Rezzy Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I'll chime in and say that the gameplay balance is very uneven. Some units join at way too low a level, and the maps after chapter 18 I believe it is simply stop being a challenge even on Lunatic due to how much space there is on the maps; you'll never be swarmed. Also, watching through Path of Radiance to refresh my old memories, I'm shocked at how much they discuss strategy and politics (although admittedly often sloppily and rather blandly written such) considering we have none of that in Fates. It's bizarre how such an important element of a medieval strategy game has just disappeared. Does Corrin even once mention strategy, supplies or other important stuff outside of supports? In the boat map of Conquests, they mention the gold you're given for your campaign, mostly since the gimmick for that map was the enemy stole a little bit of your gold every turn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanFox15 Posted May 22, 2016 Author Share Posted May 22, 2016 I really appreciate all of the continued advice you guys are giving. Thanks a ton! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWerdna Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Supporting her, on the other hand, can get a bit tricky. If you mean getting her supports up, then just fight my castle teams that are weaker than you to grind supports on her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yvette Posted May 25, 2016 Share Posted May 25, 2016 Also, watching through Path of Radiance to refresh my old memories, I'm shocked at how much they discuss strategy and politics (although admittedly often sloppily and rather blandly written such) considering we have none of that in Fates. It's bizarre how such an important element of a medieval strategy game has just disappeared. Does Corrin even once mention strategy, supplies or other important stuff outside of supports? Corrin hardly ever mentions strategy. It's surprising that Leo didn't push him to outside of the supports, at least I can't recall anything too relevant. You would think it would be mentioned in Conquest, with it having such a variety of maps and objectives. I miss the good old days of Soren throwing strategies at Ike and of Izuka arguing with Micaiah over their next move. The lack of politics in Fates is disappointing, it could have potentially added more dramatic elements and complexity to each side: corruption besides Iago and Garon, prevalent nobles ruling over certain parts of Hoshido/Nohr, inner power struggles, etc. If present on both sides, they could have been less morally black and white (looking at you Birthright), showing how "humans will be humans" and that good and bad are too general of terms to be applied to either nation. With FE having acquired a much larger audience with the arrival of Awakening, I'm not sure IS is certain that these traditional elements will appeal to newer fans of the series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanFox15 Posted May 25, 2016 Author Share Posted May 25, 2016 I agree with Yvette. I don't think I explained it very well, but my biggest issue with Birthright was the story. I felt that the game definitely could have explored a more 'shades of gray' approach. I wondered if a Hoshido noble bent on usurping the crown might have been a decent addition. Or fighting against Nohrian spies inside Hoshido. Inner power struggles, like Yvette said. The 'faith, trust, and pixie dust' dialogue throughout the game seemed out of place in a game that seemed like moral ambiguity might have been a better route to take. The events of the last several chapters, in particular, struck me as incredibly cheesy. I got the overall feeling like most of the development time was spent streamlining the gameplay and not on the story. That said, I don't like criticizing just to criticize. I admire the ambition of the developers. I like what they were trying to do. I enjoyed the gameplay. I even found myself starting to like some of Birthright's characters. I wouldn't say that I feel as if Birthright is worth the forty bucks I spent on it, but it has kept my interest long enough for you guys to help me with Conquest. Thanks again for all your input. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thane Posted May 25, 2016 Share Posted May 25, 2016 That said, I don't like criticizing just to criticize. I admire the ambition of the developers. I like what they were trying to do. I enjoyed the gameplay. I even found myself starting to like some of Birthright's characters. I wouldn't say that I feel as if Birthright is worth the forty bucks I spent on it, but it has kept my interest long enough for you guys to help me with Conquest. Most people here don\t just criticize just to complain but rather to discuss different aspects of the game and maybe, in the best case scenario, make their voices heard by anyone who has the ability to relay that information to people in charge in order to improve the next installment. Intelligent System acknowledged that people had a problem with Awakening's story directly in an interview, and it wouldn't surprise me if a few of the changes made in Fates are a direct result of people discussing the game's (or series') weaker gameplay elements. I believe Fates' story is a particularly hot potato because the gameplay is for the most part very solid while the hyped story failed to deliver on every level, which makes the intelligence-insulting writing stick out even more. There's much to say and much to improve, so I'd say it's fine as long as you don't derail threads or lash out against people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanFox15 Posted May 28, 2016 Author Share Posted May 28, 2016 Ladies and gents, I have taken the plunge. I've been playing Conquest for a few days now. So far I'm actually quite impressed with what the developers have done, though I'm not entirely sure if it's because Birthright lowered my expectations quite a lot. Thanks again for chiming in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Holy Elf Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Hope you enjoy it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thane Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Ladies and gents, I have taken the plunge. I've been playing Conquest for a few days now. So far I'm actually quite impressed with what the developers have done, though I'm not entirely sure if it's because Birthright lowered my expectations quite a lot. Thanks again for chiming in. Have fun, and tell us what you thought when you're done! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanFox15 Posted June 13, 2016 Author Share Posted June 13, 2016 Hey everyone! I realize it's been quite some time since the last posts on this thread, but I've finally finished Conquest. Despite the fact that I didn't have the 'true' Conquest experience, I found the game and the story highly enjoyable. Weirdly, I had a lot more fun with Conquest than I did on Birthright, despite the fact that I played both on the same difficulty level. Anyway, I'm officially declaring an open discussion about Conquest. What was your favorite part about the game? Least favorite? Most-liked Character? Least-liked? Favorite level? Paralogue? What about least favorite? I look forward to hearing some of your replies! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinks Their Own Way Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 Thoughts on Conquest (I played this route first) : Easily my favourite of the three routes (I did enjoy all of them). I understand Birthright is suppose to be much easier, but sometimes it felt a little dumb downed gameplay wise, were as Conquest I feel was challenging but fun (even on Normal, I failed Chapter 10 of Nohr and fuck any level with lots of Ninjas in them). I mainly I picked Conquest first was because I much prefer the Nohr siblings way more the Hoshido siblings. I really like Charlotte as a character (a lot more depth to her than one might expect). I hate Arthur, I really hate Arthur (gameplay wise and personality wise). I like the paralogue's where the child starts off as a non NPC, least favourite are the ones where they are NPC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rezzy Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 (edited) Hey everyone! I realize it's been quite some time since the last posts on this thread, but I've finally finished Conquest. Despite the fact that I didn't have the 'true' Conquest experience, I found the game and the story highly enjoyable. Weirdly, I had a lot more fun with Conquest than I did on Birthright, despite the fact that I played both on the same difficulty level. Anyway, I'm officially declaring an open discussion about Conquest. What was your favorite part about the game? Least favorite? Most-liked Character? Least-liked? Favorite level? Paralogue? What about least favorite? I look forward to hearing some of your replies! Favorite Part: I like that they tried something new, instead of the tried and true FE formula like BR. I also liked the varies map objectives and difficulty. Least Favorite: They could have done a better job of world building and give us a political map, so we could figure out what's going on geographically Most liked character: LEO! Least liked: Peri Favorite Level: That's a tough one. The fabled Chapter 10 comes to mind, but that could change if I went through and thought about it for a while. Favorite Paralogue: Forrest's jumps to mind Least-liked: Soleil's Paralogue, it's hard to move units efficiently due to the maze of houses, none of which you can visit, and the annoying reinforcements are reminiscent of Birthright Glad you enjoyed Conquests. It's more aligned with past FEs. Edited June 14, 2016 by Rezzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.