Fire Emblem Wii U

[Knight]

I'd like to ask what you think how the Wii U's capabilities would improve FE, other than multiplayer. Second screen, camera, gyroscope, Miiverse, how do you think those may improve the game?

Thanks for the comments so far, there's some great ideas, I like the idea of more factions on the screen, enemies who not only fought you but fought each other, that's an excellent idea.

[Byte2222]

Relevant: FE4 had a four factions: Player, Enemy, Ally and Neutral. Player, Enemy and Ally behaved like the rest of the series (allies were not controllable) but the neutral units were quite interesting. You couldn't fight them or move past them but enemies could fight and kill them. They were mostly used for events that the player wasn't supposed to get involved in: razing villages, blocking the way,

dying with you being powerless, killing off a load of allies

- that sort of thing. Quite an interesting concept if you ask me, if under-utilised.

[cyron]

for a new fe

-3 tiers with branching promotions

-wind/fire/thunder magic being contained in anima like fe13 but bring back light and have dark be an entirely separate weapon type

-dlc

-long 50+chapters

-multiple groups

-branching story paths so you can choose to be a hero and eventually die a hero be a coward and live be a coward and die or be a hero and live this would come through many choices every major plot point or so

-enemy factions so you have enemies fighting among themselves

Edited December 6, 2012 by Cyron

[Gone2Ground]

Giant FE4 style maps.

Fixed it for you

[Anacybele]

I agree on the bringing back the third tiers, except I would either take away the mastery skills or make them weaker like in PoR.

No way, mastery skills are sooo cool. D:

Especially Aether and Colossus! Those are my favorites. <3

Edited December 6, 2012 by Anacybele

[Ema Skye]

I like the mastery skills, but I think they need to be toned down so that they aren't instant death 95% of the time.

I also think that the next game should have a quality>quantity approach when it comes to characters. I'd rather have a cast of 24 well developed characters than a group of 60 that we just know their name and what they look like. They feel slightly more important that faceless generics when they lack character development or a backstory. I feel no guilt for killing off characters with no depth like Aran, Edward or pretty much anyone in FE11 except for Caeda and Minerva.

Multiple Lords going through different adventures like in FE2. Having three lords together was cool in FE7, but the story was pretty much the same for both Eliwood and Hector. Alm and Cellica went through completely different stories that only merged at the end.

In terms of multiplayer, I think something like a fleshed out version of the FE11/12 Multiplayer system could work on the Wii U, with one person using the gamepad and one using Wii Remote + TV. I don't think a multiplayer campaign/main story would work well though.

Haven't really experimented with any of Wii U's neat stuff other than the gamepad, so I won't say anything about how it could use them.

[BrightBow]

Please no Mastery Skills. They are nothing but a second chance to score a critical hit.

I'm not much of a fan of third tiers either. Now they worked well in Radiant Dawn, because the characters were already powerful veterans and were able to take on the most powerful mortals on their world. When they were facing an even bigger thread, a foe that was nothing short of divine, they had to raise to another level.

It was kinda appropriate there.

But in a new world, it simply means we are dealing with bigger numbers.

And as far I am concered, if the numbers grow to high from level 1, they loose any sort of believable scale.

And as a result stop feeling like they are representing a characters actual strength and instead feel like they are nothing but...well... numbers.

Edited December 6, 2012 by BrightBow

[Anacybele]

But in a new world, it simply means we are dealing with bigger numbers.

And as far I am concered, if the numbers grow to high from level 1, they loose any sort of believable scale.

And as a result stop feeling like they are representing a characters actual strength and instead feel like they are nothing but...well... numbers.

Not if they're fighting a tough, long war where a lot of training and skill-building is required. I do this sort of thing for my fic. Trust me, when I want to find a way to make something work, I do. It's the beauty of having as much dedication and persistence as I do. :3

[Integrity]

There's still a pretty solid limit to human strength. I actually get BrightBow for a change here.

EDIT2: Hell, put it this way: a capped Edward increases his physical strength fivefold over the span of like a year.

EDIT: Look at Disgaea. The numbers there just stop meaning anything. +1 attack? What's +1 attack?

Edited December 6, 2012 by Integrity

[Byte2222]

Balancing the actual size of the numbers in FE is a surprisingly difficult task. FE 2 and 11 had the numbers too small which reduced the sense of scale and messed with the calculations but FE10 had the numbers way too big and the gulf between your strongest unit and your weakest one was massive, not to mention that everyone was hitting their caps*, devaluing their merits as an individual and discriminating solely based on class. This is not even taking the in-world implications into account: how much are your units growing by? Has occasionally-hunts-with-a-bow Rebecca really gained so much experience in a few weeks/months that she can slay leagues of elite (promoted), trained soldiers and fight unearthly demi-humans? How hard should I be thinking about this?

*Hyperbole

[Comet]

This is not even taking the in-world implications into account: how much are your units growing by? Has occasionally-hunts-with-a-bow Rebecca really gained so much experience in a few weeks/months that she can slay leagues of elite (promoted), trained soldiers and fight unearthly demi-humans?

And then you get est and her archtypes in other games.

[Anacybele]

There's still a pretty solid limit to human strength. I actually get BrightBow for a change here.

EDIT2: Hell, put it this way: a capped Edward increases his physical strength fivefold over the span of like a year.

EDIT: Look at Disgaea. The numbers there just stop meaning anything. +1 attack? What's +1 attack?

Yeah, but since when was FE entirely realistic to begin with? lol

Dragons, magic, medicine that heals wounds right away, people that shapeshift into animals. All of that is just fantasy stuff. Some things in FE do look better realistic though, I'll admit.

[CT075]

i'd be less opposed to third tiers if the second/first tier classes were scaled down to match

[Integrity]

Yeah, but since when was FE entirely realistic to begin with? lol

Dragons, magic, medicine that heals wounds right away, people that shapeshift into animals. All of that is just fantasy stuff. Some things in FE do look better realistic though, I'll admit.

Please, please, please don't go straight to the FE ISN'T REALISTIC BECAUSE defense. It's really childish and pointless. ;/

Anyway, BrightBow's point wasn't that it was unrealistic for these numbers to be so high, it was that if the numbers inflate too much (fe10 to disgaea) it removes all sense of "well this is a rating of how strong the person is" and becomes a spreadsheet. This dude's strength is two thousand, you know. What's that mean? Who knows. Two thousand strength putting out eighty thousand damage is just huge arbitrary numbers, and removes any sense of connection the average player has to the scale of the game, making them into - like he said - numbers and nothing more.

[Knight]

i'd be less opposed to third tiers if the second/first tier classes were scaled down to match

Perhaps first tier caps at 15, 2nd 20, 3rd 20-30 or 35

[Rehab]

I'd probably want to put the brakes on the numbers creeping up before they go past a hundred on a non-crit hit, certainly, but given we've already gotten into some relatively anime territory with the GBA animations, like the mercenaries and swordmasters and such, and some of 9/10's special animations, like the masteries and normal hits occasionally launching dudes into the air, I don't think it's too out of line for the series to take some creative license with human limits. Where to draw the line, I'm less sure.

help I'm being beaten to the points

Edited December 6, 2012 by Rehab

[Emperor Hardin]

Actually I think having generic player units is a very bad idea, unless they're given as a form of mockerycompensation like in Shadow Dragon. Every unit having a name, a face and a personality is an important feature of Fire Emblem; while, yes, the developers do intend for you to let some allies die, they also aim to make those allies worth fighting to keep alive, for more than just their stats/inventory. Things like sending units on suicide missions should be a last-resort tactic you feel fairly conflicted about rather than something you shrug and do anyway because the unit in question is a bad match for the map you're on, for one reason or another, and who cares anyway because you can just replace them next chapter.

In short, you're supposed to actually care about your allied units; I think that's why even the generic replacements from the DS games all have their own names, as opposed to simply being called "Altea" or "Soldier".

I suggested Multiplayer Generic units so multiplayer wouldn't be determined by which player was favored by the RNG the most or who forged the best weapon. That way it would rely on strategy.

The other alternative would be multiplayer being a scenario of sorts. One side could control a gang of bandits on the offensive and the other the defending army, both sides would have non-generic units but stats unaffected by campaign.

If monsters are present, veer them away from "demons" towards "fantastical fauna", and maybe make a Tamer skill that, if used to "kill" a monster, (in a mechanic similar to Capture battles) would convert that monster to a

Tearring Saga sorta did that with monsters and certain playable units could summon them as NPC allies.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Emperor Hardin

[Anouleth]

There's still a pretty solid limit to human strength. I actually get BrightBow for a change here.

EDIT2: Hell, put it this way: a capped Edward increases his physical strength fivefold over the span of like a year.

EDIT: Look at Disgaea. The numbers there just stop meaning anything. +1 attack? What's +1 attack?

Yes, if there's something Fire Emblem can't afford to do, it's to be more like other RPGs like Final Fantasy and Pokemon.

[Integrity]

Yes, if there's something Fire Emblem can't afford to do, it's to be more like other RPGs like Final Fantasy and Pokemon.

I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. :(

[Knight]

I always liked Fire Emblem because designs and story were more realistic than other RPGs, I mean, dragons and magic aren't real, but it seems more faithful to medieval mythology, and it should remain that way.

[Byte2222]

Oh, and while we're on the subject of being realistic, can we have pre-FE13 armour back please? FE has been really good about armour being not too bulky but covering everything that needs protecting (ahem), but FE13 was a bit too... stylistic for my liking.

[Anacybele]

Please, please, please don't go straight to the FE ISN'T REALISTIC BECAUSE defense. It's really childish and pointless. ;/

Anyway, BrightBow's point wasn't that it was unrealistic for these numbers to be so high, it was that if the numbers inflate too much (fe10 to disgaea) it removes all sense of "well this is a rating of how strong the person is" and becomes a spreadsheet. This dude's strength is two thousand, you know. What's that mean? Who knows. Two thousand strength putting out eighty thousand damage is just huge arbitrary numbers, and removes any sense of connection the average player has to the scale of the game, making them into - like he said - numbers and nothing more.

Firstly, I never said FE wasn't realistic period. I said it isn't ENTIRELY realistic. Yes, it's more realistic than a lot of other games. But it's not exactly like real life.

Second, just what "dude" are you talking about here? o_O

EDIT: And I agree about the armor, some of Awakening's just looks weird, imo. Tellius has the coolest armor, imo, especially in RD.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Anacybele

[Integrity]

Firstly, I never said FE wasn't realistic period. I said it isn't ENTIRELY realistic. Yes, it's more realistic than a lot of other games. But it's not exactly like real life.

Second, just what "dude" are you talking about here? o_O

In that case, there's no sense bringing the realism card up. The things that are like reality might as well be molded to be like reality, so why would you even bring magic up? ;/

Second, that was the generic 'this dude' for any value of 'this dude' you want to assign to 'this dude'.

[arvilino]

I suggested Multiplayer Generic units so multiplayer wouldn't be determined by which player was favored by the RNG the most or who forged the best weapon. That way it would rely on strategy.

The other alternative would be multiplayer being a scenario of sorts. One side could control a gang of bandits on the offensive and the other the defending army, both sides would have non-generic units but stats unaffected by campaign.

I don't think it necessarily needs to generic units it could be the players characters and still be fair and rely on strategy. This could be done with set stats for each class but with small differences for the characters highest and lowest stats, so that level doesn't impact your ability to play online but you'll still be able to use the characters you want with similar stat distributions to what they usually have.

[Anacybele]

In that case, there's no sense bringing the realism card up. The things that are like reality might as well be molded to be like reality, so why would you even bring magic up? ;/

Second, that was the generic 'this dude' for any value of 'this dude' you want to assign to 'this dude'.

Fine, fine. xP