FE13: A Faustian Bargain?

[Arch]

It was more a statement about the style being not-Fire Emblem than it was a statement of "Fire Emblem is becoming Final Fantasy Tactics." You're taking the statement too literally, it's just a point of comparison for FE13 being mistakable for something else entirely.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Arch

[Ike-Mike]

Motion is less important, and the console is designed specifically to win back the "hardcore" crowd.

Correct.

it's meant to appeal to a vaster range of audiences than the Wii.

How is it supposed to reach a 'vaster range of audiences' when the Wii was having games for everyone?

This also contradicts your previous statement.

[General Banzai]

"Faustian Bargain" doesn't have any less negative connotation than "Deal with the devil." It just sounds more pedantic.

How is it supposed to reach a 'vaster range of audiences' when the Wii was having games for everyone?

This also contradicts your previous statement.

There's no such thing as a game for everyone. Wii had a lot of games which appealed to a certain audience and very few which appealed to another.

[Celice]

"Faustian Bargain" doesn't have any less negative connotation than "Deal with the devil." It just sounds more pedantic.

That's 'cause it's the same fuckin' thing :p

Advance Wars has always done poorly in Japan. And I think that AW4 was great. The addition of online multiplayer is a great addition, and the redesign of how COs worked made multiplayer really fun.

Exactly. It's just gone down the pooper. Though, to be somewhat fair, 2001 put a bit of a stake in the series for Japan... if memory serves. But that's hardly an argument for three whole games not doing well for sales. It was probably a lack of connection to the game that let it smoulder. I mean, the game last debuted in French :p

[Wooster]

Err... *Raises hand*

I seem to have forgotten my notes from the last class. Could someone explain to me how-

A) A change in art direction

-and/or-

B) Freely equipable skills

- determines the downfall of Fire Emblem, and consequently civilization as we know it?

I don't tend to follow Fire Emblem 'that' closely, but I seem to recall that there's been an art change just about every time there's been a change in hardware. (The GBA games specifically I recall being attacked for being "too cartoony", so it's not like this controversy is unprecedented. And I ~think~ we're all still alive.

...Better double check though. Can't be too sure. Show of hands? Who here didn't survive the great cartoon massacre of the early '00's?

As for skills, I think we've had 5 games (7 if you count the DS) where there wasn't a user skill system. Then there's sacred stones where you don't 'really' get a say in the matter. For these games, it basically boiled down combat to stats and weapons as the only defining characteristic. So right now I fail to see how a game where stats and weapons being the only defining characteristic for each character also brings about the end of gaming as we know it.

... but then again.... it IS 2012? Didn't the Mayans forget to fix their version of the Y2K bug? Could Fire Emblem: Awakening -set to be released IN 2012- be the catalyst for the aforementioned apocalypse?

~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~

Yeah, I'm being quite cheeky, but honestly. I don't have a clue the nature of this argument. Would someone mind giving me the cliff notes version of this controversy? I don't want to fail the upcoming test.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Wooster

[Ike-Mike]

There's no such thing as a game for everyone.

Explain the arcade boom of the 80s and subsequently the success of the NES then.

Yeah, I'm being quite cheeky, but honestly. I don't have a clue the nature of this argument. Would someone mind giving me the cliff notes version of this controversy? I don't want to fail the upcoming test.

Casuals Are Destroying Everything: Fire Emblem Edition

[Othin]

Explain the arcade boom of the 80s and subsequently the success of the NES then.

Casuals Are Destroying Everything: Fire Emblem Edition

Many people played those games, but certainly not everyone. The Wii has already outsold the NES, indicating that it's "for" more people than the NES was.

[Celice]

Isn't there a larger market now for those sales to exist from, though? Things should be looked at at a relative scale so you don't skew numbers :(

[Arch]

Casuals Are Destroying Everything: Fire Emblem Edition

Never said that.

A) A change in art direction

-and/or-

B) Freely equipable skills

- determines the downfall of Fire Emblem, and consequently civilization as we know it?

Never said that either.

People have terrible comprehension skills, it seems. Find the place where I say "mainstream is inherently wrong," "casuals are ruining the world," etc. Here's a hint: you can't. It's just an analysis of the new direction taken with FE13. That's it.

Cliff notes version? It's not like I wrote a fucking book. But here's the gist of it since you obviously missed the entire point of the writing: Change in art direction and new gameplay mechanics showcase a new, more mainstream-friendly direction with FE13 which, I surmise, is part of a push of Fire Emblem towards a broader audience and more commercial success. The analogy of a Faustian bargain is quite appropriate. The question I have is: are we trading some soul for success? Will this move cause the downfall of Fire Emblem and consequently civilization? That's for you to discuss and decide on your own. I'm just pointing out this new direction, deciphering it, and offering food-for-thought on the impact it will have.

[Othin]

Isn't there a larger market now for those sales to exist from, though? Things should be looked at at a relative scale so you don't skew numbers :(

Naturally. And that larger market is a symptom of video games being "for" more people for whatever reasons, rather than a cause of it.

[Wooster]

Ah, yes, Archy. I did say I was being cheeky but I suppose I deserve the whiplash. But allow me to clear up where you are confused on my confusion. Every good argument requires three things.

#1: Claim - The Cake is a Lie

#2: Evidence - There is no cake. I was promised cake,

#3: Warrant - The fact that the promise for cake remained unfulfilled means the offer was made under false presences: In other words: A LIE.

As I understand it your argument is thus:

#1: Claim - Fire Emblem is loosing its spirit (Or what makes Fire Emblem Fire Emblem) by becoming more mainstream.

#2: Evidence - New Art Direction. Free Skills.

#3: Warrant - ???

Part three is where I remain confused, even after your reply, which explained why IS wants to be more main stream, but not how either item makes it mainstream or even why they are bad or less Fire Emblem-y. In between my jesting I took an opposite claim using the same evidence, and argued that such changes are not unprecedented. And if such changes are precedented then it must by argument be still Fire Emblem.

'cause right now without a proper warrant I find this whole discussion quite silly.

[CT075]

The warrant is in comparing it to more 'typical' (using it as a tentative term, I'm backing off from mainstream for a few reasons) SRPG games that do very similar things. To use something that you already pointed out, it's the kinds of repositionable skills are what Arch is talking about (as I see it), not the fact that they are repositionable. The skills are minor things, +5 STR, +5 evade, etc. This is the kind of thing you'd see in Final Fantasy Tactics, where new party members are about as generic as they come. A new class here, a few stat points there, it's all become so much less personalized. At least in FE10, the skills actually did something unique, something special. You can never replicate the effect of Miracle or Paragon, for example, with any kind of stat boost or item.

And this isn't even going into the things like anime-styled battle cut-ins (which every other SRPG and their grandma does at some point or other), or support attacks (aka the backbone of 50% of the tactics used in many games).

[Arch]

Looks like Cam got it covered. I had a response all done out, complete with a highlighted section of the reading for my cheeky student, and then realized that it wasn't the warrant he was looking for. Then, lo and behold, Cam's already got it taken care of.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Arch

[Wooster]

The warrant is in comparing it to more 'typical' (using it as a tentative term, I'm backing off from mainstream for a few reasons) SRPG games that do very similar things. To use something that you already pointed out, it's the kinds of repositionable skills are what Arch is talking about (as I see it), not the fact that they are repositionable. The skills are minor things, +5 STR, +5 evade, etc. This is the kind of thing you'd see in Final Fantasy Tactics, where new party members are about as generic as they come. A new class here, a few stat points there, it's all become so much less personalized. At least in FE10, the skills actually did something unique, something special. You can never replicate the effect of Miracle or Paragon, for example, with any kind of stat boost or item.

And this isn't even going into the things like anime-styled battle cut-ins (which every other SRPG and their grandma does at some point or other), or support attacks (aka the backbone of 50% of the tactics used in many games).

Ah HA, now we're getting somewhere.

First, I admit. Stat up skills are boring. Though, I think I like Gamble, I like the tit-for-tat it has. But more to the point, explain to me how the minor stat increases are different from something like robes and drops, which do the same thing, but do not have the incumbency of preventing you from equipping something else. For right now they seem to have more and not less limitations then what we're used to.

As for "where new party members are about as generic as they come", I'm not 'quite' sure how that doesn't apply to Fire Emblem. Most of the games, particularly the ones without skills, were quite boring in their differences if we ignore "a few stat points here and there". Forgive the spelling, but Myridom and Mercenary? Hunter and Archer? Knight and Solider? Or even Knight and Cavalier families in 10? In my mind, Fire Emblem is the example, not the exception, to that generalization.

And second, I'm not sure 10 is a shining example where skills all do unique things. Deadeye, Colossus, Tear, Luna... I can't recall an instance where any did something beyond KO the target. And it's not like we don't still have Sol, Vengence, Mug, and Astra in the new game which are not stat up skills. Perhaps 9 might be better? But I'm nitpicking.

Looks like Cam got it covered. I had a response all done out, complete with a highlighted section of the reading for my cheeky student, and then realized that it wasn't the warrant he was looking for. Then, lo and behold, Cam's already got it taken care of.

Daw... I was hoping for a good tongue and cheek response. I'd like to read it anyways, even if the contents are void and thus not worth further discussion over. What good is life if you can't laugh even a little?

Edited January 6, 2012 by Wooster

[deuxhero]

Of course if I said "everyone pants" I feel some of the dudes here might throw things at me. :/

I'd personally be happy.

[CT075]

First, I admit. Stat up skills are boring. Though, I think I like Gamble, I like the tit-for-tat it has. But more to the point, explain to me how the minor stat increases are different from something like robes and drops, which do the same thing, but do not have the incumbency of preventing you from equipping something else. For right now they seem to have more and not less limitations then what we're used to.

The minor stat boosts are not any different from drops and robes, except that they're removable. That's... kind of the reason they're generifying FE. Now there's no reason to carefully consider whether or not to use this small boost, since it can now be shuffled around. It's one less consumable resource (consumable being a tentative word).

Like, if I want my unit to be slightly more durable, I consider whether to use an Angelic Robe, thereby using up the resource so it can't be used in the future on a possibly more worthy candidate, or use tactics to keep him/her out of danger. Now, I can /always/ go for the first one, since I know that if there's someone who needs it more, I can just take the skill off.

EDIT: Now, you do make a point of "now I have to consider whether I can fit this skill with all the others stacked on him". Which is a valid point, but now it just feels like "does Guy want a Killing Edge or a Silver Sword more", since it's (almost) the same question.

As for "where new party members are about as generic as they come", I'm not 'quite' sure how that doesn't apply to Fire Emblem. Most of the games, particularly the ones without skills, were quite boring in their differences if we ignore "a few stat points here and there". Forgive the spelling, but Myridom and Mercenary? Hunter and Archer? Knight and Solider? Or even Knight and Cavalier families in 10? In my mind, Fire Emblem is the example, not the exception, to that generalization.

Classes =/= characters.

When I think of the cast of a game like FFT, I think of the three guys who are consistently in the story, in the focus. Then I think of the faceless generics who are a name. Hell, in my example in particular, they don't even have unique /faces/ half the time. Whereas in FE, I think of the main players, then I think of all the characters with unique support conversations, growths, etc. Classes are only one element of what makes a character unique.

Sure, when I think of Raven I think 'that mercenary dude'. And Guy, 'that myrmidon dude'. In the end, they're both sword guys, true. But Raven is also a character with his own, unrelated quest for vengeance. And Guy is on his own, also completely unrelated character with dreams of grandeur. This is why I really like the idea of the 'character side quest', since it expands more on a character I might otherwise have just forgotten about. In FE4, I think of characters who can love each other, with unique skills and all that.

This is the main cause for the distaste I have with FE11 and 12. The characters are from the S/NES era where it wasn't possible to make too much unit customization, so the main point of uniqueness is class and face, except scratch the former because hello reclass. So really, all that sets, say, Cain and Roshea apart in my mind is jointime. Same goes for Julian vs. Rickard, or Draug vs. that pirate du- Darros. It's just like (IMO) FFT where, aside from the main, story-focused characters, all I can remember about my units are their names, and maybe not even that.

And second, I'm not sure 10 is a shining example where skills all do unique things. Deadeye, Colossus, Tear, Luna... I can't recall an instance where any did something beyond KO the target. And it's not like we don't still have Sol, Vengence, Mug, and Astra in the new game which are not stat up skills. Perhaps 9 might be better? But I'm nitpicking.

FE10 isn't the prime example of unique skills, I just picked that one in particular since that was the main example cited for 're-assignable skills don't make things generic'. FE10 really ruined what I liked about the 'mastery skills', in that they really made them way too powerful. I see where they were going, since many of them in FE9 were fairly underwhelming, but now the skills have become, as you say, "glorified ways of transforming the living enemy into a dead pile of ash".

I'm looking more at FE4 and FE5. Pursuit? Critical? Decent ideas that was just implemented badly. You'd be hard-pressed to find skills like Savior (oh hey, FE10) or Bargain (FE4) or Charge, or FE5!Wrath in other games. What I want are unique things. How about a skill that makes it so that a unit can capture (FE5) with full stats (oh wait that'd be super-broken but you get my point)? Or a skill that allows you to optionally avoid counterattack at the cost of halving your attack?

No, there's nothing that says that there won't be skills like this in FE13. But the mere fact that they've introduced stat boosts as skills signals to me that they're running out of ideas for skills and are turning to the more typical RPG skills for inspiration.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Camtech

[Anouleth]

FE10 isn't the prime example of unique skills, I just picked that one in particular since that was the main example cited for 're-assignable skills don't make things generic'. FE10 really ruined what I liked about the 'mastery skills', in that they really made them way too powerful.

So you liked it when 90% of mastery skills were worthless trash and the only one worth talking about was Sol? Mastery Skills might have all felt the same way in FE10, but that way was awesome. So cool to see Tanith rip enemies apart with Stun!

I see where they were going, since many of them in FE9 were fairly underwhelming, but now the skills have become, as you say, "glorified ways of transforming the living enemy into a dead pile of ash".

And I wouldn't have it any other way <3 Mastery skills should disintegrate enemies. Anything less would be underwhelming.

Or a skill that allows you to optionally avoid counterattack at the cost of halving your attack?

Ugh, I hate skills that have "costs"! You know, we already have a skill that lets you avoid counterattacks: it's called CANCEL.

[arvilino]

The warrant is in comparing it to more 'typical' (using it as a tentative term, I'm backing off from mainstream for a few reasons) SRPG games that do very similar things. To use something that you already pointed out, it's the kinds of repositionable skills are what Arch is talking about (as I see it), not the fact that they are repositionable. The skills are minor things, +5 STR, +5 evade, etc. This is the kind of thing you'd see in Final Fantasy Tactics, where new party members are about as generic as they come. A new class here, a few stat points there, it's all become so much less personalized. At least in FE10, the skills actually did something unique, something special. You can never replicate the effect of Miracle or Paragon, for example, with any kind of stat boost or item.

And this isn't even going into the things like anime-styled battle cut-ins (which every other SRPG and their grandma does at some point or other), or support attacks (aka the backbone of 50% of the tactics used in many games).

As well as those skills there are ones that work alot like the mastery skills, we currently know there's atleast lethaliaty in the game so it's likely minor boosts are not the only skills available. But on that matter specific stuff such as +5HP, +X str, +1 move skills that are finite in quantity and number per character but replacable remind me more of FE4's Rings than any other SRPG game skill system.

[Kngt_Of_Titania]

The skills are minor things, +5 STR, +5 evade, etc. This is the kind of thing you'd see in Final Fantasy Tactics, where new party members are about as generic as they come. A new class here, a few stat points there, it's all become so much less personalized.

Star shards in FE12 H3 are a big deal strategy-wise, because they can be MOVED from character to character at a whim. They only give like +1 STR/+1 SPD or +2 SPD or +2 DEF...but they can get a unit to double that otherwise wouldn't, or just achieve a ORKO on a boss to shave a turn.

So, you know what? They don't look interesting, but once you start manipulating them to achieve maximum performance, it gets surprisingly involved thought-wise, particularly when you have to start making compromises as to who gets what.

[CT075]

Now pretend that it was a consumable item. Can you honestly tell me that it takes less thought that way?

[Kngt_Of_Titania]

Now pretend that it was a consumable item. Can you honestly tell me that it takes less thought that way?

The point is that it's NOT CONSUMABLE. You can put +2 SPD on Krom for one chapter and then switch it over to another character the next. If it was consumable, you couldn't do that; the stat bonus would be stuck on one person.

If you give people the option to shuffle stats like that between characters and then tune the game around intelligent use of such a feature, it will make it take more thought, yes. Without a doubt.

Having skills take their own slots takes away the only annoying feature of star shards...they hog the living crap out of your inventory at times.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Kngt_Of_Titania

[Rewjeo]

No one ever complained about star shards that I saw, though, and those are interchangeable on any turn ever. I don't think anyone even complained about the rainbow potion blurring the line between units, although I remember people being worried about how easily it might trivialize the game...

[General Banzai]

The warrant is in comparing it to more 'typical' (using it as a tentative term, I'm backing off from mainstream for a few reasons) SRPG games that do very similar things. To use something that you already pointed out, it's the kinds of repositionable skills are what Arch is talking about (as I see it), not the fact that they are repositionable. The skills are minor things, +5 STR, +5 evade, etc. This is the kind of thing you'd see in Final Fantasy Tactics, where new party members are about as generic as they come. A new class here, a few stat points there, it's all become so much less personalized. At least in FE10, the skills actually did something unique, something special. You can never replicate the effect of Miracle or Paragon, for example, with any kind of stat boost or item.

And this isn't even going into the things like anime-styled battle cut-ins (which every other SRPG and their grandma does at some point or other), or support attacks (aka the backbone of 50% of the tactics used in many games).

Reclassing ruined unit individuality already, so this is nothing new

[Anouleth]

Reclassing ruined unit individuality already, so this is nothing new

Would you say that FE is ruined... FOREVER????

[General Banzai]

Would you say that FE is ruined... FOREVER????

No