Three Houses, Five Years

[Alistair]

So, timeskip day is upon on us. Today marks the five year anniversary of the release of Three Houses.

It's weird to think that 2019 was five years ago, but it'I guess that's how time works. Given both the Switch's rapidly approaching end of lifespan and the release of a new mainline game in Engage, I think it's an interesting time to think about Three Houses and what's meant since its release. It's the most commercially successful game in the series, but it also drew a lot of (perfectly valid) criticism related to its level design, social sim elements, and unit homogenization. Nevertheless, it has some of the most popular characters in the entire series (at least judging by CYL results), and I'd be surprised if it ever leaves Fire Emblem fan discussion. What do y'all think of the game now that it's been a half decade since its release?

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I remember being very concerned about Three Houses' high school sim stuff and came away from that first playthrough even more disappointed than I was expecting. It's half the game time and every bit of the game balance is designed around engaging with it. But the Maddening mode was a breath of fresh air. Suddenly the minute benefits of all that between map grinding was having tangible effects on the run. Totally unexpected that such a half baked update would show me where the game's strength's lie. Canto is great. Linked attacks are the best take on Support bonuses ever. Battalions and gambits are dynamic without ever breaking the game. I love class masteries and the split between Class Skills and Equipped skills. And there's a wide amount of build variety at high level play. I can't see myself going back to it for anything other than a dumb, hyper-specific challenge run, but coming up with challenge runs extends the life of this game more than in any other entry in the series.

In my mental tier list of Fire Emblem, Three Houses is bottom of B tier. 8th place. After FE7, and occasionally losing its slot to FE6 depending on the day of the week.

Edited July 27 by Zapp Branniglenn

[Acacia Sgt]

I'll admit I don't remember much of what I specifically thought about the game back then. More so, I only got the game recently to finally play it myself. So I'm not sure I have much to say. That said, I will say I very much enjoyed the Monastery as a mechanic, and the whole concept of building up your units justified in-story with the teacher and students structure, I so loved that.

[Jotari]

My opinion about it hasn't really changed since it came out. I enjoyed it. Quite a lot I'd even say. I don't think its the best the series has to offer in any department (unless you want to make manufactured controversy a series wide criteria) but it's a solid game. I'd say its biggest weakness is that each of the routes are basically the same, but, well, we're probably not expected to the play the game four times over (though if that's the case why localize it as Three Houses and put so much advertising emphasis on the three routes >.>).

[lenticular]

It's one of my favourite games in the series, and possibly my absolute favourite. But then, I also play the sort of social sim games that the monastery sections are riffing off, so I was always going to like it. I personally enjoyed the pacing of alternating between the battle sections and the monastery sections, though I completely understand why a lot of people aren't into it. I think that as we go forward, people are generally going to view Three Houses in the same sort of way they view Gaiden/Shadows of Valentia. It's a game that deviates substantially from the traditional Fire Emblem format and some people will love those changes and others will hate them and that's the way it should be. All of which is assuming that Three Houses doesn't become a blueprint for the series going forward, which I don't think it should even as someone who loves it.

On a somewhat personal note, I also like that Three Houses has the first LGBTQIA+ Fire Emblem character who actually felt authentic and well-realised to me (Dorothea). The game is still far from perfect on that front, but it felt like such a step up from the likes of Heather or Leon, and that meant a lot to me.

[Etrurian emperor]

I think the first experience with the game was among the best I had in Fire Emblem, but its also a game that's hard to go back to because the gameplay of each route except Crimson Flower is mostly the same. The Fodlan fatigue only extend to gameplay though, since Hopes showed that there was even more millage to get out of the cast, world and story then we thought. 

Its still unclear what the legacy of Three Houses will be within the series. Engage took over practically nothing from Three Houses but was also developed alongside it, so it couldn't have. What lessons the series will take from Three Houses will likely get revealed in the next Fire Emblem.

In terms of story, worldbuilding and characters Three Houses could be a happy accident due to another dev being at the helm, and it being the Awakening style that IS really wants to stick with. Or due the positive reception the next game will take cues from Three Houses in this area. In terms of gameplay I think I would be a little disappointed if the next game does take after Three Houses. It would make the game less unique but also risk bringing a fatigue to the next title. And while I have little interest in ironmanning, I do strongly feel that the gameplay style of Three Houses doesn't really fit with the philosophy that units should be allowed to die, and that this is a shame. 

Edited July 27 by Etrurian emperor

[Jotari]

12 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Its still unclear what the legacy of Three Houses will be within the series. Engage took over practically nothing from Three Houses but was also developed alongside it, so it couldn't have. What lessons the series will take from Three Houses will likely get revealed in the next Fire Emblem.

It took the aspect of punching things. But it also made it so unworkable as a weapon it might have killed any potential for gauntlets in the series going forward.

[Etrurian emperor]

One thing I hope is that whatever follows Three Houses gives old traditions or failed ideas a rest. I think Three Houses(and Engage) where at their least interesting when following tired conventions. The prime example for this being Jeralt(and Lumera) dying pretty much solely because its tradition that the Fire Emblem parent dies. Same with the slitherers. They mostly exist for two reasons, one of them being that creepy cloaked guys manipulating things from the shadow is just what Fire Emblem does.

The other reason they exist is to give the player a choice between factions without any of the factions getting their hands too dirty because all of those jobs will be outsourced to the joke villain brigade. And this was a flawed idea Three Houses lifted directly from Fates where Team Garon were there so that Corrin could join Nohr without him and Xander ever having to do something bad. 

In return I'd like to see what was interesting in Three Houses return to create some new traditions. Edelgard having her design and philosophy modeled after the antagonists rather than Marth/Hector was a great decision that I like to see more of. For example a more scruffy/cutthroat lord from a poor nations who takes his cues from Travant or Naesalla. 

Edited July 27 by Etrurian emperor

[Fire Emblem Fan]

At launch five years ago, I couldn't put Three Houses down. I was pretty engrossed with it. Now, five years later, I still think it's an excellent game.

True, I complain about Three Houses bias in Heroes, but that's because I've always felt the other games should get equal billing and just as much attention since Heroes is supposed to be crossing over ALL the FE games. Also true that I think the discourse surrounding it can become very toxic, and I especially think a number of fans of a certain character can also be very toxic.

But at the end of the day, I still really like Three Houses. I like the story, I like the characters, and I always have fun playing it. It's a great game.

[Etrurian emperor]

One thing I hope they'll take from Three Houses is the rather ''Game of Thronesian'' vibe of the noble houses. From the three countries we have from each house a set of traits/specializations, relations with other houses, a rough take on their location and various miscellaneous trivia about them. It made the world feel a lot bigger and defined, and its even something world building king Tellius hasn't done. Of course not every house needs to be represented by a character next time. 

Edited July 28 by Etrurian emperor

[vanguard333]

I think it was a very ambitious game that Intelligent Systems really needed to do. Awakening saved the series while bringing in an influx of new fans unfamiliar with the older titles, and it's quite clear from how Fates was advertised as one game being like Awakening and another being like the older games, and with its vast amount of superfluous gameplay elements (like the second gen units whose in-story justification is ridiculous and borderline-nonexistent) that IS was using Fates as a form of throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. Three Houses was very much something the series needed: a new, serious and ambitious game that wasn't trying to be like Awakening or the old games, but its own thing.

My opinion on Three Houses on its own hasn't really changed:

I think the game overall very much succeeds at making the player feel like a professor educating the next generation in warfare, and that a lot of the problems with the unique professor mechanics are fairly minor overall. For all that it could become repetitive and boring, I very much enjoyed the Monastery.

Another area where it really succeeded was the characters; in strategy RPGs like this, getting the characters right is often far more important than the plot, as the characters, also being the player's units, are the ones carrying the game's story. It was really good that we finally had deep and compelling characters for the first time since the Tellius games.

However, I also think that, particularly in part 2, the game shows many signs of overambition; it wants to do both Empire vs Church and three nations at war, and I don't think those ideas were integrated well enough for the game to do both. It really says a lot that the routes are really everyone vs empire with barely a token attempt at three-way conflict; add in that Azure Moon and Verdant Wind were built off of Silver Snow, as well as the fact that Crimson Flower was originally supposed to be a secret bonus route (hence it being underdeveloped in chapters and presentation), and you really see how the game grew to be too big for its own good.

I think that map reuse is an issue; it didn't have to be an issue, as there are very good examples of maps being reused in ways that they still provide unique and interesting challenges (Crimson Flower shows this well, as its few chapters are often fantastic in providing different challenges than chapters in other routes with the same map).

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

Three Houses is definitely in my "top 4" Fire Emblem titles. Alongside Genealogy, Rafiant Dawn, and Echoes: Shadows of Valentia.

Back when it came out, I managed to complete my first playthrough over the course of a month. Which might not sound special, until I point out that it took me 85 hours to beat Golden Deer. One of the last times I was really "obsessed" with a game. And I think it played a big role in turning me back into a "regular" of the Forest.

Since then, I've put an extra 500 hours or so, completing the other three routes, and the DLC campaign. As well as finally returning to Golden Deer for an NG Maddening playthrough, and the fabled "golden screen".

Having said all that, I haven't really touched 3H within the past couple years. Perhaps I'm wary of another big time commitment, especially when there are so many games I've yet to complete once. It's one of the harder games to "get in, play briefly, get out", and I'm not doing many lengthy "gaming sessions" nowadays. Still, if I ever return to that frame of mind, I could do worse than enroll for another year at Garreg Mach.

[Dark Holy Elf]

I was a bit skeptical about the game before release, and even while I was playing it I remember thinking "huh, this seems really good, but I assume they'll mess it up". They did not, in fact, mess it up. Five years later, Three Houses has unquestionably taken the position of favourite Fire Emblem for me. I think its world/characters/themes are simply far stronger than other games in the series. It's still the only one I've extensively discussed with non-FE fans and even non-gamers.

I wouldn't elevate its gameplay quite as high relative to the rest of the series, but I also think Fire Emblem has exceptional gameplay, and I do think Three Houses is good at it, if different, by series standards. In particular I love the class system; I think it has an incredible amount of unit variety and this makes for great replay value. I think its map design is a bit weaker than games like Fates and Engage, but not the worst.

From a personal standpoint this game has gotten me much more involved in what I consider to be the very positive sides of game fandom, creation of art and writing and character analysis and all that. It was an incredibly positive community to be part of especially as covid forced me into online spaces relatively more during lockdowns. I've now played it 21 times, in all sorts of ways, and it is probably my favourite game of all time.

[Barren]

I think Three Houses definitely holds up well to this day as others here have echoed. Taking the FE Fates multiple route idea and better refining it certainly paid dividends, even if some of it’s storytelling wasn’t perfect. 
 

The meat and bones of the game imo are the cast of characters and most of them to me seemed interesting to get to know. Also the idea of molding your team into whatever you want from noble/commoner was really cool.

 

Admittedly I wish a couple of routes could have been adjusted in some ways, like Crimson Flower was a bit too short and I wished that Verdant Wind and Silver Snow was more different apart from their endings. And that Azure Moon had a different start to their part 2 than it was from Silver Snow and Verdant Wind. Not sure how that would have been done but I think there were ways to retell the stories. My biggest complaint about part 1 was the kidnapping of Flayn and why. Rather, it wasn’t explained all that well if at all.

 

Other than that, I would go back to this game someday.

[samthedigital]

I got sick of the Monastery after my first two playthroughs of the game, so naturally the game has aged like milk for me.

[Etrurian emperor]

6 hours ago, Barren said:

My biggest complaint about part 1 was the kidnapping of Flayn and why. Rather, it wasn’t explained all that well if at all.

There's a lot of speculation the demonic beasts wouldn't be able to have been created without it. I'm not sure that holds up after Hopes where Flayn never got kidnapped and the Slitherers still have demonic beasts. 

And lets face it. Kidnapping Flayn for the lulz is something Solon would definitely do. In fact he loses his cover because he just couldn't resist destroying some random village. 

[Barren]

4 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

There's a lot of speculation the demonic beasts wouldn't be able to have been created without it. I'm not sure that holds up after Hopes where Flayn never got kidnapped and the Slitherers still have demonic beasts. 

And lets face it. Kidnapping Flayn for the lulz is something Solon would definitely do. In fact he loses his cover because he just couldn't resist destroying some random village. 

That would not surprise me if that were the case.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

6 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

And lets face it. Kidnapping Flayn for the lulz is something Solon would definitely do. In fact he loses his cover because he just couldn't resist destroying some random village. 

The writing there frustrates me so much. "Tomas" could have pretended to be a hostage of the Slithers, and their "demand" could be that the Professor surrender the Sword of the Creator to them. Obviously it wouldn't play out, but then at least Solon isn't giving away his evil plan all willy-nilly.

Also, the whole setup. How does the Church know that something is wrong in Remire Village, but apparently not wrong enough to actually get involved yet? Woulda worked better if there were no "mission" for the month, until the second-to-last day, when refugees arrive to Garreg Mach following mass villager psychosis. Then it's urgent, so you can go the next day to save them. Spend the month focused on important matters, like the fishing competition, instead.

13 hours ago, Barren said:

bones of the game

Did you mean: Hero's Relics?

On 7/30/2024 at 6:00 AM, Dark Holy Elf said:

In particular I love the class system; I think it has an incredible amount of unit variety and this makes for great replay value.

That'd be the biggest reason for me to go back at this point: trying units in non-sensical builds. Like Great Knight Marianne, War Master Lorenz, and my favorite, Senator Raphael Warlock. I dunno, I think the game gives enough absurd tools (skills, battalions, weapons) that almost any build is "viable", even as some are far less "optimal" than others.

13 hours ago, samthedigital said:

I got sick of the Monastery after my first two playthroughs of the game, so naturally the game has aged like milk for me.

Sorry that was your experience. To me, it's aged more like a... Saghert and Cream.

[Metal Flash]

My thoughts on Three Houses remain largely the same as when the game first came out. The gameplay and story are the main exceptions.

As others have stated before, and will likely continue to say, the monastery becomes a huge time sink on repeat playthroughs. The late games maps, even on hard mode, felt rather easy. Outside the Death Knight, no enemies ever gave me much trouble. The demonic beats were fun at first, but after a couple of runs, they became minor obstacles with too high HP. While I kept the characters in their "canon" classes, the ability to use (almost) any weapon in any class made many of the units feel very same-y. Especially when including the DLC characters.

Meanwhile, I have noticed more problems I have with the story over time. As already mentioned above, it`s never explained why Solon kidnaps Flayn in part 1. The fate of Dimitri`s stepmother is also never explained. Rhea being reduced to "mad dragon lady" so as to make Edelgard look like the good guy, despite being the aggressor in the war. The second Gronder Field battle making no sense on Verdant Wind. Rhea being absent for most of part 2 in all but one rout. There are probably more, but these are the main ones that come to mind.

With all that said, Fodlan is still one of my favourite continents in FE. The way the past informs the present helps the world feel alive. The cast is also great, even characters I`m not a fan of personally are still written very well. 

[Jotari]

30 minutes ago, Metal Flash said:

My thoughts on Three Houses remain largely the same as when the game first came out. The gameplay and story are the main exceptions.

Isn't gameplay and story kind of everything though? Well, I guess there's the music and visual presentation (but even then they're kind of story adjacent).

[Dark Holy Elf]

On 7/31/2024 at 11:54 AM, Etrurian emperor said:

There's a lot of speculation the demonic beasts wouldn't be able to have been created without it. I'm not sure that holds up after Hopes where Flayn never got kidnapped and the Slitherers still have demonic beasts. 

There are a lot less demonic beasts in Hopes than in Houses. While the Doylist explanation for this is surely that they simply aren't the type of thing you'd want to have a large number of in a single map, the way they were implemented in Warriors-style gameplay, it does leave open a Watsonian one that Flayn's kidnapping might have been useful for their creation in some way.

Certainly though it isn't the only way to create them, as the slitherers are shown to have one prior to the events of Three Houses Chapter 6 in the Rescue Monica chapter.

On 7/31/2024 at 7:05 PM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Also, the whole setup. How does the Church know that something is wrong in Remire Village, but apparently not wrong enough to actually get involved yet? Woulda worked better if there were no "mission" for the month, until the second-to-last day, when refugees arrive to Garreg Mach following mass villager psychosis. Then it's urgent, so you can go the next day to save them. Spend the month focused on important matters, like the fishing competition, instead.

I agree with this. I think the game should have been a bit more willing to use a fakeout mission for the month. As is Chapter 8 feels very odd.

That said Solon is implied to be utterly sick of his disguise and him shaking it off to cackle about being THE SAVIOUR OF ALL does feel in-character for him. It's not a very interesting character and it's not a very effective one at achieving the slitherers' greater goals, but I buy it.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

13 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

That said Solon is implied to be utterly sick of his disguise and him shaking it off to cackle about being THE SAVIOUR OF ALL does feel in-character for him. It's not a very interesting character and it's not a very effective one at achieving the slitherers' greater goals, but I buy it.

Yeah, it does make sense with the character they were going for. I think I'm mostly salty because I was really enjoying "Tomas" as a character. So when the game takes him away from me, it's a disheartening loss.

14 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Certainly though it isn't the only way to create them, as the slitherers are shown to have one prior to the events of Three Houses Chapter 6 in the Rescue Monica chapter.

Can't Crest Stones also be used to create Demonic Beasts? Or was there some other reason that Edelgard tried to rob the Holy Tomb? Of course, there's no real consequences of totally stopping the theft, but that can just be attributed to gameplay-story segregation.

23 hours ago, Metal Flash said:

Rhea being reduced to "mad dragon lady" so as to make Edelgard look like the good guy, despite being the aggressor in the war.

Intelligent Systems "make a Dragon the bad guy without having them go crazy" challenge:

[Metal Flash]

On 8/12/2024 at 2:07 PM, Jotari said:

Isn't gameplay and story kind of everything though? Well, I guess there's the music and visual presentation (but even then they're kind of story adjacent).

I guess I should`ve said my thoughts overall have not changed much, but those the gameplay and story specifically have gotten worse over time.