Is it strange to enjoy Fire Emblem, but not other SRPGs?

[Knight]

I said that neither are strategy RPGs, but both are turn-based strategy games, no matter how different they are. I agree that Advance Wars is more similar to Fire Emblem, but it's not an RPG, so...

[The DanMan]

I love Halo but can't stand CoD's gameplay and am none too high on Battlefield.

So no, it's not strange to only like one series in a specific genre.

[Baldrick]

OP, have you tried Dungeons and Dragons? It's an RPG like Fire Emblem, so it's more likely to be to your taste than Advance Wars, a non-RPG, would be.

[SniperGYS]

I tried Final Fantasy Tactics long time ago, but didn't went far than chapter 3th? Mmm I don't remember that much about it either, I failed to find it interesting

In the other hand, Pokémon Conquest was good for me, I loved it, it was a compilation of 3 things I like: a gameplay similar to Fire Emblem, Pokémon and KOEI Warriors.

But another SRPG I liked was the Luminous Arc games for NDS, they are SRPG too, and even have something similar to supports, but maybe people remember these games more for the fanservice? Maybe you can check them, I can't say they are "TOO AWESOME" but is another option you can try

[Radiant head]

You're obviously completely missing my point if you've bothered to say this.

In context of what I was talking about yes it is.

Grinding trivialises the entire game if it wasn't easy enough. With Pokemon the lack of level cap means low manning is best.

Same with Disgaea. Either you A) Low-man with an overleveled dude and destroy everything or B) Grind to make a full team good/balanced.

Awakening is sort of similar with the endless reclassing and pair up. FeMu or FeMorgan as Dark Flier can pretty much solo maps outside of Lunatic/Lunatic++.

Edited September 13, 2015 by Radiant head

[Rapier]

It isn't, because Fire Emblem isn't just summed as a SRPG game. It has a lot of elements that separates itself from other SRPGs that make all the difference. The faster pace, simple to learn but hard to master mechanics, interesting characters (and Supports), the story and permadeath are some of the reasons why I prefer it over other SRPGs.

The only other games of the genre that I liked were Yggdra Union and SMT. I couldn't get into Tactics Ogre, Ogre Battle, FFT, Advance Wars, Gungnir etc., although I did love XCOM.

[Tamanoir]

I tried Final Fantasy Tactics long time ago, but didn't went far than chapter 3th? Mmm I don't remember that much about it either, I failed to find it interesting

In the other hand, Pokémon Conquest was good for me, I loved it, it was a compilation of 3 things I like: a gameplay similar to Fire Emblem, Pokémon and KOEI Warriors.

But another SRPG I liked was the Luminous Arc games for NDS, they are SRPG too, and even have something similar to supports, but maybe people remember these games more for the fanservice? Maybe you can check them, I can't say they are "TOO AWESOME" but is another option you can try

I like Luminous Arc 2 (which had a lower Exp curve btw...), but the first is one of the most awfull game I ever play.

The ridiculous difficulty curve (extra easy except trhat one battle that is almost impossible), and slow as hell (having a lag after each actions is unacceptable, especially when the graphism are nothing to write home about),..

And obviously Nikolai and Kaph are the worst, but this isn't gameplay related.

Shining force have the same simplicity and fast pacing, but is less complex (It's exp curve would be interresting without Egress).

[Espinosa]

I enjoy the FFT series to a varying extent depending on which one we're talking about.

Tactics Ogre games are fun, but time-consuming and I tend to not finish my runs.

Disgaea is a bit too easy, and the puzzles are in the centre of the game. I don't think lowmanning is a thing in Disgaea because it's generally a good idea to have multiple strong characters than a single strong one (for the storyline anyway). Equipment is generally more important than levels there, though levels also matter a good bit.

Pokemon Conquest was a fun little game the two times I played it; don't think there's any reason to go back and play it again.

Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume was a ton of fun and I'll be sure to replay it when I can slide a cart into something, because doing it on keyboard is detrimental to enjoying the thing.

Breath of Fire 5 / Dragon Quarter is a great game, as drastically different as it may be from the first four. It could've still used a full overworld and a larger cast of characters to make it more enjoyable.

The Devil Survivor titles are basically just another Atlus thing; I 100%'d the first one but could never force myself to finish the second one even though I attempted to play it thrice or so. I know it's improved compared to the first game but I get bored of it past some point.

[Shrouded In Myth]

Not really, from what I observed SRPGs are actually two genres, which I call Fire Emblem-Type and Tactics Ogre-Type, based off of where their primary inspiration comes from

Copy-Paste from a post I made on r/fireemblem

I divide SRPG's into two types: Fire Emblem-Type and Tactics Ogre-Type. Fire Emblem Type games take influence from Fire Emblem and focus more on the strategy part with a lack of grinding, different objectives and varied terrain. Some games I consider to be in this type are Super Robot Wars, Valkyria Chronicles, and Langrisser. Tactics Ogre type games are basically JRPG's on a grid and focus on complex mechanics that gives you a lot of options freedom to customize your units, giving it more of a sandbox feel. Games I consider to be in this type are Final Fantasy Tactics, NIS games and Idea Factory Games.

I do not like Tactics Ogre-Type games because all their complexity doesn't matter because their usually poor level design doesn't give reason for those mechanics to matter. These types of games are the more popular of the two, since the current video game audience cares more about mechanics that they can mess around with, rather than level design that puts those mechanics to use. Just look at the popularity of open-world games and games with procedurally-generated content.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Nah, i prefer the simplicity of FE over the others in the genre.

[Lantairu]

I know, this is isn't really SRPG, more just strategy, but I really, really got into Civ V Brave New World. Other than that, though, I agree.

[Roflolxp54]

I've pretty much played only Fire Emblem and Kamidori Alchemy Meister in the turn-based SRPG category.

[General Banzai]

Shining Force rocks, AoE magic roast some fucks yo

[Tamanoir]

Shining Force rocks, AoE magic roast some fucks yo

Did you played FEDA ?

It's more or less the same, but grittier, and with a basic system of alignment (Between Law and Chaos).

[Avarice Shadow]

I'm the same way. I've tried to get into other SRPG's but they don't grip my attention like Fire Emblem does. The only two SRPG's I've managed to get into are Disgaea and Natural Doctrine.

[Icemario]

I've never gotten to play another SRPG that isn't Fire Emblem, although I'm certain it would feel very awkward to adjust unless it played similarly because of this.

Edit: Oh actually I played Pokemon Conquest, which is actually my favourite Pokemon game and I enjoyed it very much. But besides that, I don't think so.

I don't think it's weird to only enjoy Fire Emblem, though.

Edited September 15, 2015 by Icemario

[llee1000]

I haven't really played any other SRPGs besides Advance wars and Pokemon Conquest. Advance Wars seem... different. I'm just on the tutorial stuff and I don't know how to skip it. But from what I played, it seems quite complicated. And everyone's a generic soldier!

Pokemon Conquest was fun enough, but needed some fleshing out in the story and gameplay.

[Zerxen]

Hmm, I tried replaying FFTA on the GBA the other day. After some patience, I actually enjoyed it. Not to keep on the isometric angle still.

[KMT4ever]

I haven't really played any other SRPGs besides Advance wars and Pokemon Conquest. Advance Wars seem... different. I'm just on the tutorial stuff and I don't know how to skip it. But from what I played, it seems quite complicated. And everyone's a generic soldier!

Advance Wars is quite an interesting foil to FE. Individual units aren't very important, especially since they don't carry over between missions, so efficiency and speed become more important than unit preservation.

The land-air-sea paradigm can get complicated later on, but it's not that hard to get used to. Incidentally, which AW are you playing?

[llee1000]

Advance Wars is quite an interesting foil to FE. Individual units aren't very important, especially since they don't carry over between missions, so efficiency and speed become more important than unit preservation.

The land-air-sea paradigm can get complicated later on, but it's not that hard to get used to. Incidentally, which AW are you playing?

Yeah, I've noticed that. There isn't a huge emphasis on character, instead you I find that AW is about using your units in the most efficient way to gain the best victory.

I'm currently playing the original one, but I haven't played it in a while because of school.

[Glitchy]

The only other SRPG I've played was Pokémon Conquest, it was very fun and possibly my favourite Pokémon game but I enjoy FE a lot more.

Edited September 17, 2015 by Glitchy