Jump to content
Patriarch

Describe your "perfect" Fire Emblem game.

Recommended Posts

Take Three Houses, throw it out the window because the game engine is ugly and needs to be restarted from scratch.

Story:

1.Sequel to Sacred Stones or something on par with FE4 in terms of depressing.

2. I want it really depressing and gritty. Kill off main characters without informing the player (ex: Kaze, FE4 Gen 1, Orson Leaving)

3. Something very violent. War is supposed to be gritty.

4. Include references to their games so that the games can be connected.

gameplay:

1. Traditional recruitment like games before FE13

2. Bring back capturing, rescuing, summoning, and keep mechanics like push, drawback, super canto, and archers attacking at close range.

3. Remove class changing altogether and instead have something like branching promotions like in sacred stones.

4. Have dismounting but it needs to be nerfed.

5. Have simple skills like in FE4, FE5, FE9, FE10. I don’t like the whole skill emblem thing brought with FE13, FE14, FE16.

6. Weapons should either be very limited and cannot be traded like in FE4 or weapons not being repairable like in FE8

7. CALM DOWN THE SUPPORT CONVERSATIONS FOR HEAVEN’S SAKE. Limit who can support who like in the GBA games but improve the system so that is not clunky and slow.

8. Have conversations like in FE4 where you get stat points and items.

9. Branching paths like in FE5 and FE8 but instead of having two paths, have the player chooses between two superset branching paths. (4 total)

10. Keep the amount of units you can recruit small so that you can deploy every unit you have like in FE2/15, and FE4

11. No central base you return to like in FE14 and FE16 but instead have moving camps like in FE4, FE9, FE10.

12. Be able to run around your camp as your main lord (or any character in your army that you choose) and go and talk to people like in FE16. However support conversations would only be between certain characters.

13. Remove Avatars.... period. They do not belong in fire emblem in my opinion. The least offensive one is Mark and that’s because he barely does anything.

14. Have moments where you have to split your army into different chapters like in FE10.

15. Improve infantry units in some way.

16. bring back Laguz like transformations.

17. While I think romance is perfectly justifiable in FE4, I think it needs to be toned down exponentially in future games. I don’t like the whole pair whoever with whoever. I want it to be like in GBA titles or PoR where some characters are just meant to be together like Neimi and Colm, and Gilliam and Syrene.

18. Bring back traditional weapon levels and the way they are increased. I would also be okay with something like FE11 where the the higher your weapon rank is, the more efficient you are with those weapons.

19. Tellius Bonus EXP

Game Modes:

1. Normal, Hard, Lunatic, Reverse Lunatic

2. Reverse recruitment, Iron Man mode, Paragon mode, negative growths mode, 0% growths mode.

3. Level editors with terrain customization. Something like forging in Halo or Mario maker. You can make your own maps and draw your own characters kind of like what was done in mii verse. You could also have some sort of character creator menu like in FE12, FE13, and FE14. You could also make your own skills for these characters.

4. PVP like in FE11

5. A post game like in FE8 and FE15 where you travel around, recruit new characters like in FE8 and FE13 and also unlock characters who were killed off in the story.

Graphics

1. Anything but what we have now with Three Houses. Doom and Zelda look way better than Three Houses. 

2. More cutscenes but have them be in engine so that they would be easier to make. Don’t have limited movement like in Three Houses. Those animations are clunky and awkward. 

3. Good music like always. Every game has amazing music.

4. The battle animations I think are really good in Three Houses so that style I would like to keep.

5. The voice acting in FE15 is some of the best I’ve ever seen in video games. Who ever was in charge of hiring those people, bring them back and give them a pay raise.

I if I ticked you off with my opinions, let’s talk about it.

Edited by Stephano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2020 at 3:01 AM, Glennstavos said:

You don't have to beat around the bush. Nobody would object to Oliver as the protagonist of a perfect fire emblem game. It's a splendid idea.

Three cheers for you sir. 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2020 at 10:54 AM, Etheus said:

Start with Three Houses.

 

Shrink the base of operations to a fraction of its size with no loading screens.

 

Make it more enemy phase focused and add multiple Defense missions for climatic Elincia's Gambit style battles to break up the pace.

 

Decrease the number of routes - focusing on telling two well written sides of a morally gray conflict. 

 

Remove all outside actors. No magical dragon goddess. No mole people. Hinge the conflict on a natural war for resources or some other politically understandable source of conflict.

 

Stop giving the middle finger to infantry lance classes.

 

Add a lot more class options and improve the class system.

 

No gender locked classes.

 

Combine all magic types into Magic Rank and give every character one spell per Magic Rank. 

 

Restrict Auxiliary Battles to 1 per free day to improve pacing.

 

Add Tellius' Bonus Experience system. This is generated through missions, paralogues, auxiliary battles, and seminars.

 

Allow Seminar participants to be manually selected. Increase the weapon xp gained and restore some uses of all sacred weapons (combine with Rest).

 

Remove lost items and make fishing fun, with an auto fish option for players who don't want to bother with it all all.

So, answer #2

 

Tellius story, characters, map design, and music. 

Shadow Dragon/New Mystery portrait art style.

Modern character models, like Three Houses but higher quality. 

Branching classes ala Sacred Stones

Combat arts and TH magic system.

No ambush spawns, ever. 

Lots of difficulty settings with smaller jumps between difficulties, making it easier to find a personal sweet spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. It has to be dark. That is, it has to have gore, famine, genocide, rape, and everything else that comes with war. War is monstruous and people are slaughtered. Show the player those aspects. Show them soldiers removing the bodies of their dead comrades from a filthy, bloody soil filled with exposed organs, maggots, flies, and broken weapons soaked in blood. Make them feel disturbed.
  2. Good voice acting to really demonstrate the feelings of the characters.
  3. A dark story where the "bad guys" are not evil just because they want to or because they are possesed. No one truly has evil intentions when they ascend power, they simply have a different point of view or get corrupted with power along the way since humans are flawed creatures. Therefore, make the "bad guys" have good qualities. Also, do not make them all dark priests. The concept of "black" or "darkness" should not be directly associated with evil. I believe Edelgard and Sephiran are examples of good "vilains".
  4. It has to be linear and must not have grinding maps.
  5. It has to kill off likeable, playable characters without warning the player and without compromising the rest of the game gameplay-wise.
  6. It has to limit the player somehow so that the maps are designed with a specific diversity of characters in mind. That is, at most, Sacred Stones branching promotions.
  7. It has to have the canto or even super canto mechanic.
  8. No ambush spawns.
  9. The player has to be able to forge and repair weapons.
  10. Combat arts based on weapon usage.
  11. It must have branching paths or different routes since the very beginning in order for the game to have replay value.
  12. Make the nations based on real ones and make the people from that place resemble each other. That is, no nation with a disgustingly large variety of hair, eye, or skin colour. It is fine to have people with odd hair colours, such as green or blue, as long as they have their own nation. The nation that resembles Germany must have German names, the nation that resembles Japan must have Japanese names.
  13. If the main character leads an army, the game must have generic units at the player's disposal which grant bonus experience to be used at the base in order to give the feeling that the player is indeed commanding an army and not a small group of people against an entire nation. That, or at least feature generic units alongside them during combat, just like Three Houses has with nearly every enemy even if they are not commanding a battalion. The battalion feature, alongside gambits, is also nice.
  14. Have all units wear headgear during combat animations. What in the world is an armoured knight doing with the most vulnerable part of his body completely exposed above all that heavy armour? It looks ridiculous.
  15. The weapon triangle has to be present. Preferably, the one from the Tellius series with at least a boost of 20% to avoid/hit.
  16. It must have meaningful support conversations. However, there is no need to have a lot of them if they do not lead to something interesting. Also, there is no need for everyone to have support conversations with each other.
  17. It must have different bases along the course of the game. It also has to limit the player's movement around the world map if there is one at all, which I believe there should not be.
  18. A small and simple amount of skills is enough. There is no need to overdo it like in Awakening, Fates, or Three Houses. Dear God, do not even get me started on Heroes.
  19. No pair-up mechanic, especially not the one from Awakening.
  20. No avatar.
Edited by Erick
Language

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Stephano said:

Take Three Houses, throw it out the window because the game engine is ugly and needs to be restarted from scratch.

😂 You got my attention, mate. This was a solid start.

I do not have experience in some games that you mention, but I agree with various of your points.

19 hours ago, Stephano said:

- Story:
2. I want it really depressing and gritty. Kill off main characters without informing the player [...]

- gameplay:
2. Bring back capturing, rescuing, summoning, and keep mechanics like push, drawback, super canto, and archers attacking at close range.
3. Remove class changing altogether and instead have something like branching promotions like in sacred stones.
5. Have simple skills [...]
7. CALM DOWN THE SUPPORT CONVERSATIONS FOR HEAVEN’S SAKE [...]
17. While I think romance is perfectly justifiable in FE4 [...] I want it to be like in GBA titles or PoR where some characters are just meant to be together [...]

- Graphics
1. Anything but what we have now with Three Houses. Doom and Zelda look way better than Three Houses.
3. Good music [...]
5. The voice acting in FE15 is some of the best I’ve ever seen in video games [...]

 

I actually agree with more points than the ones I list here, but either I was neutral to the ones removed or they were not my priorities.
(Since the numbers are assigned by the formatting, removing each of them was the only way to preserve the numbering.)

11 hours ago, Erick said:
  1. It has to be dark. That is, it has to have gore, famine, genocide, rape, and everything else that comes with war. War is monstruous and people are slaughtered. Show the player those aspects [...] Make them feel disturbed.
  2. Good voice acting to really demonstrate the feelings of the characters.
  3. A dark story where the "bad guys" are not evil just because they want to or because they are possesed. No one truly has evil intentions when they ascend power, they simply have a different point of view or get corrupted with power along the way since humans are flawed creatures [...]
  4. It has to be linear and must not have grinding maps.
  5. It has to kill off likeable, playable characters without warning the player and without compromising the rest of the game gameplay-wise.
  6. ---
  7. ---
  8. ---
  9. The player has to be able to forge and repair weapons.
  10. ---
  11. ---
  12. Make the nations based on real ones and make the people from that place resemble each other [...]
  13. ---
  14. ---
  15. The weapon triangle has to be present [...]
  16. It must have meaningful support conversations. However, there is no need to have a lot of them if they do not lead to something interesting [...]
  17. ---
  18. A small and simple amount of skills is enough [...]
  19. No pair-up mechanic, especially not the one from Awakening.
  20. ---

Point 18: I do no think that the four skills (two per tier) in Conquest was "overdoing it", but I am also not fond of skill-grabbing though multiple re-classing.
If anything, skills add flavour and variety to units, specially to enemies. Skills made enemies unique, and let two otherwise identical units pose entirely different threats to the player. I also liked some Personal Skills, but could do without them.

Point 19: I would like to have Attack Stance back. In my opinion, it adds complexity and variety to the tactical side of the game. Without Attack Stance, you know exactly which of your units can kill a certain enemy and which cannot. With Attack Stance (and weapon trading), you now have a lot more options to deliver the kill.

Guard Stance could also work if "backpacks" were dis-incentivised, say, by fielding less units per map and by making the pair-up bonuses depend on the proximity of the levels of the pair (so that a L10/1 Berserker grants no bonuses to a L20/4 unit, precisely because the latter is an actual combat unit while the former is only a "backpack.")


I want the game to be heavily Player-Phase oriented. I do not want tanks who can survive numerous phases (or squishy enemies who cannot kill me), that is just boring. I want a diverse party who must come up with ideas to clear (or escape) areas with menacing enemies, under my commands. Player Phase is where most of the strategising takes place.

Edited by starburst
Formatting.

Share this post


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

😂 You got my attention, mate. This was a solid start.

I do not have experience in some games that you mention, but I agree with various of your points.

 

I actually agree with more points than the ones I list here, but either I was neutral to the ones removed or they were not my priorities.
(Since the numbers are assigned by the formatting, removing each of them was the only way to preserve the numbering.)

Point 18: I do no think that the four skills (two per tier) in Conquest was "overdoing it", but I am also not fond of skill-grabbing though multiple re-classing.
If anything, skills add flavour and variety to units, specially to enemies. Skills made enemies unique, and let two otherwise identical units pose entirely different threats to the player. I also liked some Personal Skills, but could do without them.

Point 19: I would like to have Attack Stance back. In my opinion, it adds complexity and variety to the tactical side of the game. Without Attack Stance, you know exactly which of your units can kill a certain enemy and which cannot. With Attack Stance (and weapon trading), you now have a lot more options to deliver the kill.

Guard Stance could also work if "backpacks" were dis-incentivised, say, by fielding less units per map and by making the pair-up bonuses depend on the proximity of the levels of the pair (so that a L10/1 Berserker grants no bonuses to a L20/4 unit, precisely because the latter is an actual combat unit while the former is only a "backpack.")


I want the game to be heavily Player-Phase oriented. I do not want tanks who can survive numerous phases (or squishy enemies who cannot kill me), that is just boring. I want a diverse party who must come up with ideas to clear (or escape) areas with menacing enemies, under my commands. Player Phase is where most of the strategising takes place.

I can see why some people like the gameplay of Fire Emblem Fates, especially the one seen in Conquest. In fact, even I enjoy it. I actually would not mind the pair-up system of Fire Emblem Fates even though I do not believe it is ideal. I should have mentioned that instead of only rejecting Awakening's. I can totally see your point, but I believe combat arts, supports, and a small number of skills are already enough for the game to work. I believe most skills are not reliable enough to actually use them in strategies, such as skills like Aegis and Pavise. However, I do not mind reliable ones. Therefore, my perfect Fire Emblem game would not have them. I simply do not see myself coming up with strategies that rely on these skills working. Meanwhile, I have complete control over combat arts and supports as long as I execute them correctly.

I believe the gameplay mechaninc which you have mentioned would work as long as it is not as broken as it is in Awakening and as long as it is needed to beat the chapters or at least play the game optimally. I definitely do not want to have two paired up units who can solo entire maps like we see in Awekening. I believe Fates managed to take this broken system and make it consistent enough for me to like it.

Share this post


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

I believe most skills are not reliable enough to actually use them in strategies, such as skills like Aegis and Pavise. However, I do not mind reliable ones. Therefore, my perfect Fire Emblem game would not have them. I simply do not see myself coming up with strategies that rely on these skills working. Meanwhile, I have complete control over combat arts and supports as long as I execute them correctly.

A 1 % chance of success is infinitely better than 0 % of it. 😛
In any case, when I mentioned skills and how they affect strategy, I was talking about how skills on enemies (activation-based or set) can dramatically alter the situation to solve. This is what makes you rethink your strategy. As you say, it would not be smart to plan your moves based on the activation of Pavise or Aegis on your favour, but you would definitely need to re-plan your moves if the enemy had them.
I love the fact that chance is always present, just like in real life.

And chance-based moves are objectively better than reliably-insufficient moves: You are on the last move of a phase, you have an Iron Sword and a Killer Edge, none of which can kill the last enemy standing by their own might, which one are you going to use? The answer is pretty obvious: the Killer Edge, for a critical hit might accomplish your goal, while the other weapon would certainly not. It is the correct answer, regardless of the landing of the critical hit.
Conversely, because of a bad move, your frail healer and your severely wounded Paladin are left open against an enemy; who should protect whom? Both would be killed if hit, but the frail healer has higher Avoid, Speed and Dodge than your wounded rider, thus the answer is obvious: you let the healer take the hit because it is the one with higher chance of survival, while the other one would certainly die. It was the correct answer, even if the healer died.

 

2 hours ago, Erick said:

I definitely do not want to have two paired up units who can solo entire maps like we see in Awekening. I believe Fates managed to take this broken system and make it consistent enough for me to like it.

Exactly. We are on the same page here, mate. Pair-up should not be used to "solo" maps. This is why I mentioned the reduction of the bonuses based on the levels of the pair.

I prefer Attack Stance, but I should mention that the bonuses of Guard Stance and the "guard shield" grant certain freedom to the party composition. Say, by using Guard Stance, your somewhat-sturdy-yet-not-tank units have a better shot at maintaining a position, and it also allows frailer units to stand a chance on selective Enemy Phases.
All in all, as long as "backpacks" are addressed and forbidden, I find Guard Stance a positive addition.

Edited by starburst

Share this post


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

I can see why some people like the gameplay of Fire Emblem Fates, especially the one seen in Conquest. In fact, even I enjoy it. I actually would not mind the pair-up system of Fire Emblem Fates even though I do not believe it is ideal. I should have mentioned that instead of only rejecting Awakening's. I can totally see your point, but I believe combat arts, supports, and a small number of skills are already enough for the game to work. I believe most skills are not reliable enough to actually use them in strategies, such as skills like Aegis and Pavise. However, I do not mind reliable ones. Therefore, my perfect Fire Emblem game would not have them. I simply do not see myself coming up with strategies that rely on these skills working. Meanwhile, I have complete control over combat arts and supports as long as I execute them correctly.

Generals need all the help they can get and Pavise is definitely better then no Pavise, especially if its the not the Awakening version of Pavise.

Share this post


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

A 1 % chance of success is infinitely better than 0 % of it. 😛
In any case, when I mentioned skills and how they affect strategy, I was talking about how skills on enemies (activation-based or set) can dramatically alter the situation to solve. This is what makes you rethink your strategy. As you say, it would not be smart to plan your moves based on the activation of Pavise or Aegis on your favour, but you would definitely need to re-plan your moves if the enemy had them.
I love the fact that chance is always present, just like in real life.

And chance-based moves are objectively better than reliably-insufficient moves: You are on the last move of a phase, you have an Iron Sword and a Killer Edge, none of which can kill the last enemy standing by their own might, which one are you going to use? The answer is pretty obvious: the Killer Edge, for a critical hit might accomplish your goal, while the other weapon would certainly not. It is the correct answer, regardless of the landing of the critical hit.
Conversely, because of a bad move, your frail healer and your severely wounded Paladin are left open against an enemy; who should protect whom? Both would be killed if hit, but the frail healer has higher Avoid, Speed and Dodge than your wounded rider, thus the answer is obvious: you let the healer take the hit because it is the one with higher chance of survival, while the other one would certainly die. It was the correct answer, even if the healer died.

 

Exactly. We are on the same page here, mate. Pair-up should not be used to "solo" maps. This is why I mentioned the reduction of the bonuses based on the levels of the pair.

I prefer Attack Stance, but I should mention that the bonuses of Guard Stance and the "guard shield" grant certain freedom to the party composition. Say, by using Guard Stance, your somewhat-sturdy-yet-not-tank units have a better shot at maintaining a position, and it also allows frailer units to stand a chance on selective Enemy Phases.
All in all, as long as "backpacks" are addressed and forbidden, I find Guard Stance a positive addition.

Well, I do not see how them being on enemies would change the way I view them much. For me, most of the time they are just a bother, regardless on who they are. I never liked the Great Shield on enemies in FE4, for an example. However, that alone does not make the game unplayable. I will not cherry-pick to such a level. While it is not my favourite mechanic, I can tolerate it with no issues. I still find them annoying because it is an inconsistency I have no control of.

Of course, I would never want a Fire Emblem game where there is no inconsistency. In fact, chance is a big aspect of Fire Emblem. The growth rates and the chances to hit, avoid, and crit are a few of the examples. I can see why players, such as yourself and many others, like the extra chance because it gives more possibilites, making it more exciting. I enjoy some of the inconsistency myself. Take avoid-tanking for an example. Speed is my favourite stat and I love speedy units. You cannot damage what you cannot hit after all. I love building up fast units and see them avoid every attack. That is one of the reasons I really liked Alert Stance+ and Deviant Avo on Three Houses. The fact is, I can control this. I know whenvever I wait I will get +30 of avoidance and that I will get even more avoidance once my hit points are low enough. I prefer games that give a challange and complexity without using this random chance which I cannot predict.

However, this is the least of my worries. Conquest is one of my favourite games gameplay-wise and as long as the game has everything else which I have listed it is going to be my new favourite game. We are talking about perfection, though. My perfect Fire Emblem game would not have that, but it would still be my favourite as long as it had everything else.

In fact, I am most likely going to sound like the most obnoxious guy to you now and you probably think this is one of the dumbest reasons to dislike a game, but the nomenclature of weapons is actually a much, much bigger issue for me. I do not like the fact that in Fates, for an example, we have lances and naginatas. The naginata is still a lance, is it not? A javelin is, too, a lance. So is a spear. Why we do have killing edges when we have killer lances and axes? This striggers me. A lot. I want everything to be smooth and clean. Whenever I solve a Math or Physics problem (I am studying to become a mathematician, by the way), I always write it in a very specific way. I always clean my room and I have a specific place and order for everything. I always carefully place food on my plate in such a way that it "fits visually" for me and nothing gets "too mixed". I might seem crazy and I probably am, to some extent at least. Personally, I would use new names to represent swords, lances, axes, tomes, bows, daggers, and anything else which can be used to kill living things.

I would have three types of swords: rapiers, broadswords, and claymores. The rapiers would be the sword swords, that is, low might and high accuracy, just like swords in the weapon triangle. The broadswords would be the lance swords, that is, average might and accuracy, just like lances in the weapon triangle. You get the point. The same would apply to lances and axes, that is, three types for each. We could have spoontons, partisans, and scythes for lances. I do not really know what I would do with the axes. I just know the current nomenclature really triggers me. It bothers me way more than Aegis or Pavise. Do not think I am mentally ill, please.

I honestly should have listed this before, but I am aware almost no one thinks this is an actual problem.

Edited by Erick
Language

Share this post


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

Well, I do not see how them being on enemies would change the way I view them much. For me, most of the time they are just a bother, regardless on who they are.

But they should be a bother, that is the point! Skills on enemies present new obstacles (at least new variables) to analyse and overcome.
Say that you are in a situation where you need to kill a General to reach the boss. You know that your Sniper and your Sorcerer can independently kill the General with a 100 % Hit chance. Well, if the General has Pavise (or Aegis, I cannot remember what weapons they block), you would necessarily need to keep both units ready to attack him, for you cannot know whether or not his defensive skill will activate. (Yes, you could do the numbers and prepare a single attack to kill him even if the skill triggered. God luck getting a guaranteed 120 Damage!)

 

2 hours ago, Erick said:

In fact, I am most likely going to sound like the most obnoxious guy to you now and you probably think this is one of the dumbest reasons to dislike a game, but I the nomenclature of weapons is actually a much, much bigger issue for me.

Ha, ha, ha! No worries, I do understand you, mate. Anxiety manifests in multiple, different ways. The nomenclature does not bother me in particular, but it makes perfect sense to me that you demand consistency.

 

2 hours ago, Erick said:

We are talking about perfection, though. My perfect Fire Emblem game would not have that, but it would still be my favourite as long as it had everything else.

This is so very true. We are talking about our “perfect” game, but what are the real chances of achieving it? Many points described by you and others seem highly probable to be implemented, but some others, like reducing the “social” components, seem far fetched in the current situation.
Oh, well, one can always wish. Is it not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are different ways how my favourite would look like. There are however two main ways that appeal to me.

I have  been considering combining Fire Emblem with Age of Empires. Basically you have an big overworld that is in real time where you plan out how your armies move, army composition (since you move around multiple armies) and resources and when opposing armies meet it switches to turn-based combat. The battlefield is based on the ground on which armies engage (if armies meet in a mountain they fight in mountains, if they meet while on a boat you get a boat map etc). During the preparations for a encounter you can request reinforcements. The turn they arrive and where they arrive is based on their movement-type and their distance. This game would sacrifice story for gameplay which is why there are two ways for me to make the 'perfect' Fire Emblem game.

The other way of making my 'perfect' Fire Emblem game is a linear game that has fe5 gameplay and the story I described in a previous thread.

Quote

I have had this thought for this story a while. It begins with the protagonist dying. The secondary protagonist is someone who was very inspired by this person who was a famous hero and wants to know what his life was like so he starts looking for people who have known him. Each person has a very different opinion of him and some even tell different things about the same event.  

The chapters are basically the events that are told to the secondary protagonist but because they're told by different persons the tone isn't consistent. Some chapters are very heroic while others are more grim because that's the way it's told.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The final boss if a crazed dragon has some reasoning behind them not Im crazy and evil time to destroy humans (I'm looking at you Anankos)

flesh out the evil cult and make them not want to bring back this one stupid god

Include more races besides the Manaketes and Humans and the occasional beast INCLUDE THEM IN THE STORY like how they did in PoR and RD.

And @Stephano Idk what you have against 3H but ok I guess

They need to do a saga the next time they wanna include child units

1st Game: The lord and his group defeat the big bad

2nd Game: On a distant continent another lord defeats a big bad that is tied to 1st game big bad but soon discover that there might be someone else who's plan is just beginning 

3rd Game: The children characters exist their training at some school and are the first to encounter this new threat but their parents won't let them fight in the war against them

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say something like Radiant Dawn.

  • Difficulty spikes to keep you on your toes
  • Insane boss stats
  • Defense-oriented maps as opposed to the usual "seize" or "route the enemy" (Elincia's Gambit and Blood Contract are some of the best maps in the series IMO)
  • Convos that are not support convos but still fun to watch
  • Ledges. Yep, ledges
  • Canto that allows you move again after attacking
  • Rescue command
  • Well-written story
  • Memorable units...I mean, Radiant Dawn has a large roster (probably the largest) and yet all of the characters are memorable

But then, FE5 has also some of these qualities that maaaaaay be controversial to a lot of us even though I like them:

  • Ambush spawns
  • Capture and steal mechanics
  • Leadership stars
  • Levels that can be cheesed out in absurd ways
  • Low stat caps
  • Scrolls
  • Broken weapon that stays
  • RNG that can never reach 100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@PeonyofLeosa Dreamworld, I'm in a weird place with 3H. I think it did a lot of things right and several things that i did not like. I had tons of fun with it but it's not really a game i have any desire to play again.

The reason why i started the post the way i did by saying "throw three houses out the window" is because i personally believe that game is ugly as sin. Awkward Dialogue, incredibly stilted animations, ugly character models, weird backgrounds, ect. I am not one who complains about graphics often, but the reason why 3H bothers me is because any emotion i am suppose to be feeling is immediately ruined by awkward dialogue pauses and stilted animations. Thats why i worry about a potential FE4 remake using the same engine. That game is VERY emotional and all of that would be ruined by 3H's engine. I don't hate the game, i just don't like the way it looks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Stephano said:

the reason why 3H bothers me is because any emotion i am suppose to be feeling is immediately ruined by awkward dialogue pauses and stilted animations.

Would you prefer the animations to be just like they were in previous games? That is, character portraits with different facial expressions only. If not that, than what? Also, do you believe the voice acting in the game is any good (disregarding the pauses)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Erick said:

Would you prefer the animations to be just like they were in previous games? That is, character portraits with different facial expressions only. If not that, than what? Also, do you believe the voice acting in the game is any good (disregarding the pauses)?

This is actually something I’ve pondered quite a bit actually. I truly do believe you can have a lot of emotion with just dialogue and and simple mouths moving. One of my favorite examples of this is how Ike confronts Sanaki about her disrespect to Elincia in FE9. I think Ike’s anger and frustration were conveyed very well. I actually could feel his anger. This could also be contributed to the writing because I felt the exact opposite in Fates and awakening.

voice acting is something that I’m mixed about. We have 2 instances of partial voice acting, 2 instances of cutscene voice acting, and 3 instances of full voice acting. In FE13 and FE14, I found their one off lines to be repetitive and annoying and would have much preferred them to not there at all. In FE9 and FE10, the cutscenes are..... hit an miss. Most of them pretty bad while the lines spoken by Ranulf, Shinon, and Zeligus to be pretty good. 

For Three Houses, I found the Voice acting to be not great with only a few voice actors like Seteth, Dimitri, Dedue, and Claude sticking out to me. I really did not care for the others and found most of them to be annoying. This makes me sad because I thought the voice acting in FE15 was MASTERFUL! I don’t think this is the fault of the voice actors themselves but rather the characters they are portraying. I found the characters to be too trope-y. Don’t get me wrong, I like a lot of the characters in 3H, but there lots of moments when they would be talking and I just wish they would stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also hope they ditch the two character models standing around emoting at each other model of dialogue sequence. I understand wanting to get the most out of the hard work that comes with creating these character rigs - they need a visual representation for battle animation, if nothing else, but there are only so many animations they're willing to make for the hours upon hours of talking sequences. And the shortcuts tend to get old too, like how they fade to black for any thing they don't want to animate - and force the characters to awkwardly describe what's happening off screen. By choosing to have 3D characters and animation, the workload sky rockets for a game like this. Maybe in the future they can compromise by having more curated animation for story sequences, while having Echoes-style dialogue sequences for the support conversations. Oh, and more drawn pictures would be nice. I like how they were interspersed in Echoes, though the pictures of Clair and Matilda in a cell were a bit...indulgent.

I'm also interested in a full return to the visual methods of older games. Instead of creating character models at all, go back to a 2D style with full character portraits, sprite battle animation, and a lot of drawn backgrounds to look at during dialogue sequences. Maybe not for every Fire Emblem game, but once in a while just so some games have visual variety. It would place a lot of the narrative back onto the writers and artists rather than programmers, and I also think that would go well with the 2D cutscenes of recent games

Edited by Glennstavos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving preferences aside, we may probably agree that the animations used in Three Houses are objectively "rougher" than those of other games with similar development- and marketing budgets. The crew surely knew that the animations would not land any awards, but deemed them good enough for release and focused on other elements of the game.
It is in this scenario where I believe that portraits with different facial expressions would have been a better option than the animations that we got. Specially when they had added fully voiced conversations, which could excuse some rough elements.

 

7 hours ago, Stephano said:

For Three Houses, I found the Voice acting to be not great with only a few voice actors like Seteth, Dimitri, Dedue, and Claude sticking out to me. I really did not care for the others and found most of them to be annoying.

I only tried Blue Lions and I too felt neutral about the voice acting in the game. It did not help that I cannot stand Mercerdes's fake voice. But do you know what my greatest surprise was? Hapi's voice acting! God, I adore it. I watched online various of her support conversations and they changed my perception about the voice acting.

I mention this because there might still be a voice actor who can surprise you. It would certainly not change your views of the entire game, but it might at least give you an element to care about. It is these small things what make me appreciate games through different lenses.

Edited by starburst
Clarity.

Share this post


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

I only tried Blue Lions and I too felt neutral about the voice acting in the game. It did not help that I cannot stand Mercerdes's fake voice. But do you know what my greatest surprise was? Hapi's voice acting! God, I adore it. I watched online various of her support conversations and they changed my perception about the voice acting.

I mention this because there might still be a voice actor who can surprise you. It would certainly not change your views of the entire game, but it might at least give you an element to care about. It is these small things what make me appreciate games through different lenses.

I bought the DLC the day it came out and have yet to beat the second chapter so I can’t really comment on Happi.

i retyped this 4 times because I wasn’t too sure what to say. I may have not given the voice actors much credit. The interactions between the characters are lot like the Star Wars prequels to me: Good/great actors, but terrible direction. I think if the supports were scaled back to 2D, it would feel more natural. But on the other hand, I want fire emblem to progress and get more detailed. I’m, sorry I just can’t get over it.

 Koei Tecmo is NOTORIOUS for reusing assets and overall being pretty lazy. I just hope that IS will either develope the entire thing themselves without the warriors engine or partner with another company that would be willing to put in work for better animations so that voice acting can really shine.

Share this post


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

i retyped this 4 times because I wasn’t too sure what to say. I may have not given the voice actors much credit.

No worries, mate; I like the game even less than you do. 😂

Before I listened to Hapi, I was indifferent to the voice acting. The thing is that Hapi’s voice was brilliant, an outstanding surprise for me. And I do not expect others to find it as entertaining, but this is one of those small, fulfilling things that make me stick to a game, despite not enjoying other, bigger elements. Hell!, had I found other characters as funny and smart, I would have certainly played the game in a more positive mood.

It is such details that I wanted you to note, given that we both dislike numerous elements from Three Houses.

Edited by starburst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. TH combat arts.

2. TH paralogues.

3. Only spawn reinforcements when you have to complete an objective other than routing the enemy (in short, NO reinforcements when you have to rout the enemy).

4. Chapters where you have to capture an enemy base and defend it for a set number of turns.

5. An Intermediate mode that goes like this:

-Any fallen units are absent for a set number of battles

-There is a timer next to the units' portraits; units with a 2 must be absent for one battle, and units with a 3 must be absent for two battles.

-Units with a 1 can battle again, but at a catch; there max HP is reduced by 2, and they are lost forever when they fall in battle again.

-Surviving for 4 turns removes the 1 from the unit's portrait, and their max HP is returned to normal, but their current in-battle HP remains the same.

-When a unit falls to a normal hit, their timer number is 2. When they fall to a critical hit, their timet number is 3.

6. No breakable regalia; instead, just have “durability” be a charge that allows you to use combat arts, and you can only use it as a normal weapon once the charge runs out. It fully recharges automatically between battles.

7. Have a TH-size major character roster, but with added dialogue depth.

8. Let the player explore the map freely after beating the final chapter (like in Awakening).

9. Allow a special Coliseum that lets you rematch bosses.

10. Branching promotions.

11. A main hub world outside the map.

12. Personal preference, but I want the main Lord to be an actual adult.

13. Have spells like Fire, Thunder, Wind, and Heal use HP, and have spells like Nosferatu, Warp, and Rescue have TH magic durability.

14. Musically speaking:

-Specific armies have their own phase music (both for enemy phase and neutral phase).

-Calm/Ablaze music for the player phase, and pre-Awakening map and battle music for the enemy and neutral phases.

-A variation of Calm/Ablaze music that plays when the player is near either victory (triumphant tune) or defeat (somber tune).

-Battle themes for both enemy phase battles and neutral phase battles.

-Minor thing, but I’d LOVE for Yoko Shimomura to compose for a Fire Emblem game.

Edited by Perkilator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me cuztomizable Avatar is a must. I dont mean appearance (that is a welcomed feature but not neccessary, but classes and spell list.

Class system like Fates. Must have butler and Griffin rider (i just like Griffin more than pegasus.) No wyvern at all (hate how dragon is always more powerful in most fantasy games or stories)

Weapon system in 3H with few addition. Dagger in Fates is my favorite weapon type in the whole series. So that is a must. Also you can earn the power to use magic in non-magic class.

Story wise I don't really care. Just not too lengthy and wordy like fe4 and 5. I prefer Awakening where it has diff arc that isn't connected to each other, different big bad. Branching stories like 3H is definitely good as well.

Personal skills and combat skills. 3H really bring it home. It's also why I like Heroes so much.

Challenging maps. Not inconvenient and annoying, but maps that makes you utilized all your resourses and strategy.

We can dispatch limited number of units to side missions(can choose between auto complete or control the battle yourself, with objectives range from stealing information to simple rescuing villages. they wont be available for the next battle.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm...

Well if I am to be perfectly honest, the perfect Fire Emblem game for me would be one that ditches all the fantasy stuff and focuses on real historical events, recently playing the games I dreamed of the same gameplay and style being applied to some historical setting such as say the fall of the Western Roman Empire or the Mongol Invasions, maybe even tap into a little early modern history with The American Revolution or the Napoleonic Wars. There are so few story driven history games so this is concept I would like to see, however there are many reasons why I'm sure it'll never happen, so the next best thing would be a game that sticks to it's fantasy roots but evolves passed the middle ages to welcome the age of Colonization. Musketeers could be a new class, characters that specialize in fire arms would be interesting to see, although likely a nightmare to balance (Perhaps Muskets could be a reskin of bows or the muskets being a special few use weapon that is hard to find, can be very useful but can only be used a few times before breaking)

A game set in an age like this could also invite a new style of character design, a large majority of fire emblem characters wear basic fantasy armor with capes or cloaks, and while that fits in the context of medieval Fire Emblem, a new age in the world would bring a new sense of style and design for characters, gone are the days of armor and income the days of military uniforms.

 
 
1
 Advanced issue found
 
 
Spoiler

Redcoat.jpg.8441a97c787ab74014c97c70946d2ffc.jpg     Something like this would be nice.

Not to mention Tricorn hats and cotton shirts as well as big fancy dresses, there is so much you could do with it in the context of Fire Emblem in terms of character design and it would make the characters really stand out among all the other FE characters, even to those who haven't played it.

Cultural difference is something I would also love to see. Something I loved about fates was the cultural difference between Nohr and Hoshido, it's obvious that they were based off of cultures in real life, Hoshido being Japan and Nohr being...some odd mix of Europe. I want to see this be expanded upon, with more different cultures being introduced and have the weapons and characters be different depending on that culture (Hoshido in fates used traditional Japanese like the Naginata, Katana, Yumi and Shuriken, as opposed to the Lances, Swords, Bows and Daggers you'll see in Nohr) Some ideas of mine would be a nation based off of the Native tribes in north America, each tribe is very different from one another so a pin pointer could be the Iroquois. It would also be neat to see the Mexica culture be represented, a nation based off of the Aztec empire would be amazing to see.

The story I would actually like to borrow from Fates, accept this time done right. Instead of having you choose between an evil nation and a good nation, you would choose between two or more nations that have their good and bad qualities, this would make it so the choice could be based on the players own personal opinions and not just which mode would be more fun or more challenging. This would be fun for fans as well as they could debate with each other which nation is better. 

That would be my ideal Fire Emblem game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's a Genealogy remake: Anything gameplay-wise that was nothing like the original. I'm sorry, but it was super boring and I gave up and just read through a few of the chapter scripts because I couldn't deal with how horribly unbalanced it was. Story was cool, though. I'd want to play it if the game was made more playable.

 

If it's a Sacred Stones remake:

  • Add a maddening mode to satisfy the peopel who say it's too easy, make regular mode a bit harder
  • Improve Amelia and Ewan's growths, keep Ross the same and keep them as Trainees. (But give them more than base 4 movement please.)
  •  Add a Lyon's route because I think it could be fun
  • More insight into the religion and stuff since it's important but we don't know much about it.

If it's something new:

  • Make playable soldiers good please.
  • Traversable world map
  • Branching promotion like in FE8
  • GBA-style supports but with easier access like in modern games
  • Base with convos, supports, shops and a forge like in FE9 and 10

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...