FE: if sold as two (three) separate versions in Japan

[arvilino]

@arvilino: Your argument is poor. The promotional material tells me nothing about the values and goals of either faction. I cannot make an informed choice about which side I want to support without knowing their ideals and objectives.

Now, if it turns out that FE:if has no real depth to its choice system- which I'm beginning to suspect- and the narrative between Nohr and Hoshido really is as simple as Bad Guys versus Good Guys, then you'd be correct and a branching path within the game wouldn't be as necessary.

Well I'll repeat the information about the two sides along with the description:

Two nations stand on the crossroads of war and peace: the peace-loving Hoshido and the glory-seeking Nohr. You were born into Hoshidan royalty, but raised by Nohrian royalty. As the conflict reaches a climax, a grave decision must be made. Will you choose to fight for the land of your birth or the land that raised you?

1)One side is the Peaceful Hoshido in a campaign involving the player protecting their country from the Nohr invasion, world map and skirmishes, the main characters true family.

2)Glory seeking Nohr, involving the player revolutionising the country from inside with a more complex plot, challenging campaign with no world map and limited resources, the country where the main character was raised and is loyal to.

The advertising provides about as much of a description about the campaigns as most Fire Emblem games do, a brief description of factions/countries, what the story centres around(but without mentioning the values of goals), and what of campaign to expect in regards to some of the gameplay(world map). Any more, especially a description of goals could be very well giving away plot spoilers.

If that isn't enough to make an informed decision when buying one separate game most people would have never bought previous Fire Emblem games where you don't even have a choice between two versions.

Edited April 4, 2015 by arvilino

[Knight]

Well I'll repeat the information about the two sides along with the description:

Two nations stand on the crossroads of war and peace: the peace-loving Hoshido and the glory-seeking Nohr. You were born into Hoshidan royalty, but raised by Nohrian royalty. As the conflict reaches a climax, a grave decision must be made. Will you choose to fight for the land of your birth or the land that raised you?

1)One side is the Peaceful Hoshido in a campaign involving the player protecting their country from the Nohr invasion, world map and skirmishes, the main characters true family.

2)Glory seeking Nohr, involving the player revolutionising the country from inside with a more complex plot, challenging campaign with no world map and limited resources, the country where the main character was raised and is loyal to.

The advertising provides about as much of a description about the campaigns as most Fire Emblem games do, a brief description of factions/countries, what the story centres around(but without mentioning the values of goals), and what of campaign to expect in regards to some of the gameplay(world map). Any more, especially a description of goals could be very well giving away plot spoilers.

If that isn't enough to make an informed decision when buying one separate game most people would have never bought previous Fire Emblem games where you don't even have a choice between two versions.

All that says for me (as an average consumer) is that the Nohr campaign has less content. As a veteran Fire Emblem player, I can appreciate a game that doesn't have a world map and grinding. It doesn't say anything about the characters you'll meet, and most importantly, the differences in gameplay and what you'll encounter.

That isn't my gripe though, I'm just tired of developers creating more content to a game and selling it as separate parts, cutting what should be one game into two. I get that some developers want to be paid for their extra hard work, but it seems with the modern game industry, the ratio of "what is actually on the cartridge" versus "what is split off into separate chunks" is beginning to even out and developers can get excused for putting out smaller games. In my opinion, DLC should only be stuff that the developers make after the whole game is finished, or if it's made during, it's something separate from the main game. For example; DLC in Bethesda games (Skyrim, Fallout), the games are already loaded with content and the DLC is something separate from the main game's story that can be completely ignored if wanted. The only thing to attract players to the DLC of Bethesda games is new stuff to find for people who've already completed the main game. The problem with these separate stories in FE: if is that the game will feel incomplete, because you only know one side of the same, main story. There's no new content in FE if's other half, just another half of the same, or very similar, story that share the same characters as the other. It forces you to buy another half of the game, not because you wanted more, but you feel you deserve more.

This business model is (somewhat) justifiable in games like Pokemon because having two versions is meant to encourage interaction and, theoretically, through trading Pokemon and items, you should have access to both games' content for free through the social features.

[arvilino]

All that says for me (as an average consumer) is that the Nohr campaign has less content. As a veteran Fire Emblem player, I can appreciate a game that doesn't have a world map and grinding. It doesn't say anything about the characters you'll meet, and most importantly, the differences in gameplay and what you'll encounter.

That isn't my gripe though, I'm just tired of developers creating more content to a game and selling it as separate parts, cutting what should be one game into two. I get that some developers want to be paid for their extra hard work, but it seems with the modern game industry, the ratio of "what is actually on the cartridge" versus "what is split off into separate chunks" is beginning to even out and developers can get excused for putting out smaller games. In my opinion, DLC should only be stuff that the developers make after the whole game is finished, or if it's made during, it's something separate from the main game. For example; DLC in Bethesda games (Skyrim, Fallout), the games are already loaded with content and the DLC is something separate from the main game's story that can be completely ignored if wanted. The only thing to attract players to the DLC of Bethesda games is new stuff to find for people who've already completed the main game. The problem with these separate stories in FE: if is that the game will feel incomplete, because you only know one side of the same, main story. There's no new content in FE if's other half, just another half of the same, or very similar, story that share the same characters as the other. It forces you to buy another half of the game, not because you wanted more, but you feel you deserve more.

This business model is (somewhat) justifiable in games like Pokemon because having two versions is meant to encourage interaction and, theoretically, through trading Pokemon and items, you should have access to both games' content for free through the social features.

I'd understand your point if one of the campaigns directly followed the other like if Hoshido was the first half of the game and Nohr was the 2nd half or conclusion. But all three are parallel and from what is known/said each one is a drastically different story with the characters and the outcome being different.

The Nohr side has an emphasis on solving internal Nohr conflict and Hoshido emphasizes protecting itself from a Nohr invasion. Two related stories but not the same story. Do you expect the Hoshido campaign to involve the elements of the internal Nohr conflict especially when it's supposed to have a simpler story?

[Knight]

They are likely going to be very different, but they have many of the same characters involved, same setting, but yes, I admit, the two stories may be radically different. However, from a gameplay perspective, they will likely be much the same, same classes, same gameplay elements, possibly sharing the some of the same recruits and maps, the only difference really is map or no map. You see, there isn't enough different about them gameplay-wise (at least from what we can tell so far) to justify having different games, and not enough emphasis on social features to justify having them so similar. Most other games with two campaigns would not split up the game and sell it as two parts, heck, the main selling point for most games with multiple campaigns is that after you've played the game once for one story, you go back to play the other, you're satisfied knowing that the whole story is available to you and you can collect it through subsequent playthroughs. The problem with this game is that there is $20 dollars between you and that other story.

[Ownagepuffs]

I honestly believe that whilst giving more purchasing options seems like a consumer friendly approach on paper, the actual way this comes off to many people strikes the wrong chord. I am perfectly willing to pay more for this game, as I've outlined earlier in this thread, because I do recognise that game development costs have risen over the years, and I also am inclined to believe that this game is getting a lot of budget thrown at it (it's pretty apparent by the trailer alone IMO). But it feels too crude to attempt to split the games up as such and sell them piecemeal, a very unelegant solution that compromises the game's overall value and vision. Is the game being acutely designed around the prospect of some players never experiencing one half of the game? Or are they essentially assuming that the player will cave to get a complete experience? Will each release feel complete by itself?

Whilst I'm happy that they're selling a bundled package as a limited edition, to me that indicates that they are intended to be together. The fact the data for both routes is on the download version also supports this, as does the emphasis on choosing your path. As a result, I think it will be detrimental to the experience to separate them. Whilst the game is not out yet, and I can't judge just how different the two games actually are going to be, or how much content each game will have unique from the other, I am concerned about compromise being made here for the sake of being able to sell a game at a regular price. I can't help but imagine paying to see a film but only seeing half of the total scenes in the film, all from one protagonist's perspective, when the entire thing is supposed to be viewed together. It feels like a sellout...even if the intent is not malicious.

How do you always to pull out well written walls of text?

[ckc22]

3 games for the price of 2 is a cash grab?

It is impossible to fully experience what was originally promised without buying two games = cashgrab.

Also I haven't seen anywhere where it has been stated that the dlc path is equal in size to a full game apparently that's only true about each version (which really sounds like industry speak in the first place).

[Carter]

Err... I'm not really sure I like this idea. Cover Art for both is beautiful though.

I thought buying the game was it. Y'know, once you buy it, you could access both versions with different save files. I didn't think you'd have purchase the other version separately. Though it's a good thing we get a discount on buying the other path.

It looks like I'll be getting the digital version, as it might be difficult for me to choose right on the spot. I can't stay at GameStop for 10 hours, but I can leave my 3DS in sleep mode for that long! But right now I'm thinking of starting with the Hoshido or "White Kingdom" side.

[arvilino]

It is impossible to fully experience what was originally promised without buying two games = cashgrab.

Also I haven't seen anywhere where it has been stated that the dlc path is equal in size to a full game apparently that's only true about each version (which really sounds like industry speak in the first place).

I think it's very likely that they'll be the length of a regular Fire Emblem. If each campaign was shorter than 22-30 chapters long there simply wouldn't be enough time to develop your party in a typical Fire Emblem fashion, especially during the Nohr campaign. If each route was half a regular Fire Emblem you'd finish each campaign very shortly after getting access to promotions and would make each campaign pretty unsatisfying.(They would end before you really got to level your party, gain supports,etc.)

If both games were on the cartridge and they both concluded after chapter 11 or 15 you'd have a Fire Emblem game with the expected number of chapters but split into two campaigns that are too short.

Edited April 4, 2015 by arvilino

[ckc22]

Though it's a good thing we get a discount on buying the other path.

This is like thanking someone for using lube before they **** you.

I think it's very likely that they'll be the length of a regular Fire Emblem. If each campaign was shorter than 22-30 chapters long there simply wouldn't be enough time to develop your party in a typical Fire Emblem fashion, especially during the Nohr campaign. If each route was half a regular Fire Emblem you'd finish each campaign very shortly after getting access to promotions and would make each campaign pretty unsatisfying.(They would end before you really got to level your party, gain supports,etc.)

If both games were on the cartridge and they both concluded after chapter 11 or 15 you'd have a Fire Emblem game with the expected number of chapters but split into two campaigns that are too short.

This is all blatant speculation and I don't have a response. If you've bought more than 1 game ever you know that developers chronically overestimate content/hours.

[Eselred]

Unless each cartridge is only $15-$20 (doubtful), this is nothing but a blatant cash-grab by Nintendo.

Let's use this (very likely) scenario: Nintendo gives you a "discount" and each cartridge is "only" $30. If you want the entire experience, it will cost you $60. The standard 3DS game price is $40. That's not counting DLC costs, and they've already revealed at least a 3rd campaign that will be DLC. This gets even more ridiculous if each cartridge is full price.

This is an indefensible and very consumer unfriendly decision by Nintendo. Let's hope it gets corrected before it comes stateside. I have a buddy who played Awakening as his first Fire Emblem game and he loves it. However, once I described the new Fire Emblem to him, he just laughed and said "no thanks".

This greedy decision will kill any positive momentum gained by Awakening.

[Knight]

Unless each cartridge is only $15-$20 (doubtful), this is nothing but a blatant cash-grab by Nintendo.

Let's use this (very likely) scenario: Nintendo gives you a "discount" and each cartridge is "only" $30. If you want the entire experience, it will cost you $60. The standard 3DS game price is $40. That's not counting DLC costs, and they've already revealed at least a 3rd campaign that will be DLC. This gets even more ridiculous if each cartridge is full price.

This is an indefensible and very consumer unfriendly decision by Nintendo. Let's hope it gets corrected before it comes stateside. I have a buddy who played Awakening as his first Fire Emblem game and he loves it. However, once I described the new Fire Emblem to him, he just laughed and said "no thanks".

This greedy decision will kill any positive momentum gained by Awakening.

The other story can be bought as DLC on the same cart for around $15-$20 (estimation based on the Japanese version). Still too much of you ask me, it should be free.

[LuxSpes]

I feel ambivalent about this.

On one hand, if every versions of the game are as individually as long as Awakening, why should we expect to get 2 games (potentially 3) for the price of one?. If IS really broke the bank trying to make 2-3 complete game and release them at the same time, is it really so wrong for them to try get back some of the money they invested.

On the other hand, a game like Xenoblade chronicles which is massive in scale and in length is sold at a normal price and was able to be fitted on a new 3DS cartridge, meaning it wouldn't have been impossible to get the 3 paths in one game (and unless you get download codes with the Premium version, it seems like at least 2 paths can fit on one cartridge). And unless there are more choices in the individual paths, splitting the games kinda puts a damper on the the whole 'choose your path' thing that was pushed a lot in these trailers.

I guess we'll have to wait for more info to see how complete each individual paths are and how the game will be localized (which is why I'm glad for the long localization).

[Emeraldfox]

I'd be okay with this. Isn't the other route/game/whatever DLC for the other game?

[goodperson707]

So it splits at chapter 6 right?

So if its 25 chaoters plus the final like awakening. after the split' is a bit more that 75% of total game.

So you get an extra 75% of game for 40% of the price(going by Japanese prices for Dlc)

And if the third path has the same amount of content and you get 250% of game for the price of 180%.

And thats not including possibly different Gadien chapters.

Plus i like that each game seems to have its own style of story and gameplay,

So i don't see this as a moneygrab but of course we'll have to watch the game to see if the versions are unique enough for this to be worth it but i think it will.

[Skynstein]

When the Emmeryn choice and dual endings in Awakening essentially did nothing a lot of people here complained "what bullshit, why didn't they do branching paths?"... Now that IS actually gives them what they want, these people still complain!

3DS carts aren't very large. They have around 4GB of memory, but that's not a whole lot if you consider lots of large-scale games are exceeding 25GB nowadays and reaching 50GB. If they plan to release both routes in one cart in the West, they're going to need a bigger cart. DLC is a non-issue because it's stored in the SD card so it can be as large as they want, and SD cards have far higher capacity than 3DS carts.

It's funny because, whenever someone here brought the fact the split choices in Awakening were purely cosmetic, and criticized the game for it, I reminded them that a game with multiple branches is fairly complex and requires a lot more cart space than something more linear. No wonder they're releasing If as two carts.

That being said, FE isn't like Pokémon in which a lot of people get both versions despite them being barely different. The userbase for FE is a lot smaller in the West, and it's quite risky for Nintendo to do it. If this was on the Wii U, you'd probably see it in one disc...

EDIT: Ok, now that I read the summary, it seems to me not so good of a decision. For example, I was more interested in the Nohr branch, but it seems to be some sort of expert mode compared to Hoshido. It tells me that either side will have better storytelling and gameplay than the other. That's not so good IMO, because, if Nohr is the expert mode, chances are it'll have a more refined gameplay, and they're already promising more complex story for Nohr so I wonder if the games will have equal value, all things considered.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Cerberus87

[VincentASM]

I don't think it's a cash-grab, but Nintendo did a bad job of (not) explaining how the different versions work.

Chances are when the game comes out in the West, there will probably only be one version anyway, because FE isn't big enough in the West to warrant publishing separate versions.

But whether it's both campaigns or just one campaign and then you're locked out of the other (until you buy it as DLC), I couldn't guess.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter if both campaigns could fit in one cart. You could fit 100 GBA campaigns in one cart, but what matters is how the game was designed and budgeted. Clearly IS considers the individual campaigns as enough content for separate versions.

[Rapier]

It's funny because, whenever someone here brought the fact the split choices in Awakening were purely cosmetic, and criticized the game for it, I reminded them that a game with multiple branches is fairly complex and requires a lot more cart space than something more linear. No wonder they're releasing If as two carts.

When they complained about FE: A's linearity and fake choices, they did not mean they wanted a new game worth of choices and branched endings. I doubt it would take much space for IS to add another ending to FE: A, or to change bits of the dialogue in the case Emmeryn survived. Actually, IS approached the space issue with far too much care.

I agree with you though, it is better to have two games where one side is as well explored as it should be, than cut down both paths, make them shorter and boring, and declare the job's done. Even if I have to pay for both games, it is better if both amount to the same size as Radiant Dawn chapter and character wise.

[ClevelandSteve]

They could always have two carts but sell them together in the same case in the west. I mean, it would be kind of like back in the day when huge games (generally RPGs) usually came on multiple disks. Any money they would lose by doing this would be made up for by the fact that they would sell way more copies this way. They could even justify charging slightly more than a typical 3DS game (i.e. possibly around $50) with the two carts thing without upsetting too many people. Of course, Nintendo has a habit of making downright baffling business decisions, so I would not put it past them to release both versions as separate games for at or near the price of a regular 3DS game and thus kill the enthusiasm for Fire Emblem in the west that Awakening created.

[BlueLore]

When the Emmeryn choice and dual endings in Awakening essentially did nothing a lot of people here complained "what bullshit, why didn't they do branching paths?"... Now that IS actually gives them what they want, these people still complain!

3DS carts aren't very large. They have around 4GB of memory, but that's not a whole lot if you consider lots of large-scale games are exceeding 25GB nowadays and reaching 50GB. If they plan to release both routes in one cart in the West, they're going to need a bigger cart. DLC is a non-issue because it's stored in the SD card so it can be as large as they want, and SD cards have far higher capacity than 3DS carts.

The thing is that its not like the cartridge is too small for both games.

There will be a special edition in japan that features both versions on one cartridge,so there is no problem when it comes to space.

This also implies that when you buy the game,you actually buy both versions and the other one is simply locked(this is what more or less happens when you buy the digital version,since it will initially offer you the choice of both,but then lock you out of your choice afterwards)

Edited April 4, 2015 by BlueLore

[Ownagepuffs]

Xenoblade 3DS is only possible on the new 3DS. It is probably multi cartridge in order to keep it available for all 3DS versions.

[franknguyen]

Nintendo knows that fire emblem game isn't a well known , received game in the West .Doing things like this will kill them . I wander around all the nintendo sites and almost see complaints about this spliting sh*t. :

" You buy a game , play to chapter 6 and make a choice : choose hoshido or Nohr for the rest of game . The other path will be locked up until you spend money buying it . "

What a point of choosing here ? it's like you have a choice to choose which game to "buy" than play to get another ending ? OH god. Nintendo .

Edited April 4, 2015 by franknguyen

[Ownagepuffs]

Lol guys Fire Emblem is a well known title now. It's always been well known because of Smash but now people are actually playing the games thanks to Awakening.

[Ambulz]

But it's not Pokemon.

[franknguyen]

Lol guys Fire Emblem is a well known title now. It's always been well known because of Smash but now people are actually playing the games thanks to Awakening.

Trust me , only RPG , TBS ,born 80s or 90s , anime - loving style,.... gamer will know Fire Emblem game .AH i forget another console gamer on PS or Xbox , well to be honest they don't know much .

[Raguna]

Lol guys Fire Emblem is a well known title now. It's always been well known because of Smash but now people are actually playing the games thanks to Awakening.

I agree Smash Melee led us to having Fire Emblem in the first place, but it didn't cause the significant push that came with Awakening later on due to Nintendo properly advertising and displaying the game and it's features. The fanbase grew astronomically with Awakening's release, but since they're new fans, some don't really have as much investment as some of the veterans do. Awakening was great, but who knows if they can really invest even further down to line with If?

This info certainly caused a split in a emerging series, and hopefully we'll do fine since c'mon we're just fearing the worst here and nothing has been officially confirmed on our side yet on this matter.

Edited April 5, 2015 by almi23