Should Casual Return?

[The Protagonist]

I have a strong moral objection to casual mode, but, considering the necessity of catering to casuals, the mode should probably exist. My solution is to lock story content and missions on casual mode, in order to ease players into the real game with the enticement of a more complete playthrough.

[shadowofchaos]

Also, in case Casual Mode makes a return, they should still punish players for it. The green mark of cowardness on Awakening's file select screen was pretty funny, hehe.

I hope this is a joke, because this the kind of crap that gives us FE fans the elitist reputation. The view that it's cowards that use a difficulty option that gives the player an easier time. To punish players simply because they are given more room to be reckless than your own standards of "true strategy".

I see nothing elitist about suggesting optional content that jars with design is better off excluded. Not a popular opinion here, but a reasonable perspective that's more prevalent within game design circles.

The reason I throw it around is the underlying motivation behind WHY they want casual out. The person I quoted earlier has the clear motivation of punishing newer players. Why remove an option when it clearly works for the newcomers? What is your motivation for removing it? There are reasons people have said in this thread of staying true to what FE is. Sure, tweak classic mode. But why is casual better off excluded? Justify that statement with more value than what I personally saw bringing in newcomers? Why would those alternative silly game modes be better? Would IS really make it more complicated for the user? And toxic newcomers exist who won't even try the old games because of the lack of the mode... but honestly, why are you people letting that get you hostile enough to demand that an ENTIRE GAME MODE be removed just to spite them? A mode I personally enjoy. Edited February 13, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Thor Odinson]

I see nothing wrong with keeping casual. Maybe some newcomers won't move to classic, but you know, that's their choice. Fuck off shaming people who wants to, ~oh no~ play a more relaxing version of a piece of entertainment. God forbid someone has fun instead of subscribing to some elitist notion of how a game is supposed to be played.

And some newcomers will eventually move to classic because they like challenge, but casual makes their learning curve easier. And being more welcoming/having options to suit more people's taste in difficulty of gameplay means more people will be willing to give it a shot which means FE sells better, make IS more money, and is more likely to get new games.

So as long as casual remains optional and I get my Lunatic/+ I'm totally cool with this.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Thor Odinson

[The Protagonist]

Players who don't share our experience or understanding of classic mode can be alienating. Many dedicated fans of some games have long hated casual gamers, seeing their influence on the identity of the game and their lack of respect for the same aspects of the game that the "hardcore" or older player might value. I'm not saying "casual" hatred is right, but it's pretty understandable.

Me, I want some way to bridge the gap and incentivize casual players to try and hopefully stick with classic mode. Beating the game on casual feels downright illegitimate to me, and it detracts from experiencing a critical aspect of the franchise. Casual players also, once given the easier option, tend to stay casual, and that divides the community between older and newer players. Bonus content on harder difficulties or for higher completion are not uncommon in games. Why not make that a means to broaden the horizons of casual players?

While demeaning players who use a casual file may seem like punishment to newer players, it also motivates people to try the harder modes. If nothing else, the hardest difficulty available for casual mode should not insinuate that it is difficult, because that's plain dishonest and teaches players to settle for easy gameplay. A player used to puny difficulty struggles to accommodate to a higher difficulty in a similar scenario, with habits and expectations already set.

The impatience of modern gamers has resulted in easier and easier games with more instant gratification. Look at the newest Pokemon, which did not even see fit to include the Battle Frontier due to the expectation that casuals wouldn't even bother with something remotely challenging.

Edited February 13, 2015 by The Protagonist

[feplus]

Why remove an option when it clearly works for the newcomers? What is your motivation for removing it?

I explained my thoughts on this in another FEif thread. In short: Fire Emblem is not designed with Casual Mode in mind, and including a bastardized version of the game in the name of accessibility strikes me as a poor trade-off.

Consider a new LP by your favorite band; the first half is the regular album, and the second half is a simplified version of that album. The instrumentation is less complex, the lyrics are cruder, and the melodies are made to feel more "pop." This direction is taken because the band wants to become more accessible.

Is the album better or worse for including that second half? It is optional, so you don't have to listen to it, but I think most would agree the album would be stronger if the group didn't compromise their vision to appeal to a wider audience.

Edited February 13, 2015 by feplus

[Vashiane]

God, y'all want more people to play the games and fret about the fanbase being too small to sustain the series and then you want the games to cater exclusively to your fucking elitist standards.

I think it should stay, because if you don't like the mode - guess what? You don't have to pick it!

[DeadGame]

I hope this is a joke, because this the kind of crap that gives us FE fans the elitist reputation. The view that it's cowards that use a difficulty option that gives the player an easier time. To punish players simply because they are given more room to be reckless than your own standards of "true strategy".

Wouldn't you know, it was a joke... just like awakenings difficulty. (That's something I do from time to time, messing around. I'm not actually meaning it most of the time, haha.)

I sure like to see the return of these marks on the file select screen, though.

[Knight Falchion]

I explained my thoughts on this in another FEif thread. In short: Fire Emblem is not designed with Casual Mode in mind, and including a bastardized version of the game in the name of accessibility strikes me as a poor trade-off.

Consider a new LP by your favorite band; the first half is the regular album, and the second half is a simplified version of that album. The instrumentation is less complex, the lyrics are cruder, and the melodies are made to feel more "pop." This direction is taken because the band wants to become more accessible.

Is the album better or worse for including that second half? It is optional, so you don't have to listen to it, but I think most would agree the album would be stronger if the group didn't compromise their vision to appeal to a wider audience.

The album comparison is a poor one, as a weaker half of the album does actually hurt the listening experience as a whole. Albums are meant to be listened to as a whole, whereas different FE modes are not all meant to played by everyone. If you take this argument to even the older FEs, then only the first 5 are infallible because all of the following FEs have different difficulty modes- some easier and more accessible, and others harder and more for experienced players/ those who want to challenge themselves.

FE has already been designed with different modal-based difficulty in mind, so including a new mode does absolutely nothing to affect the design.

Honestly, I don't get why everyone's treating accessibility like a bad thing, 'cause it's not. It hasn't actually "bastardized" FE, since I know that gameplay I love is still there even with Casual being present.

Players who don't share our experience or understanding of classic mode can be alienating. Many dedicated fans of some games have long hated casual gamers, seeing their influence on the identity of the game and their lack of respect for the same aspects of the game that the "hardcore" or older player might value. I'm not saying "casual" hatred is right, but it's pretty understandable.

Not, it's actually not understandable. It never is. Judging people based on their personal play styles/ skill levels is dumb and elitist- it can go both ways, but more often than not it is from long time fans and players. I also never found it alienating to talk about Fire Emblem with my friends who haven't played Classic; we could still talk about what we enjoyed about the gameplay and characters, and I could always offer them advice if they wanted to try Classic. It worked out a lot better than telling them that I thought their playthroughs were less valid than mine because I went Classic and they did not.

Hell, if a friend of mine who hasn't played FE yet asks me what game is best to start out on, I always recommend Awakening and SS. If they end up liking the series, then I'll tell them to try one of the more difficult entries.

There's more I want to say on the subject of Casual mode, but it's either already been said or can be better expressed by the other more articulate members of this site.

[Topazd]

Casual mode being a potential boon in the game's sales does not mean it is a good design choice. A bloated fanbase does not contribute much to restoring the series if its majority is going to draw the series away from it was intended to be.

It isn't a matter of keeping the difficulty unplayable to newcomers - the easiest modes are already quite accessible enough and most likely will be even easier in the future (even without Casual). Casual mode just isn't Fire Emblem, and therefore the direction the series is taking is worrisome.

[Irysa]

man I just wanna like copy paste posts I made earlier as responses but that would be such a pompous thing to do that I'm going to make a completely useless post wishing I didn't get buried in reactionaries.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Irysa

[feplus]

The album comparison is a poor one, as a weaker half of the album does actually hurt the listening experience as a whole. Albums are meant to be listened to as a whole, whereas different FE modes are not all meant to played by everyone. If you take this argument to even the older FEs, then only the first 5 are infallible because all of the following FEs have different difficulty modes- some easier and more accessible, and others harder and more for experienced players/ those who want to challenge themselves.

In the other thread, I made the analogy with books instead of albums (second half of the book is a simplified version of the first), but I suppose you'd argue that "Novels are meant to be read as a whole." I don't think this criticism works. Just as Casual Mode is meant for new players, the second half of the album is meant for new listeners and the second half of the novel is meant for new readers. This was the intention of our hypothetical artists.

I don't take issue with difficulty options. Having the game be slightly harder or slightly easier still jives with its design. Casual Mode removes an integral component of the design.

[Magical Glace]

I think there should be more Classic incentive.

This game will have many "choices" apparently... What if Casual mode is locked from them? It'll give more incentive for Ex-casual players to try classic for exclusive maps. Alternately, prevent Gaidens from appearing on Casual.

[shadowofchaos]

I don't take issue with difficulty options. Having the game be slightly harder or slightly easier still jives with its design. Casual Mode removes an integral component of the design.

It's... simply another option to the difficulty? Why is this so hard to accept?

Why are people so angry at the option. Why must permadeath be compulsory?

if its majority is going to draw the series away from it was intended to be.

*snip*

Casual mode just isn't Fire Emblem, and therefore the direction the series is taking is worrisome.

You do know that you can just go and look at it like it would have ended up.

Awakening being the last FE.

And just pretend the newer installments don't even exist.

There's a point where "you like the old ways and what FE is was".

And there's the point where "let's take out the game mode to restore the honorable and former glory of Fire Emblem" by TAKING OUT A GAME MODE.

Why can't you just... you know... ignore it when people "aren't playing it like FE is supposed to be played"?

At the root of all this, it's just veterans feeling alienated because something they love is being "corrupted".

It's just like the divide between the Smash community as a whole and Melee.

Edited February 13, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Refa]

To be honest, I didn't really have any issues with Casual Mode when I first waltzed in on this thread, but Irsya brought up some compelling points that made me think otherwise. Yes, you can argue that it made the game less accessible, but 1) people are drastically over inflating the importance Casual Mode brought to the sales of the series (don't get me wrong, I'd agree that a not insignificant portion of people were interested in Awakening because of it, but not like...that much idk how to express my thoughts here words are hard) and 2) there are ways of achieving the same end goal without it, which makes it feel pointless. Too lazy to give my extended thoughts, but basically I don't see the mode really adding anything to the experience besides a sense of security for people.

But FE isn't really catering to me as of late anyways, so whatever. Do what you want IS. *runs off into the sunset*

EDIT Also yeah, people seem to be correlating a design decision that increases sales/accessibility with a good one. FE could do a lot more to increase sales/accessibility (for example, including a Story Only mode for people who only wish to enjoy the plot and characters) yet it doesn't. Games can always become more accessible, and by the same virtue inaccessible to a group of players; developers don't need to cater to every audience imaginable, just as many audiences as possible without harming the integrity of the game's design. Honestly it annoys the fuck out of me when people speak about games in a purely business tone (such as talking about how the FE series NEEDS to sell well and perpetuate itself infinitely because money) when games are an artistic medium as well. Here's a very good video explaining my stance, actually (thanks people who are more eloquent than myself).

Edited February 13, 2015 by Refa

[Knight Falchion]

In the other thread, I made the analogy with books instead of albums (second half of the book is a simplified version of the first), but I suppose you'd argue that "Novels aren't meant to be read as a whole." I don't think this criticism works. Just as Casual Mode is meant for new players, the second half of the album is meant for new listeners and the second half of the novel is meant for new readers. This was the intention of our hypothetical artists.

I don't take issue with difficulty options. Having the game be slightly harder or slightly easier still jives with its design. Casual Mode removes an integral component of the design.

I wouldn't argue that novels aren't meant to be read as a whole, I would argue that books and albums are differently structured than games and really aren't comparable as they are completely different mediums, but whatever, my opinion here doesn't matter, and I'm done with the negativity of this discussion anyways.

Edited February 13, 2015 by The Legendary Falchion

[Gradivus.]

it isn't cowardice that makes a new player play casual mode. it's largely the presumption that no permadeath is better because permadeath tends to be unusual to FE beginners. most players who started before casual mode existed don't have any issues with classic mode. it doesn't necessary feel like a negative gameplay affection to those who started FE with it and didn't bother with CLA, but honestly there's much more strategy involved when permadeath is turned on. FE is a strategy game btw!

and I agree with feplus that elitist is a sort of overrated word and mainly used as an accusation against different ways of thinking.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Gradivus.

[Refa]

Overrated is an even dumber word anyways, so you're not really winning any points by using it.

Also just for the record, I don't have any issues with the actual people playing Casual Mode (fuck man, if they enjoy it, more power to them), it's just not a design decision that I feel benefits the game in any way (and would even argue radically changes the experience).

[shadowofchaos]

it isn't cowardice that makes a new player play casual mode. it's largely the presumption that no permadeath is better because permadeath tends to be unusual to FE beginners. most players who started before casual mode existed don't have any issues with classic mode.

and I agree with feplus that elitist is an overrated word and mainly used as an accusation against different ways of thinking.

You're calling the newcomers cowards for not starting the way you did. From your tone you're being a "guardian" to what FE is supposed to be.

If you were a game designer on IS's team, your failure is presuming that your vision is more important than what the player wants to do.

You're the one refusing to look at it from the other's perspective because you're already judging newcomers getting into the series via an optional game mode "contrary to the spirit of FE" is SHAMEFUL.

That is why the word "elitist" is thrown around. You're trying to make newcomers feel bad and stop playing if they can't handle it.

If it doesn't contribute to the design of FE, so what?

What is so offensive about people playing casual?

What if they don't want permadeath? Is that a shameful choice?

FE is a strategy game btw!

And if it was a game designed to punish people for not being strategic enough, FE WOULD BE DEAD BTW.

Edited February 13, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Refa]

And if it was a game designed to punish people for not being strategic enough, FE WOULD BE DEAD BTW.

I seriously don't see what's wrong with Fire Emblem dying. Lots of franchises die. Maybe IS can do new and interesting things that they couldn't under the constraints of the Fire Emblem name. The idea that franchises have to live for as long as possible is alien to me.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Refa

[shadowofchaos]

Some wise words from a veteran programmer:

I would practically never take an option away from a game in the interest of improving it, generally speaking.

When you actually somehow have too many options, it tends to be pretty obvious to the designers.

I again speak as a person who has friends who got into it because they ENJOY the game via Casual Mode.

I as well, enjoy Casual Mode.

Having the option to have challenge and leisure.

It is taking away my freedom to enjoy it the way I want, all in the name of making "FE be a more proper strategy game".

That is absolutely infuriating.

You can have your opinion that the design is crappy to have it.

But to suggest to take away my enjoyment of having options and it doesn't affect you in any way picking classic mode is you being selfish.

Edited February 13, 2015 by shadowofchaos

[Azz]

Everyone is saying FE is a strategy game when there are many other strategy games that do not have perma-death and are amazing and have extremely big fan bases.

I actually am really disappointed that this is the reaction.How does casual's inclusion affect you anyways?You don't have to play the mode.You are all basically saying newcomers should go find a new game cause FE is to good for you.That is just...uhhh....Honestly if a game has a mode to help newcomers to the franchise then so be it.Also as The Protagonist pointed out,people treating the with disrespect for not playing classic,that just,wow.Sorry for playing the way I want to.

Also locking people out of certain scenes/gameplay aspects is just wrong.A game's story and gameplay should be experienced fully on all difficulties IMO.That includes possible choices.

Now that is just me so yep.I don't want a fight or argument so I am just gonna stop posting and leave.

[Gradivus.]

@shadowofchaos

I'm pretty sure that I explicitely disagreed on the cowardice argument.

My point was that the newer players would be introduced into real FE strategy by not implementing CAS mode. There being a choice between "permadeath on" and "permadeath off" makes permadeath look like, intimidating to them because, as I said, they aren't used to it. In my opinion, it fails an important strategic aspect of FE. I'm not trying to make newcomers feel bad either or whatever you was implying; I became better at FE just by playing FE11 a lot and reading a bit in FE forums and watching FE youtube videos. After playing through FE11 quite some times I played FE12, I just chose Classic mode because I didn't see a reason to play CAS. I'm not judging anyone either, your post is pretty outrageously accusing me in that way. I was speaking out of the experience of having started FE with a CAS-less game. Normal Mode with permadeath is perfectly okay as an introduction to new players. Nobody starts off as a master (and I didn't either, even when I used master seals), but normal mode doesn't force you to. Classic mode doesn't force you to do so either.

Besides, we're not arguing what IS would do, we're arguing what we'd find better, so that quote from an experienced programmer is irrelevant.

Also, leaving out CAS grants more place for different data that would otherwise go into "retreat" quotes that appear instead of death quotes.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Gradivus.

[feplus]

If it doesn't contribute to the design of FE, so what?

And if it was a game designed to punish people for not being strategic enough, FE WOULD BE DEAD BTW.

You don't see why some people would be annoyed at the inclusion of a mode that defies design? It's optional, but the second half of our hypothetical book / album is optional; do those improve the experience, or not?

And Fire Emblem games that cater to strategy have sold plenty well. 7 sold almost a million, 8 almost 900K, and the Japan-only titles did fine. The Tellius games nearly killed the series, but those are unique cases (9 being on the rather poor-selling Gamecube, 10 being critically panned and a sequel to a game not as many people played).

Awakening brought the series newfound mainstream appeal, but it could have easily met its target sales number with more traditional design.

[omega zero]

If the devs wanted Casual mode to draw in more players AND wanted the new players to "graduate" to Classical, then why didn't they make any incentive to do so?

[The Geek]

I think the more pressing question in the argument for Casual is: "Why do you care?"