Jump to content
Florete

I like Fates more than Three Houses

Recommended Posts

Just now, Sid Starkiller said:

hat's just probability. Hell, I missed a 90% attack in 3H just the other day. The only time you're guaranteed to hit is at 100%. The only time you're guaranteed to miss is at 0%.

When you miss high 90s multiple times in the same stage and get hit by single digits multiple times in the same stage... when does probability actually goes off chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ciphertul said:

When you miss high 90s multiple times in the same stage and get hit by single digits multiple times in the same stage... when does probability actually goes off chances.

...that's how probability works? I don't understand the issue you're having. A 90% chance is just a chance. It's not a guarantee. It never was, and never will be.

Share this post


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

I don’t see how getting hit by single digit hit rates and missing with high 90s is “meant for experienced players”. Testing your luck with 50-60 range is one thing but it doesn’t matter how experienced your are when the game hates the player

Yeah, that has nothing to do with Conquest. It doesn't have any kind of unique RNG. You got unlucky or your bad experiences are sticking out more than your normal ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More like, Fates has a. . .unique RNG (by that, I mean "have flashbacks to the SNES days").  I think it carried over to 3H, too.

Edited by eclipse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probability means that if I have 3% chance that mean 3 out of 100 would connect but I constantly got hit with 3% the actual chance based on experience was more around 70. I got hit 7 times out of 10 in sub-10 percentage.  In the same level.

Edited by ciphertul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ciphertul said:

Probability means that if I have 3% chance that mean 3 out of 100 would connect but I constantly got hit with 3% the actual chance based on experience was more around 70. I got hit 7 times out of 10 in sub-10 percentage.  In the same level.

THAT'S HOW PROBABILITY WORKS. The chance that something might happen is NOT a guarantee of how often it will actually happen. Seriously, what is the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sid Starkiller said:

THAT'S HOW PROBABILITY WORKS. The chance that something might happen is NOT a guarantee of how often it will actually happen. Seriously, what is the problem?

The problem is you won’t simple admit that this is my opinion, I was attempting to explain why this is one of the causes that Fates is worse then 3H. You are trying to argue someone’s experience, that is inviting conflict.

Share this post


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

The problem is you won’t simple admit that this is my opinion, I was attempting to explain why this is one of the causes that Fates is worse then 3H. You are trying to argue someone’s experience, that is inviting conflict.

That's what you were doing? I thought you were complaining that things didn't go exactly the way the % chance said they "should".

Share this post


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

Probability means that if I have 3% chance that mean 3 out of 100 would connect but I constantly got hit with 3% the actual chance based on experience was more around 70. I got hit 7 times out of 10 in sub-10 percentage.  In the same level.

That is not what probability means nor how it works, mate. Your perception has nothing to do with probability.

Take a simpler example and toss a coin. It is perfectly possible that you get tails twice, or thrice, even five times in a row; but the probability of getting tails will always be 50 %, and it is independent of your results. It is 50 % because a coin lands on one side and there are two sides.
Mathematics does tell you that if you repeated the experiment infinitely, the occurrence of the two possible results will match that 50 % chance.
In the case you described, you did not try the experiment a high enough number of times to see the occurrence match the probability, or you simply “had bad luck.” There were 97 red marbles and 3 black ones; you got a black one. More than once, you say. But the probability of getting it was, is, and will be 3 %, regardless of what you got, get or will get.

I read your message stating that you were trying to give an opinion, even though your phrasing did not express this idea. And I am only telling you this hoping that, in the future, you will have a lighter time dealing with “probabilities.”
Every action we take every day has a probability of success, and the immense majority of results are not guaranteed. We simply do not see the percentages.

Edited by starburst
Grammar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, starburst said:

That is not what probability means nor how it works, mate. Your perception has nothing to do with probability.

Take a simpler example and toss a coin. It is perfectly possible that you get tails twice, or thrice, even five times in a row; but the probability of getting tails will always be 50 %, and it is independent of your results. It is 50 % because a coin lands on one side and there are two sides.
Mathematics does tell you that if you repeated the experiment infinitely, the occurrence of the two possible results will match that 50 % chance.
In the case you described, you did not try the experiment a high enough number of times to see the occurrence match the probability, or you simply “had bad luck.” There were 97 red marbles and 3 black ones; you got a black one. More than once, you say. But the probability of getting it was, is, and will be 3 %, regardless of what you got, get or will get.

I read your message stating that you were trying to give an opinion, even though your phrasing did not express this idea. And I am only telling you this hoping that, in the future, you will have a lighter time dealing with “probabilities.”
Every action we take every day has a probability of success, and the immense majority of results are not guaranteed. We simply do not see the percentages.

Every single outcome in FE it technically 50/50 you succeed or you fail. you're right, sure that might not be "probability" but still regardless constantly failing do to thing far outside of my control is a reasonable reason to dislike something no? Perception has got to do with everything, you "perceived" my intention show as much. My time dealing with "probability" can and does impact my view of games.

Oh and "I am only telling you this hoping that you have a lighter time dealing "experiences"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A month ago after completing my first playthrough, I'd have called you absolutely insane, OP. Now, going into route 4, I almost feel this way just because the monastery grind on maddening sucks that much. Being able to fire up Conquest lunatic and just "go" is a huge plus for me. It may even outweigh the story gap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's strange, really. While there is more stuff in Fates that angers me more than Three Houses, I still overall prefer the former. I dislike both CQ Corrin AND BR Corrin. I hate how Camilla is treated. I hate the fanservice-y armor. I hate that Nohr is so obviously evil, Hoshido so obviously good. (But what I hate about Fates the most is the RNG. I swear, it is rigged in the enemy's favor...)

But...well, while Three Houses doesn't have a character I hate as much as some of the ones in Fates? Overall--as a whole--I prefer the characters of Fates, even if they aren't as "grounded" as a lot of the ones in Three Houses. I still love the Nohr siblings more than anyone in the latter game, for example. And while the first part of Three Houses still has a fairly, fairly similar story no matter which House you decide to pick, the story in Fates changes as soon as the paths split. I also prefer the concept of Fates--do you side with the people who raised you, even though you might be on the wrong side morally? Or do you decide to defend an innocent country, even if it means turning your blade on your loved ones? ...whereas Three Houses is simply just kind of...pick the students you want to teach.

I would also say that Fates has the better gameplay...or at least Conquest. I think everyone's said it before, but that one in particular has some of the best maps in the series (even though some could be quite...unfair in difficulty). I would also say that Fates has the better replayability, due to the pairing and various seals. I also much prefer the music in Fates. I really can't remember that many music tracks in Three Houses, whereas Fates has stuff like You of the Dark/LightPray to the DarkDusk Falls, and much more. And I love just how absolutely...dream-like Past Below and Woleb Tsap sound.

 

...so, yeah. There's my two cents. Or three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm convinced people only think Fates RNG is bad (it's definitely weird) because so many people grew up with the true hit GBA nonsense that was so ridiculously skewed in the players favor that they think 85% should hit all the time and 33% should never land. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boomhauer007 said:

I'm convinced people only think Fates RNG is bad (it's definitely weird) because so many people grew up with the true hit GBA nonsense that was so ridiculously skewed in the players favor that they think 85% should hit all the time and 33% should never land. 

Anyone that's played a GBA Hard Mode without turtling knows how ridiculous 2RN can be (one of my drafts features a 93% miss, which required some serious RNG abuse to fix).

In other words, take this generalization elsewhere.

Share this post


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

I would also say that Fates has the better gameplay...or at least Conquest. I think everyone's said it before, but that one in particular has some of the best maps in the series (even though some could be quite...unfair in difficulty). I would also say that Fates has the better replayability, due to the pairing and various seals. I also much prefer the music in Fates. I really can't remember that many music tracks in Three Houses, whereas Fates has stuff like You of the Dark/LightPray to the DarkDusk Falls, and much more. And I love just how absolutely...dream-like Past Below and Woleb Tsap sound.

This! I find that Fates have many more maps and music that are more memorable for good reasons (mostly on Conquest). Even Birthright which, according to the fanbase,  is apparently the easiest game ever created in existence has that one chapter ('Camilla') that's memorable and provides a good challenge. On Birthright Lunatic, the map that introduces Reina is also a decent challenge. I've played through 3H four times, and the only map I can remember clearly preskip is Miklan's and that's for bad reasons (Maddening turtling. 65 turns ftw).

The fact that the more praised maps of 3H are available in a DLC should suggest the quality of the map design in 3H.

The shortcomings of 3H gets completely overshadows by the better story and presentation of characters. Although my theory is that if 3H supports weren't fully voiced and are the same length as supports during the 3DS era, then the characters would be pretty shallow too. I think having the game be fully voiced allowed for the supports to be much longer since people don't need to read that much which in turns allow for better developed characters.

Share this post


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

I don’t see how getting hit by single digit hit rates and missing with high 90s is “meant for experienced players”. Testing your luck with 50-60 range is one thing but it doesn’t matter how experienced your are when the game hates the player

14 hours ago, ciphertul said:

[...] you're right, sure that might not be "probability" but still regardless constantly failing do to thing far outside of my control is a reasonable reason to dislike something no?

Mandatory “Conquest only hates the type of player who doesn´t use the resources it gives them” comment.

An experienced player might look at the potentially shaky hitrates of Fates and Conquest in particular. Thereupon said player might start to look into “how do I avoid this outcome/improve my units’ performance?” And then said player will realise the ways Fates and Conquest in particular give him, in order to influence enemy Avoid, thereby possibly preventing failing to hit.

17 hours ago, ciphertul said:

The problem is you won’t simple admit that this is my opinion, I was attempting to explain why this is one of the causes that Fates is worse then 3H. You are trying to argue someone’s experience, that is inviting conflict.

So, just to see whether or not I understood your opinion correctly:

You consider (for possibly other reasons as well) Three Houses to be the superior game to Fates and specifically Conquest because you have less trouble hitting/evading the enemy?

Is this correct or did I miss your point?

 

Regardless of this there are two things I would like to ask.

  1. Do you think, being able to Divine Pulse back in case of an unfavourable combat outcome (e.g. a [possibly critical] attack misses) influences this opinion?

  2. Have you taken a dip into TH Maddening difficulty yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

Regardless of this there are two things I would like to ask.

 

  1. Do you think, being able to Divine Pulse back in case of an unfavourable combat outcome (e.g. a [possibly critical] attack misses) influences this opinion?

     

  2. Have you taken a dip into TH Maddening difficulty yet?

1.Divine pulse is a crutch that I do not use, miss once or twice maybe even three times with 97-99 hit is one thing but missing five times with same rates does effect one’s outlook on a game

2.I play for fun, if you can have fun on maddening more power to you. I feel maddening(and lunatic) take away from the game as you can’t as easily play it the way you want to.

And let me ask you why, Your mandatory comment has what meaning exactly?

Edited by ciphertul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2020 at 2:38 PM, Etrurian emperor said:

In the end I don't respect Fates nearly as much as I do Three Houses and I'm a lot harsher on its flaws. The reason for this is that so much of what went wrong with Fates doesn't seem to be mistakes but deliberate acts of bad faith. In Fates I often feel that the developers know exactly what they should have done artistically but that they also refuses to do it because other factors took preference.

I think this is a very good take. Even if Fates and Three Houses' flaws were exactly the same and directly comparable, which I don't for a second think they are, then Fates would still come up short because its flaws feel intentional and cynical while Three Houses' shortcomings feel like they stem from an insufficient development time. There's a big difference.

The difference in the way the two games treat their casts is night and day. While not everyone is a winner in Three Houses, you generally get to know the characters pretty in depth, their likes and dislikes, their take on the current conflict and the reasons why they came to Garreg Mach in the first place. Everyone has a unique background from places you can actually see on the detailed map of Fódlan and the surrounding areas, making them seem part of the world. It helps that the worldbuilding is also solid, complete with different cultures and traditions and noble houses.

In Fates, we learn very little about the vast majority of characters, many of who only exist as a satellite to other, more important characters. Kaze is a good example of this, turning his back on the good guy nation to help Corrin because they mentioned that they want to end the war and "change things from the inside, stop the death and destruction". When Corrin invades Hoshido, Kaze doesn't say or do anything about that fact, despite that the main reason he defected was to stop all the fighting. 

Even the supposedly more important characters in Fates, like the royal siblings, end up contributing fairly little. It was already a strange idea to give Corrin two sets of siblings with the exact same composition and age range, but weirder still to market them so heavily when they themselves primarily work as satellite characters to Corrin and are defined mainly through their relationship with them. Remove the legendary weapons (that no sister got for some reason, hmm...) and, besides Takumi in Conquest and Elise in Birthright, their involvement in the plot based on their own actions is limited to say the least. You collect them almost like Pokémon in almost all routes and then they sort of...tag along.

This might have been fine if Fates had a stronger overarching narrative. While one can rightly talk about plot holes and plot conveniences, I would also like to bring up something that is more rarely discussed, namely the interactions between the characters before and after chapters and the structure of the plots in all three versions. After the prologue, very, very little time is spent on the characters actually interacting or talking about anything that isn't immediately connected to the main plot. There is no character building or any moment where you can see the chemistry between the characters. Look at Birthright, for example, and how Corrin suddenly feels right at home with these people who until very recently had been strangers to them. There's no dialogue about how Corrin doesn't feel like they fit in or  how they don't understand some of the cultural aspects, and the siblings never ask about their time in Nohr, how they got along with the Nohrian royals, etc. Everything is brushed aside to focus only on the plot at hand, which leads directly into another major issue: the idea of all three versions after a certain point is to get Corrin from point A to point B, and they get attacked/tested on the way there. There is very little planning, talk of strategy, resources, morale or anything of the sort; it's Corrin and their army marching in a straight line until they run into an obstacle .

While there are many more things I'd like to bring up, I'll give my two cents about the "choice" in Fates: it's all a lie.

Ignoring the fact that the version that you bought dictates the side that you can choose, all of it is smoke and mirrors for several different reasons. First and foremost, Corrin is not related to the Hoshidans by blood despite that being the premise. Now, this could've been a good twist if used correctly, but the problem is that it's not used at all - if you don't marry any of, er, your "siblings", this is only brought up in Revelation after which it's immediately ignored and forgotten about. If you do marry one of your non-siblings and the truth is revealed, then nothing changes anyway; one of the main arguments the Hoshidan royals had used to win over Corrin to their side suddenly doesn't apply anymore, and what's worse, Ryouma knew about it and actively lied straight to Corrin's face, but this also gets ignored. Just like Kaze, it's an inconvenience that's swept under the carpet.

The other reason why the choice doesn't work is even more straightforward: Revelation renders it null and void. Revelation makes both Birthright and Conquest completely obsolete in terms of the story. Some people will happily bring up the multiverse as an argument for everything and nothing being canon, but the fact remains that Revelation offers a golden ending where none of the siblings/Azura die and you defeat the true big bad behind the entire conflict, making the choice to go Birthright and Conquest de facto wrong and a bad idea.

Share this post


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

1.Divine pulse is a crutch that I do not use, miss once or twice maybe even three times with 97-99 hit is one thing but missing five times with same rates does effect one’s outlook on a game

So, are you saying that should you miss 5 hits with above 90% hit rate in Three Houses you would consider it a worse game than you consider it now?

 

1 hour ago, ciphertul said:

2.I play for fun, if you can have fun on maddening more power to you. I feel maddening(and lunatic) take away from the game as you can’t as easily play it the way you want to.

This had less to do with being about fun or challenging yourself, but rather with the many times you will inevitably face enemies that you do not have high hitrates against and low hitrates even with gambits on Maddening difficulty. It was not meant as a sort of “Do YoU EvEn LiFt BrO?” comment.

 

1 hour ago, ciphertul said:

And let me ask you why, Your mandatory comment has what meaning exactly?

Because Fire Emblem Fates gives you a great many ways of dealing with its challenges. On the contrary to hating me, I would go so far and even say Conquest loves the player (just to trigger people though).

However, using these tools requires the player to do some very basic things, I feel.

  • checking enemy stats.
  • checking enemy skills.
  • checking enemy inventories.
  • checking enemy positioning, movement range, attack ranges.
  • thoroughly looking at the map layout and it´s specifics.

Now onto some of these tools.

  • stat benchmarks, while not necessarily easy to reach are more lenient due to temporary stat buffs, permanent stat buffs, cooking, pairing up, rallying.
  • Fates allows you to use two very, very strong mechanics: Attack and Guard Stance. Some units are tremendously powerful when paired up. Attack Stance on the other hand, is nothing less than a brave attack, allowing you to dispatch enemies without taking damage or be afflicted with debuffs.
  • Personal Skills. These have so many different aspects to them. For one there is Niles. Incredible utility. Similarly Elise, Camillas, Corrins, Silas, (Jakobs, Gunther, Felicia in regard to Corrin), Corrins personal skills tremendously boost other units performances. Bennys, Laslows and Effies PS aren´t to be overlooked either.
  • Class skills. These are more complicated due to the levels they may be available. But Breaker skills and Rally skills are very powerful (especially on child units). Skills such as Heartseeker, Gentilhomme/Demoiselle, Elbow Room are nothing to forget either.
  • I will only shortly mention Staves, as I personally only ever hoard them . But I don´t think it needs explaining why freezing, entrapping and enfeebling an enemy is a useful thing.

 

Do you see where I´m coming from?

Edited by Imuabicus

Share this post


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

So, are you saying that should you miss 5 hits with above 90% hit rate in Three Houses you would consider it a worse game than you consider is now?

The thing is, it’s not as problematic in 3H. I generally don’t have to worry about whiffing on it.

 

10 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

This had less to do with being about fun or challenging yourself, but rather with the many times you will inevitably face enemies that you do not have high hitrates against and low hitrates even with gambits on Maddening difficulty. It was not meant as a sort of “Do YoU EvEn LiFt BrO?” comment.

This whole thread is about enjoyment, If your opinion is based on challenge and difficulty your enjoyment of it will differ. If you WANT to face bad hit rates is one thing. This whole quote is counterintuitive to the point of the thread.

 

10 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

Because Fire Emblem Fates gives you a great many ways of dealing with its challenges. On the contrary to hating me, I would go so far and even say Conquest loves the player (just to trigger people though).

 

However, using these tools requires the player to do some very basic things, I feel.

 

  • checking enemy stats.

     

  • checking enemy skills.

     

  • checking enemy inventories.

     

  • checking enemy positioning, movement range, attack ranges.

     

  • thoroughly looking at the map layout and it´s specifics.

Now onto some of these tools.

  • stat benchmarks, while not necessarily easy to reach are more lenient due to temporary stat buffs, permanent stat buffs, cooking, pairing up, rallying.

     

  • Fates allows you to use two very, very strong mechanics: Attack and Guard Stance. Some units are tremendously powerful when paired up. Attack Stance on the other hand, is nothing less than a brave attack, allowing you to dispatch enemies without taking damage or be afflicted with debuffs.

     

  • Personal Skills. These have so many different aspects to them. For one there is Niles. Incredible utility. Similarly Elise, Camillas, Corrins, Silas, (Jakobs, Gunther, Felicia in regard to Corrin), Corrins personal skills tremendously boost other units performances. Bennys, Laslows and Effies PS aren´t to be overlooked either.

     

  • Class skills. These are more complicated due to the levels they may be available. But Breaker skills and Rally skills are very powerful (especially on child units). Skills such as Heartseeker, Gentilhomme/Demoiselle, Elbow Room are nothing to forget either.

     

  • I will only shortly mention Staves, as I personally only ever hoard them . But I don´t think it needs explaining why freezing, entrapping and enfeebling an enemy is a useful thing.

 

 

Do you see where I´m coming from?

So, have you watched me play? You seem to think that I don’t know how to play FE. If you’re gonna criticize my way of playing a game, that would be more of a PM. The way you’re coming off is that you’re looking down your nose at us(me). I don’t know your experience with the FE series not do you know mine, so I would suggest wording your messages more carefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ciphertul said:
21 minutes ago, Imuabicus said:

This had less to do with being about fun or challenging yourself, but rather with the many times you will inevitably face enemies that you do not have high hitrates against and low hitrates even with gambits on Maddening difficulty. It was not meant as a sort of “Do YoU EvEn LiFt BrO?” comment.

This whole thread is about enjoyment, If your opinion is based on challenge and difficulty your enjoyment of it will differ. If you WANT to face bad hit rates is one thing. This whole quote is counterintuitive to the point of the thread.

It was meant as an example to highlight a very specific part of gameplay, since as far as I remember there are few instances where TH Hard features extreme hit difficulties (excluding mini-/ bosses). Who plays what game with whatever intent behind it was never part of it.

 

19 minutes ago, ciphertul said:

So, have you watched me play? You seem to think that I don’t know how to play FE. If you’re gonna criticize my way of playing a game, that would be more of a PM. The way you’re coming off is that you’re looking down your nose at us(me). I don’t know your experience with the FE series not do you know mine, so I would suggest wording your messages more carefully.

I answered your question. If I insulted you while doing so, I´m sorry.

And yes, if somebody argues that influencing Hitrates in Fates is far outside their control I start to wonder, because it´s the direct opposite to my own experience.

Share this post


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

And yes, if somebody argues that influencing Hitrates in Fates is far outside their control I start to wonder, because it´s the direct opposite to my own experience.

So you did just say “Yea, I’m looking down my nose at you.” Such altruism, lowering yourself to our level to impart thy wisdom. So tell me, I’m my situation, a swordmaster(paired up with master ninja/support level B) with duelist blow and in +eva terrain, how would you use your infinite wisdom and knowledge to better that match?

Share this post


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

Uhh please don't turn this into a war

Sorry, really felt like they were actively trying to irritate me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've played and completed all three routes of Fates. I have only completed one route of Three Houses so far, so I cannot really compare them in terms of quality. 

However, I will say about Fates, it is very much a product of the 3DS era. It came right after Awakening: the game that saved the franchise through good marketing and being a 3DS game in 2012/2013, and playing Fates felt less like playing a game, and more like playing through an experiment: one in which, whatever gameplay mechanic came to mind, they just threw it in to see what worked and what didn't, and what would resonate with their customers most after the huge influx of new fans.

I hear a lot of people say that Conquest has some of the best gameplay in FE, but I don't see it; for me, the gameplay in all three routes of Fates is bogged down by a heavy reliance on experimental gimmicks, all placed on top of Awakening's foundation. There's a reason it was marketed gameplay-wise as Birthright being like Awakening and Conquest being like the old FE games. And yet, because Conquest is built on top of Awakening, I don't think it succeeds in that regard. It also leans heavily on thrown-in gimmicks and it mistakes complexity for depth. Every aspect of Fates' gameplay, except maybe for shuriken, feels ill-considered and thrown-in, and it's hard for me to enjoy a game that doesn't feel like it's following a clear purpose/intention. 

 

Playing Three Houses so far has been a lot like playing through Breath of the Wild for me: the game does not feel great overall when playing through it for a large stretch of time, but every now and then, there's those moments of almost-perfection where everything works together and the game feels utterly fantastic to play through. The gameplay feels completely overhauled, as if sitting on a brand new foundation. It's isn't "like Awakening", nor is it "like the old FE games", and everything within it feels likes it's there as part of a particular goal, rather than just thrown in; even the unnecessary fishing mini-game, which I would normally dismiss as thrown in because it's in every RPG, does feel like it has a reason for existing in Three Houses. Nothing feels thrown in, except maybe for the adjutant system.  Like with Breath of the Wild, I think that what Three Houses does best, is lay the foundation for new FE games to come; I could see a sequel building on top of what's been set with Three Houses and making a truly great game. 

 

Does that make sense? 

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...