead. 

Funny too, given that the most played genre can be summed up with the words "point and shoot."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's necessary to talk DOWN to other games in order to justify a theoretical FE JRPG (or lack thereof).

As in, if this happens one more time, I'm locking this thread, and dishing out the warnings I've been holding back on.  Between Smash, TMS banner, and CYL, it's not a good time to be a mod on this site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Harvey said:

Ok so we know that Fire Emblem is TRPG series where its tactics adding role playing elements. But would you like to see a spin off where the universe of Fire Emblem is practically a huge world and it plays more of a JRPG where you have turn based combat and doing several sidequests with more dialoge and cutscenes kinda like Xenoblade style?

Personally, I would like to see a spin off like that not because it can help Nintendo fill more of the RPG market but because with how the Mario RPG series are gonna be dormant from this point on after the last Paper Mario game bombed and that the Mario and Luigi series is doubtful now that Alphadream is gone, a spin off relating to Fire Emblem could atleast be nice and could fill the empty void of the Mario RPG absence to me atleast.

Nintendo already has two developers who are experienced in RPG games. Monolith and to some extent, Intelligent Systems. While the latter might not have experience writing great depth stories, they can make the mechanics interesting to say the least such as adding support scenes instead of conversations or depending on who you recruit, some of the game changes etc.

I'm not really into JRPGs, but I will play any reskin of Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door. Just give me Paper Marth: The Hundred Year Sword, an RPG-style retelling of FE1, and we're golden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see a JRPG working if the goal was to tell the story of a historic Fire Emblem character when the tactical gameplay wouldn't work as well. Being able to control a one-man army instead of placing a unit in the middle of the enemies range and pressing "wait" would be a nice change of pace. It helps that several Fire Emblem mechanics could easily work in a different kind of RPG with some tweaks. It doesn't have to be based on historical characters, either. Seeing what certain units did during timeskips, before joining the player's army, and/or after the game ends has its own appeal.

Personally, I haven't played a lot of JRPG's (does Mario & Luigi: Bowsers Inside Story count as one? Or is it considered an Action RPG?), and I don't think I've played a "pure" one that doesn't have some kind of significant gameplay twist. I have no interest in TMS, though more power to the people who were looking forward to the Switch release. Unless I'm intrigued by the concept, I think a Fire Emblem JRPG would be a pass for me, although I would still be happy for the people who are excited.

As for Fire Emblem spin-offs I would be interested in:

- I wouldn't mind seeing at least one Fire Emblem game that focuses on strategy, where you have to buy units, position generals, fight in unscripted battles, and so on. I know that supports, characters, and permadeath are what set Fire Emblem apart from other tactical games, but I think it would be cool to see a game in the series that focuses on the logistical side of war. And since it would be a spin-off, there could be the possibility of Fire Emblem characters being elite units and generals, and have situations like Chrom and Ike fight or Alm and Marth meet and so on.

- A fire Emblem Fighting game would also be cool. I would probably suck at it, but it could work. The appeal of seeing characters from different games interact and duel is pretty strong with this one.

- A game set after Awakening that deals with rebuilding a Taguel warren while fending off bandit attacks, handling diplomacy, and rebuilding a culture from the ground up. Essentially, combine the gameplay of Fire Emblem, King of Dragon Pass, and basebuilding/mining games. It would also be a good opportunity to add some lore and worldbuilding to the taguel and the world of Awakening in general. I'm not holding my breath for this to become a thing, but I really like the idea and hope something comes out of it someday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here's an idea. An action based JRPG set after the events of Radiant Dawn in which Ike sets off to explore new lands. Party members would be Ike, Soren, and Ranulf, alongside a few new faces. 

 

Leave certain things up to the player. There's an ambiguity to Ike in certain obvious regards that some appreciate. So, no canon romances, but allow for both male and female romance options, or a completely asexual ending.

 

And the end of the game could result in a biological child to inherit the Ragnell in one ending or a worthy successor (Ike finds a new hero to hand the blade to) in another. You'd even have the option to return home to visit a sickly Mist and leave the weapon in her family's care. Again, leaving the origin of Priam ambiguous, but allowing the player a chance to appreciate this under-developed character on their own terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as Marth's relation to Anri is through one of his siblings, perhaps Priam is related to Ike via Mist?  Yeah, that could be a nice plot point.  But that means Mist marries Boyd (or she stays single forever).

Edited by eclipse

Share this post


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

Setting aside XC2, RPG often try to have good narratives.

  • RPGs aren't Interactive Novels or pure Adventure games, that are boom or bust based on narrative and narrative-esque immersion. However, compared to a lot of genres: Fighting, Platformer, Action, MMO, FPS, Shump, 4X, Strategy, RPGs can be very narrative heavy.
  • Can be- Not every game in the genre tries, Etrian Odyssey is a pure gameplay experience, FFV leans on gameplay over plot, but a larger number of RPGs try telling a good story than do than a significant number of other genres.

Well I find the notion that RPG = narrative heavy to be pretty antiquated. We're some twenty years off from a time in gaming history where we had to worry about text limitations. Games of any genre can have as many words as they please. From collecting notes in Resident Evil (1996) to our modern action-adventure games where dialogue is near constant during gameplay - either between the protagonist and other characters, or just radio chatter and audiologs. Nobody runs with the assumption that good gameplay and good narrative come at the cost of each other. Nathan Drake making exertion sounds as he climbs up an unsteady cliff is compelling gameplay and narrative at once. It only gets boring if it's the eighth hour of climbing, just as the eight hour of pressing Attack in a menu tends to get boring.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that gameplay in the twenty first century has been just as carefully considered as any cutscene is. And it bugs me that modern jrpgs tend to find cutscenes as the primary means of delivering narrative - especially generic dialogue sequences. Why do I need ten hours of Rex being awkward around Pyra when that dialogue could have been delivered during any gameplay segment or by optionally talking to party members in specific contexts? Narrative gets delivered faster, and it also makes the gameplay feel more rich and varied when you can interact with the characters and world outside of cutscenes.

Edited by Glennstavos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Hawkwing said:

(does Mario & Luigi: Bowsers Inside Story count as one? Or is it considered an Action RPG?)

It's a turn-based RPG. Action Commands don't change that fact, and they're great in adding fun and liveliness to the game. In a way, I consider them a reminder of Mario's origins as a platformer. Platformers need reflexes, and Action Commands add them in a way that isn't always something you could do in Action or Fighting game. 

 

 

26 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

Nobody runs with the assumption that good gameplay and good narrative come at the cost of each other.

Won't disagree with this.

 

15 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

And it bugs me that modern jrpgs tend to find cutscenes as the primary means of delivering narrative - especially generic dialogue sequences. Why do I need ten hours of Rex being awkward around Pyra when that dialogue could have been delivered during any gameplay segment or by optionally talking to party members in specific contexts? Narrative gets delivered faster, and it also makes the gameplay feel more rich and varied when you can interact with the characters and world outside of cutscenes.

I can totally see this problem, I hope you haven't played the Bravely games then. They're fun to me, but they've this problem to a "t". I felt the slowdown in Second by the time of Chapter 5.

Though with XC2, mid-battle shouts of relevant dialogue could easily be drowned out by SPINNING EDGE! DYNAMIC SPARK SWORD! MEHMEHMEH! TOPPLE-WIND! BURNING SWOOOOOOORD! ...And don't forget the battle music. Subtitles and temporary disabling of anime battle quips would be necessary

Share this post


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

I can totally see this problem, I hope you haven't played the Bravely games then. They're fun to me, but they've this problem to a "t". I felt the slowdown in Second by the time of Chapter 5.

Bravely Default was an atrocious experience for me. What contempt those developers must have had for the player to withhold the ending so long. I've no interest in its sequel(s)

Quote

Though with XC2, mid-battle shouts of relevant dialogue could easily be drowned out by SPINNING EDGE! DYNAMIC SPARK SWORD! MEHMEHMEH! TOPPLE-WIND! BURNING SWOOOOOOORD! ...And don't forget the battle music. Subtitles and temporary disabling of anime battle quips would be necessary

They don't have to carry on conversations during battle. I was thinking more of the the quiet sections of the game where you're running between aggro ranges of monsters toward a destination and/or taking in the landscape of an area. In western rpgs, party members strike conversations with the player and each other all the time outside of battle. Usually one of hundreds of potential conversations based on who is in the party and what area you're in. I call this the "Dragon Age Origins party banter", though it probably originates from other games depending on how you define the concept. And when a battle does occur mid conversation, one of the characters says "we'll pick this up later" and then "so, you were saying?" once the battle has concluded.

Edited by Glennstavos

Share this post


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

Bravely Default was an atrocious experience for me. What contempt those developers must have had for the player to withhold the ending so long. I've no interest in its sequel(s)

The sequel learned from the first's ginormous mistake and didn't repeat it. -Not trying to convince you to try it. The idea of behind Default's error wasn't bad, it was just terribly bloated in execution, and made more for a movie or novel than a video game perhaps. The writing behind the mistake did not help in the least either.

 

32 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

They don't have to carry on conversations during battle. I was thinking more of the the quiet sections of the game where you're running between aggro ranges of monsters toward a destination and/or taking in the landscape of an area. In western rpgs, party members strike conversations with the player and each other all the time outside of battle. Usually one of hundreds of potential conversations based on who is in the party and what area you're in. I call this the "Dragon Age Origins party banter", though it probably originates from other games depending on how you define the concept. And when a battle does occur mid conversation, one of the characters says "we'll pick this up later" and then "so, you were saying?" once the battle has concluded.

I was specifically referring to antagonist confrontations here. I must've misread mention of this into your post.

As for peacetime, well Tales is beloved for its Skits, but I can very clearly tell their sudden stopping of all others things when they happen is one annoying very hair short of what you want. And I can envision some but not all Skits transitioning into what you desire. So close, but so far.

 

 

 

To stay more directly on topic, I will say that I think I'd prefer an original game, if with a more properly traditional FE setting, than a crossover for an FE RPG. Hopes and disappointments about the FE roster in case of a crossover would be unpleasant. Yet! If the RPG franchise being crossed with was to my liking, I could dismiss FE roster qualms. Xenoblade x FE would be fine if it was all 13-16 FE, if I had playable Dunban, Elma, and Morag to look forward to.

Edited by Interdimensional Observer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this is an idea I've had to change up the FE formula (it works for a spin-off), and it's to kinda become more like Valkyria Chronicles, or rather I guess Code Name Steam would be a better mix but given Valkyria Chronicles unique take on the strategy RPG I would prefer a spin-off closer to that.

Share this post


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

What's wrong with Warriors, on a level at which it should not exist? I genuinely want to know.

 

It did not take resources from mainline games, was not developed by IS, and its engine was used to build the next mainline game. Meaning, it actually furthered the franchise.

 

No comment on Warriors as a game. We all have our different valid opinions. Mine are positive on gameplay, negative on roster.

Mostly because fire emblems name is associated with it. same with encore, they are not good games and thus people can/will associate fire emblem with them sadly. We have much better things we should be known for. 

Edited by Zihark11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Zihark11 said:

Mostly because fire emblems name is associated with it. same encore, they are not good games and thus people can/will associate fire emblem with them sadly. We have much better things we should be known for. 

Shrugs. To some degree, I get that, but spinoffs don't have to be taken with a negative connotation.

 

I don't see Zelda fans ashamed to be associated with Hyrule Warriors. On the contrary, it was very well received. And if it weren't for roster controversy, I'm sure the same would be true for FEW.

 

Perhaps you could even consider it a point of pride. These days, JRPG warriors spinoffs are the in thing. Having one means you've become a large enough brand to sell spinoffs. It means that your IP is desirable and can be used to make another game more attractive. Did FE fans ever think their franchise would become that big in the pre-Awakening days?

Edited by Etheus

Share this post


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

Shrugs. To some degree, I get that, but spinoffs don't have to be taken with a negative connotation.

 

I don't see Zelda fans ashamed to be associated with Hyrule Warriors. On the contrary, it was very well received. And if it weren't for roster controversy, I'm sure the same would be true for FEW.

 

Perhaps you could even consider it a point of pride. These days, JRPG warriors spinoffs are the in thing. Having one means you've become a large enough brand to sell spinoffs. It means that your IP is desirable and can be used to make another game more attractive. Did FE fans ever think their franchise would become that big in the pre-Awakening days?

i see your points but to me the series gets the attention for the wrong reasons and the spinoffs don't help with that. I love fire emblem for its characters, world building and story, but i cant say everyone likes it for those reasons, at least not in 2020. im glad the series is finally getting traction and attention, but hopefully the community will be more united on why the series is good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Zihark11 said:

i see your points but to me the series gets the attention for the wrong reasons and the spinoffs don't help with that. I love fire emblem for its characters, world building and story, but i cant say everyone likes it for those reasons, at least not in 2020. im glad the series is finally getting traction and attention, but hopefully the community will be more united on why the series is good. 

I respect your opinion. But I would like to say that the entire appeal of Warriors spinoffs is characters. Warriors dropped the ball on its worldbuilding and story, but the reason why so many FE fans wanted this spinoff in the first place was to experience a power fantasy as these iconic characters that the grew up with.

 

It's also why there was so much fuss over iconic characters like Ike, Roy, Hector, etc. not making it in. 

 

And it's also why, with Warriors 2 speculation, the roster is the first and biggest topic to come up. It's the biggest selling point. 

 

I'm wondering, in that regard, if you would respect a FE spinoff that was all about story/characters/worldbuilding in the FE universe proper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Zihark11 said:

 im glad the series is finally getting traction and attention, but hopefully the community will be more united on why the series is good. 

Best case scenario. . .this will never happen.  Everyone has their own preferences.  Let others have their own reason for liking FE games, even if you don't agree with them.

Worst case scenario is that this happens, and "good" is everything you don't like.  Then what?

Share this post


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

I respect your opinion. But I would like to say that the entire appeal of Warriors spinoffs is characters. Warriors dropped the ball on its worldbuilding and story, but the reason why so many FE fans wanted this spinoff in the first place was to experience a power fantasy as these iconic characters that the grew up with.

 

It's also why there was so much fuss over iconic characters like Ike, Roy, Hector, etc. not making it in. 

 

And it's also why, with Warriors 2 speculation, the roster is the first and biggest topic to come up. It's the biggest selling point. 

 

I'm wondering, in that regard, if you would respect a FE spinoff that was all about story/characters/worldbuilding in the FE universe proper.

Good point. if they polished the game up id be willing to give it another try. Characters was a big thing. the 2 new ones i even forget their names cause they were that forgetful, were bad and it just felt like fates and awakening characters with a couple shadow dragon. Yes i would love a fire emblem spinoff if it stayed more true to what fire emblem is actually like. Like even a modern fire emblem with guns and shit would be interesting. Not like xcom though, same play style as fire emblem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have previously argued that Awakening and Three Houses would be more interesting if they were turn-based JRPG’s. I mean, if simpler games like Advance Wars or Into the Breach offer more compelling maps, then why would I play Awakening on a grid? It just limits my options. The broken pair that is soloing maps would still wipe screens on a JRPG, would it not? Thus, if the maps are not interesting, why not focus on the story and character interactions and forget about the grid? “Well, it would no longer be Fire Emblem then.” I do not know, mate, map design does not seem to be the priority anyway; and being on a grid does not to make it “tactical.”

I am not an RPG fan, but I would definitely try a Fire Emblem RPG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this basically what the cancelled Wii game was supposed to be?

 

Anyway, I would love to see a spin-off or crossover that leans a lot more heavily towards JRPG. However, I buy a Fire Emblem game expecting tactics; if there's no need for tactics, then why am I buying something titled Fire Emblem?

I think an ideal Fire Emblem JRPG would be something like this:

The exploration is real-time in a segmented-open-world, similar to The Witcher 3 or Dragon Age: Inquistion. There would be multiple locations, including important cities, castles, ancient plot-relevant ruins, etc. However, when you enter a world section with enemies, it changes to a hybrid between the Fire Emblem tactical structure and typical JRPG combat. 

Does that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2020 at 7:11 AM, LucarioGamer812 said:

So this is an idea I've had to change up the FE formula (it works for a spin-off), and it's to kinda become more like Valkyria Chronicles, or rather I guess Code Name Steam would be a better mix but given Valkyria Chronicles unique take on the strategy RPG I would prefer a spin-off closer to that.

 

Uhh...that's basically it being in the same genre instead of it being a JRPG?

I think a lot of you seem to think that Fire Emblem having a spinoff as a JRPG is a bad thing when it completely means the opposite. Basically, you're just saying Nintendo to not do much of RPGs when that is something that they should venture into considering their capabilitiy of doing so. Think of it this way. People mostly like Fire Emblem because of its characters. So if they just want those characters to be played in some JRPG where they don't have to think hard to keep them alive, that kinda works.

FE Warriors worked because you're playing with your favorite characters here or atleast characters that you weren't exactly getting full control off. The same can go for the JRPG route where you can possibly see the depth of some characters who weren't as deep in the main games.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...