What Changes (if any) Would You Like to See Made in a FE 4 Remake?

[Deenward]

10 hours ago, Yexin said:

literally the only thing i'd love to see is support conversations, unless they dive too much into the "bland and forced romance" trend like some of modern supports tend to do

the second thing i'd do with a Genealogy Remake would be making it in 2D: no one can deny that the GBA era was the best in terms of battle animations, and i wanted to tear my eyes out of their cavities for how bad looking many of 3H's parts were, so the best case scenario for a Genealogy Remake for me would involve it being 2D (and no, i do NOT want to imagine this remake's potential cutscenes with 3H's engine nor its animation studio)

everything else is irrelevant to me: things like choosing how much money you want to give, faster animations and whatnot, i couldn't care less, i just want them to nail the core gameplay and the visual aspect

also, adding things which would make Genealogy Remake NOT a Genealogy Remake (free trading, changing the skill system and stuff like that which i read some comments above) is a huge no no for me

I get where you're coming from, but I'd take an awkward romance that at least has some dialogue build up over a romance happening for no reason except it's a core game-play mechanic  It always bugged me in Genealogy how quite a few parings had no dialogue at all, even if they ended up a couple. Obviously, I would prefer if said added supports were well-written, tho. It's hard to go down from the lack of romance a lot of the couples had in FE 4, tho

I would love to see a retro-style Fire Emblem game made today, ala Sonic Mania or something of the like. With modern software, you could make some ridiculously clean sprites and animations. It'd also be a lot more cost effective than 3D modeling and animating. Presentation-wise, I'd be fine with the 3d models and environments for combat as long as they had the weightier, grittier feel of Echoes animations. Cut-scene-wise, I"m with you on 3H looking bleh, so I'd just go the Echoes route, where the cut-scenes feature well drawn half/full body pics of the characters with a generous amount of CGs to represent key story moments. I'd like pre-rendered cinematic, but I'd prefer the mocap animation of Awakening and Fates over the anime-esque 12 fps cutscenes of Echoes and 3H. 

I do think for the most that Genealogy has aged pretty well, but if someone wanted the authentic original experience, they could just play the original. A re-make's target audience isn't just fans of the OG, but the plethora of new FE fans worldwide, many of who know barely anything about FE 4. I agree things shouldn't be changed just for the hell of it, but I'm definitely open to changes to make the moment to moment gameplay flow more smoothly and make things less tedious for the player. 

38 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:

If they keep it faithful, then odds are it bombs sales wise, and they lose money, not to mention the risk that it goes the way of Shadow Dragon. Also, it was sensible for them to not have the weapon triangle in SoV because it wasn't built around it in the first place (to say nothing of axes remaining enemy only).

Like Yexin said, FE 15 was by and large pretty faithful to Gaiden. They even kept the (imao) barren and boring map designs, and weird eccentricities like Jedah's "you can only damage me after hitting me several times for no damage" thing. The story and artwork received the most of a face-lift, but mechanically, they just added a few extra things instead of changing the core experience. While Fe 15 sold pretty poorly in Japan, it sold fairly well overseas, to the point that Nintendo said it met expectations and was a noteworthy title in their quarterly financial report. This isn't a RD or SD situation where the game just sold poorly all around. I think this indicates that people can be totally on-board for a faithful remake as long as QOL adjustments are made. I do think it'd be a bit of a risk to leave the gameplay completely unchanged, tho. 

[Shadow Mir]

12 minutes ago, Deenward said:

Like Yexin said, FE 15 was by and large pretty faithful to Gaiden. They even kept the (imao) barren and boring map designs, and weird eccentricities like Jedah's "you can only damage me after hitting me several times for no damage" thing. The story and artwork received the most of a face-lift, but mechanically, they just added a few extra things instead of changing the core experience. While Fe 15 sold pretty poorly in Japan, it sold fairly well overseas, to the point that Nintendo said it met expectations and was a noteworthy title in their quarterly financial report. This isn't a RD or SD situation where the game just sold poorly all around. I think this indicates that people can be totally on-board for a faithful remake as long as QOL adjustments are made. I do think it'd be a bit of a risk to leave the gameplay completely unchanged, tho. 

One of those two games had the misfortune of being released around the same time as Super Mario Galaxy, which would be bad for a game in a smaller-name franchise for obvious reasons. And I'm particularly concerned about the gameplay because Genealogy imho has the weakest gameplay of the entire FE series by far, and the mechanics don't help one bit.

[Lightcosmo]

47 minutes ago, Shadow Mir said:

I mean the individual money system and all that jazz. Even compared to FE1, it feels clunky and clumsy.

I thought you meant literally. Whoops! Nevermind that, then!

[Deenward]

I'll grant SMG stole its thunder. The marketing for RD was pretty bad, too. There's this old NA trailer released at E3 that's just two teens playing the game with zero context and exciting music, and that was literally the trailer. FE marketing has come a long way, lol. Tbf, making your first FE title on a brand new, selling like hotcakes console a game that's hard to understand unless you've played its predecessor on the less popular Gamecube wasn't necessarily the best move. I'm really glad RD exists, but all things considered, it was a hard sell.

It'd be interesting to see how people who'd never played Fire Emblem before get a Genealogy remake as their first game and see how they react to it. I know FE 4 was Chaz's first FE and he loved it, but I wouldn't say he represents the average consumer. My little bro, an off-and-on FE fan who's played FE 7, 8, 13, Conquest, and 16, is nearing the end of Gen 2, and he's enjoying it overall, but he's echoed some of the points brought up here, like balancing different magic types, precise gold giving, smoother inventory management, and stuff like that.

It was also suggested to me that lovers should be allowed to freely trade weapons between each other as a sign of trust in their relationship, which I think is an intriguing idea. 

[Lightcosmo]

I mentioned this earlier, but they really need to fix things like bosses not having consistent holy bloods, it's just odd. Not a huge game changer, just a minor nitpick.

[Etrurian emperor]

I'd completely revamp the love system in Genealogy. Pairing up characters is fun and getting the right pairings is pretty important in Geneology. But currently you can't control the pairings in Genealogy. You can subtly influence what the game will do but if Genealogy insists that Adean will hook up with Dew despite having glued her together with Jamuka the entire game then that's final. The game is taking the pairing into a direction you don't want and you cannot stop it. Just scrap that convoluted nonsense and put in a regular support system. This way you not only give control to the player but you also give Genealogy a much needed support system to flesh out its cast. 

[Yexin]

2 hours ago, Deenward said:

I'd take an awkward romance that at least has some dialogue build up over a romance happening for no reason except it's a core game-play mechanic

i may have worded it wrong
i don't want supports to be a mere passive boosting mechanic, i just want them to be well written, and i'd like them to expand every character's past, personality and relations, if possible

i don't want them to be "chrom x sumia" level, for example, where they randomly fall in love simply because the girl cooked a lot for the guy

Edited June 8, 2020 by Yexin

[Forseti Spaghetti]

20 hours ago, NinjaMonkey said:

Maps that don't take an hour to beat because they're so huge.

See, that's kind of the charm to them though. It's a unique experience. 

[samthedigital]

I don't like that the maps are large while also having large gaps between action. It's hard to propose a solution without fundamentally changing the game though. Besides that quality of life changes would be nice, but I don't know that I would enjoy a remake that much anyway because of the first problem.

Edited June 8, 2020 by samthedigital

[Deenward]

4 hours ago, Yexin said:

i may have worded it wrong
i don't want supports to be a mere passive boosting mechanic, i just want them to be well written, and i'd like them to expand every character's past, personality and relations, if possible

i don't want them to be "chrom x sumia" level, for example, where they randomly fall in love simply because the girl cooked a lot for the guy

Ah, that makes sense. I agree. Mb for misinterpreting you. 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Deenward

[Konrad the Red]

On 6/8/2020 at 1:17 AM, Deenward said:

 I'd replace the love points system with C-S support conversations that can be activated once per chapter. That way, each potential relationship can be fleshed out while also remaining relevant to what's going on in the story at the time.

Great way to modernize relationship system while still keeping them on the map and not the hub.

Regarding problems people have with the maps I think it's not their big size but them being artificially split into parts. Story-wise it often makes no sense why the ruler of a castle should wait till the previous castle falls to make his move. Let all the action take part at the same time, add some enemy reinforcements, counter-attacks and side-objectives and the maps will be over quicker and all 24 units will be busy.

Of course this will lead to a more strategy focused game-play and some Fire Emblem players will hate it. But it's better for each FE game to be unique.

[Shadow Mir]

21 hours ago, Yexin said:

i may have worded it wrong
i don't want supports to be a mere passive boosting mechanic, i just want them to be well written, and i'd like them to expand every character's past, personality and relations, if possible

i don't want them to be "chrom x sumia" level, for example, where they randomly fall in love simply because the girl cooked a lot for the guy

I see this and raise you Chrom/Olivia. That's THE definition of "randomly falling in love".

17 hours ago, Konrad the Red said:

But it's better for each FE game to be unique.

I take issue with that when being unique also means being hard to play or even unplayable.

[eclipse]

18 hours ago, Konrad the Red said:

Great way to modernize relationship system while still keeping them on the map and not the hub.

Regarding problems people have with the maps I think it's not their big size but them being artificially split into parts. Story-wise it often makes no sense why the ruler of a castle should wait till the previous castle falls to make his move. Let all the action take part at the same time, add some enemy reinforcements, counter-attacks and side-objectives and the maps will be over quicker and all 24 units will be busy.

Of course this will lead to a more strategy focused game-play and some Fire Emblem players will hate it. But it's better for each FE game to be unique.

Some FE players hate the idea of having 5-6 empty turns between the action.  Can't please everyone!

Though having multiple objectives going off at once might give me a reason to deploy my infantry, so bring it!

[Benice]

My biggest problem with Genealogy's map design thus far is that the answer to literally everything is "Do it with Sigurd." I don't mind unbalanced games, but I feel like that there should have been SOME things where Sigurd isn't the answer. And it stays that way to the point that it is completely brainless: Getting the speed ring in the prologue? Do it with Sigurd. Capture a castle so Ayra won't kill your units/ get herself killed? Do it with Sigurd. Capture a castle so Lewyn and Sylvia can save villages? Do it with Sigurd. I just wish that there was more variety in the way you handle situations.

[Deenward]

1 hour ago, Benice said:

My biggest problem with Genealogy's map design thus far is that the answer to literally everything is "Do it with Sigurd." I don't mind unbalanced games, but I feel like that there should have been SOME things where Sigurd isn't the answer. And it stays that way to the point that it is completely brainless: Getting the speed ring in the prologue? Do it with Sigurd. Capture a castle so Ayra won't kill your units/ get herself killed? Do it with Sigurd. Capture a castle so Lewyn and Sylvia can save villages? Do it with Sigurd. I just wish that there was more variety in the way you handle situations.

I get the frustration, but I feel Sigurd's strength in-game reinforces how terrifyingly competent his army is in the story. He's also one of the big reasons the maps in-game don't go slower than they already do. 

20 hours ago, Konrad the Red said:

Regarding problems people have with the maps I think it's not their big size but them being artificially split into parts. Story-wise it often makes no sense why the ruler of a castle should wait till the previous castle falls to make his move. Let all the action take part at the same time, add some enemy reinforcements, counter-attacks and side-objectives and the maps will be over quicker and all 24 units will be busy.

Of course this will lead to a more strategy focused game-play and some Fire Emblem players will hate it. But it's better for each FE game to be unique.

Yeah, I agree. It kind of breaks immersion and creates an awkward flow through the map, especially in maps like Chapter 2 where the castles are placed in a way that forces you to backtrack a lot. Making the maps non-linear by allowing more pathways to get to different castles would open up more options for the player as well. That would help solve the tedious repetition Benice is feeling, too. 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Deenward

[Benice]

1 hour ago, Deenward said:

I get the frustration, but I feel Sigurd's strength in-game reinforces how terrifyingly competent his army is in the story. He's also one of the big reasons the maps in-game don't go slower than they already do. 

I get that, but I do wish that the challenges the game presents were more varied so that Sigurd wasn't the answer to EVERYTHING, just some things. I don't mind him being insanely strong, but I do mind him taking the challenge away from the parts that make you not want to turtle.