this is my weird theory

[Phoenix Wright]

We all know 2 was a sidestory of 1 but thats not the point. Anyone else here think that 8 and 2 are a lot a like they both have pretty much the same features. and neither of them have sequals.They both also came out as the second game for there platforms. to me 2 is the worst on the console 8 is the worst on the GBA. think about it for a second

Edited August 8, 2008 by FEFL

[Florete]

Ok. I never played Gaiden (don't really plan on it either), but SoS was the worst on the GBA.

[Kintenbo]

Ok. I never played Gaiden (don't really plan on it either), but SoS was the worst on the GBA.

Sword of Seals? Is that some type of sick joke? It's ton better than Sacred Stoners. It had existing challenge, more interesting characters, (which is sad on Sacred Stoners part, the Sword of Seals characters aren't even overly interesting), and in my opinion, a better music score. Don't go dissing on Elibe, y'hear? If you complain about graphics or whatever, obviously a 2002 game will not be as graphically impressive as a 2004 game. *is a Sword of Seals fan*

Oh yeah, Gaiden and Sacred Stoners are quite similar, they even feature monsters. But if I'm not mistaken, in Gaiden, you can go to villages and walk around freely to talk to folks, unlike the rest of the Fire Emblems. I'm not sure about Gaiden, but Sacred Stoners is definately not what I'd call the best Fire Emblem game ever. (Blazing Sword is my favorite, Elibe is home sweet home to me)

Edited August 8, 2008 by Kintenbo

[Serene]

Sword of Seals? Is that some type of sick joke? It's ton better than Sacred Stoners. It had existing challenge, more interesting characters, (which is sad on Sacred Stoners part, the Sword of Seals characters aren't even overly interesting), and in my opinion, a better music score. Don't go dissing on Elibe, y'hear? If you complain about graphics or whatever, obviously a 2002 game will not be as graphically impressive as a 2004 game. *is a Sword of Seals fan*

Oh yeah, Gaiden and Sacred Stoners are quite similar, they even feature monsters. But if I'm not mistaken, in Gaiden, you can go to villages and walk around freely to talk to folks, unlike the rest of the Fire Emblems. I'm not sure about Gaiden, but Sacred Stoners is definately not what I'd call the best Fire Emblem game ever. (Blazing Sword is my favorite, Elibe is home sweet home to me)

Seriously SoS blowed chucks. It was bland and boring, I know that it was the first GBA game, but it was extremely boring.

SS however, had some of the ideas from Gaiden which made it a bit more entertaining since you were stuck with the same thing over and over again on premote

[HowAreYaBud]

I thought SoS was okay. Sacred Stones was just too easy, and I hated Gaiden, even though it WAS pretty cool to be able to actually walk around in a FE game.

[Serene]

I thought SoS was okay. Sacred Stones was just too easy, and I hated Gaiden, even though it WAS pretty cool to be able to actually walk around in a FE game.

Yeah SS was easy, but SoS was bland in comparision to Blazing Sword

[HowAreYaBud]

Compared to Blazing Sword, yeah, but it still wasn't that bad.

[The Envoy of the Beginning]

I'd take Sword of Seals over Sacred Stones. The difficulty and a big character selection makes up for the other things that make SoS suck. Sacred Stones was easy and short.

[HowAreYaBud]

I'd take Sword of Seals over Sacred Stones. The difficulty and a big character selection makes up for the other things that make SoS suck. Sacred Stones was easy and short.

My point exactly.

[Phoenix Wright]

I still like SoS better but they have no personalities (at least not in english trans) and I thought it was weird when Roy just states in front of the army that he thought Percival was "handsome."

Edited August 8, 2008 by FEFL

[Florete]

Sword of Seals? Is that some type of sick joke? It's ton better than Sacred Stoners. It had existing challenge, more interesting characters, (which is sad on Sacred Stoners part, the Sword of Seals characters aren't even overly interesting), and in my opinion, a better music score. Don't go dissing on Elibe, y'hear? If you complain about graphics or whatever, obviously a 2002 game will not be as graphically impressive as a 2004 game. *is a Sword of Seals fan*

I am NOT an Elibe hater. See my favorite FE over there?

Problems with SoS: (Note that I'm comparing to the other GBA games

All chapters (Save the very last) being sieze missions

Enemies appearing at the start of the enemy phase

No enemies dropping items

Way too many villages

Constant recruitable enemies (Not a huge problem, but having to alter strategies every chapter to get an enemy to your side without either of you dying was annoying. I'm looking at YOU, Douglas!)

Predictable sidequest requirements (Keep someone alive or beat in X turns)

No promotion for thieves (I had Chad and Cath at level 20)

Lack of a significant story. Did it even have a story?

No support library.

Need I continue?

[Serene]

I am NOT an Elibe hater. See my favorite FE over there?

Problems with SoS: (Note that I'm comparing to the other GBA games

All chapters (Save the very last) being sieze missions

Enemies appearing at the start of the enemy phase

No enemies dropping items

Way too many villages

Constant recruitable enemies (Not a huge problem, but having to alter strategies every chapter to get an enemy to your side without either of you dying was annoying. I'm looking at YOU, Douglas!)

Predictable sidequest requirements (Keep someone alive or beat in X turns)

No promotion for thieves (I had Chad and Cath at level 20)

Lack of a significant story. Did it even have a story?

No support library.

Need I continue?

That's my issues as well. Compared to the others SoS is bland

[Raven]

I am NOT an Elibe hater. See my favorite FE over there?

Problems with SoS: (Note that I'm comparing to the other GBA games

All chapters (Save the very last) being sieze missions

Enemies appearing at the start of the enemy phase

No enemies dropping items

Way too many villages

Constant recruitable enemies (Not a huge problem, but having to alter strategies every chapter to get an enemy to your side without either of you dying was annoying. I'm looking at YOU, Douglas!)

Predictable sidequest requirements (Keep someone alive or beat in X turns)

No promotion for thieves (I had Chad and Cath at level 20)

Lack of a significant story. Did it even have a story?

No support library.

Need I continue?

Agreed...

The story was just plain bland, I found SS alot more interesting to play, and enjoyable for that reason. Who cares if it's short? The length does play a part in a game, but it wasn't horribly short, either. I played through SoS once, and I don't feel the urge to go back and play it again, even on hard mode, for most of the reasons Fox had listed.

[Phoenix Wright]

That's it I'm changing my fav. FE game

[Raven]

That's it I'm changing my fav. FE game

What was your favourite before changing it? And why did you change it?

[Phoenix Wright]

SoS

Just lost in chapter 1 on hard (I know I suck)

[The Envoy of the Beginning]

I much rather play a bland but difficult-enough game than an easy and short one.

As I get better at video games, I seek more difficult challenges.

Edited August 8, 2008 by Black Luster Soldier

[Kintenbo]

How'd a topic about Sacred Stones and Gaiden turn into a debate to whether Sword of Seals sucks or not? Seriously, if you don't like it, then whatever. I just said all that stuff earlier out of Fox saying Sword of Seals was the worst GBA game, and me liking it more than Sacred Stoners. Quite really, I do like both of them (even though I do have a habit of calling Sacred Stones, Sacred Stoners), so saying that there's a "Worst" Fire Emblem would make me a liar. I just don't like the apparent Sword of Seals bashing that apparently goes around on this site.

Well, let's get back to topic, for those who played Gaiden, was it super easy? That would be another similarity between the two.

Edited August 8, 2008 by Kintenbo

[Phoenix Wright]

How'd a topic about Sacred Stones and Gaiden turn into a debate to whether Sword of Seals sucks or not? Seriously, if you don't like it, then whatever. I just said all that stuff earlier out of Fox saying Sword of Seals was the worst GBA game, and me liking it more than Sacred Stoners. Quite really, I do like both of them (even though I do have a habit of calling Sacred Stones, Sacred Stoners), so saying that there's a "Worst" Fire Emblem would make me a liar. I just don't like the apparent Sword of Seals bashing that apparently goes around on this site.

Well, let's get back to topic, for those who played Gaiden, was it super easy? That would be another similarity between the two.

thanks for getting back on topic :)

but no I don't think Gaiden is super eay

[Kintenbo]

Hmmm, how would Formatiis compare to the final boss in Gaiden?

[Relinquished]

Sword of Seals? Is that some type of sick joke? It's ton better than Sacred Stoners. It had existing challenge, more interesting characters, (which is sad on Sacred Stoners part, the Sword of Seals characters aren't even overly interesting), and in my opinion, a better music score. Don't go dissing on Elibe, y'hear? If you complain about graphics or whatever, obviously a 2002 game will not be as graphically impressive as a 2004 game. *is a Sword of Seals fan*

i have to agree with him. SS is plain too easy, unlike SoS. Characters may be a tad boring, but who cares?

[Zanryu]

All chapters (Save the very last) being sieze missions

Seize is awesome, because you can stand around and beat the snot out of reinforcements until no more rush you.

Enemies appearing at the start of the enemy phase

That adds difficulty to it, which is always good. Doesn't make the game bad.

No enemies dropping items

That also adds a bit of difficulty, because you can't have someone run up, kill to get a vulnerary, and have someone else run up, trade and heal. You have to think about it more and get on the defensive. It ruins your current strategy, but it makes you think up a new one. If a game tests you like that, it's always cool.

Way too many villages

More villages = more items, more often than not. It got excessive, but those items are blessings half the time.

Constant recruitable enemies (Not a huge problem, but having to alter strategies every chapter to get an enemy to your side without either of you dying was annoying. I'm looking at YOU, Douglas!)

Again, adds difficulty in that you have to endlessly alter your strategies.

Predictable sidequest requirements (Keep someone alive or beat in X turns)

That doesn't make the game bad. Would you rather have some odd, obscure requirement that is almost impossible to accomplish without trying the chapter seven times over? That'd get rather pointless most of the time. They were predictable because you need to go to the Gaiden chapters if you want to go to the laaaaaast chapters.

No promotion for thieves (I had Chad and Cath at level 20)

Aye, that was annoying, but maybe they hadn't come up with something fitting for the GBA series?

Lack of a significant story. Did it even have a story?

There was a significant story, it just wasn't overly exciting. =/

No support library.

Didn't that only come to be in FE9? I can't recall any others having them, but I rarely use supports anyways, so I may be wrong. But I don't think the feature was introduced then, considering FE6 was the first game with customizable supports, IIRC.

Half of what you listed actually added difficulty to the game, which is never a bad thing. =X

Also, there's a slew of characters to choose from, the Sword of Seals is awesome, and characters have SOME personality (although not much, it's there). All in all, FE6 was sort of bland, yes, but it was by no means a bad game. Far from it.

Then there's FE8... no character development, minimal personality, weak plot, pointless features, severe lack of difficulty (honestly, a six year old could probably beat Hard Mode), lack of Gaiden chapters, main characters have horrible caps for their growths (Ephraim, anyways), overly repetitive enemies, etc.

Granted, FE8 was a pretty good game. It just isn't better than FE6. >_>

Edited August 8, 2008 by Zanryu

[Phoenix Wright]

Seize is awesome, because you can stand around and beat the snot out of reinforcements until no more rush you

But doing the same thing every chapter can make a game really boring. <_< Like Final Fantasy's random battles walk two steps the BAM!

[Zanryu]

Oh well. It doesn't detract from the game any, especially because you can abuse reinforcements. Or abuse the bosses, if you feel compelled to do so. No turn limit = awesomeness. Even moreso when it's seize, as you can spend endless turns on the map doing shit.

[Florete]

Seize is awesome, because you can stand around and beat the snot out of reinforcements until no more rush you.

That adds difficulty to it, which is always good. Doesn't make the game bad.

That also adds a bit of difficulty, because you can't have someone run up, kill to get a vulnerary, and have someone else run up, trade and heal. You have to think about it more and get on the defensive. It ruins your current strategy, but it makes you think up a new one. If a game tests you like that, it's always cool.

More villages = more items, more often than not. It got excessive, but those items are blessings half the time.

Again, adds difficulty in that you have to endlessly alter your strategies.

That doesn't make the game bad. Would you rather have some odd, obscure requirement that is almost impossible to accomplish without trying the chapter seven times over? That'd get rather pointless most of the time. They were predictable because you need to go to the Gaiden chapters if you want to go to the laaaaaast chapters.

Aye, that was annoying, but maybe they hadn't come up with something fitting for the GBA series?

There was a significant story, it just wasn't overly exciting. =/

Didn't that only come to be in FE9? I can't recall any others having them, but I rarely use supports anyways, so I may be wrong. But I don't think the feature was introduced then, considering FE6 was the first game with customizable supports, IIRC.

Half of what you listed actually added difficulty to the game, which is never a bad thing. =X

Also, there's a slew of characters to choose from, the Sword of Seals is awesome, and characters have SOME personality (although not much, it's there). All in all, FE6 was sort of bland, yes, but it was by no means a bad game. Far from it.

I'm not saying FE8 was great, I'm saying FE6 pretty much sucked. I'm too lazy for quote tags, so...

Same mission every chapter is boring. I like seize, but not for every chapter.

It's annoying when, "Killed all enemies. Oh noes, an enemy appeared right next to my healer!" Healer dies. Or anyone else even. Even the best character can be screwed over in an instant, it's frustrating.

Some of the best items were dropped by bosses and such in other games, items you would get from villages anyway in this one. This game had too many villages and no enemies dropping items. That just wasn't balanced.

^That

I said it wasn't a huge problem, it just got monotonous.

I'm happy it had sidequests, but the requirements could have been more interesting. Once again, this isn't a big deal. It's just another reason it's inferior to Blazing Sword.

Most likely.

Worst part, definitely. I could forgive most of the other things if it at least had a good story.

FE7 and 8 had support libraries, and 9 didn't until it was in 10.

The things I listed added annoyance and frustration. Difficulty comes with that, but not in a good way.

Edited August 8, 2008 by Fox