Rumoured FE games in development

[Fabulously Olivier]

3 minutes ago, Metal Flash said:

Fair enough, I guess it could work for the Tellius duology. Heck, it could even make stuff like transfers easier to manage.

I mean, Gaiden`s remake sold really well on its own, and that is disliked MUCH more than Thracia from what I have seen. There would also be the issue of FE4 and FE5`s clashing gameplay styles. The latter plays more like a traditional FE game, while the former has the infamous huge maps and besieging several castles per map.

And even then, very few characters would actually benefit from a inheritance system (Roy, Lilina, Wolt and Sue come to mind). 

They really would have to create new characters for Binding Blade for it to work as an inheritance duology. It would be so much work, and BB is notoriously poorly balanced as is.

 

I do wonder if an FE4 remake keeps the mega maps. It may be faithful to keep them, but it would be better game design and better for sales to split them.

[Acacia Sgt]

If they didn't change SoV to be more in line with the other FE's, I don't see them doing it to Genealogy either.

As a side note, if Binding Blade ever gets remade, part of me hopes that any new content they add to it, rather than it be actually new, they just adapt Hasha no Tsurugi into it. I'd find it a very organic way to add "new" content.

[Azz]

Honestly... would really enjoy both Marth games being remade if only to watch the world burn lol.

As for more serious stuff... I think a FE4 and FE5 duo remake would work if FE4 was the main game and FE5 was treated the way Torna the Golden Country was to Xenoblade Chronicles 2. Otherwise I don't see it working since they are so different. Also I don't really want a FE4 remake if its as faithful as previous remakes since I don't like FE4 lol.

The idea of FE6 and FE7 being remade together is stupid to me since both are barely connected because they thought making the sequel first was best. If we were to get an Elibe remake, I just want FE6 (which apparently was the scraped second 3DS remake apparently).

FE9 and FE10 would actually be interesting to me if only for the fact it could improve on FE9 as a game by giving it some of FE10's QOL features and give us the extended script of FE10.

Am expecting a FEW2 for the alleged spin off. Hoping for an Age of Calamity esque game but Three Houses set during the War of Heroes but I don't mine tbh as long as its fun. 

[Metal Flash]

3 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

They really would have to create new characters for Binding Blade for it to work as an inheritance duology. It would be so much work, and BB is notoriously poorly balanced as is.

 

I do wonder if an FE4 remake keeps the mega maps. It may be faithful to keep them, but it would be better game design and better for sales to split them.

Yup.

I can see a case for either option, but since they have, mostly, tried to keep their remakes faithful to the original game, I see it more likely that they keep them. Then again, like you said, it will probably be better for sales to split them into smaller maps.

[Use the Falchion]

3 hours ago, Metal Flash said:

There would also be the issue of FE4 and FE5`s clashing gameplay styles. The latter plays more like a traditional FE game, while the former has the infamous huge maps and besieging several castles per map.

 

18 hours ago, Florete said:

The Jugdral games play way too differently for this idea to make sense

I know I'm in the minority, but I never really saw this as a problem, but rather an opportunity. Fates was critiqued for telling three stories across 2.5 full-priced games. Three Houses was both praised and lambasted due to its route splits. I think Echoes was praised for the Alm/Celica split, but I honestly don't know. How do you keep the trend of multiple story options alive, but still tell a single-narrative story while also trying to make fans feel like the game is a 2/3/4-for-1 bargain? You sell the two games at once, in one pack.

Besides, Rereleases nowadays have multiple games with different gameplay styles or controls in them - I don't see the need for Fire Emblem to be any different. 

For example, let's look at Mass Effect Legendary Edition. ME 1 plays like old-school Bioware because it is old school BioWare. players have a choice about which planets they want to visit and explore, and in which order they want to complete story missions. There are very few progress checks, and the worlds are pretty bare-bones. 

Mass Effect 2 has fewer explorable areas that work more like hubs for the missions on them, but MUCH more detail and depth to them. Most missions can still be handled in any order, but there are progress missions. The story isn't as narratively propelled as other games are either. 

Mass Effect 3 is different even still! You've got a hub world and a ship, and that's about it. Multiple planets may have missions, but there's no hub connecting them.

And that's only overworlds! That's not talking about powers, paragon/renegade stuff, healing, looting, and smaller changes along the way.

 

For an FE 4/5 remake, it'd be similar, but still different. From the main screen, having players choose whose story they want to play could give players the choice on how to proceed in things. You'd have Sigurd's story, Leif's story, and Seliph's story. Players can pick one from the get-go, allowing them to play the game and the story in any way they like. Yes, there will be changes from one game to another, but I don't think that's a reason to stop the two from being combined. Then again, I'm the type of person who went straight from beating all three Mass Effect games 3 back to Mass Effect 1, and then got bored of so I skipped to ME 2, which I then beat. Then, I went back to ME 1, beat it, and started up ME 2 again. I'm also the type of person who will start a Fates or FE 7 playthrough in order to cope with my Three Houses and Awakening burnout. So, what do I know?

 

Narratively, this could allow FE 4 and 5 to work together to make sure that the story doesn't have any major plot holes or inconsistencies, or makes fans of one pair or ship feel left out in order for the story to function. 

 

On the flip side, if Genealogy does come out, and it's an incredible success, then Thracia - a story set in the same world with similar characters - may be able to sail on the winds that Genealogy provided. Granted fans may feel cheated due to the different gameplay and mechanics, but that can be overcome for most. 

[joevar]

rumors will be rumors. Unless they are officially confirmed, it might as well get canned sometime while in development. never see the light of day.

i do want all of those rumors to happen and get released asap though.

 

also like other said. the fact that they work on multiple project, also mean some of those actually have considerably lesser workload than the other. either re-used assets, mostly make-over from previous games, or in best scenario now IS sign contract with other studio to help them make FE. not just studio behind Warrior series. (monolith will be sweet, but doubt it since their hand also full atm)

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

On 2/5/2022 at 9:12 PM, AnonymousSpeed said:

Aw sweet, are we getting a New Mystery + Shadow Dragon echoes Switch port?

Can't wait for Fire Emblem: Echoes: Heroes of the Shadow Dragon: Even Newer Mysteries of Light and Shadow to drop.

Not necessarily likely, but what if the "remake" is an English-language port of New Mystery of the Emblem, like FE1 received over a year ago? That's already two games packed in one. Obviously a mere port would be kind of a letdown, but having a legit way to play FE3 in English would be pretty cool.

My hope is for Genealogy of the Holy War to be remade in some fashion. I'd like it to be a mostly faithful (I unironically think Pursuit and Critical being locked to skills is a good thing), but I wouldn't mind adding some new weapons and items, as well as Casual Mode and different difficulties. Also maybe making Gen 2 more than the "Seliph and Jerkass Lewyn" show, narratively speaking.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Shanty Pete's 1st Mate
Edit

[Fabulously Olivier]

1 hour ago, joevar said:

rumors will be rumors. Unless they are officially confirmed, it might as well get canned sometime while in development. never see the light of day.

i do want all of those rumors to happen and get released asap though.

 

also like other said. the fact that they work on multiple project, also mean some of those actually have considerably lesser workload than the other. either re-used assets, mostly make-over from previous games, or in best scenario now IS sign contract with other studio to help them make FE. not just studio behind Warrior series. (monolith will be sweet, but doubt it since their hand also full atm)

You're somewhat misunderstanding Koei Tecmo if you think the 3H team was "the studio behind the Warriors series." They had their Romance of the Three Kingdoms team do most of the heavy lifting, albeit on the engine made by Omegaforce for FE Warriors. So we're talking seasoned strategy vets here.

[joevar]

4 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

You're somewhat misunderstanding Koei Tecmo if you think the 3H team was "the studio behind the Warriors series." They had their Romance of the Three Kingdoms team do most of the heavy lifting, albeit on the engine made by Omegaforce for FE Warriors. So we're talking seasoned strategy vets here.

maybe i did? but my point is actually focused on "gathering more helper" rather than criticizing about KT. since if we're talking about 3 simultaneous project of FE, then its still a big task for just IS plus an elite team of KT. whether KT help IS with their strategy vets or not is anybody guess, but its not like KT under IS or nintendo they would treat FE like its their own IP ( meaning they will do their utmost with whatever resource available at their disposal)..

unless one of project turn out to be mobile which doesnt require as much workload as full priced title on switch, or those 3 project are a grand plan for next 6 year with no less than 2 year gap for each project. then my point can be ignored.

and ofc part of it is just me that want to see another FE thats doesnt have anything to do with KT.

Edited February 7, 2022 by joevar

[Fabulously Olivier]

6 hours ago, joevar said:

unless one of project turn out to be mobile 

Don't hurt me like that. I don't think I could take my potential FEW2 turning out to be FEH2.

[Metal Flash]

14 hours ago, Use the Falchion said:

I know I'm in the minority, but I never really saw this as a problem, but rather an opportunity. Fates was critiqued for telling three stories across 2.5 full-priced games. Three Houses was both praised and lambasted due to its route splits. I think Echoes was praised for the Alm/Celica split, but I honestly don't know. How do you keep the trend of multiple story options alive, but still tell a single-narrative story while also trying to make fans feel like the game is a 2/3/4-for-1 bargain? You sell the two games at once, in one pack.

Besides, Rereleases nowadays have multiple games with different gameplay styles or controls in them - I don't see the need for Fire Emblem to be any different. 

For example, let's look at Mass Effect Legendary Edition. ME 1 plays like old-school Bioware because it is old school BioWare. players have a choice about which planets they want to visit and explore, and in which order they want to complete story missions. There are very few progress checks, and the worlds are pretty bare-bones. 

Mass Effect 2 has fewer explorable areas that work more like hubs for the missions on them, but MUCH more detail and depth to them. Most missions can still be handled in any order, but there are progress missions. The story isn't as narratively propelled as other games are either. 

Mass Effect 3 is different even still! You've got a hub world and a ship, and that's about it. Multiple planets may have missions, but there's no hub connecting them.

And that's only overworlds! That's not talking about powers, paragon/renegade stuff, healing, looting, and smaller changes along the way.

 

For an FE 4/5 remake, it'd be similar, but still different. From the main screen, having players choose whose story they want to play could give players the choice on how to proceed in things. You'd have Sigurd's story, Leif's story, and Seliph's story. Players can pick one from the get-go, allowing them to play the game and the story in any way they like. Yes, there will be changes from one game to another, but I don't think that's a reason to stop the two from being combined. Then again, I'm the type of person who went straight from beating all three Mass Effect games 3 back to Mass Effect 1, and then got bored of so I skipped to ME 2, which I then beat. Then, I went back to ME 1, beat it, and started up ME 2 again. I'm also the type of person who will start a Fates or FE 7 playthrough in order to cope with my Three Houses and Awakening burnout. So, what do I know?

 

Narratively, this could allow FE 4 and 5 to work together to make sure that the story doesn't have any major plot holes or inconsistencies, or makes fans of one pair or ship feel left out in order for the story to function. 

 

On the flip side, if Genealogy does come out, and it's an incredible success, then Thracia - a story set in the same world with similar characters - may be able to sail on the winds that Genealogy provided. Granted fans may feel cheated due to the different gameplay and mechanics, but that can be overcome for most. 

Can`t say I agree, but hey, to each their own.

I fail to see why anyone would play Gen 2 before Gen 1, that is half of the story and all the context to the current state of the world you are skipping. It just makes no sense to me.

[Fabulously Olivier]

5 minutes ago, Metal Flash said:

Can`t say I agree, but hey, to each their own.

I fail to see why anyone would play Gen 2 before Gen 1, that is half of the story and all the context to the current state of the world you are skipping. It just makes no sense to me.

I think there is a case for having the option to skip Gen 1 (AFTER completing it the first playthrough) with a questionnaire for unit pairings and inheritance. Because it's Gen 2 where inheritance varies up the gameplay. 

 

Kind of like Fates did for its first 6 core chapters, and 3H SHOULD have done for the entirety of Book 1 because White Clouds actively makes the game less replayable.

[genesis]

About the remake: If it's two games in one, I can see it being Echoes, Shadows of Elibe saga, I don't know how they would work Thracia and Genealogy in one game since the mechanics are too different unless they change Thracia or Genealogy mechanics drastically   

Edited February 7, 2022 by genesis

[Metal Flash]

59 minutes ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

I think there is a case for having the option to skip Gen 1 (AFTER completing it the first playthrough) with a questionnaire for unit pairings and inheritance. Because it's Gen 2 where inheritance varies up the gameplay. 

I guess that could work.

[Use the Falchion]

2 hours ago, Metal Flash said:

I fail to see why anyone would play Gen 2 before Gen 1, that is half of the story and all the context to the current state of the world you are skipping. It just makes no sense to me.

It's not like the game would be forcing anyone to skip Gen 1, It's just giving players the option to not have to play through Gen 1 if they don't feel like it or have to always play though Gen 1 in future playthroughs. Fates had a similar aspect in some ways, with the whole "Choose Your Fate" part, where you skip the first 5-6 chapters of the game in order to get to the actual story. (It even had a little difficulty warning screen - maybe this game could do something similar where it warns players that finishing Part 1 is highly recommended, but it ultimately leaves the power and control to the player.) I'm sure the talks about the grind and repetition of Three Houses' Monastery wouldn't be as criticized or pronounced if players could just choose a house and skip to Part 2 if they so desired. 

Let's say I have all of my pairings locked down from a previous playthrough, but I want to see different supports (if they have those) epilogues for Gen 2, or try out different weapon builds or classes (if they have that option). Why should I be forced to play through all of Gen 1 just to see those changes? 

I have friends who also like to know the end of the story before they start or finish it. (Monsters, I know.) To them, this would be a way to see the experience the end of the story while still playing the game and enjoying it. Or who knows, they may just read the ending and start from the beginning. I have other friends who HATE to see their units and characters die, and get very stressed about unit deaths in games. I know these friends would adore Fire Emblem for the characters, story, and gameplay, but the unit deaths might also scare them off. Giving them the option to skip to Gen 2 may help alleviate some of that anxiety - they're able to play (at least part of) one of the most beloved games in the franchise and skip most of the dark stuff and mandatory character deaths. 

IMO Giving players options isn't a bad thing. It only becomes bad if it's mandatory and makes the game either too easy or too hard. I highly doubt many players would intentionally skip to Gen 2, at least not on their first playthrough. But having the option there doesn't really hurt anyone either, at least that's how I see it. 

 

2 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

with a questionnaire for unit pairings and inheritance. Because it's Gen 2 where inheritance varies up the gameplay. 

In my head I had it so that the Gen 2 units would simply be the children from the latest Gen 1 playthrough's pairings. I.E, if someone paired Lewyn and Ayra together on the previous Gen 1, then all Gen 2 future playthroughs would have Lewyn and Ayra together until the player decided to replay Gen 1. But your idea is far neater and far better. 

Edited February 7, 2022 by Use the Falchion

[AnonymousSpeed]

14 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

They had their Romance of the Three Kingdoms team do most of the heavy lifting, albeit on the engine made by Omegaforce for FE Warriors. So we're talking seasoned strategy vets here.

I'd trust a seasoned steak to make a better game than they did. An under-seasoned one, even.

14 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Can't wait for Fire Emblem: Echoes: Heroes of the Shadow Dragon: Even Newer Mysteries of Light and Shadow to drop.

Not necessarily likely, but what if the "remake" is an English-language port of New Mystery of the Emblem, like FE1 received over a year ago? That's already two games packed in one. Obviously a mere port would be kind of a letdown, but having a legit way to play FE3 in English would be pretty cool.

Fire Emblem Echoes: Shadows of Archanaea: Shadow Dragon and the Blade of Light + New Mystery of the Fire Emblem + BS Archanaea Saga & Knuckles

I don't know, I'd be kind of interested in an FE3 port if not for the lack of axes.

To be honest, even though I don't like Genealogy that much, I'd probably be quicker to buy a faithful FE4 remake than a new game, especially if said new game took after Three Houses.

[Acacia Sgt]

1 minute ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Fire Emblem Echoes: Shadows of Archanaea: Shadow Dragon and the Blade of Light + New Mystery of the Fire Emblem + BS Archanaea Saga & Knuckles

You forgot to add: "Featuring Vergil from the Devil May Cry Series"

---

Can't say I see much appeal on skipping Genealogy's Gen 1... or even White Clouds. That's like... half the game. Who wants to only play half the game? Fates' skip is barely a quarter in, so it's more palatable... but half the game...?

[AnonymousSpeed]

Man, if I had no dignity, I would pay to skip White Clouds.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

In this tactics RPG, you'll be managing fatigue, missing heal spells, and braving the battlefields of Darkness in your bid to defeat the greatest tactician who ever lived. Be sure to stop the Child Hunts and save Manster this fall, only on Nintendo Switch.

2 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

Don't hurt me like that. I don't think I could take my potential FEW2 turning out to be FEH2.

(Feh the Owl slowly flutters in, except it's a 3D model in HD, running on the Switch.)

...Flap flap! ...Flap flap! Helloooooo Summoners. 

[The PaperCrafter]

On 2/6/2022 at 12:38 PM, YourBoyRoy said:

Lol why would they do SD + NM? They've already remade each book of the Archanea Saga 2-3 times, it would be a massive wasted opportunity to not get the older games out there. Then again, the fact NM has no official localised release does make it a distant possibility.

I would be down for remaking Archaea again for the following reasons..

1. Exactly, Mystery of the Emblem and New Mystery weren't localised.

2. Shadow Dragon wasn't remade enough. Enemy variety wasn't changed, no supports (or at the very least, they could go the Kaga route by adding a bunch of events, talk conversations and making characters relevant to the story), no nods toward Mystery of the Emblem to make the story make more sense and base stats weren't touched at all. The English translation is also outdated as it conflicts with future depictions of the characters.

3. Kris completely ruined Mystery of the Emblem's story. It deserves to be remade again just so the story can be normal again. Another thing is that remakes are meant to add stuff, but there's a lot of stuff that the game could do without such as the training grounds and the most of the returning Shadow Dragon characters since most of them don't have a reason to come back and it doesn't make sense for Marth to encounter all of the same people twice in a row. Weapon weight should also come back since without it, you're just selecting the weapon that deals the most damage.

4. Archanea has a ton of lore and character info only known from interviews and dev notes. There was no reason not to add them to improve the story.

[Etrurian emperor]

17 minutes ago, The PaperCrafter said:

2. Shadow Dragon wasn't remade enough. Enemy variety wasn't changed, no supports (or at the very least, they could go the Kaga route by adding a bunch of events, talk conversations and making characters relevant to the story), no nods toward Mystery of the Emblem to make the story make more sense and base stats weren't touched at all. The English translation is also outdated as it conflicts with future depictions of the characters.

I think that makes sense to some degree but it be a kinda bad look if Archenea got yet another game because they refused to do the job properly last time while games that require a remake far more get ignored.

I'd be down with a proper Archenea remake but only after the other games got their time in the sun. Until then I'd prefer Archenea to wait in line.

[Metal Flash]

1 hour ago, Use the Falchion said:

It's not like the game would be forcing anyone to skip Gen 1, It's just giving players the option to not have to play through Gen 1 if they don't feel like it or have to always play though Gen 1 in future playthroughs. Fates had a similar aspect in some ways, with the whole "Choose Your Fate" part, where you skip the first 5-6 chapters of the game in order to get to the actual story. (It even had a little difficulty warning screen - maybe this game could do something similar where it warns players that finishing Part 1 is highly recommended, but it ultimately leaves the power and control to the player.) I'm sure the talks about the grind and repetition of Three Houses' Monastery wouldn't be as criticized or pronounced if players could just choose a house and skip to Part 2 if they so desired. 

Let's say I have all of my pairings locked down from a previous playthrough, but I want to see different supports (if they have those) epilogues for Gen 2, or try out different weapon builds or classes (if they have that option). Why should I be forced to play through all of Gen 1 just to see those changes? 

I have friends who also like to know the end of the story before they start or finish it. (Monsters, I know.) To them, this would be a way to see the experience the end of the story while still playing the game and enjoying it. Or who knows, they may just read the ending and start from the beginning. I have other friends who HATE to see their units and characters die, and get very stressed about unit deaths in games. I know these friends would adore Fire Emblem for the characters, story, and gameplay, but the unit deaths might also scare them off. Giving them the option to skip to Gen 2 may help alleviate some of that anxiety - they're able to play (at least part of) one of the most beloved games in the franchise and skip most of the dark stuff and mandatory character deaths. 

IMO Giving players options isn't a bad thing. It only becomes bad if it's mandatory and makes the game either too easy or too hard. I highly doubt many players would intentionally skip to Gen 2, at least not on their first playthrough. But having the option there doesn't really hurt anyone either, at least that's how I see it. 

I guess I can see why some would pick the option, but I still believe that it would be skipping way too much content. Still, having the option would do no harm.

[ciphertul]

1 hour ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

In this tactics RPG, you'll be managing fatigue, missing heal spells, and braving the battlefields of Darkness in your bid to defeat the greatest tactician who ever lived. Be sure to stop the Child Hunts and save Manster this fall, only on Nintendo Switch.

(Feh the Owl slowly flutters in, except it's a 3D model in HD, running on the Switch.)

...Flap flap! ...Flap flap! Helloooooo Summoners. 

Everything you put in this post is a big old hard nope from me. 

I guess the kids are out of luck.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

4 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

I think there is a case for having the option to skip Gen 1 (AFTER completing it the first playthrough) with a questionnaire for unit pairings and inheritance. Because it's Gen 2 where inheritance varies up the gameplay. 

That's... a lot of questions to be nairing. Not just "who did you pair with whom?", but also "what was everyone's inventory" and "what stats did they end up with?". I'm not strictly opposed to a "skip Gen 1 on future playthroughs" option. But if I were making it, I'd do either

2 hours ago, Use the Falchion said:

In my head I had it so that the Gen 2 units would simply be the children from the latest Gen 1 playthrough's pairings. I.E, if someone paired Lewyn and Ayra together on the previous Gen 1, then all Gen 2 future playthroughs would have Lewyn and Ayra together until the player decided to replay Gen 1.

Or just make it a substitutes run, with Seliph, Leif, Finn, and Altenna each assigned a "default inventory". Maybe give the player the option of continuing from any prior "Gen 1" they've completed?

[Use the Falchion]

8 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Maybe give the player the option of continuing from any prior "Gen 1" they've completed?

That's kind of where my head was originally, honestly. I like the idea, but I'm not in love with it. But it does make sense, and would probably be the best option so far. 

Maybe there's a compromise? Like, you can pick the pairing, but the weaponry and items (assuming they keep that style of inheritance) carry over from the prior Gen 1? But if you want different weaponry, you'd still be replaying Gen 1...hmm...

 

9 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Or just make it a substitutes run, with Seliph, Leif, Finn, and Altenna each assigned a "default inventory".

I'd rather that style be an option players get to choose than a mandatory decision (or seeming punishment) for not choosing to play Gen 1.  I'd rather have the substitutes be recruitable in a main playthrough, but that's a discussion for another time!