I still don't get the praise of this game...

[Tryhard]

(Generally) fans of the older FE games were disappointed with FE13. (Generally) people who weren't fans before or have minimal FE experience liked FE13 a lot.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ At the end of the day, it was a smart move, and one that saved the franchaise. So even if I dislike FE13, I can't fault them for making it like that. (though I wish they did better on the story jeez) I'm just waiting to see where future games go, now. No use in being bitter because we're the "old FE guard".

Edited June 3, 2014 by Tryhard

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

FE13 has great battle animations and the 3D effect is used very well. So it's a great game for newcomers.

Veterans could be disappointed about the story and gameplay. Most of the "new" features (barracks, avatar) existed in FE12 already, which only wasn't released outside of Japan.

So FE13 has not many innovations compared to other parts except for pairing (a great idea!), great support conversations unlike FE10 and enemy skills, which always activate on lunatic+.

I also agree that FE10 has the most strategical elements in the entire series, but it also has its flaws.

[Interceptor]

To me it seems more like taking the good parts of the old games and puting them into one game without understanding what made them good to begin with, but thats me

Indeed, that's you.

The old titles are no great shakes; they are thin, limiting, tedious, and have been left behind by modern TBS games. The best that you can say, is that they were good for their time. The rest is mostly nostalgia, if we're being honest.

Awakening has a potpourri of various and sundry mechanics, that appeal to a wide variety of players. As collateral damage, it offends the Stop Having Fun Guys -- i.e. people who can't abide it when someone likes something they don't like -- but that's not Awakening's problem.

[BANRYU]

It's MADE to sell, not to necessarily be a good game. Mediocrity sells.

Personally, I just try to be aware of its flaws, but I still like it despite them.

And honestly, thatoneguy, it's totally fine if you don't like Awakening; I can completely understand and sympathize with your point of view there, and I agree that it's not really good as far as FE titles go. It's also totally fine if you're genuinely trying to understand why people like it-- but if people keep giving you the same answers and you keep making new topics asking the same question in a different way, that's just pointless and counterproductive bitching. If this is indeed the case, then you are wasting your time (I try to make no presumptions; it is hard not to here, but I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt).

'Live and let live' is a much more stress-free way to look at it.

Edited June 3, 2014 by BANRYU

[BrightBow]

Indeed, that's you.

The old titles are no great shakes; they are thin, limiting, tedious, and have been left behind by modern TBS games. The best that you can say, is that they were good for their time. The rest is mostly nostalgia, if we're being honest.

Awakening has a potpourri of various and sundry mechanics, that appeal to a wide variety of players. As collateral damage, it offends the Stop Having Fun Guys -- i.e. people who can't abide it when someone likes something they don't like -- but that's not Awakening's problem.

The game is still fundamentally as thin as Shadow Dragon was. It's just not as good designed. (and that game was not well designed) And due to his nature as a remake, the game threw out most of the stuff introduced by the preceding games. Awakening has a lot of fluff added but otherwise the only new mechanic that really changes the gameplay is Pair Up. Which on top of reducing a perfectly playable unit to a glorified piece of equipment is really just Adept, Great Shield and a stat boast thrown together.

Edited June 3, 2014 by BrightBow

[Thor Odinson]

I could go on all day about the issues that the non-gameplay related portion of FE13 (bar music, I like the music) has. I'm very passionate about character design, having done hundreds myself. And while there's some designs I liked and are even pretty great, there are more that serves, rather, as a what-not-to-do. Battle panties? Seriously? I guess the plot sucks too, but I don't care about that much. Characters are by far a thousandfold more important to me than plot.

And perhaps I'm a little spoiled on characterization what with games and media with far more fleshed out characters, Awakening's hit me as tediously one-note and not much substance beyond gimmicks in the main game. While the DLC provided some actually decent writing, the fact is that writing of that quality should've been in the game in the first place rather than extra add-ons (I wouldn't mind good writing DLC on top of already good writing) now that we know the writing team is not incapable of producing things of quality. The supports in-game suffer from having to fit the gameplay and going in awkward directions towards a romantic ending regardless if the characters are actually romanticaly compatible (in terms of personality, not gameplay) or not. From unlocking and reading every support I've found that, on average, the nonromantic supports feel better-written than the romantic ones (obviously there's still a few good romantic ones, the writing isn't 100% crap), as they are free from having to try to awkwardly nudge the support into a romantic context and more free to explore the characters. I wish there was more supports like that, to flesh them out more. Using an anime stereotype in itself as a starting point is not necessarily a bad thing, but it's what you do with it. The supports had potential. When I first read them, they were pretty funny. But when I read more of them, they became repetitive of overemphasizing the same traits over and over again and having pretty much the same content for each character. This suggests that while each individual support are not necessarily bad--some better than others, but rather putting them all together makes it feel that a lot more could be done with them than what we have.

So I did go on a bit about characterisation. Whoops. I'm pretty passionate about that too. But while there's a lot that the game could've done better, the most important part of a game is the gameplay. I personally enjoyed the gameplay, as unbalanced as it is. While balance is something to strive for, not having it does not unnecessarily make gameplay unfun. I'm sure many other people had fun with it too, and that's why I like it. I hardly put FE13 as the best FE, economics aside, and certainly not my favorite FE, let alone my favorite game, but I still had fun with it and that's what it boils down to. I do think of video games as an art form, however, and my enjoyment of one portion of this artform does not deter me from criticizing its weaknesses in the other portions. After all, I liked the game, but it could be better. As an artist, critiques help me improve, and at least for me, criticizing it weaknesses shows that I care and think it has potential and can do better next time. Why would I critique something I don't care about? I'd just be like "lol [thing i don't give a fuck about]" and call it a day.

And I imagine a lot of people are the same. They enjoyed some aspects of it (or all! everyone has different tastes, if they like having gimmick-focused characters then who am I to judge) and they had fun. And so they liked the thing. And that's okay. It doesn't have to be the most well-designed thing to be fun. Liking the thing doesn't prevent you from pointing out its flaws, and being flawed not necessarily prevents you from enjoying the thing, either. Works both ways.

But if you don't like the game at all, that's okay too.

Edited June 3, 2014 by Thor Odinson

[Interceptor]

The game is still fundamentally as thin as Shadow Dragon was. It's just not as good designed. (and that game was not well designed) And due to his nature as a remake, the game threw out most of the stuff introduced by the preceding games. Awakening has a lot of fluff added but otherwise the only new mechanic that really changes the gameplay is Pair Up. Which on top of reducing a perfectly playable unit to a glorified piece of equipment is really just Adept, Great Shield and a stat boast thrown together.

If you're reduced to comparing Awakening to Shadow Dragon, that seems to be an implicit admission that Awakening murders every pre-DS title, and I couldn't agree more on that point. The contest is not even close.

Awakening's gameplay superiority does not rest solely upon "new" features; it uses old ones in new ways, or in combinations that haven't been seen before. Supports, generations, reclassing, forging, skills, etc. It's all there. Dismissing any of that as "fluff", or disqualification because it wasn't created from whole cloth, is basically nonsense.

[XeKr]

Do people think they’re not being condescending when they say stuff like, “oh you can like mediocre things. Good for you, I’m not judging.” >_>

I’ll also note the overwhelming opinion (to my knowledge) was positive prior to the western release, which includes a large period of time where our information mainly came from real dedicated fans who imported it. Generalize however you wish.

Edited June 3, 2014 by XeKr

[Thor Odinson]

That's only if you think things that aren't masterpieces are inherently unlikeable. Many people, including myself, likes some stuff even they feel isn't that great, but likes that thing because it brings enjoyment to them anyway. Thor 2 had a lot of problems. It's my favorite movie. I weep at what could've been compared to the quality of Captain America 2, which was a far-better made movie in pretty much every way which I also greatly enjoyed. Thor 2 is still my favorite movie.

I mean I think my art is a pretty big piece of shit but people like it and I still appreciate them liking my stuff because they enjoy it or something

If it brings happiness to them whatever you may think of the piece doesn't matter in terms of the context of their enjoyment

One man's trash is another man's treasure etc

Edited June 3, 2014 by Thor Odinson

[XeKr]

There’s quite a spectrum of things between masterpiece and mediocre as well.

In general, I think (we agree that) it’s unnecessary to suggest anyone’s tastes are inherently superior than another’s, whether a “veteran” or “casual” or whatever arbitrary classification.

[Thor Odinson]

In the context of arbitrary classfications, I can definitely agree. There's some stuff that, well, having a more trained/acute sensor to a piece of media makes for better judgment of the flaws in works that belong to those particular pieces of media (god I'm really bad at phrasing this, hope you understand), but that's not relevant here considering length of time playing a video game doesn't make you a better fan of the game as opposed to length of time practicing your art does make you a better artist.

[RJWalker]

If you're reduced to comparing Awakening to Shadow Dragon, that seems to be an implicit admission that Awakening murders every pre-DS title, and I couldn't agree more on that point. The contest is not even close.

Awakening's gameplay superiority does not rest solely upon "new" features; it uses old ones in new ways, or in combinations that haven't been seen before. Supports, generations, reclassing, forging, skills, etc. It's all there. Dismissing any of that as "fluff", or disqualification because it wasn't created from whole cloth, is basically nonsense.

Wiat what? How is that an admission that Awakening is better than pre-DS titles? He's said before that Shadow Dragon is not as well designed as previous games in the series.

Using old features in new combinations is nothing to be praised if those features still haven't been balanced at all. Reclassing, skills and forging are more broken than ever before. That hardly makes the gameplay superior. In fact, it's far inferior to games with less but better balanced features.

Edited June 3, 2014 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Interceptor]

Wiat what? How is that an admission that Awakening is better than pre-DS titles? He's said before that Shadow Dragon is not as well designed as previous games in the series.

It's not an "admission", it's a roundabout way of pointing out that his assertion is nonsense. Shadow Dragon is the closest cousin to Awakening, gameplay-wise. As soon as you go even one step further back, Awakening waves "reclassing" in your face, and calling it "thin" becomes self-evidently silly even before you get into the rest of the fusillade of features that the title has going for it.

Using old features in new combinations is nothing to be praised if those features still haven't been balanced at all. Reclassing, skills and forging are more broken than ever before. That hardly makes the gameplay superior. In fact, it's far inferior to games with less but better balanced features.

I find it pretty amusing that you consider Awakening's versions of forging, reclassing, and skills to be the most egregiously broken ones, as if the games after FE8 never happened.

This series has never been about perfect balance: Fire Emblem has had abusive mechanics and a healthy mix of good/shit units since the dawn of time. The balance here by comparison is just fine. Pretty good even, if you can exercise some small bit of restraint.

Checkers is well-balanced, but it's boring.

[BrightBow]

If you're reduced to comparing Awakening to Shadow Dragon, that seems to be an implicit admission that Awakening murders every pre-DS title, and I couldn't agree more on that point. The contest is not even close.

No, I didn't admit anything like that? Where did you get that from? I consider Shadow Dragon a crappy remake, as I stated quite clearly.

Awakening's gameplay superiority does not rest solely upon "new" features; it uses old ones in new ways, or in combinations that haven't been seen before. Supports, generations, reclassing, forging, skills, etc. It's all there. Dismissing any of that as "fluff", or disqualification because it wasn't created from whole cloth, is basically nonsense.

And dismissing all the old games like this...

The old titles are no great shakes; they are thin, limiting, tedious, and have been left behind by modern TBS games. The best that you can say, is that they were good for their time. The rest is mostly nostalgia, if we're being honest.

...somehow is not nonsense? But hey, it most be a fact. You gave no reasons why you think this way but after all you were the one who said it. Declaring yourself factually right about subjective things is no substitute for actual reasons.

Look, I'm well aware that you could back up your stance on these games. But could you give others the benefit of the doubt too, please.

Since you didn't give any reasons why you think the things you listed are somehow not being "thin, limiting, tedious, etc..." like the old games supposedly are, I guess I make the first step then and state a few issues I have with them:

For supports, I fail to see any improvements. We are now effectively back to the old GBA system were you have to glue units together in order to raise any support points. Needless to say, I liked FE9-12's systems a lot better. And Pair Up turns characters into pieces of equipment that give state boast and skills. I would rather actually use those units.

Even ignoring that, the system is painfully unintuitive. Somehow pairings can't heal each other and the unit in the back can't be healed by anyone else either. Archers can suddenly attack at melee range when the main units strikes in melee, melee units can attack at range when the main units is an archer but for whatever reason won't lift a finger if the archer is attacked at melee, etc... It effectively throws the game's entire logic out of the window.

Support conversations are also pretty much the same as always. But in addition to that, there is the fundamental problem that you can support everyone to A while S-Rank is reserved for lovers. This means that there is no romance whatsoever between C and A because after all, the character might already be married. And consequently the love confessions in the S-Supports come completely out of nowhere. And that is the end of the relationship. You would think that once they are in a serious commitment, things would get really interesting but they never talk to each other again.

I already didn't like Reclassing in the DS games either but I think the changes made here are for the worse. Once you change classes, your character somehow forgets all the things they learned until they reaches level 10 and get another seal at which point they forget those new skills. It's effectively the same like that multiclass nonsense for humans in the original Baldur's Gate... which was from 1998. Not very modern, to say the least. And unlike the DS games, Awakening will always make new weapon categories start at E-Rank. And since Bronze weapons do little but tickle later enemies, this effectively limits the class selection to classes using the same weapon you already used. It's not like their is much of a point to go through the trouble of training the rank since all melee categories are effectively the same anyway and bows are useless as ever. Besides, putting all these classes next to each other does little but show how little difference there is between them in the first place.

Also, if we have infinite levels, why do we still have that antique lv 20 cap? This game sticks to certain traditions when they lost all meaning.

Skills are for the most part just as pointless as ever. Random boni, random activated special effects that make them completely unreliable for actual strategy, same old story that already sucked in the console games. The few that actually change the way the unit is used are reserved for very high levels, at which point the game is pretty much done. Most of them feel like filler, used to fill in the requirement of two skills per class.

But the few good skills we already did have are missing. Like, what happened to Canto? This skill made a fundamental difference in the way mounted units are used compared to infantry. Now they are back to being just like foot units with more Movement. Besides, before that skills were given to individual units, making them more unique as a result. Now everyone in the same class pretty much feels the same.

The Generations system in Awakening compared to FE4, well: In FE4, the entire game was designed around that system. The game was themed around legacy and inheritance, so it was actually about the kids. But in this game they are just glorified Est units who walked in circles for two years while the fate of their world was decided.

The concept was promising to be sure. The Future Past DLC is prove of that. But in the main game, they are just painfully tagged on to give the player a designer child to go along with the Waifu. Rather then contributing to the story and setting, the script needs to handwave their existence and gameplaywise they are as redundant as Est units usually are.

Feel free to state what you think is great about these mechanics and why you think they are more then mere fluff. Or you can just declare yourself right and just dismiss me or anyone else as blinded by nostalgia yet again.

Edited June 3, 2014 by BrightBow

[RJWalker]

Supports in the GBA games took even less time than in Awakening since you could build up multiple supports between different characters in the same map (Binding Blade being the exception) without grinding yout units either. In Awakening, getting to A support takes 5-6 skirmishes minimum and that's only if you allow one Paired up Couple to fight. Grinding multiple supports takes forever and much longer than simply ending turns in the GBA games. And you also end up grinding so much that the kids are completely unnecessary since their parents are so overpowered now.

Now there is one benefit to the system in that it is easier to build up supports naturally between a few characters over the course of the game but if actually want to recruit all the children then it takes far longer ot grind supports in the GBA games.

[Interceptor]

...somehow is not nonsense? But hey, it most be a fact. You gave no reasons why you think this way but after all you were the one who said it. Declaring yourself factually right about subjective things is no substitute for actual reasons.

The people who know what I am talking about don't need an explanation, and the others don't merit one (because they have no excuse, or they can't meaningfully participate anyway).

For supports, I fail to see any improvements. We are now effectively back to the old GBA system were you have to glue units together in order to raise any support points.

Nope. GBA's was tedious and dumb, because you had no idea what was going on and sensible things like combat were irrelevant. Awakening's requires actual interaction between characters (THE HORROR), has visual feedback reinforcement (the hearts), and takes next to nothing for effort once you understand how the system works (four battles will max you out for a chapter).

No wonder your views are so out of the mainstream. Even this simple difference didn't register as an improvement to you.

And Pair Up turns characters into pieces of equipment that give state boast and skills. I would rather actually use those units.

It's a shame that the game forces you to use the Pair-Up system.

That was sarcasm.

It effectively throws the game's entire logic out of the window.

Fire Emblem has had illogical mechanics since the very first installment. It's a fantasy game with magic swords and dragons in it. Why start demanding logic at this juncture?

"Marth! In this continent, we obey the law of conservation of energy!"

Support conversations are also pretty much the same as always. But in addition to that, there is the fundamental problem that you can support everyone to A while S-Rank is reserved for lovers. This means that there is no romance whatsoever between C and A because after all, the character might already be married. And consequently the love confessions in the S-Supports come completely out of nowhere. And that is the end of the relationship. You would think that once they are in a serious commitment, things would get really interesting but they never talk to each other again.

[filed under: nitpicking]

[subsection: no awareness that the last X games didn't even have this option]

I already didn't like Reclassing in the DS games either but I think the changes made here are for the worse. Once you change classes, your character somehow forgets all the things they learned until they reaches level 10 and get another seal at which point they forget those new skills. It's effectively the same like that multiclass nonsense for humans in the original Baldur's Gate... which was from 1998.

Which is actually from the late 80's, since that's when DnD 2nd edition was released, and that's the ruleset that Baldur's Gate was based on. Gary Gygax actually had a reason for the mechanic in pre-2nd days, not that I imagine you have any idea what I'm talking about.

Reclassing like this serves the purpose of 1) constraining abilities to the primary class, and 2) forcing you to protect units that are training (see: Bronze weapons). The payoff for the curve, is better attributes along with some lingering aspects of prior classes. And of course, not everyone has access to every class set.

We've had games before where everyone could do anything. There's one called Final Fantasy XII. Everyone turns into bland poop by the end. I'm glad that Fire Emblem didn't go that route.

Also, if we have infinite levels, why do we still have that antique lv 20 cap? This game sticks to certain traditions when they lost all meaning.

Why not? It's still a useful breakpoint for seals. Level 20 is just one of those Fire Emblem things, like the weapon triangle and blue-haired Lords.

Skills are for the most part just as pointless as ever. Random boni, random activated special effects that make them completely unreliable for actual strategy, same old story that already sucked in the console games.

Basically this is nonsense. The majority of the skills offer some useful benefit to the user, even just as a passive stat stick. If something has a random activation, that's because 1) this game is predicated on random events anyway, and 2) the skill would be too powerful or too lame with 100% effect. The RNG in Fire Emblem is one of the nicer things about it; events unfolding during gameplay cause you to change what you were going to do.

But the few good skills we already did have are missing. Like, what happened to Canto? This skill made a fundamental difference in the way mounted units are used compared to infantry.

Yes, and it was toxic. Canto was too good for the disadvantages of a mount. It just meant that mounts were always better than anything else.

Besides, before that skills were given to individual units, making them more unique as a result. Now everyone in the same class pretty much feels the same.

Units are still customizable with partners and class paths. It's different; it's not necessarily worse.

The Generations system in Awakening compared to FE4, well: In FE4, the entire game was designed around that system.

The Generations System in Awakening as compared to every single mother-effing Fire Emblem that's not FE4: easily beats their "nothing" entry. The re-imagining of the children system is extremely popular, so perhaps consider the possibility that you are wrong about it.

Feel free to state what you think is great about these mechanics and why you think they are more then mere fluff. Or you can just declare yourself right and just dismiss me or anyone else as blinded by nostalgia yet again.

It's not clear to me why you think that I need your permission to comment; I either will or I won't, as I feel. In this conversation, you have no authority whatsoever.

None of the classic games could be released today, and I don't just mean the graphics. The QoL changes that people take for granted are serious barriers for anything resembling fun. Go watch a video of "Geoffrey's Charge" some time, and see if you can stop your hand from reaching for a phase skip button that doesn't exist. Or play a GBA title and dream wistfully about having a base screen for basic feng shui. Or go further back, and have fun doing math in your goddamned head.

Sorry, but that rocket ship is powered purely by nostalgia at this point.

[Constable Reggie]

The people who know what I am talking about don't need an explanation, and the others don't merit one (because they have no excuse, or they can't meaningfully participate anyway).

Goddamn is this what it's like to be called pretentious by Kanye West

None of the classic games could be released today, and I don't just mean the graphics. The QoL changes that people take for granted are serious barriers for anything resembling fun.

Do you claim this only for Fire Emblem or can it extend to any expansive video game series? Is Final Fantasy XIII better than Final Fantasy [insert older title here] because it feverishly directs you on everything you can do in the game, thus taking out unnecessary clutter?

[Czar_Yoshi]

Using old features in new combinations is nothing to be praised if those features still haven't been balanced at all. Reclassing, skills and forging are more broken than ever before. That hardly makes the gameplay superior. In fact, it's far inferior to games with less but better balanced features.

The more balanced gameplay is, the closer the difficulty level is to what the devs intended. Unless it becomes wither too easy or too hard to be fun anymore (with the amount of customization and room for challenge runs Awakening has, this doesn't seem to be an issue for it), then difficulty doesn't seem that important to me, and as such I'm not terribly concerned about balance.

That only applies to single player games though.

Also, if we have infinite levels, why do we still have that antique lv 20 cap? This game sticks to certain traditions when they lost all meaning.

The level cap is there as a measure against lowmanning earlygame due to the scarcity of Seals. It probably wasn't enough, but just imagine the chaos if Avatar didn't cap at Cht.4 in Lunatic.

Which is actually from the late 80's, since that's when DnD 2nd edition was released, and that's the ruleset that Baldur's Gate was based on. Gary Gygax actually had a reason for the mechanic in pre-2nd days, not that I imagine you have any idea what I'm talking about.

Is citing examples and expecting your audience to not know what they are really that helpful to your case?

Do you claim this only for Fire Emblem or can it extend to any expansive video game series? Is Final Fantasy XIII better than Final Fantasy [insert older title here] because it feverishly directs you on everything you can do in the game, thus taking out unnecessary clutter?

I assume he's referring to things like better menus that reduce prep time and cutscene skips and the like. That's different from handholding/endless tutorials, which very few people are fond of (though there is such a thing as too little).

Edited June 3, 2014 by Czar_Yoshi

[Constable Reggie]

I assume he's referring to things like better menus that reduce prep time and cutscene skips and the like. That's different from handholding/endless tutorials, which very few people are fond of (though there is such a thing as too little).

FFXIII has an auto-battle function that allows you to basically skip every battle you deem unworthy of playing or irritating (or hell, all battles). No other FF game has this.

I hereby declare FFXIII to be the best FF game of all time due to this.

[XeKr]

Interceptor generally covered most of it, but here’s some more comments.

Supports: Pair Up (or fighting adjacent to each other), is way more intuitive than just standing next to each other and spamming end turn, no? I don’t have anything against the chapter based ones so eh. I prefer Pair Up/Dual though since the bonuses have generally been proximity based anyway so it makes sense to earn levels that way too.

Reclassing/Classes: You keep the skills you learn and choose how to customize your characters. Stuff like weapon rank is purposely done for synergy and decision-making reasons in the main game. Internal levels means the level 20 cap still matters and makes deciding when to reclass/promote (level-wise) a strategic decision. Especially since Seals actually aren’t buyable for quite awhile.

And all the classes being usable and useful (some moreso in certain niches), even those with Bows? Pretty astounding.

Skills: FE is intrinsically an RNG-based game. Every skill has a use, some smaller, some larger, often balanced in obtaining them. Stuff like canto was broken, mounts are essentially just plain better from base (moreso than the move advantage alone). The advantage compounded with rescue/take/drop. At least stuff like Galeforce requires going through like 30+ levels in a Wind/Bow weak class (which is forged early and often) with low Str/Def and Vantage/Vengeance requires essentially maxed stats plus trudging through low weapon levels or possibly low Str/Mag stats.

The only truly standout skill is Veteran (though I suppose this suggests skills are actually not so useless).

Children: Being in Paralogues suggests optional content. And certainly some people like training Ests. And children are actually designed well in that respect, given that their stats/skills quickly surpass parent units if you bother with them (such that some are even useful in efficient play, which is not so trivial :O).

Various other concerns people like to bring up are…

Character balance: Everyone is usable if you like them, even in harder difficulties. All non-optional characters (and some of those too) have a niche in efficient play. Hard to ask for much more.

Map Design: Someday you’ll actually look at them (wow, there’s actually chokepoints..), and look at the (highly rational) enemy positioning + aggro behavior. Someday.

Objectives: Defense is usually trivial in the standard usage (for some reason people think chokepoints + turn limit = defense map = "really tactical gameplay". And some of the chapters referred to are easier to Kill Boss in anyway). Seize/Arrive/Escape (are basically the same) would be nice, but I think for most players, they don’t differ significantly from Kill Boss. Except a moving boss is usually harder to deal with.

And this game has subtler and more organic objectives. You approach Tiki’s map differently because of how it’s designed and because you want to protect Tiki, not because the game told you it has a defense objective. You feel pressured to rush forward because Wyvern reinforcements are coming to pincer you, not because of a strict turn limit. Endgame has an Ender’s Game-esque feel, because you’re actually against overwhelming odds and need to do so to win. etcetc

Misc: You can play casual mode and battle save. The game warns you about ambushes. It tells you which bosses move and which don’t. It tells you most of the various stats and percentages. You can skip phases. You can see enemy ranges that you choose and in total. You can refill weaponry with the convoy. In paralogues/DLC, you get to experience a huge variety of (less forgiving, yet optional) mechanics, including hidden items, hidden conversations (that can give items), more unorthodox objectives (get Donnel 100 exp, get Inigo kills), villages to save, special kinds of terrain, randomly moving doors/walls, escort missions, crazy reinforcement patterns (hi future past), and so on.

The little things (should) matter.

I’m not getting into the grinding argument again. It’s an s-rpg

FFXIII has an auto-battle function that allows you to basically skip every battle you deem unworthy of playing or irritating (or hell, all battles). No other FF game has this.

I hereby declare FFXIII to be the best FF game of all time due to this.

(I heard FFXIII actually had a surprisingly deep battle system with paradigm switching and such, though I haven’t played it myself)

Though I believe the classic example refers to how many previous FF games can be steamrolled by spamming the Attack button (or the same Spell/Jump/Tool/etc over and over) vs. the Auto-battle button (which doesn’t even work like that?).

Edited June 3, 2014 by XeKr

[Constable Reggie]

(I heard FFXIII actually had a surprisingly deep battle system with paradigm switching and such, though I haven’t played it myself)

Though I believe the classic example refers to how many previous FF games can be steamrolled by spamming the Attack button (or the same Spell/Jump/Tool/etc over and over) vs. the Auto-battle button (which doesn’t even work like that?).

It sort of does, but of course it's all mitigated by the fact that all you have to do is press xxxxxxx.

And past FF games usually required you to strategize on things like bosses. Would you like to guess which single button you have to press to beat bosses in XIII? (disclaimer: this probably doesn't work on optional mega bosses, but definitely does for the story ones)

[RJWalker]

The people who know what I am talking about don't need an explanation, and the others don't merit one (because they have no excuse, or they can't meaningfully participate anyway).

I think Constanble Reggie's reply sums up this perfectly.

Nope. GBA's was tedious and dumb, because you had no idea what was going on and sensible things like combat were irrelevant. Awakening's requires actual interaction between characters (THE HORROR), has visual feedback reinforcement (the hearts), and takes next to nothing for effort once you understand how the system works (four battles will max you out for a chapter).

No wonder your views are so out of the mainstream. Even this simple difference didn't register as an improvement to you.

For one level of support maybe. If you actually want to max out supports for all characters to recruit children, it takes hours upon hours and far longer than in the GBA games.

Fire Emblem has had illogical mechanics since the very first installment. It's a fantasy game with magic swords and dragons in it. Why start demanding logic at this juncture?

"Marth! In this continent, we obey the law of conservation of energy!"

"I have no understanding of Suspension of Disblief"

[filed under: nitpicking]

[subsection: no awareness that the last X games didn't even have this option]

What? His arguement is not nitpicking at all. It's a valid complaint that the support conversations suddenly pair off characters when they showed no inclination towards romance in the beginning.

Nevermind that 'nitpicking' is almost always an excuse to dismiss criticism of any kind.

We've had games before where everyone could do anything. There's one called Final Fantasy XII. Everyone turns into bland poop by the end. I'm glad that Fire Emblem didn't go that route.

Wait, you just described Awakening there. That applies to the children espcially.

The Generations System in Awakening as compared to every single mother-effing Fire Emblem that's not FE4: easily beats their "nothing" entry. The re-imagining of the children system is extremely popular, so perhaps consider the possibility that you are wrong about it.

Having a certain mechanic that others don't doesn't automatically make it better.

And it's not the 're-imaging of the mechanic' that's become popular. It's the mechanic itself. And I'm sure that not everyone would want it to be every game. Especially if it doesn't make sense in terms of story for it to be there which it doesn't for the other games. This game had to squeeze in badly written time travel plot shenangigans to fit a 2 Generations mechanic.

Sorry, but that rocket ship is powered purely by nostalgia at this point.

And there it is. The nostalgia based fallacy that is the cherry on the top.

Edited June 3, 2014 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Interceptor]

Do you claim this only for Fire Emblem or can it extend to any expansive video game series?

Warrantied only for Fire Emblem, because that's what we're talking about, although surely there are other game series that would fall in the same general category.

Is citing examples and expecting your audience to not know what they are really that helpful to your case?

It's not my argument, it's his. I was just pointing out that dual-classing is a lot older than he seems to think it is, and that reasons actually do exist for the concept. Maybe even in ways that are relevant to Fire Emblem, but I'm not going down a DnD rabbit hole.

I assume he's referring to things like better menus that reduce prep time and cutscene skips and the like. That's different from handholding/endless tutorials, which very few people are fond of (though there is such a thing as too little).

It's always nice when someone tries to figure out what I meant, instead of assuming that I'm advocating for oven mitts in Care-A-Lot™, because it's convenient for their point.

Interceptor generally covered most of it, but here’s some more comments.

Quoted only to highlight that this is a very nice list. I wasn't attempting to be expansive, since that's almost as tedious as playing FE7.

I think Constanble Reggie's reply sums up this perfectly.

As expected.

For one level of support maybe. If you actually want to max out supports for all characters to recruit children, it takes hours upon hours and far longer than in the GBA games.

It takes nothing of the sort. S-ranks are easy because of Pair Up and the Support unit. If you want to fill your entire book, that takes a hot second, but I'd say the overall ease of Awakening's intuitive and organic support system, generally outweighs this one weird completionist edge case.

And FFS, use Spotpass or something to grind supports.

"I have no understanding of Suspension of Disblief"

Or context, in your specific situation. Look at what was being replied to.

What? His arguement is not nitpicking at all. It's a valid complaint that the support conversations suddenly pair off characters when they showed no inclination towards romance in the beginning.

Sure, it's valid nitpicking. He's entitled to make the argument, and I'm entitled to lampoon it. The fantasy world where his wishes are granted isn't really possible, so as a pragmatist I'm perfectly happy with the flawed system that time allowed. Lullerskates at the extra effort it would take to even make C to A romantic supports work in the context of the freedom you are given in this game.

Wait, you just described Awakening there. That applies to the children espcially.

No, you just don't understand what "everyone can do everything" actually means. Play FFXII, or read up on the skill system. That's the true standard for vanilla. At least in Awakening, you are limited by current class, available trees, and skill slots.

Having a certain mechanic that others don't doesn't automatically make it better.

No, but in this case it is actually better. It's a pretty neat way to get recruits.

And it's not the 're-imaging of the mechanic' that's become popular. It's the mechanic itself.

Nitpicking. Pointless, too, since there's nobody that misunderstood me.

And I'm sure that not everyone would want it to be every game. Especially if it doesn't make sense in terms of story for it to be there which it doesn't for the other games. This game had to squeeze in badly written time travel plot shenangigans to fit a 2 Generations mechanic.

Of course everyone wouldn't want that; what thing could "everyone" possibly agree on? The weapon triangle, maybe?

Given how popular the marriage/children system was, I think it's a fair bet that IS tries to do it again in the future. They'd be fools not to.

And there it is. The nostalgia based fallacy that is the cherry on the top.

Just so you know, "fallacy" isn't a synonym for "uncomfortable truth".

Edited June 4, 2014 by Interceptor

[RJWalker]

Just so you know, "fallacy" isn't a synonym for "uncomfortable truth".

Good thing that what you said about nostalgia isn't uncomfortable truth then, right?

Edited June 4, 2014 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Loki Laufeyson]

Indeed, that's you.

The old titles are no great shakes; they are thin, limiting, tedious, and have been left behind by modern TBS games. The best that you can say, is that they were good for their time. The rest is mostly nostalgia, if we're being honest.

Awakening has a potpourri of various and sundry mechanics, that appeal to a wide variety of players. As collateral damage, it offends the Stop Having Fun Guys -- i.e. people who can't abide it when someone likes something they don't like -- but that's not Awakening's problem.

This post. This is the post that has merit.

That's only if you think things that aren't masterpieces are inherently unlikeable. Many people, including myself, likes some stuff even they feel isn't that great, but likes that thing because it brings enjoyment to them anyway. Thor 2 had a lot of problems. It's my favorite movie. I weep at what could've been compared to the quality of Captain America 2, which was a far-better made movie in pretty much every way which I also greatly enjoyed. Thor 2 is still my favorite movie.

I mean I think my art is a pretty big piece of shit but people like it and I still appreciate them liking my stuff because they enjoy it or something

If it brings happiness to them whatever you may think of the piece doesn't matter in terms of the context of their enjoyment

One man's trash is another man's treasure etc

Also this. Stuff doesnt have to be perfect for me to dig it. Btw Lumi, the more i learn about what wound up on the chopping block in Thor 2, the more i want to kick Joss Whedon in the face. My enjoyment of something is not going to be tarnished by flaws. When im playing a game, i put gameplay first and foremost. Always. The End. Good bye. Awakening delivers in that in ways i really freaking love. I like to have the choice to do full on balls-to-the-wall challenge runs, or roflstomping around if i feel like it. This game's Nancy Mode seems like a huge turn-off but without it, i couldnt tackle Lunatic without destroying my 3DS. Shit's fun. I dig it. So what if the story is crap, im not playing the game for that.

I just find it pretty sorry and horrible that people dont like that other people are enjoying this thing.