hhh Hello, Hi, Hey: I'm $$$ richh

[FrostyFireMage]

Dr. Dedede

Dr. Dededolittle

[Starman]

Dr. Dedede

Dr. Sheik

[Yuki]

Dr. Dedede

Dr. Dededolittle

Dr. Sheik

Dr. Dededepper

Edited February 13, 2015 by TheYukianesa

[Soledai]

is it worth keeping the Elfire and Meteor tomes you get in chapter 3? I could see maybe getting someone to the C Fire rank needed to use the Elfire, but it seems like getting a mage to A Fire (except maybe Miranda) needed for Meteor would be a major pain.

I can't remember if anyone aside from Cyas has an A rank, so I sold the meteor tome

for what reason, might I ask?

the topic itself is okay, but my quip came when "elitist attitudes that almost killed the series" or something to that effect

casual mode is whatever, but don't hail it as the welcoming hands for noobs

Because I could say "where was our casual mode when we started?"

There are many reasons why people came to FE, don't make it look like casual mode was the reason

Edited February 13, 2015 by Soledai

[Breezy Kanzaki]

Oh my god why .___.

[Nobody]

I can't remember if anyone aside from Cyas has an A rank, so I sold the meteor tome

the topic itself is okay, but my quip came when "elitist attitudes that almost killed the series" or something to that effect

casual mode is whatever, but don't hail it as the welcoming hands for noobs

Because I could say "where was our casual mode when we started?"

There are many reasons why people came to FE, don't make it look like casual mode was the reason

I'm always surprised at how much permadeath is a big deal when people talk about FE outside this forum.

Like every fire emblem topic in neogaf ends up with "please keep the permadeath optional" or "I love awakening and would like to try the older games but permadeath scares me"

Personaly, i think permadeath is one of the things that makes FE into what it is. Beating the game without worryig about people dying is really... Easy

[Robert Stewart]

I can't remember if anyone aside from Cyas has an A rank, so I sold the meteor tome

I see. That's what I planned on doing anyway.

the topic itself is okay, but my quip came when "elitist attitudes that almost killed the series" or something to that effect

casual mode is whatever, but don't hail it as the welcoming hands for noobs

Because I could say "where was our casual mode when we started?"

There are many reasons why people came to FE, don't make it look like casual mode was the reason

Eh, I do agree that saying that casual saved the series or whatever is going a bit far, but I do think it probably helped a lot of newer players enjoy the series more.

I mean, I remember that hearing about permadeath was what kept me away from the series for a long time.

[Starman]

I remember remember rubbing into permadeath I just got in the habit if restarting and shit

[Robert Stewart]

I also don't get how permadeath is somehow a key or pivotal aspect of the series. TBH if in the next game they removed permadeath altogether I don't think I'd honestly care much.

[FrostyFireMage]

The whole permadeath mechanic made it feel like FE was for only the most hardcore strategy enthusiasts. Casual Mode made it seem more mainstream.

[Nobody]

I also don't get how permadeath is somehow a key or pivotal aspect of the series. TBH if in the next game they removed permadeath altogether I don't think I'd honestly care much.

Because with permadeath you have to come up with a startegy that lets everyone survive. Without it, everyone can die and nothing happens, therefore you're able to beat the chapter without much thinking

Filthy communist casual...

Edited February 13, 2015 by Nobody

[Robert Stewart]

Because with permadeath you have to come up with a startegy that lets everyone survive. Without it, everyone can die and nothing happens, therefore you're able to beat the chapter without much thinking

Filthy communist casual...

Well I mean if you try to play without thinking you might end up getting your lord killed. Or some other unit that's key to some goal later in the chapter.

Losing the unit permanently doesn't have to be the only penalty for letting them die.

[Nobody]

Well, go enjoy your radioactive ferris wheel in Pripyat while i eat CHEESEBURGERS in DISNEY WORLD communist casual

Edited February 13, 2015 by Nobody

[Nobody]

Now being serious having to worry about 1~3 units not dying is far from being as challeging as worrying about all of them (or dealing with the consequences)

[Makaze]

I'm always surprised at how much permadeath is a big deal when people talk about FE outside this forum.

Like every fire emblem topic in neogaf ends up with "please keep the permadeath optional" or "I love awakening and would like to try the older games but permadeath scares me"

Personaly, i think permadeath is one of the things that makes FE into what it is. Beating the game without worryig about people dying is really... Easy

I also don't get how permadeath is somehow a key or pivotal aspect of the series. TBH if in the next game they removed permadeath altogether I don't think I'd honestly care much.

The whole permadeath mechanic made it feel like FE was for only the most hardcore strategy enthusiasts. Casual Mode made it seem more mainstream.

Well I mean if you try to play without thinking you might end up getting your lord killed. Or some other unit that's key to some goal later in the chapter.

Losing the unit permanently doesn't have to be the only penalty for letting them die.

From an interview with the creators of FE on this site:

Iwata: Well then, next I’d like to ask each of you what you feel is the essence of Fire Emblem. Let’s start from the youngest. So far, in different ‘Iwata Asks’, we’ve talked about ‘the essence of MarioExt‘ and ‘the essence of ZeldaExt‘. Now I’d like to hear what you think, Maeda-san. Having been a fan of the series for a long time now, if you were asked to give us the defining elements of Fire Emblem, what would you say?

Maeda: I think one of them is how you get attached to your characters, and the joy you derive from training them. Another is how you have to use your head to defeat your enemies–and the feeling of satisfaction you get when you’ve managed to skilfully beat them. When these two aspects are combined well, that is when a game can be called Fire Emblem.

Iwata: Do you feel that there aren’t many games out there that unite these two factors the way Fire Emblem games do?

Maeda: I think so. There are probably games that manage to do either one exceptionally well. When it comes to strategy gameplay, there is the Nintendo Wars series, and as far as fostering attachment to the units you’ve raised, RPGs and such seem to do it well. I think having both of these factors in good balance is something that is characteristic of this series.

Iwata: Certainly, in the Fire Emblem games, many charming characters make their appearance and there is also the RPG-like element of storytelling. It was probably Fire Emblem that first united all these elements into the strategy genre. However, after this kind of game has been introduced to the world, the same formula has been tried out in many other similar games. In what way do you believe Fire Emblem’s position to be unique among them?

Maeda: I think it’s the fact that when your comrades fall in battle, they never rise again.

Iwata: Yes, it’s certainly very ‘Fire Emblem-like’ that you can never meet them again. We’ll talk about that aspect in much more detail later. (laughs) Do you feel that there are no other games out there with this gameplay style?

Maeda: I think so. When you are aware that you can lose your characters forever, it strengthens your empathy towards them. It’s a factor that heightens the feeling of tension when you are playing the game.

Iwata: Back when you enjoyed the series as a gamer, did you often press the Reset Button?

Maeda: Yes, I used it a lot. (laughs) Of course I wanted my precious allies to stay with me until the end. When I lost a comrade due to unforeseen circumstances, I’d press Reset and start the chapter from the very beginning.

Iwata: Moving on, how about you, Higuchi-san? What do you think about the essence of Fire Emblem?

Higuchi: Actually, the discussion ‘What is the essence of Fire Emblem?’ sometimes crops up within the development team as well. However, opinions on this are scattered. While some people say that ‘story is number one’, others feel that the most important thing is to feature lots of characters. At the same time, some say that it’s the tactical gameplay typical of simulation games that makes the games entertaining. If you ask me, what makes the games fundamentally interesting is again the fact that you can’t revive your fallen allies. I think this aspect expresses the weight of human life.

Iwata: So the same as Maeda-san.

Higuchi: Yes. It’s because your dead comrades never return that you grow strongly attached to them. For example, when one of your units dies, you get to hear their last words and you think, ‘Oh this is what he’s thinking…’ Through the games you can feel this kind of drama. It makes you play the games under a lot of tension, thinking, ‘I can’t let them be defeated here’ or, ‘if he dies, I’m starting from the beginning’. And when you finally manage to complete the game together with your valued comrades, you really feel gratified. I think this is the real thrill distinctive to Fire Emblem.

Iwata: How about you Narihiro-san? You have been involved with the series from the very first instalment all the way to this title. What do you think is the essence of Fire Emblem?

Narihiro: Yes. Well… This is a very difficult question to answer.

Iwata: Yes. It is, isn’t it? When talking about the essence of a series with such a long tradition as this, there is no way you can describe it in only a few words. As Higuchi-san said just now, opinions are scattered. Just like when we’ve talked about the essence of Zelda or the essence of Mario, everyone has their own opinion on the matter.

Narihiro: That’s why I really can’t give you an unconditional answer. Each time we are working on a new Fire Emblem game, we have similar discussions in the office. I think that the last year or two, especially, has been the period when I have faced this question more than ever.

Iwata: So having grappled with this difficult question, what is the conclusion you have come to?

Narihiro: To put it simply, I think that the core of Fire Emblem is offering the player ‘a pleasant feeling of tension’. I’ve begun to think that Fire Emblem is just like the two of you described earlier among other things, about growing attached to your characters and knowing that, should they perish, they will never return. It’s about getting the players to taste a supreme kind of tension.

Iwata: While sitting on the edge of your seat, you get to use your head and enjoy seeing your enemies defeated one after another by the strategy you devised, and then feel the relief and the strong sense of accomplishment when you manage to attain victory without losing any of your units. This is the ‘pleasant’ part, isn’t it?

Narihiro: That’s right.

Iwata: But a ‘pleasant feeling of tension’… Tension isn’t usually a very pleasant experience, is it? (laughs)

Narihiro: (laughs) That is certainly correct.

Iwata: It’s the fact that you are able to overcome it that makes it a ‘pleasant’ feeling of tension, isn’t it?

Narihiro: I think games in general are something in which you can enjoy feeling tense. However, unlike the relative intensity of action games, in Fire Emblem you take your time thinking through each of your moves. That’s why we can talk about a pleasant feeling of tension.

Even people who are no good at action games, or people who can’t get any enjoyment out of their concept of tension, can enjoy Fire Emblem. That is because in the strategy RPG system, you can play at your own pace and be entertained in a different way compared to action games. That’s how my thoughts on Fire Emblem have settled recently.

Iwata: I see. So what you are saying is that while in the Super Mario action games you can enjoy ‘a pleasant feeling of tension’ through skilfully controlling your hero, in Fire Emblem the ‘pleasant feeling of tension’ is captured in gameplay, which emphasises considering your actions slowly and deliberately.

Narihiro: That’s right.

Iwata: In addition, you could say that the fact that your fallen comrades can’t be revived works as an interesting and very effective ‘spice’ in the game system, which raises the tension you feel during the game.

Narihiro: That’s correct. By adding these kind of ‘spices’, we have been able to take this series towards this ‘pleasant feeling of tension’.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Makaze

[Soledai]

I see. That's what I planned on doing anyway.

Neat, since money is scarce o:

Eh, I do agree that saying that casual saved the series or whatever is going a bit far, but I do think it probably helped a lot of newer players enjoy the series more.

I mean, I remember that hearing about permadeath was what kept me away from the series for a long time.

I don't deny that, but waxing it like some gold pedestal is a bit much.

This would be going into preferences, but I was blindsided by permadeath when I first started, but it made me want to protect the remaining units more.

I also don't get how permadeath is somehow a key or pivotal aspect of the series. TBH if in the next game they removed permadeath altogether I don't think I'd honestly care much.

You could say it's one of the staples, it'd be the same, roughly, as taking out the weapon triangle, it's like taking out what partly made it what it is, and if you do that, it becomes no different than the other SRPGs floating around out there. Nobody said the strategy thing, so I'd be repeating him there. I forgot what I was gonna say

Well I mean if you try to play without thinking you might end up getting your lord killed. Or some other unit that's key to some goal later in the chapter.

Losing the unit permanently doesn't have to be the only penalty for letting them die.

If losing the character permanently wasn't enough of a punishment, there already are averse effects; like not being able to get an item, or another character, etc.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Soledai

[Lance Masayoshi]

Someone should answer this topic

http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=52055

With "marry levin to tityul"

disgusting

[Starman]

Is it me, or does like

One part of the X4 intro stage theme to zero sounds really similar to a part in Guilty Love?

Sounds a bit similar to me, but idk...

[Robert Stewart]

From an interview with the creators of FE on this site:

I'm aware the creators once said it was an integral part of the series. I don't agree. Death of the author and all that.

Edit: Also, they apparently don't agree either since they eventually introduced casual. Funny thing, that.

Edited February 13, 2015 by #RR shinpichu

[Pull My Devil Trigger]

but people die when they are killed

[Robert Stewart]

Actually, did casual in FE12/13 offer any sort of direct penalty for letting a unit be killed?

[Starman]

No

They just left for the rest if the chapter

Missing level ups and all that

[Nobody]

So shinpichu is a filthy casual

I'm disappointed

[Pull My Devil Trigger]

shinpichu is such an american casual

[Makaze]

I'm aware the creators once said it was an integral part of the series. I don't agree. Death of the author and all that.

This was actually during a discussion about adding the Casual mode. Later on they discussed the debate about adding Casual mode in FE12:

Iwata: By the way, Narihiro-san, looking at the development history of Fire Emblem, what kind of things have you done with the series?

Narihiro: Well, other than the hardware evolving, core elements of the game have also changed.

Iwata: I guess it’s granted that, along with improving hardware, graphics will be prettier, maps will be larger and the number of characters you get will increase. What else have you done with the series?

Narihiro: In a sense, the history of Fire Emblem has been about us thinking about what kind of ‘service’ we should provide this time, in order to express its “essence”.

Iwata: What kind of things do you mean?

Narihiro: For example, Genealogy of the Holy War for the Super NES was a very challenging project for us in many ways. As was previously discussed, this series is partly about the strategy system and partly about presenting a charming cast of characters and a fascinating world to the player. The games consist of these two elements blended together. I think Genealogy was a game where we decided to enlarge the portion of ‘service’ on the RPG side.

That’s why we decided to depict things like parent-child relations, love affairs and so on, so that the players would develop an even stronger emotional reaction to the game. Nevertheless, we also developed things on the game system side, strengthening it by inserting new elements. Because of this, in some aspects the game’s difficulty level might have become quite high.

Iwata: I have a feeling that around that time, the number of gamers who wanted a more challenging Fire Emblem had gradually started to increase. These are gamers who enjoy an intense feeling of accomplishment by overcoming the games in a harder, ‘super-stoic’ kind of play style.

Narihiro: Yes. (laughs) I think Thracia 776Ext (10), the game which came afterwards, was the peak of that development. It was around then that doing ‘Perfect Plays’ had become popular.

Iwata: A ‘Perfect Play’ being, for example, even if you lose an ally by pure accident, you immediately press Reset and start the chapter from the beginning. You strive to complete the game without losing a single character.

(10) (Fire Emblem) Thracia 776: A strategy RPG game released in September 1999 for Nintendo Power, a download service using rewritable cartridges (it was later also sold as packaged software for the Super NES). The 6th game in the series.

Narihiro: Indeed. However, we originally designed these games without considering such styles of play. That’s why we had provided plenty of extra units to the players.

Iwata: Should you happen to lose an ally, new ones are provided to you, one after another. Even if you make big mistakes and lose units, the game is designed in such a way that you should still be able to finish it without a problem.

Narihiro: That’s right. Even so, the number of ‘super-stoic’ players increased; people who absolutely wouldn’t lose characters they had developed a powerful emotional attachment to. I am very happy that there are so many people who love Fire Emblem to such an extent. However…

Iwata: I understand. When such a style of play becomes common, and when the structure of the game expands, the difficulty level of the game starts to rise rapidly.

Narihiro: That’s why, when we began making the first game for the GameBoy Advance, while also adapting in order to make our first handheld game, we decided to shift the weight of the gameplay to create a more easily enjoyable experience. We wanted the players to enjoy a simpler, purer strategy RPG experience. When it came to the graphics, in that area too, we decided to aim at expressing a lighter, less serious world.

After that we came out with a game for the GameCubeExt (11) and another one for the WiiExt (12). Again, with those games, we wanted to offer a different kind of ‘service’ to the customers; things we couldn’t have offered on a handheld including better graphics and FMV cut scenes. That being the case, if one were to look back on the history of the series and summarise it shortly, one could say that with each game, we have strived to mix up the ratio of the two basic elements, while moulding the game to fit and bring out the special personality of the console or handheld in question.

(11) The GameCube game: Path of Radiance: A strategy RPG released in April 2005. The 10th game in the series.

(12) The Wii game: Radiant Dawn: A strategy RPG released in February 2007. The 11th game in the series.

Iwata: While steadily producing new games in the series like this, you can shape the series to the wishes of your fanbase, allowing yourselves to create ever more charming experiences for them. But on the other hand, there is the danger that the number of new players trying out the series becomes ever smaller.

Narihiro: Yes. That’s why, when we were making the previous game for the DS, Shadow Dragon, one of our big goals became introducing lots of new players to the series. Therefore, Higuchi-san and Maeda-san decided to try to re-evaluate that one big feature of the series: the fact that your fallen comrades can’t be revived.

That’s because we thought that this system was pretty severe for the people who, with the Nintendo DS, were playing games for the first time or others who had not played the games for a while.

Iwata: So you were considering the people who might be playing the series for the first time?

Narihiro: That’s right. We gave this problem a lot of consideration, but at that point, we couldn’t come up with a way to solve it. That’s why we decided to give the players locations mid-chapter where they could save the game. If you handle them well, they can be used as guideposts. And if you lose a character, you can start again from there by pressing Reset. It was meant to be a system to alleviate the trouble of retrying for those who feel they don’t want to lose any of their characters.

Iwata: However, even if you don’t start again from the very beginning, it doesn’t change the fact that you still have to start again.

Narihiro: That’s very true.

Iwata: Incidentally, how did you begin the development of the current title, Heroes of Light and Shadow? What was your driving force to make the game?

Narihiro: Actually, while making the previous title, Shadow Dragon, we were already making preparations for the development of Heroes of Light and Shadow. This is because Mystery of the Emblem for the Super NES which this game is based on included two games: the first being Shadow Dragon and the second Mystery of the Emblem. So because we really wanted the players to enjoy the latter part of the story as well, we had plans to remake and release Heroes of Light and Shadow soon after Shadow Dragon. However, we came to the conclusion that it would be difficult to release the game in the same form.

Maeda: That is to say, because this is essentially the second part of Mystery of the Emblem, there was the risk that people who hadn’t played Shadow Dragon might think they wouldn’t connect with the story. Moreover, while the story alone might have made the game awkward to approach for newcomers, releasing the game in the same form, without inserting any gameplay schemes to welcome newcomers, would have made it even worse.

Iwata: From there, how did you find the solution to overcome this obstacle?

Maeda: We decided not to make a simple remake, but instead an entirely new Fire Emblem game. Of course Mystery of the Emblem was the foundation for this game, but it would be no more than that; it would be just the base to build on. We decided to insert elements that were completely new. Starting with this intent of mixing in new ideas, we consulted with the people at Nintendo and so the development of the game began.

Iwata: During those discussions, what kind of things had come up?

Narihiro: Generally speaking, two problems came up. The first was how we should make the game easier for beginners to get into. The second and the most debated issue was the conventional ‘your fallen comrades can’t be revived’ feature.

As was previously discussed, in Shadow Dragon we had inserted Save Points to alleviate the pain of retrying, but it appears it didn’t work well enough. So the issue of ‘whether or not we should allow the characters to be revived’ became the bone of contention. The debate itself lasted several months. I actually followed the argument from a bit of a distance; Higuchi-san was our man in contact with the people from Nintendo.

Iwata: Well then, Higuchi-san, could you tell us what kind of points came up during this debate?

Higuchi: Yes. Nintendo suggested that ‘to make the game enjoyable for as many people as possible, wouldn’t it be better if you could revive your fallen units in the following chapter?’ My first reaction to this was ‘if we made such an alteration, Fire Emblem would cease to be Fire Emblem’.

Iwata: Over the years, you came to believe that the feeling of tension was created from not being able to revive your allies.

Higuchi: That’s it. I thought it was the most appealing factor of the series, its special trait. That’s why I thought that ‘on this point I will never surrender’, and so the intense debate with Nintendo’s representatives stretched on and on.

Narihiro: It felt like discussions were held every day; sometimes even late at night.

Iwata: Didn’t this kind of debate occur during the development of the previous title as well?

Narihiro: Not only with Shadow Dragon, but also before that. Actually, with previous titles we’ve tried implementing systems for reviving characters numerous times, but it always seemed to take something away with it.

Higuchi: That’s right. These kinds of debates, talk of a movement to change the game system, were already around when I joined the company, back when we were developing Genealogy of the Holy War.

Iwata: Genealogy of the Holy War was how many years ago?

Higuchi: It was released in 1996, so about 14 years ago. At the time, the change was at the specification document phase. It read ‘a unit can be defeated 5 times before finally dying’. When I saw this, I went to the director to complain and said, ‘You cannot

allow a change like this to be made!’

Iwata: Hearing this makes me think that this debate has continued for quite a long time now. Even a new recruit voiced his opinion on the matter to the director, right after joining the company. (laughs) Higuchi-san, were you such a big ‘Emblem’ fan when you joined the company?

Higuchi: No. I had actually never played Fire Emblem before entering the company.

Iwata: Huh? Is that so?

Higuchi: After joining the company, I had the opportunity to try out Mystery of the Emblem, which had been recently released. It was basically the first Fire Emblem I had played. However, when I finally got to play it, a crowd of people gathered behind me. Everyone was telling me things along the lines of, ‘You should do that like this’. It was really annoying.

Iwata: When it comes to Fire Emblem, nearly everyone at Intelligent Systems has an opinion about it. It wasn’t like they could just let you play it alone in silence! (laughs)

Higuchi: That’s true. (laughs) Nevertheless, when I got to play the series for the first time, I was captured by its charms. In RPGs, it’s common that you can revive fallen allies, but in Fire Emblem it is the ‘once your units die, they stay dead’ rule that creates its sense of tension. I think it is the most appealing aspect of the series.

Iwata: So 14 years ago you made your request to the director, saying that being able to revive allies was a bad choice. This time too, you were adamant that you’d never give up on the point.

Higuchi: Yes. I thought I’d never concede to their request. Even so, when discussing the issue with Nintendo’s representatives, the point came up that just hearing about the ‘units can’t be revived’ rule might make some beginners avoid the series.

Maeda: Among other things, people new to the series wouldn’t know about the method of resetting and restarting the chapter from the beginning after a unit is killed.

Higuchi: That’s why, so that even beginners could easily enjoy the game, we tried our best to implement ‘relief measures’ aimed at them. One thing we tried was that on a certain difficulty level, like ‘Normal’ or ‘Hard’, if one of your units is killed, they will be revived for the following chapter.

Iwata: In other words, you could choose from a variety of difficulty levels. You examined what would happen, on the easiest level aimed at beginners, if defeated allies could be revived.

Higuchi: Yes.

Iwata: While Higuchi-san was having these discussions with the people from Nintendo, what kind of stance did you have on the issue, Maeda-san?

Maeda: Having originally been a Fire Emblem fan, when I first heard about this, I held the same opinion as Higuchi-san.

Iwata: It was natural that you’d be against the ability to revive characters.

Maeda: That’s right. But on the other hand, there is something that Narihiro-san keeps telling us: ‘Game developers must try to be objective.’

Iwata: In other words, he told you to avoid looking at this from only a fan’s point of view, and to try to see it from other perspectives as well.

Maeda: Yes. We would then request assistance from other people within the company and had them play-test the prototype of the game several times. Among the test players there were people who didn’t play Fire Emblem, but they told me that ‘if there was a mode like this in the game, I might come to enjoy the series as well’. After hearing this, I could sense the possibilities. We might have people, who had since now kept their distance from the series, say to themselves ‘with this game, I might be able to get into the series.’ And so I betrayed my cause midway through development. (laughs) I had gradually stepped to the other side, trying to convince Higuchi-san to change his mind.

Iwata: When you actually tried out a mode with the ability to revive characters, how did you find it, Higuchi-san?

Higuchi: When I first tried it out myself, I thought that it might actually be a nice entry point for people new to the series. And after playing this mode, they might move on to the more enjoyably challenging ‘Normal’ and ‘Hard’ modes. Though that only came after being persuaded by Maeda-san. (laughs)

Everyone: (laughs)

Higuchi: At that point, the debate abated for the moment, but it was far from finished.

Iwata: Considering how long this debate around Fire Emblem had gone on for, it wasn’t going to end so quickly, was it? (laughs)

Higuchi: Yes. (laughs) Afterwards, we argued over how the difficulty levels should be mapped out.

Maeda: In the debate, a proposal came up that, after selecting the difficulty mode, you could select whether or not your characters could be revived.

Higuchi: We had already implemented a difficulty level where your defeated characters would be revived. I thought that this would be enough, but then I would hear people tell me, one after another, that there would be people picking up this game who hadn’t played a Fire Emblem game in a while. There is no way they would want to play on the lowest difficulty level, but neither would they be the types to put up with the ‘super-stoic’ style of play, the style of pressing Reset every time one of their units died. This was the reason for the proposal.

Iwata: Certainly, the people who had played the games ‘back in the day’ would know how to play a Fire Emblem game quite well. Even if these people wanted to enjoy the game casually, it’s unlikely they would be satisfied with just playing the game on the lowest difficulty level.

Higuchi: That’s right. So because we wanted not only beginners, but also the ‘lapsed’ Fire Emblem players to be able to casually enjoy the game, we decided that, instead of only making it a part of a certain difficulty level, we would let the players decide whether or not characters could be revived. Ultimately we wanted to let the players choose the way they would play the game. Targeting not only beginners, but everyone, who wanted to enjoy the game casually, we decided to call the mode with the ability to revive characters ‘Casual’. And for the people who wanted to play this game in the same way as always, we called the other mode ‘Classic’.

Iwata: ‘Classic Mode’ essentially means ‘traditional mode’, doesn’t it?

Higuchi: Yes. In the end, the player could choose from 4 difficulty levels and then, depending on his or her preference, the game mode they wanted to play. We hope that in this way, a wide variety of people can enjoy the game. While we had all kinds of problems during development, I do think the long debates have paid off in the end.

Iwata: Around how long did these discussions continue?

Higuchi: About four months.

Iwata: So after all these years, the debate around this point finally came to an end. It took quite a long time didn’t it?

Higuchi: Yes. It did take a while. (laughs)

My point is, permanent death is widely considered the key thing that makes FE, FE. Not only by the fans, who you deny, but by the the creators, who you also deny.

If you don't think permanent death defines the Fire Emblem experience, you're wrong by every metric we could possibly use to measure it. The actual games, the fanbase, the creators. You're just plain wrong.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Makaze