In this topic, I will explain why calling Shadow Dragon FE11 is silly

[Ϲharlie]

I could be mistaken, but doesn't Intelligent Systems also use a numbering system? Not in the titles of the games, but I could have sworn I heard something about the internal data referring to the games as "FIREEMBLEM6/7/8" for example.

[Mekkah]

I call the first remake of FE1 FE3 Book 1. Not FE1onwhateversystem.

[Celice]

I could be mistaken, but doesn't Intelligent Systems also use a numbering system? Not in the titles of the games, but I could have sworn I heard something about the internal data referring to the games as "FIREEMBLEM6/7/8" for example.

They are somewhat numbered in terms of their releases, what number the next project is going to be. But as far as naming convention goes, there's no actual numbering system. One is for internal reference, and one is the actual title the series respects.

[Blacknight9]

They are somewhat numbered in terms of their releases, what number the next project is going to be. But as far as naming convention goes, there's no actual numbering system. One is for internal reference, and one is the actual title the series respects.

thats interesting

Edited June 11, 2009 by Blacknight9

[Robert]

Marth Koopa strikes again.

[Ϲharlie]

Marth Koopa strikes again.

This has been established and dealt with.

This isn't an inherently bad topic to discuss, which is why it hasn't been locked.

[Kiddo]

Ankoku (FE1), Gaiden (FE2), Monshou (FE3), Seisen (FE4), Thracia (FE5), Fuuin (FE6), Rekka (FE7), Seima (FE8), Souen (FE9), Akatsuki (FE10), New Ankoku (FEDS).

I think the REAL problem with the numbering system is that -everyone forgets that BS Fire Emblem: Akanea Senki exists-.

What would you "Number" BSFE?

It was released between Seisen and Thracia but it wouldn't be 4.5 because it's more similar to Monshou. (And besides that, having decimal numbers throws a monkey wrench in the whole idea.)

Also, if you believe in the numbering system so tightly, then the implication is that BSFE not having a number would render it insignificant, like a "black sheep" of the franchise or something.

I know it probably doesn't help that it took aeons for those game scripts to be found - leading many people to be unsure exactly what the game had other than just battle maps - and that it's pretty much the most obscure entry in the whole franchise, but I feel the complete negligence to mention it in this whole thread is rather sad.

(It also causses some confusion whenever Intsys mentions numbers when referring to their projects, because apparently whatever numbering system they use DOES account for BSFE.)

Edited June 16, 2009 by Kiddo

[VincentASM]

(It also causses some confusion whenever Intsys mentions numbers when referring to their projects, because apparently whatever numbering system they use DOES account for BSFE.)

It does?

I thought, more often than not, when listing their games, they only include the 11 ones that we know about.

I do know they sometimes skip Gaiden in the numbering, but that only seemed to happen during the SNES era.

In any case, I think most people consider the BS FEs as spin-offs or not fully-fledged games. Hence they simply don't have a number (if anything, their "number" is probably "BS").

[Kiddo]

It does?

I thought, more often than not, when listing their games, they only include the 11 ones that we know about.

I do know they sometimes skip Gaiden in the numbering, but that only seemed to happen during the SNES era.

I'll probably need to dig back for any more specifics, but I recall one incident with Nintendo Power -

I referenced it in this thread, in fact.

The fifth title... was broadcast over the Super Famicom Satellaview network..

Which, if you don't realize that BS Fire Emblem was the fifth production release and not Thracia 776, as the current numbering system specifies, -gets really confusing-. If they called it a side-game or spinoff, there probably wouldn't be that confusion, but I'm sure many fans misinterpreted this as an error on their part.

In any case, I think most people consider the BS FEs as spin-offs or not fully-fledged games. Hence they simply don't have a number (if anything, their "number" is probably "BS").

"Spin-off" is a bit of a bad way to put it, since it implies that it somehow shifted significantly from standard Fire Emblem gameplay/story style. (Moreso than a "Gaiden" or a "Seisen" or... yeah. Most entries after the third one.)

As for arguing whether or not they're fully-fledged games, that is unfortunately really hard to truly know until versions of the games with the (currently absent) storyline segments reconstructed can be done, offering a more "complete" quasi-remake. It probably won't change the minds of many though.

Other than the argument over whether it's truly a "full-fledged" game or not, I can't see much other reason why BSFE is the only entry outside the numbering system, especially when the numbering system includes a game specifically LABELED "Gaiden", a game who's plotline is a gaiden-story similar to BSFE (refering to Thracia here, although I can easily guess the immediate rebuttal being the gameplay features), and a remake are -in- the numbering system.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Kiddo

[Rodykitty]

"Spin-off" is a bit of a bad way to put it, since it implies that it somehow shifted significantly from standard Fire Emblem gameplay/story style.

It shifted significantly in the distribution and purpose, from what I know not meant to be a full game and played in real time to the cue of voice acting.

Maybe not a spin off, but definitely not part of the main series either.

I think, obviously, FEBS is referred to as...

FE BS. Now was that hard? Just call it FE3.5 if you must pin some number to it. It's definitely not FE3, but it deals with FE3's story, and it has nothing to do with FE4, so just call it FE3.5 to curb some gnarling appetite to give every game a number.

As for FE11, this topic is clearly intended to troll people with Elitism, but people have had no problem with saying FEDS, FESD, or FE11 (in fact, people have actually been doing this since FE8 or FE9, where FE9 is usually referred to as PoR or FE10 referred to as RD).

And once again, the only reason the numbering system we have is because of how Japan numbers them. We have no control over that, and we are forced to accept it. This is not a weeaboo act, this is simply because other sites follow suit (namely this one).

Edited June 16, 2009 by Chainey

[VincentASM]

Actually I assumed we Westerners came up with the numbering scheme, but I wasn't around that early on so I don't really know.

Also because most Japanese fans just refer to them by subtitle or an abbreviation of the subtitle, eg. Rekka no Ken/Rekka. They can probably afford to do that since the titles are only a few symbols-long in Japanese.

However, yeah, it's probably too late for change. Although I can't see anything wrong with the numbering system, at least up to 10, but it might just be because I'm so involved in the fandom. People outside often think we're crazy for using it X D

In any case, once the next FE is unveiled, we'll know if our (or some peoples') choice in naming Shadow Dragon FE11 was a good choice or not.

[Kiddo]

It shifted significantly in the distribution and purpose, from what I know not meant to be a full game and played in real time to the cue of voice acting.

Maybe not a spin off, but definitely not part of the main series either.

There were more significant shifts in other factors in other game entries. The amount of differences in gameplay in each game entry really makes it difficult to define what the "Main series" is. Seisen in particular is hardly similar to any other FE game due to how differently it handles most of it's gameplay features (Huge maps, different kind of arena, different item handling, the Romance system which was unique to it at the time, the generational change which is -still- unique to it), yet no one would dare question it being in the "Main series".

The distribution form it was released in alone should not be a discredit for it - especially when you consider that Thracia 776 was also originally distributed in a non-standard format, in the rewritable Flash cartridge.

And while it may lead to debates over what other players consider a "full" FE game, IntSys has (particularly in the subject of remaking the game) referred to it as though it were a full game in their eyes. That being said, the discussion of what makes a "full game" is more or less a subjective matter and not an objective one.

On the note of minor nitpicking, "FE BS" is inaccurate. If you want to give BSFE a proper "Subtitle" acronym, it'd probably be "ASH", short for Akanea Senki Hen ("BSFE:ASH"... that actually has a funny ring to it.)

Numbering the game "3.5" throws a monkey wrench into the system because it messes with chronological order - "3.5" shouldn't be between "4" and "5".

That being said, I do tend to prefer an acronym system for the games. The major problem with it is deciding on acronyms that are generally accepted. For example, SoS (Sword of Seals) vs BB (Binding Blade).

As for FE11, this topic is clearly intended to troll people with Elitism,

I don't know about the original intention of the topic, but hopefully at least my own points are legitimate debate. O:

Actually I assumed we Westerners came up with the numbering scheme, but I wasn't around that early on so I don't really know.

I always thought that as well. In fact, in my searches for FE things on various JP websites, usually trying a search for "FE##" gets me -nowhere-. The most common "Shortening" I've seen on JP sites is cutting out every word after the first word of the subtitle. ("Ankoku", "Monshou", "Seisen", "Fuuin", "Rekka", "Seima", "Megami", and the one that bucks the trend "Shin Ankoku")

In any case, once the next FE is unveiled, we'll know if our (or some peoples') choice in naming Shadow Dragon FE11 was a good choice or not.

Doubt it. Until FE starts adapting a system other than "Subtitles for each new entry", this debate will likely go forever.

[VincentASM]

I always thought that as well. In fact, in my searches for FE things on various JP websites, usually trying a search for "FE##" gets me -nowhere-. The most common "Shortening" I've seen on JP sites is cutting out every word after the first word of the subtitle. ("Ankoku", "Monshou", "Seisen", "Fuuin", "Rekka", "Seima", "Megami", and the one that bucks the trend "Shin Ankoku")

I actually do know one site that sort-of uses numbering- Valhalla

However, I'm pretty sure you're correct.

In any case, once the next FE is unveiled, we'll know if our (or some peoples') choice in naming Shadow Dragon FE11 was a good choice or not.

Doubt it. Until FE starts adapting a system other than "Subtitles for each new entry", this debate will likely go forever.

I actually meant to say something a bit more situated. Eg. if the next FE is another straight-foward remake, then calling Shadow Dragon and it FE11 and FE12 probably isn't such a good idea. Also it's highly likely IS will give the next game some numbering in the game code, which might be helpful. Of course, it still won't be set in stone, but I wasn't really referring to the numbering system in general.

And while it may lead to debates over what other players consider a "full" FE game, IntSys has (particularly in the subject of remaking the game) referred to it as though it were a full game in their eyes. That being said, the discussion of what makes a "full game" is more or less a subjective matter and not an objective one.

They have?

If you're referring to the sort-of-recent conference call, the reference to the BS FE remake might have been a mistranslation of FE4. Since another site said a FE4 remake instead of a BS FE remake. They might have mistaken BS FE as the "fourth game" that IS may have mentioned.

Also, outside of FE World's Sound Museum, I've never seen IS reference BS FE at all (ever since their initial broadcast at least). So I'm not surprised that many people don't know about them.

[thunderstrife]

how about we all refer to them as follows:

1.　暗黒

2.　外伝

3.　紋章

4.　聖戦

BS. アカネイア戦記

5.　トラキア７７６

6.　封印

7.　烈火

8.　聖魔

9.　蒼炎

10.　暁

11.　新・暗黒

I mean, that's TECHNICALLY the most correct after all.

But really, I think it makes NO difference, people will use what they think people will understand, and usually the context makes any clarifications needed.

[Kiddo]

If you're referring to the sort-of-recent conference call, the reference to the BS FE remake might have been a mistranslation of FE4. Since another site said a FE4 remake instead of a BS FE remake. They might have mistaken BS FE as the "fourth game" that IS may have mentioned.

That sounds rather baffling. BSFE is the fifth game. It's the more obscure of the two entries. There'd be no reason someone would mistranslate BSFE for the "fourth game" because of the sheer amount of research required to even know of BSFE's existence - you'd know Seisen as the fourth game entry looong beforehand.

The reverse - an obscure entry being mistaken for the most popular entry among the fans - would be a more probable scenario.

[Celice]

There'd be no reason someone would mistranslate BSFE for the "fourth game" because of the sheer amount of research required to even know of BSFE's existence - you'd know Seisen as the fourth game entry looong beforehand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_emblem#Games

[Rodykitty]

Or we could go with the numbering system we have now, because people have already accepted it and we don't need to confuse them by establishing a new system.

[Kiddo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_emblem#Games

I'm not sure what point is trying to be made here. :(

Or we could go with the numbering system we have now, because people have already accepted it and we don't need to confuse them by establishing a new system.

The problem is that the confusion was already happening before these debates, and many examples were cited -in this thread-.

The proposals for new ways for fans to name the games are meant as solutions to quell confusion.

If the people have truly already accepted it, there wouldn't be any debate in this thread.

[Rodykitty]

There is very little actual confusion.

If the people have truly already accepted it, there wouldn't be any debate in this thread.

People have accepted it. The only reason this thread exists is because Marth Koopa is a radical and felt to need to rant on it. The numbering system we have now may not be preferable, but to say that people are actually confused is incorrect, and for people that don't know in the first place, we would have to explain what the game is anyway.

[Meteor]

As long as I know what you're talking about, I really don't care what you call it.

[Celice]

I'm not sure what point is trying to be made here. sad.gif

You had said that knowing of BSFE would be far less likely than of the others in the series, when even Wikipedia includes it--something that most people reference without thinking. Second to this, most "good" Fire Emblem boards include it listed somewhere on their site. Even simply looking on GameFAQs, one could see that there were a number of the BS titles for Fire Emblem.

It's not exactly hidden knowledge, unless you're not leisure browsing--which then I don't quite get what you're doing.

[Kiddo]

You had said that knowing of BSFE would be far less likely than of the others in the series, when even Wikipedia includes it--something that most people reference without thinking. Second to this, most "good" Fire Emblem boards include it listed somewhere on their site. Even simply looking on GameFAQs, one could see that there were a number of the BS titles for Fire Emblem.

It's not exactly hidden knowledge, unless you're not leisure browsing--which then I don't quite get what you're doing.

Wikipedia may have articles on obscurities, but it doesn't necessarily make them suddenly be less obscure.

No matter how many times I'd link the Satellaview article on there, I'm still gonna meet people who have no clue what it is.

The same goes for the PC-FX, the Sega Pico, The Pippin, the Loopy, or various other video game obscurities.

Also, bringing this back to being about the possibility of mistaking BSFE For the "Fourth" game - since the list shows the games in order of release date, it doesn't defeat any point about anyone possibly being able to mistake BSFE for Seisen.

Besides that, originally these articles were so lacking in good information that this thread was pretty much made for the purpose of gathering all the "more obscure" info on BSFE possible.

Most of the information now available - how the Soundlink worked in it, the voice actors, etc. - come from the research and translations done in that thread (or in FESS previously to that thread.)

In that thread I was even asked questions about the ROMs which could be answered fairly easily in other places, but I answered anyway, realizing that I couldn't assume people played those ROMs or check emulation sites.

(As for GameFAQs, that's a terrible place to look for game research.)

[Celice]

Wikipedia may have articles on obscurities, but it doesn't necessarily make them suddenly be less obscure.

I'm not responsible for your semantic. You had said that it's obscure and that no one knows of them--not that there's hardly any sources that provide adequate knowledge on the subject. Two =/= the same. But then again, you're on ranting mostly to yourself so...

Edited June 18, 2009 by Celice

[Kiddo]

I'm not responsible for your semantic. You had said that it's obscure and that no one knows of them--not that there's hardly any sources that provide adequate knowledge on the subject. Two =/= the same. But then again, you're on ranting mostly to yourself so...

If the amount of knowledge on a subject and the amount of quality articles on a subject aren't related, why did you try to link a Wikipedia article in the first place?

That reeks of a hypocrite argument setup.

I also don't need indirect insults thrown at me, thank-you-very-much.

[Dat Nick]

HAY GUYS I JUST HAD A BRILLIANT IDEA

LETS JUST CALL IT FEDS SO WE CAN STOP THIS EPICLY POINTLESS THREAD