FE

[BEST TRYNDAMERE PLAYER]

And how about enemies that actually use their warp staves, have status staves that affect the entire map, have dancers that actually sometimes dance, some units have these stars that randomly let them go again (perhaps at 5% per star), and the enemy can instantly pick up almost any of your units that don't have a weapon equipped and then instantly take everything you have?

Well, I guess they already did that once.

Yeah and it worked. Although probably even the Japanese complained about it's difficulty. That re-move stuff could really fuck you over though. Like chapter 10 for example with the Wyvern miniboss or even Shiva in Chapter 7.

[dondon151]

Yeah, I didn't like movement stars, and I'm tempted to say that having enemy assassins would be a great way to piss players off. We don't need more chance-based elements in FE.

[BEST TRYNDAMERE PLAYER]

Yeah, I didn't like movement stars, and I'm tempted to say that having enemy assassins would be a great way to piss players off. We don't need more chance-based elements in FE.

Yeah I know enemy movement stars have fucked me over before. Like literally I had to restart chapter 10 THREE times in a row solely because that Wyvern miniboss got a lucky remove in ALL those attempts and 1RKO'd one of my weaker units that weren't originally in his range.

I don't think enemy assassins would be too bad in the GBA games because lethality is based on crit/2 and most units should have the luck to be able to completely avoid assassin crits unless they had a Killing Edge on them. I can see them being a total pain in the ass in RD though when their Lethality skill is determined by Skill/2 and has nothing to do with crit.

[Ike-Mike]

It's not like the inclusion of enemy dancers in FE5 wasn't used to their fullest potential anyway.

I was always kinda bummed that Capture was never used again while Rescue was kept. For me one can't exist without the other.

[dondon151]

I don't think enemy assassins would be too bad in the GBA games because lethality is based on crit/2 and most units should have the luck to be able to completely avoid assassin crits unless they had a Killing Edge on them. I can see them being a total pain in the ass in RD though when their Lethality skill is determined by Skill/2 and has nothing to do with crit.

Why wouldn't you give those enemy assassins Killing Edges? That's all they're good for. I suppose if the game gave you like 4 Iron Runes then it wouldn't be too bad to deal with, but with 5 item slots, I really wouldn't want to dedicate one just to avoid the possibility of a random OHKO.

[StinDuh]

what.

FE1 had a story to cut?

Yes, actually. Because in FE11 they barely even tell you whats going on. At least in 1 you know why your doing exactly what you're doing. Yes I know that it didnt have a back story and history and all that that the other games have, but the dialogue was so dumbed down it was terrible. Even an official Nintendo statement said that the North American localization team was going cut the dialogue and story to focus more on the gameplay. And since the gameplay was so weird, the game was just a crappy ass remake. I thought it sucked. I didn't even finish the game. I sold it to game stop like 4 months after I bought from them. Purely for the money. It laid in my unused DSLite for a good long time. The game sucked all together. FE9 and 10 were the best to me because they had the most back story, the most history, the most side story. And it all fit in to one big scheme. It was amazing. The story is what makes a Fire Emblem game good. Yeah, you could just give us a team of 10 or so units and have us go from map to map killing everyone, or you could give us a team of 10 units killing a bunch of Begnion Soldiers because they're trying to overthrow Empress Sanaki because she says she is the Apostle when the senators know she is not, but everyone thinks she is. All this time Sephiran/Lehran just wants the world destroyed. Seems like a good guy at first, but hey look! He wants everyone dead! Then somehow we kill a god. And then life goes on. Yeah. That's how a Fire Emblem game should be.

Edited May 8, 2010 by StinDuh

[Junkhead]

I don't get how more levels of difficulty is a bad thing. You don't have to play them. Just consider NM = NM, HM = H2/3, MM = H5. Or something like that. Giving more levels of difficulty helps someone that likes the challenge of H2 and wants more but can't take H5. It's like in various shooting games where there are like 8+ levels of difficulty. Most people probably aren't jumping to godmode after beating the first difficulty level.

It's not bad, it's exagerated, they could've given H1 H3's difficulty, and then the other HM H5's difficulty, it's easy as that...

[Narga_Rocks]

It's not bad, it's exagerated, they could've given H1 H3's difficulty, and then the other HM H5's difficulty, it's easy as that...

What? My point is that the gradual build up is better than just having 3 different difficulty levels. Of course they could have only made 3 difficulty levels, but why would you find that superior to having 6 different difficulty levels? I just don't understand how that even makes sense. You'd rather have fewer options than more. What, do you feel compelled to beat every single difficulty level so it pisses you off that they made 6 of them? Beat whichever ones you want, ignore the rest, and leave the creators alone about it. There is bound to be somebody out there enjoying a difficulty level you think shouldn't exist. Why do you want to deprive that person of H2 or H4 or whatever difficulty they love playing?

[Rodykitty]

I agree. Hard Modes would be even more challenging than if they just gave enemies stat boosts. I'd like to see them posses different weapons (like killer/Brave), maps altered (like more chokepoints or things blocking your way), maybe promoted units can have skills (enemy Assassins oh my )

On Killer/Braves, FEDS' H5 already does that (Killers less often because randomly dying all the time would be cheap, even for H5), and the last couple of chapters even have forged Brave enemies.

While I agree that altering the map is a good idea, H5's approach still worked exceptionally well barring some broken stuff in the game on the player's side.

It's not bad, it's exagerated, they could've given H1 H3's difficulty, and then the other HM H5's difficulty, it's easy as that...

So... Take away a feature for absolutely no reason and without adding any difficulties beyond H5?

You are a very silly man. Filler difficulty levels don't hurt FEDS, in fact it's a great way to justify having a difficulty mode as hard as H5.

[Junkhead]

So... Take away a feature for absolutely no reason and without adding any difficulties beyond H5?

You are a very silly man. Filler difficulty levels don't hurt FEDS, in fact it's a great way to justify having a difficulty mode as hard as H5.

I meant I want somethingsimiliar to FE9 (Japan) where you have Hard Mode and then Maniac Mode, not an exagerated ammount of Hard Modes. I mean, they just can't vary much, can they?

[Rodykitty]

They do vary. There is a gigantic difference between H1 and H5, and a large enough difference between H1 & H3 and H3 & H5. Having six difficulty modes actually does have a point.

Think of it from a developer standpoint. If it were just three difficulty modes, the question would likely come up, "How hard should these be? They need to be beatable" and the hardest difficulty probably wouldn't be as hard as H5 is now because of the need to be conservative, but if there are a lot of difficulty modes, it immediately tells the player "HEY. THERE ARE FIVE HARD MODES. THAT'S MORE THAN THE TWO YOU GET IN OTHER GAMES. THIS FIVE STAR MODE IS PROBABLY GOING TO KICK YOUR BUTT." and they can be perfectly fine making the hardest difficulty as hard as it is.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Ilyana

[Narga_Rocks]

They do vary. There is a gigantic difference between H1 and H5, and a large enough difference between H1 & H3 and H3 & H5. Having six difficulty modes actually does have a point.

Think of it from a developer standpoint. If it were just three difficulty modes, the question would likely come up, "How hard should these be? They need to be beatable" and the hardest difficulty probably wouldn't be as hard as H5 is now because of the need to be conservative, but if there are a lot of difficulty modes, it immediately tells the player "HEY. THERE ARE FIVE HARD MODES. THAT'S MORE THAN THE TWO YOU GET IN OTHER GAMES. THIS FIVE STAR MODE IS PROBABLY GOING TO KICK YOUR BUTT." and they can be perfectly fine making the hardest difficulty as hard as it is.

Yeah, I wonder if fe9 had 6 difficulty modes if we in NA would have seen maniac mode. I mean, less complaints in Japan because there are plenty of modes that were more easily beatable might have meant they would have been less hesitant to unleash MM on NA.

[Ike-Mike]

Yes, actually. Because in FE11 they barely even tell you whats going on. At least in 1 you know why your doing exactly what you're doing. Yes I know that it didnt have a back story and history and all that that the other games have, but the dialogue was so dumbed down it was terrible. Even an official Nintendo statement said that the North American localization team was going cut the dialogue and story to focus more on the gameplay.

Couldn't you have given us some dialogue comparisons instead of going into a temper tantrum?

Oh and saying that FE1 has no backstory is a blatant lie.

Besides, I'd prefer just going from map to map killing everyone to the latter ...

Edited May 10, 2010 by Ike-Mike