Return of Casual

[iavasechui]

I don't get why everyone is arguing about an optional feature. My input is that I hope it stays because a run on casual can be quite a nice stress reliever when you are having difficulties with your classic file on the highest difficulty.

[Refa]

It wouldn't have changed my decisions, it would have been more enjoyable to be able to move on. I learned my lesson; I didn't need to restart dozens of times to finally get I screwed up royally. If I remembered how I got through it I would share, but I don't, and if it was a particularly skillful strategy I think I would have remembered.

I think FE7's critical percentages are actually wrong, but I found that out later - it probably showed something closer to 10% but in actuality it was 2%, but I forget the actual equation. So I was taking more of a gamble than suggested.

Yeah, I can get that. I'd be really frustrated if I was stuck in a similar situation, mostly because it's an RPG and that time investment.

I thought FE7's critical percentages were perfectly fine, though? Maybe you're thinking about true hit, which is different (and in the player's favor).

[Dark Holy Elf]

The one thing that is somewhat weird about FE7's critical formula is it subtracts tactician stars from enemy crit rates, but it does show you the correct final percentage, to the best of my knowledge.

For what it's worth I actually like those low crit rates. They're something I enjoy having to watch for and planning around not risking (more on bosses, for whom it comes up more often... Thunder mages in Radiant Dawn, too). And personally when I see a potentially fatal 2% crit I hadn't planned for I freak out. I totally get that this probably isn't for everyone, though!

[Crysta]

That might have been it. I'm too lazy to check.

I did, after all, miss as well. I'm pretty sure I didn't just go send Oswin into a party of thunder mages on a whim because you learn how bad of an idea that is fairly early, so I was fully expecting to hit it and be done with it. Foolish me.

[falcoknights]

personally? i think casual should come back. i've never been a devoted fan of fe (i love the series, but i'm not devoted, i guess), and the last fire emblem game i played?

was a gba game.

i was horribly, horribly lost after the character customization screen. i nearly killed chrom and robin in premonition, i was that lost. that being said:

i created my first file with the idea of keeping it around until i got the hang of it, and lemme tell you, casual mode made getting the hang of everything so much easier. i would have probably not touched my copy of fire emblem ever again after the northroad map if i was playing classic- i was literally that lost. after chapter 10, i did delete it and go to a normal/classic file, because i got the hang of it. on my hard file though, it is casual, because i knew i would have trouble keeping virion alive before his promotion, and i didn't want to base my entire plan on keeping virion alive, because that's a really crappy plan to have for around a quarter of the game's plot (gaius would also have died, too, if i hadn't done casual. i can usually keep thieves alive no problem, but gaius... hoo boy. his myrmidon option is a blessing).

in short, absolutely it should come back! it was a great stepping stone for me when i was hopelessly lost in the muck, and as for the "fire emblem experience" arguments-- a lot of people play games for fun, and aren't strategy game oriented, but still want to play. i like professor layton, but for the love of god. it's so wordy that i get lost (even after working on it for 20 minutes) and have to turn to solutions for many of the puzzles to advance further. does that mean i'm not getting the "professor layton experience?" of course not! i still enjoy and solved a huge chunk on my own, and getting a boost/ leg up in some parts does not mean i didn't get the full experience, and so on.

on top of that, it's an optional feature that you don't have to pick. people arguing against it are literally complaining about an option they don't have to do ever if they don't want to. just because you don't want it doesn't mean other people don't, and a move that makes it accessible to more people like that is a good option- more people play it, boosting sales, amount of people to talk to about the game, and overall that leads to a richer fanbase, and higher sales means the likelyhood of more games coming out.

Edited April 25, 2015 by falcoknights

[eclipse]

(I'm really starting to get sick of people laying words in my mouth on these forums.) What made you think I'm trying to change these dweebs' minds, now?

I just said I'd like so see their butthurt faces, I wouldn't even think of wasting my time changing their minds, haha.

It's like console wars. People fighting over which machine is better, I'm just sitting back with my Nintendo systems and PC, enjoying the show.

I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding why you'd make that sort of statement. I was mistaken.

You're treading on extremely thin ice - being malicious to others is very much against the spirit of the Code of Conduct. If in doubt, PM me.

If I may counter, I was reffering more to the fact that grinding is actively encouraged in Awakening. I prefer the Arena's risk vs reward system to casual + reward as it provided tension. I will admit that the arena system is far from perfect, as you mentionedit was quite easily exploited. The reason I prefer The Arena to Awakening is that there were no consequences to dying and millions of DLC dedicated to it. This is just my opinion as to why I prefer the Arena to Awakening's system, but all be the first to admit both systems are very, very flawed.

This is mostly fair, but it still doesn't take into account FE8's overworld system, which is equally exploitable. If you don't like overworld systems as a whole, that's fine, but to lay the blame solely on Awakening's feet is wrong (now if you want to argue how Casual plus an overworld makes it unfair. . .that's another can of worms entirely, which I will counter with "Sticking to the first floor of the Tower of Valni").

(There it is again, by the way. What must one do to not be laid words in the mouth around here? This is how discussions explode.)

From your location, it looks like English isn't your first language (that's fine), but to get upset over how you're being interpreted, multiple times, indicates that the problem may be how you're expressing yourself.

I see, a classic instance of an elitism accusation being used as a conversation ender, this indeed is such serious business that we must dismiss different opinions. (this addresses DarkGold's post, fyi) Isn't elitism no more than a hyperbolic statement of personal opinion and aren't those who think they need to feel offended by it equally hyperbolic? (Yeah, oversimplified point, but it should make it clear enough) Those make discussions devolve into trading blows with people they disagree with, I think. The ones allegedly being elitists aren't the sole contributors.

Problem is, perceived elitism hurts the community as a whole. I don't stick around in places where I feel that I won't be welcome, and I'm positive I'm not the only person on this planet that has this mindset. Browse the Introduction subforum for a bit, to see what it's like for someone who's just joining up.

Fortunately, the unfriendly elitist opinions are in the minority. I see many more opinions either agreeing with the inclusion of Casual, or respectfully disagreeing with it.

Why?

So Cipher comes to America

More Fire Emblem games, and more people to talk to, both online and IRL! Why not use the game as a filter for "people I wouldn't mind talking to"? It takes a certain type of person to enjoy FE!

Okay for everyone jumping down my throat on the rape thing, I'm not comparing playing casual mode to rape. I'm saying that you can care about things even if they don't affect you, and used a powerful example to demonstrate how. The argument of "it doesn't affect you" is bogus as a result, we have individual values and preferences that reflect our values.

That wasn't powerful, that was tasteless. Please think about how you're perceived. I shook my head at your initial comment, but the lack of apology in this comment is really appalling. Rape's a very personal subject, and I know there's people on SF who are NOT comfortable about it.

I view Cysx's comments in a different light. A newcomer fanbase can be great, but what's to ensure migration from one thing to another. The Wii U ttempted in many regards to cater to a market that didn't accept it in the long run and it took the Big N a while to realize this. If FE14 decides to cater primarily to the casual audience, it will go one of 2 ways: It will be successful, or a failure. A new shifting marketplace and fanbase can be exciting, but it can also be risky. IS (hopefully) knows it has a certain # of gamers who have played since Rekka, or Sacred Stones, or what have you that will play FE:14 and they need to cater to them. The sales in the series declined until the mainstays were left leading to a healthy hold (No Difference in Shadow Dragon and NMOTE sales in Japan) that carved out a niche big enough to pass the 250 000 threshold. This is a niche market that will support them and they should be given priority in that they KNOW they have a sell. A sell is better than a sell on paper. And while I'm not saying that IF shouldn't be accessible, hell Hoshido is designed for that purpose, IS needs to cater to the mainstays so they can remain mainstays. Because if a series with a following from the older titles shifts focus more and more as installments go by, they can be losing a big potential market. So from a business standpoint, they should allow accessibilty, but it should be a 50/50 split with appeasing the older mainstays in my opinion.

Change is risky. But I'll take it over stagnation.

Bah, I've spent too long on this post.

Edited April 25, 2015 by eclipse

[arvilino]

I view Cysx's comments in a different light. A newcomer fanbase can be great, but what's to ensure migration from one thing to another. The Wii U ttempted in many regards to cater to a market that didn't accept it in the long run and it took the Big N a while to realize this. If FE14 decides to cater primarily to the casual audience, it will go one of 2 ways: It will be successful, or a failure. A new shifting marketplace and fanbase can be exciting, but it can also be risky. IS (hopefully) knows it has a certain # of gamers who have played since Rekka, or Sacred Stones, or what have you that will play FE:14 and they need to cater to them. The sales in the series declined until the mainstays were left leading to a healthy hold (No Difference in Shadow Dragon and NMOTE sales in Japan) that carved out a niche big enough to pass the 250 000 threshold. This is a niche market that will support them and they should be given priority in that they KNOW they have a sell. A sell is better than a sell on paper. And while I'm not saying that IF shouldn't be accessible, hell Hoshido is designed for that purpose, IS needs to cater to the mainstays so they can remain mainstays. Because if a series with a following from the older titles shifts focus more and more as installments go by, they can be losing a big potential market. So from a business standpoint, they should allow accessibilty, but it should be a 50/50 split with appeasing the older mainstays in my opinion.

I think it'd be a bit odd for Nintendo to let IS sell a series that will just dodge a bullet every release. Perhaps there is a mainstay audience(and I'm one of them) but really how many of them owned the best selling Nintendo handheld ever to what is currently the lowest selling? Would New Mystery have sold 250k+ if it was on 3DS(~50 million) instead of DS(~150 million)? How many of the ~50 million are their mainstay audience?

They should really always change things up to draw in new players because when transitioning to a new piece of hardware they can't be certain the same group who had a GBA would 3 years later have a DS, 8 years after that a 3DS and so on.

[Jedi]

Thing is, all of the old FE games are full of shitty mechanics, such as Capture, Fatigue and Dismount, which would probably drive them away from the series, rather than turning them into "loyal fans".

You havent even played the games with said "shitty" mechanics (most of which you stated were actually done well), so your argument is invalid,

When attempting to troll, try to actually have experience with a subject. Or actually have something useful to say.

[Irysa]

You're coming at this from the point of view of someone who is good at Fire Emblem. I could probably beat that map with just Pent and Marcus, sure, now, but I sure as hell couldn't on my first playthrough. Fire Emblem is not generally considered an easy game, even on ENM; those of us who play the games to death tend to forget this.

Lecturing me now about what I should have done years ago when I hadn't played a single Fire Emblem game seems a little silly. It's not like I didn't know I was stupid back then now, but a new player neglecting to raise a competent army isn't something entirely out of the realm of possibility. In fact, I did it, as I was explaining. I would have appreciated Casual training wheels.

Sorry, I suppose that did get a bit preachy. My intent wasn't to present things "you should have done", it was a "the game's design accomodates for such decisions made throughout the game" and that it wasn't really a "mistake" to quick promote your other units and spam Marcus. It's just a way of playing the game.I can't tell you how to have fun with a game, I can only make the defence of the fact that game doesn't rely on you raising growth units to beat it. I was also making a defence of RNG's existance. Comparatively, something like say, Awakening on Lunatic does rely on raising growth units to beat it, or at least, non Frederick units, and you are pretty much obligated to restart after a certain point if you spam Frederick too much.

If you didn't have fun spamming prepromotes and trying to keep chump Lords away from danger, but were determined to keep everyone alive, then as I've mentioned before, I'm not against the prospect of a more integrated battle save system that helps to alleviate that frustration, since that would still largely reduce the amount of restarts that you complained about. I think that at least still reinforces the fact that a mistake can result in someone's death, (I don't believe that negative reinforcement is bad design) but makes it easier to correct that mistake.

That wasn't powerful, that was tasteless. Please think about how you're perceived. I shook my head at your initial comment, but the lack of apology in this comment is really appalling. Rape's a very personal subject, and I know there's people on SF who are NOT comfortable about it.

I don't mind apologising for errors I've made (see above), but this one I find puzzling.

Why should I apologise here? I didn't insinuate at any point that rape wasn't bad, that was in fact, the entire point, I picked a topic I think we'd all agree on - that rape is deplorable. Ofc a radical libertarian/objectivist (or extremely liberal anthropologists) may disagree and say "it doesn't matter to me as long as I'm not being raped", and I'd consider them morally bankrupt as a result! Fortunately I don't think anyone on this particular site at least would prescribe to that (although I may as well say my own sister does and I haven't talked to her in years as a result).

If anyone's somehow offended by a statement that says "I think rape is terrible even if I'm not being raped" as opposed to "I think [human injustices] are terrible even if I'm not suffering [human injustice]" just for merely mentioning the word then I they're free to tell me why that statement is offensive. Depending on their explanation, I may apologise, but I don't believe anyone but you has asked for one right now, and you haven't really explained why. I wouldn't make a crass joke about rape, that I'd label tasteless, but my statement was literally "rape is bad", what's to apologise for?

Edited April 25, 2015 by Irysa

[Baldrick]

Well, you should be able to find a subject that's powerful, but not so... emotionally volatile, for lack of a better term. You want to minimise the risk of offending people, and breaking the spirit, if not the letter, of Godwin's Law.

For example, I would use the argument "It's like saying if you're not American, you're not allowed to have an opinion on the American public healthcare system".

[Awakener_]

I view Cysx's comments in a different light. A newcomer fanbase can be great, but what's to ensure migration from one thing to another. The Wii U ttempted in many regards to cater to a market that didn't accept it in the long run and it took the Big N a while to realize this. If FE14 decides to cater primarily to the casual audience, it will go one of 2 ways: It will be successful, or a failure. A new shifting marketplace and fanbase can be exciting, but it can also be risky. IS (hopefully) knows it has a certain # of gamers who have played since Rekka, or Sacred Stones, or what have you that will play FE:14 and they need to cater to them. The sales in the series declined until the mainstays were left leading to a healthy hold (No Difference in Shadow Dragon and NMOTE sales in Japan) that carved out a niche big enough to pass the 250 000 threshold. This is a niche market that will support them and they should be given priority in that they KNOW they have a sell. A sell is better than a sell on paper. And while I'm not saying that IF shouldn't be accessible, hell Hoshido is designed for that purpose, IS needs to cater to the mainstays so they can remain mainstays. Because if a series with a following from the older titles shifts focus more and more as installments go by, they can be losing a big potential market. So from a business standpoint, they should allow accessibilty, but it should be a 50/50 split with appeasing the older mainstays in my opinion.

Blazing Sword sold like 400k both in JP/NA (FE3/4 sold a lot more in Jp), but Tellus series sold like shit and the remake of the Akaneia series sold average. Even old school fan isn't buying any recent pre-Awakening FE games, there no excuse why Shadow Dragon being on a 150 million console didn't sold as much as or greater than Blazing Sword. Your "mainstays" peoples is the one who left the franchise, I see no reasons trying to appease a declining fanbase. A real business standpoint should retain what left of the fanbase and expend the audience (Casuals, new comers and older fans), a move worked due to Awakening. I see even older fans who play games like Radiance Dawn coming back to Awakening.

[NoirCore]

@Irysa: I apologize if I missed something, but I agree with the others. Your original post sounds like you're comparing ignoring casual mode and ignoring rape like they're the same thing. However, casual mode isn't traumatizing and abusing to people, while rape is. You claimed that was not your intent, but your reasoning that eclipse quoted fails to excuse the comparison for me.

@Gradivus (in eclipse's post): I didn't even attempt to end the conversation. Heck, I ASKED him to explain. He claimed to not care for Casual mode while demanding without please for me to "Zip it. :)" (so really, he wanted me to stop in the first place), but his previous posts state that he WANTED punishments for "playing that way", so while I may have gone a little too overboard with pointing out what I perceive as his close-minded actions, I had to let him know that there was conflicting evidence on his opinion.

Edited April 25, 2015 by DarkGold777

[Irysa]

@Irysa: I apologize if I missed something, but I agree with the others. Your original post sounds like you're comparing ignoring casual mode and ignoring rape like they're the same thing. However, casual mode isn't traumatizing and abusing to people, while rape is. You claimed that was not your intent, but your reasoning that eclipse quoted fails to excuse the comparison for me.

I never compared casual mode to rape. The original statement doesn't even mention casual mode.

here is what I said originally.

The "it doesn't affect you" argument is bizzare because it's like trying to argue "who cares if rape is legal in some backwater country on the other side of the world, it doesn't affect you!". I mean, technically it doesn't. But that doesn't mean you can't think it's bad for that to be the case?

What is being attacked here is the position of "you shouldn't care if it doesn't affect you", aka, objectivism (which I find utterly loathesome). Not casual mode. It's a principle, that we are perfectly capable of caring about things that don't affect us. As such, it can't be used to dismiss any argument (by itself). Well unless you're a hyper libertarian, but then I'm not even going to bother talking to you.

Well, you should be able to find a subject that's powerful, but not so... emotionally volatile, for lack of a better term. You want to minimise the risk of offending people, and breaking the spirit, if not the letter, of Godwin's Law.

For example, I would use the argument "It's like saying if you're not American, you're not allowed to have an opinion on the American public healthcare system".

I'm not sure how saying "rape is a bad thing" is offensive though, and you haven't clarified as such. I chose something I thought we could all agree on. My first thought was murder, but then figured someone would try to distract from the point and use a death penalty argument to do so, getting into moral relativism on whether or not someone can ever deserve to die etc. I also thought of vaccinations, but then figured someone would disagree with me on that too.

Your example doesn't work beacuse there actually ARE people who argue that you're not allowed to have an opinion on American healthcare if you're not American. I've met and talked to those people, and I wouldn't even be surprised to find them on this site. I tried to pick something I geninuely felt all of us would agree on, and broadly trusted the character of the users of these forums to understand that much, but I guess I presupposed too much.

EDIT: If you want more clarity, I do feel very strongly about objectivism and moral relativists, mostly because of having to personally experience the horror that is my sister's philosophy. I picked a strong example because I really dislike any sort of implication that individuals shouldn't care about something someone else does as long as it doesn't affect the individual personally. It's a really irresponsible and selfish outlook.

Edited April 25, 2015 by Irysa

[DeadGame]

@Irysa: I apologize if I missed something, but I agree with the others. Your original post sounds like you're comparing ignoring casual mode and ignoring rape like they're the same thing. However, casual mode isn't traumatizing and abusing to people, while rape is. You claimed that was not your intent, but your reasoning that eclipse quoted fails to excuse the comparison for me.

@Gradivus (in eclipse's post): I didn't even attempt to end the conversation. Heck, I ASKED him to explain. He claimed to not care for Casual mode while demanding without please for me to "Zip it. :)" (so really, he wanted me to stop in the first place), but his previous posts state that he WANTED punishments for "playing that way", so while I may have gone a little too overboard with pointing out what I perceive as his close-minded actions, I had to let him know that there was conflicting evidence on his opinion.

If you're lying about me saying I want casual mode removed and that I call everyone who likes it a "dweeb", I might as well tell you to shut up.

What you were doing is making me look bad which is a way to try to shut people up.

I already explained myself, by the way.

[Jagged Jagen]

Blazing Sword sold like 400k both in JP/NA (FE3/4 sold a lot more in Jp), but Tellus series sold like shit and the remake of the Akaneia series sold average. Even old school fan isn't buying any recent pre-Awakening FE games, there no excuse why Shadow Dragon being on a 150 million console didn't sold as much as or greater than Blazing Sword. Your "mainstays" peoples is the one who left the franchise, I see no reasons trying to appease a declining fanbase. A real business standpoint should retain what left of the fanbase and expend the audience (Casuals, new comers and older fans), a move worked due to Awakening. I see even older fans who play games like Radiance Dawn coming back to Awakening.

Tellius didn't sell like shit. It missed the threshold in Japan due to a small ass adopter base for the Wii and GC at the time of release, even less so were FEs target demographic. They still held enough in sales across all installments in America to meet the 250 000 required units. Couple in Japan and Europe and Awakening still would have sold what was required. Why do you assume the mainstays left the franchise when the North American sales stayed at a healthy level? Lets put it this way, people bought Rekka, then SS, then grew disappointed and left. Now I love SS, but I know a lot who will contest it. What'sbto say that off the success IF sells less but nearly as much, the casual audience doesn't like it for this, that, the other, and leaves meaning the mainstays remain. The issue has been time and time again that a new market is unpredictable with rapidly changing tastes. Compare this to a niche market which steadily holds over the years. Awakening needed to sell 250k, it could sell 500k on the niche alone. IS should be careful to not alienate the guaranteed sales by catering to their wants and needs. I'm not saying to cater to newcomers, I'm just saying more effort is needed to appeal to veterans.

Edited April 25, 2015 by DeoGame

[Book of Ereshkigal]

If you're lying about me saying[...]

...huh? I'd think you'd know if they were lying or not, unless you don't remember what you posted.

[NoirCore]

If you're lying about me saying I want casual mode removed and that I call everyone who likes it a "dweeb", I might as well tell you to shut up.

What you were doing is making me look bad which is a way to try to shut people up.

I already explained myself, by the way.

I never said you did NOT explain yourself. I said you claimed not to care about casual mode "Should it come back? Meh, personally don't care...", yet, you posted in a topic about what you wanted to see in FE if, and you wanted "Bigger punishments for playing on casual mode", and you repeated that statement a few times on this forum, which meant you DO care about something about the mode, thus contradicting yourself.

[DeadGame]

I never said you did NOT explain yourself. I said you claimed not to care about casual mode "Should it come back? Meh, personally don't care...", yet, you posted in a topic about what you wanted to see in FE if, and you wanted "Bigger punishments for playing on casual mode", and you repeated that statement a few times on this forum, which meant you DO care about something about the mode, thus contradicting yourself.

Well, I never said you did not say I didn't explain myself. I just mentioned that I explained everything before, because you don't seem to have read what I wrote very carefully.. and you've proven that yet again.

As I said: No, I wouldn't care if casual-mode didn't return. Yes, I'd want it to have a twist (if it returns), punishing/challenging the player with tougher enemies or locking parts of the story for loosing units during missions or some other downside. I am not contradicting myself with that.

Also, I don't know what you understand by "punishments", whether or not you actually believe I'd want Iwata to come by, laughing at your face or something.

[Vascela]

The whole point of casual mode is to... play casually--to not have an excess worry. It would go against the entire point of the mode if you made it more challenging/locking out content.

Why would you give the "casual" mode a hard twist? That's just silly.

[Gradivus.]

I just got a completely different idea. How about limiting the amount of units revived per map to like, 4? It would easily be enough to make up for misplays (hell, you can get around misplays even without deaths), but would also lead to more strategic consideration and maybe be kind of an introduction for newer players into Classic mode.

Edited April 25, 2015 by Gradivus.

[NekoKnight]

I just got a completely different idea. How about limiting the amount of units revived per map to like, 4? It would easily be enough to make up for misplays (hell, you can get around misplays even without deaths), but would also lead to more strategic consideration and maybe be kind of an introduction for newer players into Classic mode.

I endorse this idea. Another idea is to have a limited number of turns to revive them before they really die, such as it was implemented in Valkyria Chronicles.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Why are people still arguing about it?

No one is forced to play casual mode.

I don't do it either, because it's no classic FE for me. Ignoring this mode is the best thing I can do.

Casual mode is at least good for people, who have problems to keep their units alive.

However I think the quick battle save option would have done it already. At least it was a very good option for me to learn the strategy in FE10.

[Crysta]

Bad things to use as allusions/comparisons/metaphors in an epic internet fite:

1) rape

2) nazis/nazism

3) abortion

4) nickelback

Because there's a good bet there's millions of better and more fitting things to use.

[NoirCore]

Well, I never said you did not say I didn't explain myself. I just mentioned that I explained everything before, because you don't seem to have read what I wrote very carefully.. and you've proven that yet again.

I guess I'll drop this... It's just arguing over a minor technicality, and I think I started it, so I'll just let it go.

As I said: No, I wouldn't care if casual-mode didn't return. Yes, I'd want it to have a twist (if it returns), punishing/challenging the player with tougher enemies or locking parts of the story for loosing units during missions or some other downside. I am not contradicting myself with that.

OK, thank you for clarifying. I won't agree with your opinion, but I understand that you'd want to balance out the lack of permadeath. I guess you didn't contradict yourself in the end after all.

Also, I don't know what you understand by "punishments", whether or not you actually believe I'd want Iwata to come by, laughing at your face or something.

I DID think along the lines of what you wanted the punishments to be, and while that would be a great idea for a new mode separate from both classic and casual, I respectfully disagree with implementing such punishments on casual mode itself. The mode was intended for casual players, and if they want a harder challenge without jumping to classic, they can self-implement said challenges.

Replies in bold. Edited April 25, 2015 by DarkGold777

[Jedi]

I endorse this idea. Another idea is to have a limited number of turns to revive them before they really die, such as it was implemented in Valkyria Chronicles.

It was implemented way longer ago via FFT but I digress.

Having punishments on Casual mode makes absolutely 0 sense. If people want to challenge themselves after casual they will go to classic.