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

[The Geek]

I agree with the Marvel Brothers, Awakening is deeply flawed, but not in a way that makes it unenjoyable. At least not for me.

[arvilino]

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.

Fire Emblem 4's generation mechanic is pretty unintuitive and without prior knowledge of what is the biggest spoiler of the first half of the game(perhaps the whole game depending on viewpoints) it will completely throw any player for a loop. They'd literally have to know Sigurd and co. are going to die in chapter 5. How exactly is a mechanic better realized when it's all about planning for something the player can never actually predict without being spoiled?

On the otherhand we have Awakenings system, If we break it down gameplay-wise it introduces them one at a time and presents Lucina earliest providing the player a bit of a prompt what to expect in terms of statistics and inheritance, which allows you to make decisions for the other children characters.

Since we now have two games to compare, one implementation is hamfisted tripping over itself by tying the mechanic too much to a major plot point which almost guarantees first time players are going to miss out and either end up with unintended results, lost items and replacement children, ontop of that there are pairings that are better than others and ones that can cripple certain children. The other has a plot point that you don't like but allows more clarity and choice, it's a better mechanic.

For what reasons was Fire Emblem IV's generation system even considered ideal in the first place anyway? Just because of the plot? Useful information for decision making is hidden from the player.

Edited June 4, 2014 by arvilino

[The Geek]

Man, if you were forced to recruit all the kids at the end of Chapter 13 that would suck.

[Czar_Yoshi]

This page is huge.

Since we now have two games to compare, one implementation is hamfisted tripping over itself by tying the mechanic too much to a major plot point which almost guarantees first time players are going to miss out and either end up with unintended results, lost items and replacement children, ontop of that there are pairings that are better than others and ones that can cripple certain children. The other has a plot point that you don't like but allows more clarity and choice, it's a better mechanic.

OK, so FE4 drags down gameplay at the expense of the plot, and FE13 drags down the plot at the expense of gameplay? This shouldn't be a problem, if more time were put into the story they could have made it work with Awakening's inheritance mechanic. As long as it doesn't involve recruiting the children all at once to advance the game.

[Jotari]

Fire Emblem 4's generation mechanic is pretty unintuitive and without prior knowledge of what is the biggest spoiler of the first half of the game(perhaps the whole game depending on viewpoints) it will completely throw any player for a loop. They'd literally have to know Sigurd and co. are going to die in chapter 5. How exactly is a mechanic better realized when it's all about planning for something the player can never actually predict without being spoiled?

On the otherhand we have Awakenings system, If we break it down gameplay-wise it introduces them one at a time and presents Lucina earliest providing the player a bit of a prompt what to expect in terms of statistics and inheritance, which allows you to make decisions for the other children characters.

Since we now have two games to compare, one implementation is hamfisted tripping over itself by tying the mechanic too much to a major plot point which almost guarantees first time players are going to miss out and either end up with unintended results, lost items and replacement children, ontop of that there are pairings that are better than others and ones that can cripple certain children. The other has a plot point that you don't like but allows more clarity and choice, it's a better mechanic.

For what reasons was Fire Emblem IV's generation system even considered ideal in the first place anyway? Just because of the plot? Useful information for decision making is hidden from the player.

In all fairness to Genealogy, the name of the game does suggest multiple generations are involved and the villagers do talk about how the inheritance mechanic works. Many first time players might be confused as to why the villagers are babbling on about inherit traits but it doesn't leave the player completely in the dark.

[Constable Reggie]

Are there any scanlations of Geneology's manual? I would be surprised if there weren't any mention of the mechanic there.

[Baldrick]

There's a scan of it on the site. It's all in Japanese, but Seliph has a character profile and Junior Lord is on the list, so players would be aware that eventually you'll play as Sigurd's son. With the hints about inheritance one would get a rough idea about the mechanics of the transition. The nature of the transition is likely not revealed, but that's fair enough.

[arvilino]

There's a scan of it on the site. It's all in Japanese, but Seliph has a character profile and Junior Lord is on the list, so players would be aware that eventually you'll play as Sigurd's son. With the hints about inheritance one would get a rough idea about the mechanics of the transition. The nature of the transition is likely not revealed, but that's fair enough.

I had a check and there's only one prompt that talks about the mechanics suggesting the player will actually be dealing with it and that's in chapter 5

Villager:

Children inherit certain traits from their parents.

More often than not, boys inherit their father's traits and girls inherit their mother's.

But unless the original version is worded differently than the translation the only hint you get is that boys mostly inherit their father's "traits" and girls mostly their mother's. Though in regards to how it functions "traits"(stats,growths, personal skills and most holy blood) are shared inheritance based on both parents. Only Gold and items consistently match the villagers description of inheritance and those aren't traits.

The rest, mostly in chapter 4 just refer to the pure holy blood without any real hint about the 2nd generation, the descriptions could be referring to characters with Holy Blood which you already have. in general such as Sigurd, Lewyn, Briggid and Claude.

The manual might have an explanation(though would it refer to chapter 6 specifically?) but the game itself doesn't adequately provide the information itself and(provided the original text isn't better explained) the one piece of info you get is actually misleading.

[dondon151]

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.

the award for good map design goes to FE12. you cannot possibly defend these two aspects of FE13 when literally every other entry in the series does them better (well, almost every other entry). have you considered why it is that no one cares about map design in FE13? map design is inconsequential when there exist mechanics that trivialize its importance.

i've heard the argument that every FE game is guilty of having trivializing mechanics, therefore FE13 shouldn't be faulted for being egregious in this respect. in fact, interceptor made a similar statement earlier. this is ignoring the magnitude of and the interactions between these design flaws. there may have been juggernaut Jagens, forging, and reclassing in past games, but the ease with which FE13 was optimized really shows that there was zero concern about balancing the mechanics.

it doesn't bother me at all that people like this game, but it is popular for about the same reason that the twilight series is popular; that is, it appeals to everything that a consumer wants, without having much substance. i'm sure that most of the readers of stephenie meyer would not think of reading, say, martin amis. that doesn't mean that she's a better writer than martin amis. so you may say that IS pulled out all the stops with FE13 and made a supremely fun game, and i will agree with that statement, but i will not allow the claim that FE13 has good gameplay to go unchallenged.

The manual might have an explanation(though would it refer to chapter 6 specifically?) but the game itself doesn't adequately provide the information itself and(provided the original text isn't better explained) the one piece of info you get is actually misleading.

you cannot seriously blame a game (an old one, at that) for not providing adequate information about every single mechanic. pokemon never provided adequate information about its type matchup chart, and it never told you how damage was calculated, or when each pokemon evolved, if it did at all.

Edited June 4, 2014 by dondon151

[arvilino]

you cannot seriously blame a game (an old one, at that) for not providing adequate information about every single mechanic. pokemon never provided adequate information about its type matchup chart, and it never told you how damage was calculated, or when each pokemon evolved, if it did at all.

This is a mechanic that surrounds the vast majority of the cast you have to use for the second half of the game, it would be like if Pokémon never explained the basics capturing pokémon properly and just said "Pokémon are easier to capture in certain situations depending on their stats".

Much like how the female children in Fire Emblem Genealogy inherit their traits from their mother and by that I mean their fathers personal skills, stats, growths and holy blood effect them.

Edited June 4, 2014 by arvilino

[Skynstein]

pokemon never provided adequate information about its type matchup chart

That's not true. The chart was in RBY's manual.

Plus I believe there are plenty of information about how things work in Pokémon in recent games because there are plentiful NPCs who tell you basic stuff. And Stadium 2 had Earl's Pokémon Academy which taught you the basics of battling back in the GSC days.

[dondon151]

This is a mechanic that surrounds the vast majority of the cast you have to use for the second half of the game, it would be like if Pokémon never explained the basics capturing pokémon properly and just said "Pokémon are easier to capture in certain situations depending on their stats".

the irony in this statement is that pokemon never did explain the basics of capturing pokemon properly (depends on your definition of the word); the two pieces of information that it gave you were: weaken an enemy pokemon, and capture with a poke ball.

in fact, the chapter 5 villager's concise statement also gives the player two pieces of information, which describes how base stats, growth rates, holy blood, and equipment are usually inherited.

That's not true. The chart was in RBY's manual.

i stand corrected. a better example: RBY never told you what attacks did outside of the few moves listed in the manual.

Edited June 5, 2014 by dondon151

[arvilino]

the irony in this statement is that pokemon never did explain the basics of capturing pokemon properly (depends on your definition of the word); the two pieces of information that it gave you were: weaken an enemy pokemon, and capture with a poke ball.

in fact, the chapter 5 villager's concise statement also gives the player two pieces of information, which describes how base stats, growth rates, holy blood, and equipment are usually inherited.

Pokémon explained capturing them enough for the player to be able to successfully increase their chances of capture any Pokémon in game from your first attempt. You don't need to know the algorithm to use the system correctly.

Fire Emblem Genealogy doesn't allow you to successfully predict what you're going to achieve, equipment is not a trait and the mechanics behind inheriting equipment/losing goes unexplained as well. You do need to understand exactly whats going on to prevent losing all of a parents equipment or having items Valkyrie staff on a character who can't use it or understanding that both children gain the personal skills. It's a more complex mechanic than capturing a Pokémon(especially since you get multiple shots for Pokémon, whereas children in FE4 is ultimately decided at the end of chapter 5) therefore it needs more than some slapdash one liner during chapter 5.

Edited June 5, 2014 by arvilino

[dondon151]

Pokémon explained capturing them enough for the player to be able to successfully increase their chances of capture any Pokémon in game from your first attempt. You don't need to know the algorithm to use the system correctly.

FE4 explained inheritance enough for the player to be able to successfully increase their chances of knowing how they're passing down base stats, growth rates, equipment, and holy blood. if you're going to apply this metric, at least be consistent in doing so! (the metric is also trivial; any bit of true information should lead to a better prediction).

Fire Emblem Genealogy doesn't allow you to successfully predict what you're going to achieve, equipment is not a trait and the mechanics behind inheriting equipment/losing goes unexplained as well.

this is complete pedantry. there are two issues here: you're reading an english translation from japanese, and equipment can be interpreted as a trait within the context of the game. as for your objection of "successful prediction," is it not true that a player who has read that village conversation is more likely to predict how some aspects of inheritance work?

[RJWalker]

Genealogy not explaining the mechanics might be true but you don't suffer from not getting the children characters since there are replacements. Now if Pokemon didn't explain what Pokeballs do at all, there's a problem.

[arvilino]

FE4 explained inheritance enough for the player to be able to successfully increase their chances of knowing how they're passing down base stats, growth rates, equipment, and holy blood. if you're going to apply this metric, at least be consistent in doing so! (the metric is also trivial; any bit of true information should lead to a better prediction).

this is complete pedantry. there are two issues here: you're reading an english translation from japanese, and equipment can be interpreted as a trait within the context of the game. as for your objection of "successful prediction," is it not true that a player who has read that village conversation is more likely to predict how some aspects of inheritance work?

I'd sooner think they'd get things wrong as the most immediately apparent "traits" are skills. No one is going to read that and go "oh well they must mean growth rates, starting stats and gold".

Face it the most important mechanic of the game which determines the bulk of your forces down the line shouldn't be explained in a single(optional at that) piece of text at one of the latest possible moments with no prior demonstration and you know it.

Edited June 5, 2014 by arvilino

[The Geek]

This thread has convinced me that everyone who dislikes Awakening is an elitist.

[Skynstein]

This thread has convinced me that everyone who dislikes Awakening is an elitist.

Where is the "like" button when I want it...

[dondon151]

Face it the most important mechanic of the game which determines the bulk of your forces down the line shouldn't be explained in a single(optional at that) piece of text at one of the latest possible moments with no prior demonstration and you know it.

this is the kind of bullying that one resorts to when he becomes aware that his argument has no substance.

in the time of the SNES, there were many games that explained far more important mechanics with far less detail. this is a restatement of my original argument, which you have neglected to address. ranger jack walker makes a great point above: even if you completely fucked up your pairings, you are guaranteed to have serlis and leif in addition to a number of fixed characters, plus there are substitutes, and chances are you made at least one pairing successfully even with limited information.

This thread has convinced me that everyone who dislikes Awakening is an elitist.

lol how about you take this over to the topic in SD and we talk about what an "elitist" really is?

Edited June 5, 2014 by dondon151

[XeKr]

the award for good map design goes to FE12. you cannot possibly defend these two aspects of FE13 when literally every other entry in the series does them better (well, almost every other entry). have you considered why it is that no one cares about map design in FE13? map design is inconsequential when there exist mechanics that trivialize its importance.

i've heard the argument that every FE game is guilty of having trivializing mechanics, therefore FE13 shouldn't be faulted for being egregious in this respect. in fact, interceptor made a similar statement earlier. this is ignoring the magnitude of and the interactions between these design flaws. there may have been juggernaut Jagens, forging, and reclassing in past games, but the ease with which FE13 was optimized really shows that there was zero concern about balancing the mechanics.

it doesn't bother me at all that people like this game, but it is popular for about the same reason that the twilight series is popular; that is, it appeals to everything that a consumer wants, without having much substance. i'm sure that most of the readers of stephenie meyer would not think of reading, say, martin amis. that doesn't mean that she's a better writer than martin amis. so you may say that IS pulled out all the stops with FE13 and made a supremely fun game, and i will agree with that statement, but i will not allow the claim that FE13 has good gameplay to go unchallenged.

Feel free to lecture us on objectively good tactical gameplay (I think I know the arguments, but others might find them enlightening) and the literary/artistic value of Fire Emblem (you did make the analogy, no?).

I don’t claim to know the intentions of others, but I’ll speculate FE13 was made primarily for entertainment and for profit, and was bought by consumers for entertainment/fun. I’m sure there’s a fair sense of “good design” in the success there (sales, critical/professional/industry/casual opinions, word of mouth/internet, even wrt to the ratio of hours played/actual cost, compared to other media forms.)

(And what exactly are you referring to with “ease of being optimized”)

Also, no one (afaik) claims to discount broken mechanics, the issue is typically brought up when people claim that previous games were exempt.

Edited June 5, 2014 by XeKr

[Jotari]

Still having such limited options for the Valkyrie Staff was a bad decision in my opinion. I've had two play throughs of the game and missed the Valkyrie Staff twice in the second generation. Once because I paired Claude with Tinny (you'd think the character who's introduced with Claude and has an obsession with him would have a kid who can actually make use of the staff) and once because Slyvia and Ferry hooked up with someone else (despite me fully intended to pair Slyvia and Claude). Honestly I'd rather the stave wasn't in the game. It's pretty much a plot hole (no one felt like asking Claude or his kid to ressurect Sigurd or Kurt?) that cheapens the meaning of permanent death in Fire Emblem. At least the Aum staff could only be used once by and you get it at the very end of the last chapter and even in universe it's treated as something special.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Jotari

[Baldrick]

one implementation almost guarantees first time players are going to miss out and either end up with unintended results, lost items and replacement children, ontop of that there are pairings that are better than others and ones that can cripple certain children.

Most of the best units in gen 2 are independent of pairings or are the result of auto-pairs, so no matter how much you screw up your team should be easily able to handle things. As long as you keep everyone alive and take note of any talk conversations, everyone should be paired with a unit fairly good for them. Most of the terrible pairings you have to understand the system to get and are fairly cracky, so you're unlikely to come across them by accident.

Fire Emblem 4's generation mechanic is pretty unintuitive and without prior knowledge of what is the biggest spoiler of the first half of the game(perhaps the whole game depending on viewpoints) it will completely throw any player for a loop. They'd literally have to know Sigurd and co. are going to die in chapter 5. How exactly is a mechanic better realized when it's all about planning for something the player can never actually predict without being spoiled?

I haven't played Awakening through, so I don't know, but did Awakening explain the generation system? I remember Masked Marth being quite a mystery, so unless there are hints, it should be possible to reach Lucina's reveal in the game without even realising there is a generation system. At least Genealogy players would be aware of that!

On the otherhand we have Awakenings system, If we break it down gameplay-wise it introduces them one at a time and presents Lucina earliest providing the player a bit of a prompt what to expect in terms of statistics and inheritance, which allows you to make decisions for the other children characters.

Lucina joins in chapter 13. Is it impossible to pair anyone other than Chrom before that? If it is possible, you can "screw up" your pairings in this game as well. (read: get a sub-optimal pairing! NOOOOOOOOOO) Enough information is hidden that it's practically impossible to have optimised pairings on your first playthrough, which seems to be what you want from a generation system.

For what reasons was Fire Emblem IV's generation system even considered ideal in the first place anyway? Just because of the plot? Useful information for decision making is hidden from the player.

Believe it or not, some people like a good plot! I don't think anyone would argue the system was perfect, but it was well-integrated into the plot and can be optimised once you know how it works.

[Jotari]

Really getting bad pairings is no different from investing time into a character with bad growths or limited availability, which, incidentally, no game has actually explained to the player.

[The Geek]

Feel free to lecture us on objectively good tactical gameplay (I think I know the arguments, but others might find them enlightening) and the literary/artistic value of Fire Emblem (you did make the analogy, no?).

I don’t claim to know the intentions of others, but I’ll speculate FE13 was made primarily for entertainment and for profit, and was bought by consumers for entertainment/fun. I’m sure there’s a fair sense of “good design” in the success there (sales, critical/professional/industry/casual opinions, word of mouth/internet, even wrt to the ratio of hours played/actual cost, compared to other media forms.)

(And what exactly are you referring to with “ease of being optimized”)

Also, no one (afaik) claims to discount broken mechanics, the issue is typically brought up when people claim that previous games were exempt.

This. All of this.

Also @dondon. You claim that Awakening isn't as good because it was made to have a wide appeal. If that isn't elitist, then clearly the word means something different than what I think it does.

[Baldrick]

I forgot about the Valkyrie staff. That is quite bad, but I don't think it's so great that you'll feel the loss.