Tracing FE's roots

[Ike-Mike]

There has been a fair share of video games that have been (or are going to be) amazing and successful by going back to their roots this gen, so Fire Emblem would obviously benefit from that as well.

The FE that achieved the biggest success was FE3, so it's only logical for IS to go back to it in order to make Fire Emblem more successful.

I personally thought that Shadow Dragon was that return to the roots, but judging from others here they don't see it to be the case. Could you please elaborate on why it isn't then?

Or alternatively, would you have liked a Fire Emblem with an original story and cast but with a gameplay structure that is as condensed as Shadow Dragon's more than FESD?

[Thief]

I can't wait for us to move beyond this remake era.

[Ike-Mike]

Sequels that reuse a lot of the themes from previous games != remakes.

Also note that TF2, RDR, SC2 and WoW were going back to the roots in their respective genre.

Though I admit that the other games only could get away with reusing so much stuff because it's been over a decade before the last 'proper' game came out.

I never played the roots. I can make no comments.

All I can say is I personally enjoyed SD less than 6-10, and more so far than 4.

EDIT: Define to me how WoW went back to the MMO roots?

But you can give SMB5 to a newcomer and he'll probably enjoy it as much as you enjoyed the first 4 SMBs.

So why do FE fans think this might not be the case for Shadow Dragon?

Edited June 30, 2010 by Ike-Mike

[Integrity]

I never played the roots. I can make no comments.

All I can say is I personally enjoyed SD less than 6-10, and more so far than 4. EDIT4: My thoughts are not in order. My point by that sentence <-- was that I didn't think FEDS was a bad game, it just wasn't anything super special awesome. Still great, not incredible.

EDIT: Define to me how WoW went back to the MMO roots?

EDIT2: I totally wasn't disputing the rest. I haven't played the majority of them. I was asking about WoW specifically, because that seems like a distinct oddball.

EDIT3: Also, "to a newcomer" is a key part of that sentence. I resurrect our First MMO discussion from times gone back. People will always have something of an attachment to the first in a line. Doesn't mean NSMBW is less a game for it, but I'll be more likely to say X was a good game than somebody who joined later will, and I'll be called a newfag by people who started before me.

EDIT5: wtf, this may be my most edited srs post ever.

Amending the above: I'm also not implying that NSMBW is better or worse than, say, SMW. All I'm saying is, if they're the same quality objectively (however you want to measure it) and my first Mario was SMW and your first Mario was NSMBW, I'll be more likely to say SMW was better and you'll be more likely to say NSMBW is better - and neither of us are likely to agree they're equal.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Integrity

[Rewjeo]

Sequels that reuse a lot of the themes from previous games != remakes.

This one is a sequel to FESD, but it is also a remake.

[Ike-Mike]

EDIT: Define to me how WoW went back to the MMO roots?

It put a bigger emphasis into the social part of MMOs which has been waning before WoW.

It also used a very expansive lore as its base that is taken from previous games in the same series that were in another genre, just like Ultima Online.

EDIT3: Also, "to a newcomer" is a key part of that sentence. I resurrect our First MMO discussion from times gone back. People will always have something of an attachment to the first in a line. Doesn't mean NSMBW is less a game for it, but I'll be more likely to say X was a good game than somebody who joined later will, and I'll be called a newfag by people who started before me.

EDIT5: wtf, this may be my most edited srs post ever.

Amending the above: I'm also not implying that NSMBW is better or worse than, say, SMW. All I'm saying is, if they're the same quality objectively (however you want to measure it) and my first Mario was SMW and your first Mario was NSMBW, I'll be more likely to say SMW was better and you'll be more likely to say NSMBW is better - and neither of us are likely to agree they're equal.

True, I recall plenty of people saying that SMB5 is bland and uninspired, when in reality it's anything but that.

Maybe I'm just taking this whole FESD hate too seriously because FE is my favorite series?

... at least it shows that I have enough passion for this series left to not be indifferent towards it.

This one is a sequel to FESD, but it is also a remake.

These two and Pokémon are the only remakes out of the dozen mentioned, and there are still plenty more games that I haven't mentioned.

Point is, there is something far bigger going on than just "lol remakes".

I'd rather call this era the "Retro Revival" era, where the very values that made video games push through in its early days are finally emphasized and expanded upon just like they should've been all this time.

[Integrity]

It put a bigger emphasis into the social part of MMOs which has been waning before WoW.

It also used a very expansive lore as its base that is taken from previous games in the same series that were in another genre, just like Ultima Online.

True, I recall plenty of people saying that SMB5 is bland and uninspired, when in reality it's anything but that.

Maybe I'm just taking this whole FESD hate too seriously because FE is my favorite series?

... at least it shows that I have enough passion for this series left to not be indifferent towards it.

@Part 2: I comprehend.

@Part 1: wtf? WoW did quite the opposite from inspiring the social part of MMOs. It actually more or less defined lone wolfing. The only thing people ever grouped for in Classic was their 5s, then their 40s. The only thing people grouped for in BC was 5s, then (was it already 25 by then?). WotLK? 5s, to gear for harder 5s/10s/25s. There's no need and in fact little incentive to group from 1-60/70/80 in WoW, especially considering its predecessors. Allow me to list what I played before WoW in abbreviation:

UO: You died without friends or massive skills.

EQ: You had nothing to do past 10 without friends.

DAoC: Unless you were an Infil or a Scout, you didn't RvR solo most of the time. On the PvE front? What PvE? EDIT: <-- you could powerlevel friends/lowbies, and that required two accounts or a friend or three. See Hibernia's CF groups.

CoH: End-game raids, pretty much it. See disclaimer later.

EQ2: More like WoW than any of the others bar maybe CoH.

-

And the final note to that list, ALL OF THE ABOVE (except UO which didn't really have traditional XP) promoted grouping not for a specific Heroic or Elite goal, but to level. They did this by adding a group XP bonus, so people would naturally team up because your killing speed would double, your downtime would lessen, and you'd be getting more XP per mob. WoW, in fact, leaks XP when multiple people group, making it such that you lose efficiency leveling if you deign to share it with people - generally. Add that to the questgrind, where nobody's on the same stage of anything ever...

So WoW did nothing for MMOs from a social standpoint, and was actually - far from a return to the roots - steps BACKWARDS from our Founding Fathers in terms of social options. The only incentive you ever had to talk to other people was for your end-game raids, and roughly every RPG ever has had end-game party-based dungeons.

EDIT: To leave this off with specific bait for another post by you: what are you considering as the MMOs where the social reqs were less than WoW's immediately before it? I can't think of a one between DAoC and WoW that passively encouraged you to ignore most people.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Integrity

[Fei Mao]

I may have misinterpreted this topic when I type this but anyways...

Speaking in general I think most people started with the GBA FEs or the 3D FEs and there were features that people liked. Features for example support conversations, animations, or skills that people liked, I guess FE SD was too basic for people since people had been exposed to the previous games where there were a lot of features hence why people hate FE SD since it was too basic and had no features that would hold a persons attention. Anyways when going back to the roots there should be something that the creators did that grabbed the players' attention so they would want to play it more. Basically I'm saying that if a person is exposed to a game with lots of features as their first game and to have those features taken out is a disappointment to people.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Generic Officer

[Phoenix Wright]

Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon WAS a return to the roots. But, just like before, it wasn't popular.

Fire Emblem: New Mystery of the Emblem will also be a return to the roots. With the added "super easy mode" features, it is nearly guaranteed that they'll bring in more people to the series. Just like before, FE3 will sell more than the first (I'm assuming FE3 DS will sell more than FESD).

[Rewjeo]

These two and Pokémon are the only remakes out of the dozen mentioned, and there are still plenty more games that I haven't mentioned.

Point is, there is something far bigger going on than just "lol remakes".

I'd rather call this era the "Retro Revival" era, where the very values that made video games push through in its early days are finally emphasized and expanded upon just like they should've been all this time.

Ah, I see. I thought that was just referring to these two most recent FE games, not the gaming industry as a whole.

[Ike-Mike]

EDIT: To leave this off with specific bait for another post by you: what are you considering as the MMOs where the social reqs were less than WoW's immediately before it? I can't think of a one between DAoC and WoW that passively encouraged you to ignore most people.

I'm more specifically thinking about Tibia, where there are no party EXP rewards whatsoever when you spend the first 20 or so levels just with level grinding.

Also explain me why plenty of people say that "WoW is nothing more than an interactive chatroom".

Anyways when going back to the roots there should be something that the creators did that grabbed the players' attention so they would want to play it more.

True.

What do you think then was what FE3 did what the others didn't that it's still the best selling FE?

Edited June 30, 2010 by Ike-Mike

[Integrity]

I'm more specifically thinking about Tibia, where there are no party EXP rewards whatsoever when you spend the first 20 or so levels just with level grinding.

Also explain me why plenty of people say that "WoW is nothing more than an interactive chatroom".

Part 1: Never heard of it, frankly.

Part 2: Easy. WoW's the most popular one for reasons other than returning to the roots. MMOs are "nothing more than an interactive chatroom" as a whole - people only mention WoW because it's the most well-known.

EDITed to say: I've also heard the phrase used in a derogatory light; to say that WoW has little to no actual content so the only reason to play it is because a lot of other people do and therefore /2 is more active than an EQ2's /ooc. I don't agree with this standpoint - I think WoW has plenty of content - but I've still heard it on more than one occasion.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Integrity

[Fei Mao]

True.

What do you think then was what FE3 did so right that it's still the best selling FE?

I'm not sure how to answer this anyways, I suppose the features in FE3 that made it the best seller are: Since it was made in 1990 and it's a Strategy RPG game it was a unique genre during that year, two games in one, the cast of characters, decent story, two endings, and some novelty stuff (I suppose) like Again staff, Orbs and Mamkutes. Other reason I could think is that during that year gaming was popular and SNES was a popular console before other companies made other popular consoles and stuff and since the other FE games were on different systems and there weren't as much advertisement it affected sales of the other FE games.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Generic Officer

[Rewjeo]

FE3 wasn't 1990. If it was, then IS would've had to have made three games in one year. I'm 90% sure is it was 93.