So what exactly is it that makes FE4/5>all others?

[tehnikhil]

This has been something that has been bothering me for a while. Why exactly are these two games so much better than all the other FE games that come after it? And is there any reason like the former manager of IS died or something for the games to have gotten worse? From what it seems, FE4 is great because of the 2 gen system and no deployment limit, while FE5 is incredibly difficult and has a game system based on realism. Are these the only real reasons why 4/5>all?

[Icon of Sin]

This has been something that has been bothering me for a while. Why exactly are these two games so much better than all the other FE games that come after it? And is there any reason like the former manager of IS died or something for the games to have gotten worse? From what it seems, FE4 is great because of the 2 gen system and no deployment limit, while FE5 is incredibly difficult and has a game system based on realism. Are these the only real reasons why 4/5>all?

The creator, Shouzou Kaga, left to form is own studio. Tear Ring Saga is considered by some to be the true "FE 6".

This said, the continent of Judgral had a good and deep storyline (generation 1 moreso than 2). On top of the reasons you stated. multiple bosses per chapter, new objectives, difficulty ( moreso FE 5, though FE 4 has been tough for beginners ), really good music, large maps ( for some ) and skills are definitely among the reasons why they're the most liked FEs, and I likely forgot a good bunch of reasons.

Edited October 19, 2009 by Dante

[Sasori]

The one who was in charge of IS left nintendo and i am pretty sure he is retired by now or i must be confusing him with someone else.

The things that made FE4 so good are the number of enemies,the good story , holy blood , and the two generations.

I have not played tracia so i cant really say anything about that.

[Dat Nick]

This claim is a largely opinion based one, you know,.

[tehnikhil]

Yes, but it seems to be that way for everyone who has played the game.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

Yes, but it seems to be that way for everyone who has played the game.

"Things are not what they seem"

Cliched yes but extremely true. There's some who've played the games with high expectations and ended up disliking both or at least one. Some hate it because many like it and so on.

Edited October 19, 2009 by Vergil

[grandjackal]

FE4 is one of those severely overrated. Vasts expanses of emptiness ensure most of the game is just moving units rather than actually fighting, balance is horrible, there is next to no difficulty, the story is just basically FFT if it had bad writing (or even worse writing by the view of others) and then slowly devolved into a power rangers episode, hte game is just a boring cauldron of dullness. Nice music, pleasant animations, that's it.

FE5 was a fine game aside from a couple hiccups. Crit system, and the fact the game is WAY too dependent on staff use of which doing so makes the game a snoozefest as a couple button presses haxes the game. It's not dependent on teamwork, and it's further stressed by the fact that trying to will end up more chances for an enemy to land a crit, which destroys your team. It would have been GREAT if it weren't so dependent on staffs, but staffs just destroy whatever teamwork the game had, and a fire emblem without proper teamwork is not a proper tactics game in my eyes. Basically it's great until lategame, so FE5's good. I wouldn't say it's better than all though. Story has good writing in comparison to it's predecessor, if you care, of which after your first playthrough you never will.

So yeah, they aren't over all others, though FE5's still pretty good. FE4 though is just garbage, and I have no idea how people can possibly like it.

[Eltoshen]

@Galactica Leader Cyrus: You're one of the odd ones out. FE4 just has something special that lures you into playing the game.

[grandjackal]

@Galactica Leader Cyrus: You're one of the odd ones out. FE4 just has something special that lures you into playing the game.

You mean cheap gimmicks like the town and money system? You can't just stop a boring game from being boring by just that. It's like FE3 except more broken, easier, and added with a huge ass gallon of tedium.

[_____]

the story is just basically FFT if it had bad writing (or even worse writing by the view of others) and then slowly devolved into a power rangers episode

...

Which is still much better than every other game.

1/3/DS: Do I need explain this?

5: There was a story?

6: 1/3/DS, with a red-haired Marth.

7: Lyn's story was the most boring thing in a Fire Emblem game, Eliwood was too bland to care, and Hector's story was Eliwood's story, but a little better.

8: Wow, monsters. ... Oh wait, that's the story?

10: Nonsensical.

I haven't played FE2 or 9, but I know 2 wasn't better, and, from what I've heard, FE9's wasn't better.

I mean, at least FE4 had a back story that was kind of fleshed out, and the 1st Gen and the twists in it were pretty awesome. It may not have been that text-heavy, but what it had was pretty good.

[Chalis]

FE4 though is just garbage, and I have no idea how people can possibly like it.

The only opinion you should worry about is your own when it comes to judging a game. The bias can take over rather quickly.

Seisen no Keifu didn't feel like a Fire Emblem when I first played it, and there's nothing wrong with that. Everything felt new, unexplored, and had a distinct feature about it. The Lover System.

The story was a change of pace from anything from the time (even now, I guess) and the true natures of characters, while there wasn't that much text, were fleshed out when it appeared. Many of the characters were memorable unlike the more shallow characters of recent titles.

Best part of the game, however: The soundtrack.

[grandjackal]

the story is just basically FFT if it had bad writing (or even worse writing by the view of others) and then slowly devolved into a power rangers episode

...

Which is still much better than every other game.

1/3/DS: Do I need explain this?

5: There was a story?

6: 1/3/DS, with a red-haired Marth.

7: Lyn's story was the most boring thing in a Fire Emblem game, Eliwood was too bland to care, and Hector's story was Eliwood's story, but a little better.

8: Wow, monsters. ... Oh wait, that's the story?

10: Nonsensical.

I haven't played FE2 or 9, but I know 2 wasn't better, and, from what I've heard, FE9's wasn't better.

I mean, at least FE4 had a back story that was kind of fleshed out, and the 1st Gen and the twists in it were pretty awesome. It may not have been that text-heavy, but what it had was pretty good.

Honestly, who plays a game for the story? After the first time, it doesn't matter. So it's sorta good for something badly written, doesn't fix the problem with the rest of the game, that being the game.

The only opinion you should worry about is your own when it comes to judging a game. The bias can take over rather quickly.

Seisen no Keifu didn't feel like a Fire Emblem when I first played it, and there's nothing wrong with that. Everything felt new, unexplored, and had a distinct feature about it. The Lover System.

The story was a change of pace from anything from the time (even now, I guess) and the true natures of characters, while there wasn't that much text, were fleshed out when it appeared. Many of the characters were memorable unlike the more shallow characters of recent titles.

Best part of the game, however: The soundtrack.

Right, it doesn't have to feel like Fire Emblem to be a good game. However, that does not automatically make it a good game. It's still boring as sin. If a game is boring, it's not a good game. It can be as unique as it wants to be, if it is boring crap either way, it's garbage. All style, no substance.

The character deal is fine, but they don't feel fleshed out because the writing sucks and we barely see much of them anyways. Character depth in gen 2 generally doesn't exist, as they're just power rangers vs rita repulse (Julius), Ishtar being the only thing I could consider a truly fleshed out character in that game.

The music WAS good though.

[_____]

Honestly, who plays a game for the story? After the first time, it doesn't matter. So it's sorta good for something badly written, doesn't fix the problem with the rest of the game, that being the game.

You can't just try to nullify that just because it "doesn't matter" after the first time. >_>

I'll be the first to admit that the backtracking is annoying, and that difficulty is nearly nonexistent past the last part of Chapter 4 because of the horrible balance. Does this make it horrible, no? The backtracking isn't even as bad as you make it seems.

Prolouge: No backtracking whatsoever.

Chapter 1: Again, no backtracking. The worst thing is getting the Hero Axe for Lex.

Chapter 2: Only real backtracking is to reach Nodion after capturing that castle where Beowulf came from. You can just Return Levin to recruit Fury.

Chapter 3: Admittedly, going to

Eltshan's Cross Knights

is a pain. Same with getting Dew to the Tower.

Chapter 4: Reaching the 4th castle isn't that bad, since a large majority of your army won't even be able to get over the mountains in a reasonable time frame. The people who will be able to can be Returned or Warped to the main castle.

Chapter 5: No backtracking, just a pretty annoying desert filled with Meteor Mages and DracoKnights.

Chapter 6: No backtracking, unless you feel like taking Johalva's castle, for some reason.

Chapter 7: Again, the desert is the only real problem. Darna is fairly close to Ishtor's.

Chapter 8: No large areas of no enemies, no backtrackng.

Chapter 9: Fairly straightforward. Yes, there are corridors with no enemies, though.

Chapter 10: Considering how the castle with the purple Harold clone can be taken by Celice and one other person while everyone else can wait at the gate, there really isn't much backtracking.

Endgame: Complex progression of castles, but no backtracking.

Also, this has the best Arena to date, weapon fixing is pretty cool, and at least imo, the lover system > supports.

Edit: Took out spoilers because of the TC.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Ninji

[Dr. Tarrasque]

Ninji, you know how stubborn Jackal is and this particular topic is very subjective. You know what's coming, several of his complaints being applicable to the other FEs and the like.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Vergil

[_____]

Ninji, you know how stubborn Jackal is and this particular topic is very subjective. You know what's coming, several of his complaints being applicable to the other FEs and the like.

I know, I know. I shouldn't. I should respect his opinion, but I really would prefer if his reasons were, you know, good ones.

[TheEnd]

I see Grandjackal is still doing the same as ever, and people are still falling for it.

Ninji, you know how stubborn Jackal is and this particular topic is very subjective. You know what's coming, several of his complaints being applicable to the other FEs and the like.

I know, I know. I shouldn't. I should ignore his opinion, but I really would prefer if his reasons were, you know, good ones.

You know I'm right. You know his hyping, positive or not.

Edited October 20, 2009 by TheEnd

[Chalis]

Right, it doesn't have to feel like Fire Emblem to be a good game. However, that does not automatically make it a good game. It's still boring as sin. If a game is boring, it's not a good game. It can be as unique as it wants to be, if it is boring crap either way, it's garbage. All style, no substance.

The character deal is fine, but they don't feel fleshed out because the writing sucks and we barely see much of them anyways. Character depth in gen 2 generally doesn't exist, as they're just power rangers vs rita repulse (Julius), Ishtar being the only thing I could consider a truly fleshed out character in that game.

The music WAS good though.

The only opinion you should worry about is your own when it comes to judging a game. The bias can take over rather quickly.

This was the only comment directed at you. It is very apparent you didn't think it was and for that, I apologize for making it unclear.

[grandjackal]

I'm surprised no one has decided to take anything I say without a grain of salt, I KNOW I can be overreactive.

This was the only comment directed at you. It is very apparent you didn't think it was and for that, I apologize for making it unclear.

Oh, my bad.

EDIT: Suck it, Vergil.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Galactica Leader Cyrus

[Dat Nick]

I'd accuse FE4's story of being overrated before being bad.

Mind, I'd like it a lot more if it weren't told through characters with about as much personality as my fingernail clippings [Levin being an exception]

Edited October 20, 2009 by Athena's Chest

[21_21]

IIRC Gunpei Yokoi contributed to the making of FE 4, but I don't know if someone already mentioned this.

As for why FE 4, 5 > than all others? It's basically up to you. Most people who've played the series will often like these the best, but whatever you like the best is what you think is the best. It's doesn't necessarily mean that it is actually the greatest. That's all I can say. Don't know if I made myself clear.

Although, about FE 5, it is only good cause of the difficulty, but the RNG is just too weird in that game. I recall in one map almost every single enemy landed a critical hit and one of my units missed all the attacks with a brave weapon. WTF? But it certainly makes things interesting and if you like unpredictability then you'll like this one. Of course, some flaws are obvious and annoying to deal with, which make the game imo harder like the fact that you can't reposition at all during the preparations.

[Blademaster!]

Honestly, who plays a game for the story? After the first time, it doesn't matter.

The fact that you can play an RPG like Fire Emblem and make this comment is just..... weird and possibly stupid. Most of the appeal in almost every RPG ever comes from it's story. I mean, the story is part of the genre. Also, playing through a game the second time knowing the story can occasionally be more or just as enjoyable the first time as you know more about the game and pick up on more foreshadows than you would have before.

FE4 is generally considered such a great game because of the story. It has a great depth to it, and attempts to touch every emotion, which it does fairly well. The game play is pretty good, and the gen 2 system allows for tons of re playability. This game also introduced many of the features we see in most of the later fire emblem games too. It also has an amazing soundtrack, with the only FE game after this one that rivals/is better than it being FE10's.

Although most people generally consider FE5 a good game, personally I do not. It went back to the same old "every character caps at 20" system again, and like its predecessors uses, has many aspects of game play that make the game more annoying than fun. The mounting system is also fairly poor and could use major reworking. Also, the fact that magic and res are shared by the same stat is a fairly large drawback on the game play. And the difficulty that is found in the game is just annoying. The fact that statuses never end is just ridiculously annoying. This game had a lot of potential to be a very good one, but sadly isn't due to faulty game mechanics and other things, but there are given problems as to why it has these problems such as the fact that the game was a bit rushed. The appealing graphics and character designs found in this game is it's only real strong point. The music is pretty good too, but not as good as FE4 and FE10 and only average when compared to every other FE game as all the games have a pretty good soundtrack.

[Maou]

Honestly, who plays a game for the story? After the first time, it doesn't matter.

The fact that you can play an RPG like Fire Emblem and make this comment is just..... weird and possibly stupid. Most of the appeal in almost every RPG ever comes from it's story. I mean, the story is part of the genre. Also, playing through a game the second time knowing the story can occasionally be more or just as enjoyable the first time as you know more about the game and pick up on more foreshadows than you would have before.

FE4 is generally considered such a great game because of the story. It has a great depth to it, and attempts to touch every emotion, which it does fairly well. The game play is pretty good, and the gen 2 system allows for tons of re playability. This game also introduced many of the features we see in most of the later fire emblem games too. It also has an amazing soundtrack, with the only FE game after this one that rivals/is better than it being FE10's.

Although most people generally consider FE5 a good game, personally I do not. It went back to the same old "every character caps at 20" system again, and like its predecessors uses, has many aspects of game play that make the game more annoying than fun. The mounting system is also fairly poor and could use major reworking. Also, the fact that magic and res are shared by the same stat is a fairly large drawback on the game play. And the difficulty that is found in the game is just annoying. The fact that statuses never end is just ridiculously annoying. This game had a lot of potential to be a very good one, but sadly isn't due to faulty game mechanics and other things, but there are given problems as to why it has these problems such as the fact that the game was a bit rushed. The appealing graphics and character designs found in this game is it's only real strong point. The music is pretty good too, but not as good as FE4 and FE10 and only average when compared to every other FE game as all the games have a pretty good soundtrack.

Jackal should have said that no one plays FE for the story, not any game in general. The comment itself was way to general, no one would play any story driven rpg's without, well, the story.

And I'm going to have to disagree with you about the whole FE4 and FE5 thing. In the gameplay aspect, Fe5 is completely superior to FE4. They fixed a lot of mistakes that made fe4 such a tedious game to play. Namely, this would be the huge maps and balance issues not only with weapons, but with skills as well(*cough* pursuit *cough*). Fe5 isn't perfect in any way, but you neglected to mention any of Fe4's huge flaws and went on and on about insignificant problems found in thracia. The bias is obvious.

As for the TC's question, I don't necessarily think that more people enjoy the jugdral games over the games released in the west. It is fitting that more people on a FE fansite would favor the games that were never released outside of japan, but this community does not represent the whole fandom of fire emblem.

[deleted35362]

Nothing. Those games sucked BAD. I don't know what you members here are on.

[grandjackal]

Jackal should have said that no one plays FE for the story, not any game in general. The comment itself was way to general, no one would play any story driven rpg's without, well, the story.

Yet a story heavy RPG is possible to have bad writing, of which FE4 is the case. Story in the broad scope is fine, just it's executed horribly. After all, FE5's story was story heavy, and I liked it. Why? Executed well, thus it didn't suck. FE4 on the other hand suffered unfortunately. Thus, my beef with it's story.

Not to say other FEs have better writing, but again, FE isn't really a story heavy game, it's more a gameplay game. It can have story, but after the first time I don't need the story to be happy with it, because I like the gameplay. I don't like FE4's gameplay, thus why my opinion differs.

[bunny: spider bitten]

FE4 had characters that matter and FE5 had difficulty.

FE9(and 10 to an extent) are underrated pieces, largely because they should have been FE6 and 7 and on the much smaller but obviously more popular GBA.

Skills play a big part.

FE7 is overrated thanks to Nostalgia glasses, and FE6 has an odd charm, but both are fairly flat.