Rate each game in the series you have played out of 10

[Hello72207]

I'll do the ones I've completed + FE9 cause I've almost completed it.

FE1 - 4/10 it's a fairly decent game but it's slow and it's got the item management thing and a less then stellar story.

FE2 - 10/10 best game in the franchise, and the pinnacle of human invention

FE6 - 9/10 I enjoy playing a lot

FE7 - 5/10 HHM is an ok challenge but unfun to play, and all other modes you can't even keep your brain awake for

FE8 - 8/10 easy, but enjoyable to play, which I can't say about FE7.

FE9 - 6/10 story is decent, most of the mechanics are very good, but the gameplay is slow (and I've been playing on my wii so no speedup), and to be frank the Black Knight ambush spawn is by far the worst decision in gameplay for any FE game I've played, and I will probably struggle to find a worse one.

FE15 - I haven't actually played this one, but I watched Mekkah and Bismix play it and it looks to be by far one of the best remakes I have ever seen. Not gonna give it a score but it looks spectactular.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Hello72207

[Shadow Mir]

Binding Blade: 0/10. Bad in just about every conceivable metric, but especially map design. The only thing that it has going for it is difficulty, but that, too, is bogged down by poor game design, which leaves it as a shining example of a game that is hard for all the wrong reasons. Easily the FE game that I had the least fun playing, and thus I don't see myself coming back to this ever.

Blazing Blade: 7.5/10. The story has its fair share of issues, but it's still respectable, and the gameplay is solid, even if it's easy.

Sacred Stones: 5/10. I'm not a fan of the story or most of the characters, but decent gameplay saves this from being in the 4-or-Less Club. 

Path of Radiance: 7/10.

Radiant Dawn: 7/10.

Shadow Dragon: 2/10. Doesn't improve enough on the original, and a lot of the added features are either gated behind a wall of shitty design choices or otherwise detract from the game, with the good stuff it brings to the table not even coming close to making up for its many failings, most of which can be tied to being overly faithful to the original. It doesn't help that this game kickstarted the trend of stupidly unfair difficulties that New Mystery and Awakening carried on. Going from Radiant Dawn to THIS was something I could only call disappointing, and that's an understatement of just how much of a disgrace I consider SD to be to the series.

Awakening: 7/10. Solid gameplay and memorable characters with a good chunk of customization more than makes up for the story not being that good. 

Fates: 8/10. Improves on Awakening's already solid gameplay, and the three-story approach was novel, even if it was flawed.

Shadows of Valentia: 8/10. After Shadow Dragon shit the bed,  I was concerned about whether this would be something I could actually call good or not. It actually delivered, unlike SD.

3H: 8.5/10.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Shadow Mir

[Saint Rubenio]

In order from worst to best, on a scale from 0 to 10. I'll include KagaSaga. Yeah, I'm one of those.

Path of Radiance: 1.5 - I'll give the game half a point because the story is good I guess, and one point for having Titania in it. Beyond that, there's just nothing to this game for me. It's slow, it's boring, it's mindnumbingly easy, its maps are horrendously designed... Just about everything is wrong with this game, in my eyes.

Shadows of Valentia: 3 - I enjoyed some things about this one, but the map design is just... No. Also, the tiny cast hampers replay value.

Mystery of the Emblem: 4 - Not bad, exactly. It's playable. But it is vastly overshadowed by both of the remakes. The only things that this game has on its remakes, in my opinion, are better manaketes and Wendell being imprisoned in chapter 6 instead of fighting with Macedon for no reason at all.

Three Houses: 4 - It frustrates me, because I like some things about this game, but it has such massive flaws that I just cannot enjoy it. Bad map design, horrible difficulty design and the monastery boredom taking thrice as long as the actual FE gameplay utterly destroy this game for me.

Radiant Dawn: 6 - Parts 1 and 2 are good, but the quality of this game takes a huge dive in part 3. I hate all the parts of this game where Ike exists. Not necessarily because of Ike, but... sheesh, would it have killed them to nerf Ike and his team a tiny wee bit? Part 3 consists entirely of watching Ike's overpowered cronies kill everything. Doesn't help that this game's speed is as sluggish as PoR's. Decent, but there are far better FEs.

Sacred Stones: 6 - Decent or good in just about every aspect, except difficulty. Difficulty kills this game. It'd rate lower if I didn't have the option to improve enemy growths with the randomizer. I know, I know, it's unfair, but at least Sacred Stones only has one, fixable glaring flaw, unlike the lower titles.

From here onwards is where I'd call these games truly good and well worth the time.

Vestaria Saga: 7.5 - Excellent game at times, but some of the maps take forever for all the wrong reasons. Still, a fun experience.

Binding Blade: 7.5 - A huge mess of a game, but I have a soft spot for it. I actually like this game's map design. It's busy and varied. The cast is fun, too. It's a game of high highs and low lows, but I think the goods are good enough, personally.

Fates Conquest: 8 - The lategame soured my opinion of the game a bit, but overall, it's a really fun game that offers a good challenge, unique mechanics and probably the best handling of classes in the series. I kinda wish half the women didn't have the designs that they do, but oh well, it doesn't matter.

Thracia 776: 8 - Once again, lategame is the main reason I knocked points off of this one. That warpskip-fest is less unenjoyable than Conquest's difficulty spike, but it's by no means great. This game is carried by its unique mechanics. Capture, scrolls, fatigue... it's all so much fun, and it makes Thracia into one of the most memorable games in the series. Capture should return. Proper Thracia capture, not Fates's take that's... honestly, completly unrelated.

TearRing Saga: 8 - That's right, another 8! Also, another game of high highs and low lows. When this game is bad, it's really bad, but when it's good, it's really good. In the end, I think its flaws are overshadowed by its accomplishments. One of the most unique playable casts in all of FE/KagaSaga, some extremely fun maps and a story with some of the best villains in the series. Also, Eugen. Eugen is wonderful. Best advisor guy.

Shadow Dragon: 8.5 - One of the most simple games in the series, but I think it manages to take advantage of that. It's just you, the enemy, and good map design. Pure, unadultered FE fun. Lovely game... But stick to H4.

New Mystery of the Emblem: 9 - The best FE, in my opinion. An even better Shadow Dragon. Yes, the story is a mess, but I don't care about story, and the gameplay is excellent. About its only flaws are ambush reinforcements in the upper difficulties (and even then, they're the least bad of the series, since 99% of the time they are guaranteed to appear from forts) and wonky unit balance. Beyond that, the wonderful difficulty and map design makes it a joy to play. Biggest cast in FE also gives it plenty of replay value.

Berwick Saga: 10 - Just about perfect. It has a couple of minor flaws that do little to hamper the experience, and in every other aspect it kicks every other FE... Heck, every other strategy game I've ever played out of the park. Excellent map design (with exactly one exception. 1 out of 41 maps. Yeah), excellent unit balance (only two of them can truly be called bad, and everyone is so unique thanks to diverse skillsets), excellent difficulty, excellent story (Volcens is a well-written Garon, imagine that), excellent graphics, excellent music... Excellent, excellent, excellent! It's unbelievable how amazing this game is. Kaga's masterpiece, and one of the greatest games I've had the pleasure of experiencing, period. Do yourselves a favor, and play it if you can.

 

Blazing Sword: Unrated - In my signature, I have it placed between MotE and SoV, but in reality I might as well not rank it at all. I haven't played this one in over half a decade. It's the most uninteresting, unappealing FE in the series for me. I just cannot think of a single reason to go back to this one. It was my introduction to the series, and for that I respect it, but beyond that it's just... bleh. Very bleh.

[Pengaius]

Fe4: 2/10 The least enjoyable FE game in my opinion,the story is overrated and neither lord is that interesting, player units are either OP or just meh mostly OP, Maps are long and slow and the every turn save just ruins any difficulty the game could have had. The replay value is horrible due to needing to sit through gen 1 every time you want to try out a new child character combination and Holy Weapons are so overpowered and easily accessible that only other holy weapon users can threaten player units. The best part of the game is managing funds for arena that's all. 

Fe5: 9/10 Great game, huge cast tons of interesting mechanics, probably the best lord in all FE, regular enemies are often weak so their threat comes from their placement, universal caps prevent player units from getting too overpowered, indoor dismount stops cavs being broken, the fatigue system encourages using different units each map, hit bracketing is something I like as it keeps you on your toes. I love almost everything about the game. The only reason its a 9 not a 10 is that some of the maps are admittedly awful. 

Fe6: 6/10 it's okay, the lords a backpack and Perceval exists but otherwise story maps and difficulty are alright. 

Fe7: 5/10 see above but replace Perceval with Marcus. though it can be kinda easy so its lower than binding. 

Fe8: see above but replace Marcus with Seth. GBA Paladins are kinda busted huh?

Fe11: 8/10 a generally fun game, huge roster, and reclassing make the game different every time story's good (if you read wayy too much into it) only real downsides are the prologue being locked to super easy and gaidens having the flat 15 unit requirement. 

Fe12: 6/10 reclassing and roster are again great to have for replay value but i feel the game suffers on harder difficulties due to how low stat caps are. The other thing which loses it some points are 'zone based' reinforcements being a thing that I kinda dislike.  

Fe13: 7/10 as a srategy game its a 4/10 but I'm kind of an RPG guy so it gets a boost from that. Also it got me into FE so y'know bonus point. 

Fe14 Birthright: 6/10 Bad strategy game and bad RPG, but I like the freedom it gives as opposed to conquest's rigidness. Also I enjoy a good Ryomastomp from time to time. 

Fe14 Conquest: 5/10 good strategy game bad RPG some great maps but also a few stinkers. 

Yes I unironically like Birthright more than Conquest. 

Fe15: 8/10 despite having horrible replay value and very poor map design its a great RPG with a likeable cast and a banger soundtrack. 

Fe16: 6/10 I only played VW once on a borrowed copy and I enjoyed it but, objectively it's not a great strategy game nor a good RPG, admittedly I didn't get to know the characters that well buy MY GOD was the monastery repetative. Decently fun? Yes. Would I buy it for myself? No. 

[vanguard333]

16 hours ago, Hello72207 said:

FE9 - 6/10 story is decent, most of the mechanics are very good, but the gameplay is slow (and I've been playing on my wii so no speedup), and to be frank the Black Knight ambush spawn is by far the worst decision in gameplay for any FE game I've played, and I will probably struggle to find a worse one.

How is it a terrible gameplay design? 

The Black Knight doesn't move at all unless someone's in attack range, and it's fairly straightforward (the first time at least) to deduce where he'll show up. The commander has a conversation with the Black Knight where they talk about the plan being for the Black Knight to wait to emerge until the tide turns against the Daein forces. It's straightforward to deduce from both this and the boss' movement before and after the conversation that the Black Knight will emerge from the only house in the right side of the town that's closed; the house that's just sitting there by itself. That's not bad game design; the game basically told you, "He will jump out of one of these houses after you beat the boss, and we couldn't be less subtle about which house it is without a big neon sign saying he will emerge from that specific house."

The second time he shows up, sure, you have no prior indication that he's going to turn up at all, which is a bit bad I'll admit, but this is a mission where the goal is, "arrive at a specific tile near the top-left of the map in 15 turns when your units start near the bottom right with a bridge to their left and a bridge ahead of them, and you want to get there quickly because one of the green units guarding that spot is recruitable if he survives this chapter", so him showing up at the bottom-right corner is not a terrible gameplay decision, as the game has been telling you since before the mission begins to get your units out of the bottom-right part of the map as quickly as possible, and the time limit to get them all out of that part of the map before he shows up is rather generous: turn 5 on easy and hard mode and turn 6 on normal mode. 

 

9 hours ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Path of Radiance: 1.5 - I'll give the game half a point because the story is good I guess, and one point for having Titania in it. Beyond that, there's just nothing to this game for me. It's slow, it's boring, it's mindnumbingly easy, its maps are horrendously designed... Just about everything is wrong with this game, in my eyes.

Okay; what is all this about Path of Radiance being slow? Are you guys talking about the text speed or something? I've played the game many, many times and, while I wish it had a save system instead of a suspend system, I cannot think a way it was "slow". 

[Saint Rubenio]

10 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Okay; what is all this about Path of Radiance being slow? Are you guys talking about the text speed or something? I've played the game many, many times and, while I wish it had a save system instead of a suspend system, I cannot think a way it was "slow". 

Animations. PoR's animations are extremely slow. That'd be okay if you had another option, but if you turn animations off, the overworld animations are somehow almost as slow. It makes maps take far longer than they should.

I could probably forgive this flaw, however, if it wasn't for the fact that, personally speaking, every aspect of the game is painful. That, and Dolphin Emulator has an iffy speed-up function that doesn't work well enough to properly counter PoR's slowness.

[vanguard333]

22 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Animations. PoR's animations are extremely slow. That'd be okay if you had another option, but if you turn animations off, the overworld animations are somehow almost as slow. It makes maps take far longer than they should.

I could probably forgive this flaw, however, if it wasn't for the fact that, personally speaking, every aspect of the game is painful. That, and Dolphin Emulator has an iffy speed-up function that doesn't work well enough to properly counter PoR's slowness.

I see. I guess I never saw PoR's animations as slow.

I don't know anything about emulators, but that might be part of the problem; I play the actual GameCube version (my GameCube still runs pretty much perfectly after all this time).

How is every aspect of the game painful? I can't think of anything about the game that's painful; a few small things that are mildly irritating, but nothing painful. 

 

Oh, and please don't take this as me just defending the game; I really do want to know. If it helps, I agree with you about Shadow Dragon; it is a fun and simple game. 

[Saint Rubenio]

1 minute ago, vanguard333 said:

How is every aspect of the game painful? I can't think of anything about the game that's painful; a few small things that are mildly irritating, but nothing painful. 

Too easy for me. Not trying to brag or anything, that's really how it felt. At one point everyone got so absurdly overpowered that the enemies were incapable of putting up a fight. That's when the slowness truly began to get on my nerves, as my PoR sessions consisted of watching the game play itself veeeeery slowly over the course of an hour. By the time I got to Tauroneo's chapter, I was so thoroughly bored of the game that I couldn't fathom playing another chapter. And so, I quit.

So yeah. I just find it really, really boring. That, and some of the map design was just... Hoo, boy. Gems like the Oliver chapter(s), the bridge pitfall party, Stefan's desert, the stealth map... Not very good, in my opinion.

6 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Oh, and please don't take this as me just defending the game; I really do want to know.

That's all right. I understand being passionate about games you love. Believe me, I do.

6 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

If it helps, I agree with you about Shadow Dragon; it is a fun and simple game. 

Ayy, glad we agree on something! That's always been one of FE's greatest strengths, in my opinion. Sure, we may like or dislike some games, but at the end of the day, the games are all different experiences, and there's something for just about everyone. Not many fanbases have such diverse opinions as this one, I feel.

[vanguard333]

17 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Too easy for me. Not trying to brag or anything, that's really how it felt. At one point everyone got so absurdly overpowered that the enemies were incapable of putting up a fight. That's when the slowness truly began to get on my nerves, as my PoR sessions consisted of watching the game play itself veeeeery slowly over the course of an hour. By the time I got to Tauroneo's chapter, I was so thoroughly bored of the game that I couldn't fathom playing another chapter. And so, I quit.

I see. I know Path of Radiance was my first FE game, but I can honestly say I did not have that experience, even after going back to replay it after beating other FE games. 

 

19 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

So yeah. I just find it really, really boring. That, and some of the map design was just... Hoo, boy. Gems like the Oliver chapter(s), the bridge pitfall party, Stefan's desert, the stealth map... Not very good, in my opinion.

I'll agree about Stefan's desert being a weak one, and I never actually played the stealth map as a stealth map (I just killed the soldier right away so as not to bother) so I can't say anything about it as an actual stealth map, but I thought the map design overall was pretty great and actually better than that in a number of different FE games that I've played (Awakening, Fates, Echoes and Three Houses namely). I liked the variety and different challenges, I liked that there were often plenty of chokepoints that made knight/general units more useful, and I liked the varied objectives. Stuff like the ship missions, the defend missions, escaping that bigoted town, etc. were highlights for me. 

For Oliver's missions, I can understand disliking the swampy terrain and the attrition, but in fairness, the game does warn you about that stuff if you listen to the base conversations, and I thought the attrition especially was an interesting challenge; making sure you have enough equipment on your units at the start and the units you bring in as reinforcements. 

As for the bridge, yeah; the pitfalls are a bit annoying. I liked that you could intuit where some of the traps are from carefully observing how the enemy units move (and if all the traps could be deduced that way, I'd think it was a great map), but the rest being undetectable without a walkthrough is definitely a problem. 

 

30 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

That's all right. I understand being passionate about games you love. Believe me, I do.

Thanks for understanding. I've found myself criticizing certain things recently and being on the receiving end of, "You're just a hater or and/or an entitled fanboy" (though thankfully not on this site) and so obviously I never want to even so much as appear to be spitting that kind of bile myself, so I really wanted to make sure it was clear that I was not just trying to defend the game. 

 

34 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Ayy, glad we agree on something! That's always been one of FE's greatest strengths, in my opinion. Sure, we may like or dislike some games, but at the end of the day, the games are all different experiences, and there's something for just about everyone. Not many fanbases have such diverse opinions as this one, I feel.

Have you seen the Legend of Zelda fanbase? That one may surprise you.

[Saint Rubenio]

11 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

I see. I know Path of Radiance was my first FE game, but I can honestly say I did not have that experience, even after going back to replay it after beating other FE games.

I'll agree about Stefan's desert being a weak one, and I never actually played the stealth map as a stealth map (I just killed the soldier right away so as not to bother) so I can't say anything about it as an actual stealth map, but I thought the map design overall was pretty great and actually better than that in a number of different FE games that I've played (Awakening, Fates, Echoes and Three Houses namely). I liked the variety and different challenges, I liked that there were often plenty of chokepoints that made knight/general units more useful, and I liked the varied objectives. Stuff like the ship missions, the defend missions, escaping that bigoted town, etc. were highlights for me. 

For Oliver's missions, I can understand disliking the swampy terrain and the attrition, but in fairness, the game does warn you about that stuff if you listen to the base conversations, and I thought the attrition especially was an interesting challenge; making sure you have enough equipment on your units at the start and the units you bring in as reinforcements. 

As for the bridge, yeah; the pitfalls are a bit annoying. I liked that you could intuit where some of the traps are from carefully observing how the enemy units move (and if all the traps could be deduced that way, I'd think it was a great map), but the rest being undetectable without a walkthrough is definitely a problem. 

That's fair enough. I think the map design could've worked, but the difficulty was just too low for my tastes. Oh, well.

9 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Thanks for understanding. I've found myself criticizing certain things recently and being on the receiving end of, "You're just a hater or and/or an entitled fanboy" (though thankfully not on this site) and so obviously I never want to even so much as appear to be spitting that kind of bile myself, so I really wanted to make sure it was clear that I was not just trying to defend the game. 

That's all right. I get pretty passionate with my own opinions, but I try not to let it escalate into insult territory. That's just no good.

10 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Have you seen the Legend of Zelda fanbase? That one may surprise you.

I've heard of it, obviously, but I've never been much into it. Though now that you mention it, it's true that I've heard pretty diverse opinions about those games as well.

[AnonymousSpeed]

7 hours ago, Saint Rubenio said:

I've heard of it, obviously, but I've never been much into it. Though now that you mention it, it's true that I've heard pretty diverse opinions about those games as well.

It's been a while since I've followed the Zelda fandom, but as far as I recall it's a much more unified group than the Fire Emblem fandom. Most Zelda fans see each game as being basically good, whereas Fire Emblem fans have typically played two-thirds of the games and only like half of what they've played.

That being said, Link's Awakening is the best Zelda game.

***

My ratings:

FE4: 4/10. Geneaology has a lot of interesting mechanics but its really boring in practice. I don't have a problem with the trading system or the prevalence of horses or anything like that, but the map design is very dull and the moment-to-moment gameplay is generally pretty mindless. Most of your strategic considerations are about which pairings you want, rather than how you'll handle the immediate challenges in front of you. It's a whole game of preparations.

FE6: 8/10. It has its rough patches but also many high points. The cast is more interesting that it gets credit for and is relatively well balanced, and the maps have many side objectives to pursue. One complaint I do have is how Chapters 4 and 5 are a bit obnoxious on hard mode, but I still enjoy the general experience.

FE7: 6/10. It's a bad FE6 fanfiction but at least it's brisk and requires you to somewhat engage with it. The worst thing about it is how it neutered promotion bonuses.

FE8: 7/10. While a simple and easy game, I just kind of like it. It's a casual romp which is easier than FE7 but has better characters and the maps are closer to FE6 in quality. As Saint Rubenio said, the randomizers and their option to boost enemy growths greatly increase the quality of this game. I do wish the cast wasn't so tiny, though.

FE9: 4/10. It's as boring as FE7 to play but enemy phase lasts several times longer.

FE10: 6/10. It's alright. I like playing around with the skill system but I think it's a little more restrictive with your party than it should be. The mechanics generally seem to favor flexibility (especially the supports) so I'd appreciate if you didn't have forced deployed units as often.

FE13: ???/10. Eh. I forgot, actually. Probably a 6 or 7 out of ten, I don't know.

FE14, Conquest: 7/10. A legitimately immoral game but darn if it isn't well executed.

FE15: 6/10. I legitimately forgot about it. I think it was fine for a first playthrough and the art style is great, of course. I love the villager mechanic, but despite how much replayability it should add I feel little desire to go back to Echoes.

Edited January 26, 2021 by AnonymousSpeed

[Alastor15243]

Just now, AnonymousSpeed said:

Conquest: 7/10, it is a legitimately immoral game but darn if it isn't well executed.

Immoral? You refer to the pricing system?

[AnonymousSpeed]

2 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Immoral? You refer to the pricing system?

Nah, I mean the fanservice and the incest and the suches as that.

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Nah, I mean the fanservice and the incest and the suches as that.

Ah. Yeah the pricing was something I was prepared to fight you on, but uh... yeah no, I can only tolerate that shit you speak of because the story to begin with is just a trashy meme with delusions of grandeur.

[AnonymousSpeed]

Just now, Alastor15243 said:

Ah. Yeah the pricing was something I was prepared to fight you on, but uh... yeah no, I can only tolerate that shit you speak of because the story to begin with is just a trashy meme with delusions of grandeur.

I would agree that the pricing is fine. Each game, whether you like it or not, is a full game on its own, and you get a discount for buying more than one which is pretty cool. I definitely would not start a conversation with new people about how I like Conquest though, and I wouldn't want a younger sibling to play it either.

[Alastor15243]

1 minute ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

I definitely would not start a conversation with new people about how I like Conquest though, and I wouldn't want a younger sibling to play it either.

I've just learned to laugh at it. That game's story kinda destroyed my capacity to care in any way about it with a macerator.

[vanguard333]

43 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Nah, I mean the fanservice and the incest and the suches as that.

Yeah; that stuff is pretty bad. In hindsight, I can't believe I didn't mention that in my ratings, despite mentioning how everything feels like it was just thrown in without much thought and the fanservice and incest being perfect examples of that. 

[Venger_06]

47 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Yeah the pricing was something I was prepared to fight you on

Fire Emblem Fates is an immoral cashgrab. Sorry, I just want to hear your opinions about it.

53 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Nah, I mean the fanservice and the incest and the suches as that.

3 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

the fanservice and incest being perfect examples of that.

In retrospect, getting married to the Hoshidan Royals is not that bad. They only spent little time together in childhood, lived apart for most of their lives, and when they met, as adults, they were practically strangers. They are basically immune to the Westermack effect. The Nohrian royals on the other hand...

I know that the fact that they are not his blood brothers may seem like a cop out, but the script makes it clear that Corrin's biggest reason for choosing Hoshido is that they doesn't want to help Garon. I think this should go to the unpopular opinions thread...

5 hours ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Ayy, glad we agree on something! That's always been one of FE's greatest strengths, in my opinion. Sure, we may like or dislike some games, but at the end of the day, the games are all different experiences, and there's something for just about everyone. Not many fanbases have such diverse opinions as this one, I feel.

4 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

Have you seen the Legend of Zelda fanbase? That one may surprise you.

4 hours ago, Saint Rubenio said:

I've heard of it, obviously, but I've never been much into it. Though now that you mention it, it's true that I've heard pretty diverse opinions about those games as well.

Excuse me for intruding on your conversation. I'm not really into Zelda, but I know the fanbase and the situation is quite different from FE fanbase. Zelda fans debate which is the best and some games get hate, but for them all Zelda games are masterpieces. What I mean is that, even in fanbases where the merits of each game are debated, there is often a general consensus (Zelda, Pokémon and Final Fantasy are examples). The FE fanbase is not like that. Every single entry has a sizable hate-base and a sizable fanbase to match.

[vanguard333]

Just now, Maof06 said:

Excuse me for intruding on your conversation. I'm not really into Zelda, but I know the fanbase and the situation is quite different from FE fanbase. Zelda fans debate which is the best and some games get hate, but for them all Zelda games are masterpieces. What I mean is that, even in fanbases where the merits of each game are debated, there is often a general consensus (Zelda, Pokémon and Final Fantasy are examples). The FE fanbase is not like that. Every single entry has a sizable hate-base and a sizable fanbase to match.

True; they aren't really divided on which games are good, as pretty much all of them are of the opinion that the worst ones are still good. However, ask them slightly more specific questions like the following examples: 

• "Which game is the best?" 
• "Has Ocarina of Time aged well?"
• "Was the Zant twist in Twilight Princess a good idea?"
• "What's most important in a Zelda game: exploration, puzzle-solving, combat or story?"
• "Who's more annoying: Navi or Fi?"

Then sit back with some popcorn and watch the show. I say this as a Zelda fan, though I'll admit that some of those questions are less discussion/argument provoking than others. Every Zelda fan has a different idea on what's best for the Zelda series, even if they all agree that all of them are good, and that was more what I was trying to say. 

 

1 hour ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

It's been a while since I've followed the Zelda fandom, but as far as I recall it's a much more unified group than the Fire Emblem fandom. Most Zelda fans see each game as being basically good, whereas Fire Emblem fans have typically played two-thirds of the games and only like half of what they've played.

That being said, Link's Awakening is the best Zelda game.

Proof of my point.

[Alastor15243]

26 minutes ago, Maof06 said:

Fire Emblem Fates is an immoral cashgrab. Sorry, I just want to hear your opinions about it.

The forbidden words have been spoken.

I have been summoned.

Very well.

*Ahem*!

 

Each path is a full-fledged game, complete with 22-23 (Depending on how you count Chapter 6) mainline missions. Ignoring paralogues and gaiden chapters, that's pretty typical of the average Fire Emblem game. It's more than enough content to justify its own separate release at full price.

Then you buy the others, and it's not even full price anymore. Further games after the second are at half price, and lemme tell ya, setting aside whether or not Rev is a worthwhile buy (not quite at the point to make a value judgment on that just yet), buying either Birthright or Conquest for twenty bucks is a goddamned steal. Birthright and Conquest together is a completely worthwhile purchase, and if you're the sort of person who enjoys playing Revelation, then it's not one game for the price of three, it's three games for the price of two.

Edited January 26, 2021 by Alastor15243

[vanguard333]

3 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

Each path is a full-fledged game, complete with 22-23 (Depending on how you count Chapter 6) mainline missions. Ignoring paralogues and gaiden chapters, that's pretty typical of the average Fire Emblem game. It's more than enough content to justify its own separate release at full price.

(Cutting for space)

Yeah; I can agree that, for everything wrong with Fates, it did a good job handling the three versions thing. I'm not too well-informed about how the pricing worked since I bought the special edition (3 games on one cartridge for around $80 was a pretty good deal), but I do recall the thing you mentioned about the second version you buy being half-price. Three games for the price of two, and unlike Pokémon, they are three games (after the decision in chapter 5 at least) rather than the same game with different mascot Pokémon. 

That said, when pricing is the best thing that can be said about a game, there's a problem. 

[Stones]

I have only played most of these once so my rating will be based on that playthrough and the difficulty I chose.

Gaiden: Probably 3/10. I think it's pretty underrated but it's just so old. The maps are bad too and the story isn't very well told. I did enjoy it more than I expected to, and it did have good mechanics and music. 

Genealogy of the Holy War: 7/10. My first playthrough was a lot of fun but I have no wish to replay it. The story is quite good but the gameplay suffers from big, empty maps. Like Gaiden, the mechanics are really good though. Managing inventories and pairings was cool. 

Thracia 776: 7/10. This game has some things that are genius but also some things that are mind-numbingly terrible. On the clever side, there's capturing/stealing, PCC, movement and constitution growths, staff warfare, escape maps, plenty of personal weapons and some really clever maps like the Manster arc and the A route. On the bad side, there's enemy move stars, pitch black fog, 1-99 hit, fatigue (only a problem on a first playthrough when you don't know who you need for the next map), status conditions lasting the whole map when they show up before Restores are available, the inability to change starting positions and some pretty horrible maps, such as 24x and 11-12. The Manster arc is probably 10/10 because it is just the best but after that it is not nearly as good. The story gets really boring until Xavier's chapter and the maps aren't that flash until the route split as well. However I do think the good things outweigh the bad. 

Binding Blade: 5.5/10. I tried not to do half points but I had to for this game because I couldn't decide whether it's a 5 or a 6. The map design is quite mixed and the mechanics are a downgrade from the Jugdral games which excelled in that regard. The story is a copy of FE3 and it is pretty boring. Roy is a boring lord and Merlinus is a boring advisor. However I don't agree with a lot of the other criticisms of the game, like saying that the maps are too big and it is badly balanced. 

Blazing Blade: 5/10. I can be firmly put in the 'FE7 bad' camp. There is not much that I really like about this game. Lyn Mode is an abomination, the story is like a bad fanfic, the protagonists aren't very interesting, the antagonists are rubbish, Mark is the worst avatar in the series, the whole idea of the Black Fang is so silly especially when you think about how this is supposed to be a prequel to FE6, I'm not a fan of the low-quality-high-quantity approach to enemies 2x effectiveness is bad, and while I am appreciating the extra Hector chapters in my current HNM playthrough, I don't see why they weren't just in Eliwood mode too. However, the map design, although it never reaches Thracia's highs, it never reaches Thracia's lows either, even if it comes close once or twice. The maps tend to range from passable to pretty good most of the time. The Dread Isle and Bern arcs were solid.

Sacred Stones: 6.5/10. I like this one a lot better. The plot is not much better and neither are the lords, but the other story-important characters, such as Tana, Innes and L'arachel, are some of my favourite characters in the series. The antagonists are also pretty good. In terms of gameplay, I think it's fair to say that the maps are somewhat worse, but the mechanics are a lot better. Split promotions are great, the skill system is a bit weak but better than the previous games and I like the monsters, although they should have been combined with human enemies more often. However, the difficulty is pretty low. All the difficulties are available from the beginning but none of them are actually very hard. I made the mistake of choosing Normal on my first playthrough, although I didn't use Seth which helped balance it out a little. My current playthrough is on Difficult though. Another problem is that the enemies are as weak as FE7's and your units are just as strong, if not stronger, Seth being the main offender. Overall this is just a fun game to mess around with but it isn't that strategically deep.

Path of Radiance: ??/10. I have no idea what to rate this game. The story and writing are excellent, the characters are great, supports are a thing that will happen, Laguz are interesting and the skill system is okay but there are pretty obvious flaws. The game is really easy even on Hard and BEXP breaks it even further. The maps can be really annoying. The Black Knight battle is terribly designed. The enemies are fairly bulky but they are pretty weak offensively so you can send your paladins in and they won't take much damage. There is also that weird thing with certain terrain where you need a 2-range weapon to attack an adjacent tile on certain terrain (I remember it on the bridges in the Astrid map). But more than the simple gameplay, the biggest problem is how slow the attack animations are. Enemy Phases take forever and I could make and eat lunch in the time it takes Reyson to dance. It makes playing the game feel like almost a chore which is really disappointing. I also hate how the button that lets you move around the map fast is the same button that gets rid of enemy ranges. Also the soundtrack is pretty meh, I can only think of three tracks I like. 

Radiant Dawn: 9/10. I love this game and it's easily my second favourite in the series. It's very flawed but I still like it. Ledges are cool, third tiers are cool even though some T2s feel like T1s, the animations are my favourite in the series, the character portraits are great, the music is great, I just really like it. The writing is not as good as PoR but still good. Compared to FE7 which was like a bad fanfic, this is like a good fanfic. Unfortunately Hard Mode is really dumb for removing quality of life things.

Shadow Dragon: 7/10. I'm not sure about this one but I like it better than most people. The story and characters are all bad but Marth and Caeda had some good lines sprinkled throughout. If the localisation team had a better script maybe we could have seen something like Path of Radiance. I think the reclassing system is boring and Lance rank is the most important stat which I'm not a fan of. Honestly I don't even know why I like this game as much as I do. I am in the middle of a H2 playthrough at the moment which I am enjoying but it's hard to say why. 

New Mystery: 5/10. I really don't like this one very much. The story isn't well told, even though more things actually happen than in Shadow Dragon, it manages to feel so much more boring. Kris is also an atrocious addition, the prologue is  bad, the assassin subplot sucks, and he just generally makes the game worse. Obviously the story isn't the reason people like this game, it's the gameplay but I didn't like that either. I only played on Normal so I know I would have been more engaged by a higher difficulty but I was scared of STRs. I found the maps pretty unenjoyable and I have no wish to replay it at the moment. 

Fates Birthright: 6/10. I haven't finished this one yet but I am up to the chapter after the lava one with the dragon vein so I think I can rate it. To me the gameplay feels like a combo of SS and SD so I am finding it enjoyable in that regard, although I hate My Castle because forging is dumb and so is buying buildings because you don't know what is worth spendings DV on beforehand. You also need to upgrade certain things to get Izana and Yukimura which is impossible to know beforehand. The bath houses feels unnecessarily pervy too.

However the story is pretty rubbish. The characters aren't great, especially Corrin who is annoying and shouldn't be in charge of Hoshido's army. Children make no sense either. The Camilla cutscene was also eyebleach-tier. Still enjoyable overall. 

Fates Conquest: Only up to Ch 8 so I can't give it a proper rating. 

Shadows of Valentia: Right at the beginning of Act 3 so same as Conquest. 

Three Houses: 9/10. This is my favourite game in the series. I am probably biased because I started with it but I still really like it. The characters are excellent and I think it has the best mechanics in the series. There are many more things I like about it and also heaps I don't but I'm too lazy to go through everything. 

[Venger_06]

23 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

"Which game is the best?"

Wind Waker is the best.

23 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

Each path is a full-fledged game, complete with 22-23 (Depending on how you count Chapter 6) mainline missions. Ignoring paralogues and gaiden chapters, that's pretty typical of the average Fire Emblem game. It's more than enough content to justify its own separate release at full price.

Then you buy the others, and it's not even full price anymore. Further games after the second are at half price, and lemme tell ya, setting aside whether or not Rev is a worthwhile buy (not quite at the point to make a value judgment on that just yet), buying either Birthright or Conquest for twenty bucks is a goddamned steal. Birthright and Conquest together is a completely worthwhile purchase, and if you're the sort of person who enjoys playing Revelation, then it's not one game for the price of three, it's three games for the price of two.

Yeah, the pricing is fair and Fates handled the route split better than Three Houses. My biggest problem with Fates is the philosophy with which it was developed. They shouldn't have created a "Noob FE", a "Hardcore FE" or a "Sandbox FE", but should have made the game by incorporating all three and letting the player tailor their experience according to their own tastes and goals. Also, the snow shoveling isn't even that bad, Sumeragi's map is worse.

[vanguard333]

On 1/25/2021 at 11:41 PM, Stones said:

Path of Radiance: ??/10. I have no idea what to rate this game. The story and writing are excellent, the characters are great, supports are a thing that will happen, Laguz are interesting and the skill system is okay but there are pretty obvious flaws. The game is really easy even on Hard and BEXP breaks it even further. The maps can be really annoying. The Black Knight battle is terribly designed. The enemies are fairly bulky but they are pretty weak offensively so you can send your paladins in and they won't take much damage. There is also that weird thing with certain terrain where you need a 2-range weapon to attack an adjacent tile on certain terrain (I remember it on the bridges in the Astrid map). But more than the simple gameplay, the biggest problem is how slow the attack animations are. Enemy Phases take forever and I could make and eat lunch in the time it takes Reyson to dance. It makes playing the game feel like almost a chore which is really disappointing. I also hate how the button that lets you move around the map fast is the same button that gets rid of enemy ranges. Also the soundtrack is pretty meh, I can only think of three tracks I like. 

1. I agree about the Black Knight fight. The way I see it, it is hard to make what is essentially a duel work in FE gameplay, and things like the five-turn limit, inability to save before the fight, and reinforcements showing up to fight Mist do hold it back a lot. I will say that the rematch in Radiant Dawn is far better handled, though it has the disadvantage of happening at the exact same time that all your other units are fighting all the enemy units.

2. Regarding the tile thing, I'm pretty sure you're referring to how you can only hit an enemy on a water tile adjacent to the ship with a 2-range attack. It actually makes a lot of sense if you think about it: attacking an opponent that's out over the water. It's kind-of like the logic behind ledges in RD. 

3. Am I the only one who thinks the animations aren't slow?

4. Are you kidding about the soundtrack? The soundtrack's fantastic: the Black Knight theme, Crimea Marches, the Bishop Oliver theme, the upbeat after-the-mission's-over theme, the sad music that plays when Ike and Mist mourn Greil, etc. 

 

12 hours ago, Maof06 said:

Wind Waker is the best.

Wind Waker is definitely a great game; I do just wish it had been given a bit more time so not nearly so much content would have to have been cut: two dungeons, undersea parts of the temple dungeons, Greatfish Isle and an entire steampunk volcano island that would get recycled as the Goron Mines in Twilight Princess, but the game as-is is incredible. 

I'm one of the few Zelda fans who can't really think of a "best" Zelda game. My personal favourite is Spirit Tracks thanks to stuff like Spirit Zelda, but I definitely don't think it's the best.

Edited January 27, 2021 by vanguard333

[Stones]

26 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

1. I agree about the Black Knight fight. The way I see it, it is hard to make what is essentially a duel work in FE gameplay, and things like the five-turn limit, inability to save before the fight, and reinforcements showing up to fight Mist do hold it back a lot. I will say that the rematch in Radiant Dawn is far better handled, though it has the disadvantage of happening at the exact same time that all your other units are fighting all the enemy units.

I really like the Radiant Dawn version because there's a much higher potential for strategy meaning it's possible to one-round him even on Normal Mode where his stats are the same as Hard but the hammer faces WTD.

37 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

2. Regarding the tile thing, I'm pretty sure you're referring to how you can only hit an enemy on a water tile adjacent to the ship with a 2-range attack. It actually makes a lot of sense if you think about it: attacking an opponent that's out over the water. It's kind-of like the logic behind ledges in RD.

I never meant that it was a bad thing, but I did find it a bit odd because it was the first game it had ever happened in so I wasn't expecting it. Something else funny about PoR tiles is on the first boat map, Chapter 3, there are stairs where if you are next to them, you can't go straight onto them, you have to go up from the bottom (if that makes sense). I'm sure that happens in other maps but I can only remember it in that one. This also makes sense but I didn't know that was the case at the time.

44 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

4. Are you kidding about the soundtrack? The soundtrack's fantastic: the Black Knight theme, Crime Marches, the Bishop Oliver theme, the upbeat after-the-mission's-over theme, the sad music that plays when Ike and Mist mourn Greil, etc.

I do like the two in bold but I'm not huge on the other ones. But now that I think about it I also like the first couple of map themes and the map theme that plays on the desert map and the 4-part one, and the recruitment theme is really good as well. There is also the pirate one which I either love or hate.