Can you really choose your side?

[Ryo]

That sounds like a misinterpretation, be it on purpose or not. If you watch the non-Japanese Directs again, this is what Iwata said:

"...The Fire Emblem series has always asked players to make lots of small choices that affect the world as they know it, from conversation choices to battle tactics. In this new game, you will make even bigger choices and the effects of these choices on the world will be greater than ever...."

Sure, he refer to them as "choices" in plural form. However, that could very well be marketing tactics, as none of the things we have seen so far confirm the existence of multiple choices. Also, "from conversation choices to battle tactics" refers to the small choices from the older games, not this one. "The effects of these choices on the world will be greater than ever" sounds pretty vague, we can't really tell anything from that, it could be merely referring to the side choosing, who knows? Therefore, there is nothing so far that specifically indicates there will be in-game decisions that have major effects on the overall story/gameplay.

Edited May 10, 2015 by Ryo

[arvilino]

Game devs don't make multiple routes with the expectation or desire that you only play one of them. "You can only choose one path" can't be the real intention of the developers because they offer the other routes as heavily discounted DLC. Are the people who bought the special edition not getting the "true FE14 experience" because they get all options from the get-go? The premise of the game apparently changes depending on how much money you paid for it.

Arguably they aren't getting the experience the developers want players to go through and that's why both routes are in a special edition and DLC. They aren't going to prevent a player from buying both two routes the same way the summer of bonds fanservice DLC isn't really part of the true Fire Emblem: Awakening experience yet they'll still sell it to you.

For the other routes you're paying because you want more and to explore the alternative options, hence why siding with neither side is DLC and not its own release. Opposite to what you claim they probably do intend a full experience to be gained just from one route because 100% of players who buy and complete the game will go through atleast one route, whereas not everyone will go through more than one.

Edited May 10, 2015 by arvilino

[NekoKnight]

That sounds like a misinterpretation, be it on purpose or not. If you watch the non-Japanese Directs again, this is what Iwata said:

"...The Fire Emblem series has always asked players to make lots of small choices that affect the world as they know it, from conversation choices to battle tactics. In this new game, you will make even bigger choices and the effects of these choices on the world will be greater than ever...."

Sure, he refer to them as "choices" in plural form. However, that could very well be marketing tactics, as none of the things we have seen so far confirm the existence of multiple choices. Also, "from conversation choices to battle tactics" refers to the small choices from the older games, not this one. "The effects of these choices on the world will be greater than ever" sounds pretty vague, we can't really tell anything from that, it could be merely referring to the side choosing, who knows? Therefore, there is nothing so far that specifically indicates there will be in-game decisions that have major effects on the overall story/gameplay.

You've said everything I would about that quote, but I'll throw in that Japanese doesn't really use plural nouns so if that's not an English original quote, it might just be a approximation of what he said. Either way, it could just be marketing because "you will make one big choice" is less enticing than a more openly interpreted "you will make big choices".

Arguably they aren't getting the experience the developers want players to go through and that's why both routes are in a special edition and DLC. They aren't going to prevent a player from buying both two routes the same way the summer of bonds fanservice DLC isn't really part of the true Fire Emblem: Awakening experience yet they'll still sell it to you.

For the other routes you're paying because you want more and to explore the alternative options, hence why siding with neither side is DLC and not its own release. Opposite to what you claim they probably do intend a full experience to be gained just from one route because 100% of players who buy and complete the game will go through atleast one route, whereas not everyone will go through more than one.

First of all, comparing 25 exclusive story missions to a pure fanservice DLC map is just plain silly.

In the bolded you suggest the other routes are available through DLC to allow people to explore alternative options and yet you also insist that playing more than one route undermines the experience the game developers wanted you to have. Which is it? Do they want you to play them or not? Do you think at some point they said "Gosh, I sure hope no one plays the other route, that would undermine the dilemma of only picking one side. I know, let's heavily discount the other routes as DLC to discourage people from buying it!" Why would they sell the special edition or DLC at all if they didn't want people to play it? If I developed two games worth of content, you bet I'd want people to play and enjoy both. What is the significance of a "what if" scenario if I'm only supposed to see the outcome of one choice?

For other route based games, no one ever suggests that only one route should be played. Why would Fire Emblem be different? Because the routes are on different cartridges? THAT'S the distinction?

[Ryo]

You've said everything I would about that quote, but I'll throw in that Japanese doesn't really use plural nouns so if that's not an English original quote, it might just be a approximation of what he said. Either way, it could just be marketing because "you will make one big choice" is less enticing than a more openly interpreted "you will make big choices".

It is an English original quote. Again, I'm talking about the NA and Europe Directs here, because I don't know what exactly did he say in the Japanese version.

[arvilino]

In the bolded you suggest the other routes are available through DLC to allow people to explore alternative options and yet you also insist that playing more than one route undermines the experience the game developers wanted you to have. Which is it? Do they want you to play them or not? Do you think at some point they said "Gosh, I sure hope no one plays the other route, that would undermine the dilemma of only picking one side. I know, let's heavily discount the other routes as DLC to discourage people from buying it!" Why would they sell the special edition or DLC at all if they didn't want people to play it? If I developed two games worth of content, you bet I'd want people to play and enjoy both. What is the significance of a "what if" scenario if I'm only supposed to see the outcome of one choice?

It's both really, as I said in the second paragraph the 2nd and 3rd route aren't necessary to fully enjoying the game and in the 4Gamer interview they stated that they aim for a single route to be a full experience. Perhaps I should I have said intended instead of wanted but it's clear the set up for the typical player to pick the side and play to the conclusion. As mentioned in the review they encourage buying/playing another route if you complete one route and feel like you want to play more.

They obviously would want players to enjoy both but they're not pushing for any players to feel required to buy more than one version unless they do want more.

http://www.siliconera.com/2015/04/29/fire-emblem-ifs-third-story-route-will-difficult-white-less-black/

“As mentioned earlier, Fire Emblem If isn’t something that you can’t fully enjoy without playing both routes,” adds Yamagami. “But please give it a go if you play one route and think ‘I want to play more!’. Both routes are very complete as far as the story goes.”

Another interesting thing from the third page of the 4Gamer Interview refers to the player's choice of version of game before they even start playing. Sadly no one translated is(so I had to use google translate):

"Fire Emblem if" is, From before you buy the game, the game has begun

Edited May 10, 2015 by arvilino

[NekoKnight]

It's both really, as I said in the second paragraph the 2nd and 3rd route aren't necessary to fully enjoying the game and in the 4Gamer interview they stated that they aim for a single route to be a full experience. Perhaps I should I have said intended instead of wanted but it's clear the set up for the typical player to pick the side and play to the conclusion. As mentioned in the review they encourage buying/playing another route if you complete one route and feel like you want to play more.

They obviously would want players to enjoy both but they're not pushing for any players to feel required to buy more than one version unless they do want more.

Arguably they aren't getting the experience the developers want players to go through and that's why both routes are in a special edition and DLC.

When I read the bolded here, I thought you were saying that it's contrary to the theme of the game to play multiple routes because you're supposed to pick a side and stick with it. My new understanding of your position (correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are saying that the game devs think each version is good enough to be a stand-alone game, which I don't disagree with. The interview quotes you give point to one thing: each route is a "complete" story. Yes, that's how routes work. That's how all routes in all games work. You make choices, different things happen, a story starts and resolves. The only difference between Fire Emblem and other route based games is that the routes are on separate cartridges. I don't see why each FE14 route counts as "stand-alone" when so many other games manage to include all routes in the base game.

These interviews are to tell consumers that they are not being sold half a game (because that's what it obviously looks like at a glance). Will it be so? We shall see but this notion that Hoshido/Nohr are completely separate entities needs to be put down. The game developers embracing consumer choices over in-game choices is really sickening.

[Dark Holy Elf]

Huge caveat that the overseas releases may not be handled this way at all, and in fact there's good reason to believe it won't because (as this thread already shows!) North American fans are much more prickly about this type of thing on average.

That said, if you're the type of person for whom making the choice at chapter 6 instead of when you buy the game is a really big deal, why not just buy the digital version? From the sounds of things the choice will be an in-game one, then.

[Book of Ereshkigal]

The interview quotes you give point to one thing: each route is a "complete" story. Yes, that's how routes work. That's how all routes in all games work. You make choices, different things happen, a story starts and resolves. The only difference between Fire Emblem and other route based games is that the routes are on separate cartridges. I don't see why each FE14 route counts as "stand-alone" when so many other games manage to include all routes in the base game.

Not necessarily, FE6 has two route splits and neither brings the story to a different conclusion, the first split is which area in the western isles Roy goes to and the other is deciding between Illia and Sacae, both merge back into the same place in the main story. Same thing as the "go through the forest" or the "take the main road" route split in FE5. Those route splits could not be made into their own respective storys.

Edited May 10, 2015 by L95

[NekoKnight]

Huge caveat that the overseas releases may not be handled this way at all, and in fact there's good reason to believe it won't because (as this thread already shows!) North American fans are much more prickly about this type of thing on average.

That said, if you're the type of person for whom making the choice at chapter 6 instead of when you buy the game is a really big deal, why not just buy the digital version? From the sounds of things the choice will be an in-game one, then.

If they include all the routes on one cartridge for a fair price, I'll be the first one to give IS and Nintendo a hi-five. Personally, I prefer physical copies so I'm SoL if the game split makes it overseas.

Not necessarily, FE6 has two route splits and neither brings the story to a different conclusion, the first split is which area in the western isles Roy goes to and the other is deciding between Illia and Sacae, both merge back into the same place in the main story. Same thing as the "go through the forest" or the "take the main road" route split in FE5. Those route splits could not be made into their own respective storys.

I was referring more to games where the route takes up a significant portion of the game, such as it often goes in visual novels. My point was, Hoshido and Nohr having a full story isn't any different than other games that have branching/exclusive stories. The route ends when you reach the characters' goals. But you aren't wrong either so 50 points to House L95!

Edited May 10, 2015 by NekoKnight

[goodperson707]

When I read the bolded here, I thought you were saying that it's contrary to the theme of the game to play multiple routes because you're supposed to pick a side and stick with it. My new understanding of your position (correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are saying that the game devs think each version is good enough to be a stand-alone game, which I don't disagree with. The interview quotes you give point to one thing: each route is a "complete" story. Yes, that's how routes work. That's how all routes in all games work. You make choices, different things happen, a story starts and resolves. The only difference between Fire Emblem and other route based games is that the routes are on separate cartridges. I don't see why each FE14 route counts as "stand-alone" when so many other games manage to include all routes in the base game.

These interviews are to tell consumers that they are not being sold half a game (because that's what it obviously looks like at a glance). Will it be so? We shall see but this notion that Hoshido/Nohr are completely separate entities needs to be put down. The game developers embracing consumer choices over in-game choices is really sickening.

okay i do get your point, but ill give you a bit of an analogy what would you say if path of radiance and radiant dawn were released at or near the same time and had the same total amount of content but were pretty much the same? Should they have been one big game? To me at least, they have quite a difference between them: story themes, game mechanics, type of play they encourage, the overall difficulty. Most games tend to or are expected to stay consistent in the overall game. i dont see how the fact that they are released at the same time changes anything. Edited May 10, 2015 by goodperson707

[Book of Ereshkigal]

I was referring more to games where the route takes up a significant portion of the game, such as it often goes in visual novels. My point was, Hoshido and Nohr having a full story isn't any different than other games that have branching/exclusive stories. The route ends when you reach the characters' goals. But you aren't wrong either so 50 points to House L95!

Ah, I see your point, I admit, was focusing too much on what previous FE games have done and not games in general.

[NekoKnight]

okay i do get your point, but ill give you a bit of an analogy what would you say if path of radiance and radiant dawn were released at or near the same time and had the same total amount of content but were pretty much the same? Should they have been one big game? To me at least, they have quite a difference between them: story themes, game mechanics, type of play they encourage, the overall difficulty. Most games tend to or are expected to stay consistent in the overall game. i dont see how the fact that they are released at the same time changes anything.

It's hard to say. What I'm doing right now is making the best judgements I can about a game that has yet to be released, based on statements made by game developers. I consider FE9 and FE10 to be complete and separate games but that's because I've played them. I'd have to be a dumdum to think a game as long as RD was not big enough though.

The most important difference between the Tellius titles and FE14, however, is that "choice" is the major selling point for FEif. Radiant Dawn is the sequel to Path of Radiant. Hoshido/Nohr are the results of a important choice Kamui will have to make. The Hoshido/Nohr conflict is the basis of FE14. Kamui is the protagonist of FE14. I want to see all the way his story can play out, without paying $80.

[VincentASM]

The most important difference between the Tellius titles and FE14, however, is that "choice" is the major selling point for FEif. Radiant Dawn is the sequel to Path of Radiant. Hoshido/Nohr are the results of a important choice Kamui will have to make. The Hoshido/Nohr conflict is the basis of FE14. Kamui is the protagonist of FE14. I want to see all the way his story can play out, without paying $80.

I know what you mean, but from the way you describe things, you can do everything without paying 80 dollars.

Yes, choice is the major selling point and you can make a choice--in Japan, the moment you buy the game. Or if you have the digital version, you can make the choice in-game.

The thing is, the choice is meant to be important, like most choices in real life. And to emphasise this, you can only pick one option, hence the two separate games.

You will still see the entirety of Kamui's story, but only from one branching possibility--only one "what if".

Here's an analogy. Say you want to buy a car and there's a reliable car (Hoshido) and a speedster (Nohr). For most people, they can only buy one car. Regardless, you have the choice of either car, am I right?

Whichever car you buy will determine your entire driving experience. But no matter which car you buy, you are still getting a full, working car. That said, if people have the money to spend and really want both cars, they could buy both cars and enjoy the experience of both.

This is pretty much what IS has done--they want to limit you to one experience, but at the same time, they want to please the players who want to enjoy "everything"--and by this, I don't mean the same thing as buying both games to get the "full game".

Hope that makes sense : o

Edited May 10, 2015 by VincentASM

[NekoKnight]

I know what you mean, but from the way you describe things, you can do everything without paying 80 dollars.

Yes, choice is the major selling point and you can make a choice--in Japan, the moment you buy the game. Or if you have the digital version, you can make the choice in-game.

The thing is, the choice is meant to be important, like most choices in real life. And to emphasise this, you can only pick one option, hence the two separate games.

You will still see the entirety of Kamui's story, but only from one branching possibility--only one "what if".

Here's an analogy. Say you want to buy a car and there's a reliable car (Hoshido) and a speedster (Nohr). For most people, they can only buy one car. Regardless, you have the choice of either car, am I right?

Whichever car you buy will determine your entire driving experience. But no matter which car you buy, you are still getting a full, working car. That said, if people have the money to spend and really want both cars, they could buy both cars and enjoy the experience of both.

This is pretty much what IS has done--they want to limit you to one experience, but at the same time, they want to please the players who want to enjoy "everything"--and by this, I don't mean the same thing as buying both games to get the "full game".

Hope that makes sense : o

I understand and respect your position but I think we are running on different definitions of "the entirety of Kamui's story". To you and Arvilino, the story of Kamui is complete for each route because it has a beginning, middle and resolution. My definition of 'complete' is the sum total of all of Kamui's choices and their results. 'what if' only becomes significant when the other possibilities are explored. If I only played Hoshido, I'll have no idea about the civil conflict in Nohr. I'll never know if siding with neither was the most reasonable path for peace. You can call that complete but I call that missing 2/3 of the greater narrative. Yes, the stories are exclusive and can't exist together in a single canon but I still need to play them all to appreciate every angle of the Hoshido/Nohr conflict.

[Jedi]

I understand and respect your position but I think we are running on different definitions of "the entirety of Kamui's story". To you and Arvilino, the story of Kamui is complete for each route because it has a beginning, middle and resolution. My definition of 'complete' is the sum total of all of Kamui's choices and their results. 'what if' only becomes significant when the other possibilities are explored. If I only played Hoshido, I'll have no idea about the civil conflict in Nohr. I'll never know if siding with neither was the most reasonable path for peace. You can call that complete but I call that missing 2/3 of the greater narrative. Yes, the stories are exclusive and can't exist together in a single canon but I still need to play them all to appreciate every angle of the Hoshido/Nohr conflict.

This is also how I feel, I'd like to experience the whole thing. But at the same time I can appreciate that all the routes are going to be able to be stand alone at the same time.

Not all games that do varied routes are always fair to each, the way they are making this game will satisfy people who just want one new fe and those who want more then one view of the situation etc.

Basically we are getting 3 different games which in my opinion is awesome. Route splits in your typical game don't happen till 3/4ths through (see the old SMTs). Where the build up stays the same. FEIF is taking out the bullshit and allowing people to see ENTIRE new sides to a conflict instead of a (hmm who should I help) then on some invisible value be like (well screw these guys!)

[VincentASM]

I understand and respect your position but I think we are running on different definitions of "the entirety of Kamui's story". To you and Arvilino, the story of Kamui is complete for each route because it has a beginning, middle and resolution. My definition of 'complete' is the sum total of all of Kamui's choices and their results. 'what if' only becomes significant when the other possibilities are explored. If I only played Hoshido, I'll have no idea about the civil conflict in Nohr. I'll never know if siding with neither was the most reasonable path for peace. You can call that complete but I call that missing 2/3 of the greater narrative. Yes, the stories are exclusive and can't exist together in a single canon but I still need to play them all to appreciate every angle of the Hoshido/Nohr conflict.

Fair enough, I can respect that. Just throwing the last of my two cents XD

But to be fair, you can't really lump in the third campaign in your argument. The devs likely made that extra "what if" scenario after designing the whole game. In a sense, it might as well be a expanded version of, say, Awakening's The Future Past DLC.

Speaking of which, do you need to play all of Awakening's (story) DLC to have "played the entire story"? After all, The Future Past was one of IS's attempts at creating a "what if" situation before this game--and possibly one of the inspirations for this game.

Edited May 10, 2015 by VincentASM

[ReaperGuardian]

I understand and respect your position but I think we are running on different definitions of "the entirety of Kamui's story". To you and Arvilino, the story of Kamui is complete for each route because it has a beginning, middle and resolution. My definition of 'complete' is the sum total of all of Kamui's choices and their results. 'what if' only becomes significant when the other possibilities are explored. If I only played Hoshido, I'll have no idea about the civil conflict in Nohr. I'll never know if siding with neither was the most reasonable path for peace. You can call that complete but I call that missing 2/3 of the greater narrative. Yes, the stories are exclusive and can't exist together in a single canon but I still need to play them all to appreciate every angle of the Hoshido/Nohr conflict.

I agree with this completely and it would make me very sad if the game would be released in the West as two seperate games. Because, as stated above, I'm not getting the full narrative to be able to make a well judged choice to side with either party, if two seperate games would be released. A bit off topic here though.

I hope that in the next NintendoDirect we'll get some more information on this point. That they either confirm or deny if two seperate versions will be released in the West.

[Alphine]

When I read the bolded here, I thought you were saying that it's contrary to the theme of the game to play multiple routes because you're supposed to pick a side and stick with it. My new understanding of your position (correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are saying that the game devs think each version is good enough to be a stand-alone game, which I don't disagree with. The interview quotes you give point to one thing: each route is a "complete" story. Yes, that's how routes work. That's how all routes in all games work. You make choices, different things happen, a story starts and resolves. The only difference between Fire Emblem and other route based games is that the routes are on separate cartridges. I don't see why each FE14 route counts as "stand-alone" when so many other games manage to include all routes in the base game.

These interviews are to tell consumers that they are not being sold half a game (because that's what it obviously looks like at a glance). Will it be so? We shall see but this notion that Hoshido/Nohr are completely separate entities needs to be put down. The game developers embracing consumer choices over in-game choices is really sickening.

The fact that the two games are separate entities is that if they were to half-ass it and produce only one version of the story, it'd be a complete game that it could stand on its own (not as lengthy as Awakening was in terms of just the game's original content without DLC, but with at least a better story and some amount of extra options). Of course they intend people to buy both versions because that's how they intended the games to be marketed, otherwise, they wouldn't have gone through so much work to make two separate versions. Hell, if you want to buy the option that makes it an in-game decision, do it, but I doubt they'd make a split series if they didn't think there would be fans who'd only want to play one version. The options are there so then everyone gets what they want, and regardless of that one choice affecting so much of what happens in the games, it won't be the only choice you'll make as what was implied.

[Alphine]

is.. everyone forgetting this quote?:

the "greater than ever" in there isn't likely to be in there just for show.

i mean, the hoshido/nohr thing is likely the biggest choice ever in the game, but there's going to be things in-game that do shape the story in some way- access to gaiden chapters, items (valkyrie or goddess staff thing maybe), units, conversations maybe, idk (i'm clearly just listing random possibilities off the top of my head, lmao).

but the hoshido/nohr split probably won't be the only thing that alters the game's playthrough in an at least slightly significant way, IMO.

Considering the one cavalier being either an ally or an enemy in Byakuya, they'll likely have not only characters like that who you can choose to be with or against, but also different options to explore and different outcomes from those options.

[dragonlordsd]

I think by "choose your side" they mean choose which game you want to buy. That said, based on previous interviews, I think there will be other choices to make within your respective sides, which will determine the outcome of the story. I don't think the game will be limited to only a single choice, and I'm really hoping the choices will actually have consequence, unlike in Awakening.

[NekoKnight]

Fair enough, I can respect that. Just throwing the last of my two cents XD

But to be fair, you can't really lump in the third campaign in your argument. The devs likely made that extra "what if" scenario after designing the whole game. In a sense, it might as well be a expanded version of, say, Awakening's The Future Past DLC.

Speaking of which, do you need to play all of Awakening's (story) DLC to have "played the entire story"? After all, The Future Past was one of IS's attempts at creating a "what if" situation before this game--and possibly one of the inspirations for this game.

I haven't played the Future Past DLC but if its story is highly relevant to the main plot, maybe it should have been in the base game.

They can put it in the base game and take out the spotpass paralogues.

[goodperson707]

^ it depends on your definition of relevant, its quite complimentary to the main game story wise in my opinion and it has pseudo non generic father supports which is nice, but its not crucial to understand the story, also it was probably made after the main game was out.

If you want a better answer on its relevancy feel free to just go to the main site and read it.

[Czar_Yoshi]

http://www.siliconera.com/2015/04/29/fire-emblem-ifs-third-story-route-will-difficult-white-less-black/

Another interesting thing from the third page of the 4Gamer Interview refers to the player's choice of version of game before they even start playing. Sadly no one translated is(so I had to use google translate):

You know what else those interviews contain? This.

“Both factions have their own attractive characters, so that will be one of the charms to consider while making your choice,” adds Higuchi.

I generally prefer to be optimistic but if I was going to be worried for the future of this game, it would be about something throwing more money at it couldn't fix. It's a lot easier to find more cash than it is to wait three more years for the next game, and I'd really rather the devs not even be thinking about deliberately using this as a selling point.

Edit: it also mentions not needing to replay the first five chapters if you want to do the other path. Sounds kind of like Lyn Mode?

I hope that in the next NintendoDirect we'll get some more information on this point. That they either confirm or deny if two seperate versions will be released in the West.

Speaking of which, does that have an airdate yet?

I haven't played the Future Past DLC but if its story is highly relevant to the main plot, maybe it should have been in the base game.

It's practically more relevant than the entire third arc of Awakening's on-cart story.

But it definitely is better off as DLC- the difference in writing quality is really huge and I'm not confident they would have been able to improve so much (if at all) if it had been lumped in with the rest of the game. More story along the lines of Awakening's base isn't something I'd really want to pay extra for. FP is.

Now, if Awakening's devs really had been on the ball and were able to to make it the real ending of Awakening- complete with an FE4 style "everyone dies" timeskip and no Naga- then it would be a sight to see in the maingame. I doubt that would have gone over well with casual players, though.

Edited May 11, 2015 by Czar_Yoshi

[Book of Ereshkigal]

Speaking of which, does that have an airdate yet?

No. I expect the E3 direct to be the next direct, personally. We did have the Splatoon direct a couple days back.

[ckc22]

What premise? For one, don't assume it will be the same internationally. Fire Emblem is much more popular in Japan, and in Japan, split-games like this are more common and popular then elsewhere. Also, tell me one time when they said that you could choose IN game.

I'm uninterested in having this conversation for the billionth time.