More Unpopular Fire Emblem Opinions

[Lord Raven]

Ok...seriously, what is so great about Percival and Milady? I used them both and they barely sweep enemies within one or two hits as they need killer weapons to do so.

Neither does anyone else. They have much more durability and are really really good right off the bat, even on normal mode. Consistent ORKOing requires a shitload of rigging or arena abuse in FE6 and even that won't save you towards the later chapters.

So in BB's case, if its normal mode itself frustrated the hell out of me, then I don't see myself wanting to play it on a harder difficulty since the game to me is not enjoyable on Normal difficulty. But I get why people like it because of its insane level of extra thinking since most units you get are average and you can't always rely on them doing well(except Rutger and Dieck) and how the fact that Roy is weak gives some form of tactics that you must carefully place him in places where he won't get killed instantly. To me however, that's not done in a fun manner because the maps themselves are too frustrating most of the time and the game is super harsh on enemy reinforcement turn phrase.

Your favorite FE game is Awakening. Glass houses, bro.

Please give source that IS fired him because I think its the opposite that he himself wanted to leave IS. Also, he's not exactly the one who created the series as it was also Tohru Narihiro that was partly involved with the creation as well....idk. I guess seeing how the franchise itself has little to no history of creation unlike other IPs like Mario or Pokemon that its difficult for me to know what exactly happened during the development.

That's what "let him go" means. That's not a euphemism for getting fired, that's basically convincing him to not come back. He left over some bullshit with Paper Mario.

Kaga in general is enigmatic and a private man, so we won't see that much dev history, but keep in mind that there are a lot of notes and pre-release history on SF.

As for FE not being on level with FF, when you consider how the first FE game didn't fully educate the players on how to play the game and also because of its weak marketing, FF was bound to have done better and that one game difference alone made FF do better.

But even so, I think its unfair to compare between the two since both of them play very differently...not to mention that FF was a near death sentence to Square at the time had that game not sold as well as it did then.

but FE atleast within the Nintendo community is popular that we are bound to get it in a proper treatment like Nintendo's other IPs...atleast for now.

This is an extremely irrelevant tangent. My point was that you can't afford to take as many risks with a relatively small franchise, even today as one of the key IPs it's relatively small. FF games will always sell like hotcakes due to the massive popularity so they can always afford risks.

TRS is more like FE5 than FE6 was, but that sold well enough. It was still noticeably different; it was almost a hybrid of Gaiden and FE4/5, but still not quite FE5. FE6 was also quite different from FE5, but FE7-10 played very similar, FE11/12 played very similar, and FE13 was FE6-10 with a different evade formula, and FE14 played quite differently to all of them.

Berwick Saga, however, sold like 5-digit units and was tremendously unpopular despite massive critical acclaim. This game was such a risk for a niche company and genre that it killed his company pretty much, and we didn't see anything from Kaga again until Vestaria which I still haven't played.

[Harvey]

Your favorite FE game is Awakening. Glass houses, bro.

Awakening is more forgiving in that aspect since you get a lot of overpowered units and that the pair up system pretty much saves you a lot. Tharja's Nosferatu is good enough to kill off a chunk of armoured units in one go.

Not to mention that its very easy to know where the enemies will spawn unlike BB where they can spawn like from anywhere.

[Lord Raven]

Well yeah, Awakening is way easier. FE6's ambush reinforcements are dumb because they are basically traps (so you have to cross certain lines for them to appear) and there's a sense of randomness to them in the second half of the game (so they spawn from certain huts in one of the Sacae chapters). Ambush reinforcements are still a dumb concept, even in Awakening where it is dumb but Awakening is so easy and broken that it doesn't let you focus on how dumb ambush reinforcements are.

Even still, pre-FE7 games (and lyn mode of FE7) did ambush reinforcements, as did FE11 (I think?) and FE12. It doesn't make it any less of a design flaw, but you probably shouldn't single out FE6 for it.

[Refa]

Honestly, for how unfriendly FE5 was, I don't remember most of its ambush spawns being particularly dickish (or maybe they stood out less because, well, FE5 heh).

EDIT FE4 basically didn't have ambush spawns, though. Like, there were reinforcements but they were either extremely telegraphed (either an enemy boss retreated back into a castle or you took over a castle) or they started far away enough such that it didn't dick you over.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Refa

[Lord Raven]

ambush spawns are still dumb

[BrightBow]

ambush spawns are still dumb

Not inherently. They can be an interesting obstacle to deal with. Fire Emblem just does a terrible job with it. Mainly because it won't tell you in advance what you will be dealing with, so the game could always spawn something that could completely screw you over. So if you don't want to make a wild guess, then the only save decision you can make is to stay a Paladin w/ Javelin range away from every possible spawn point.

Tear Ring Saga did that well with Summoners. Summoned creatures could attack on the same turn where they were summoned but you could tell by the Staff of the Summoner what kind of creatures were going to show up. So if a freshly spawned Harpie shots down your Pegasus Knight, it's your own fault because you knew in advance that a flying Bow user with 5 movement would show up in the proximity of the enemy Summoner.

[Lord Raven]

TRS' staff spawns were bad because of the randomness too; they weren't ever in set spots. That's my key issue with FE6's ambush spawns by the way.

[BrightBow]

TRS' staff spawns were bad because of the randomness too; they weren't ever in set spots. That's my key issue with FE6's ambush spawns by the way.

The number of summoned creatures and their precise starting location may be random but it's a level of randomness that can be prepared for. Like, that Harpie wasn't just randomly going to have a bow that deals effective damage against regular mounted units for example.

[Lord Raven]

Well it's less about that and more about how far away from the center they spawn, and the fact that how far away they attack you from also depends on how they move (which is also RNG based). There's a lot of stupid RNG behind summons and monsters that makes the TRS summon staff mechanic annoying.

Maybe I'm just frustrated cause I remember almost finishing a chapter then suddenly a harpy spawned like 5-6 tiles away from a summoner and went after a character I didn't think they would go after.

[Harvey]

Well yeah, Awakening is way easier. FE6's ambush reinforcements are dumb because they are basically traps (so you have to cross certain lines for them to appear) and there's a sense of randomness to them in the second half of the game (so they spawn from certain huts in one of the Sacae chapters). Ambush reinforcements are still a dumb concept, even in Awakening where it is dumb but Awakening is so easy and broken that it doesn't let you focus on how dumb ambush reinforcements are.

Even still, pre-FE7 games (and lyn mode of FE7) did ambush reinforcements, as did FE11 (I think?) and FE12. It doesn't make it any less of a design flaw, but you probably shouldn't single out FE6 for it.

I think almost every Fire Emblem game has a bunch of reinforcements that show up from time to time and this is done to help train units and to also make the maps challenging.

Its the instant enemy phrase as soon as the reinforcements show up that make it irritating for FE6 because again, most spawns are not predictable and come at tight situations.

[BrightBow]

Well it's less about that and more about how far away from the center they spawn, and the fact that how far away they attack you from also depends on how they move (which is also RNG based). There's a lot of stupid RNG behind summons and monsters that makes the TRS summon staff mechanic annoying.

Maybe I'm just frustrated cause I remember almost finishing a chapter then suddenly a harpy spawned like 5-6 tiles away from a summoner and went after a character I didn't think they would go after.

5-6 tiles? Yikes! I don't think I've ever seen that before. I would have guessed 3 tiles at most. Yeah, that level of randomness is definitely not acceptable. I still think it's a rather good system at it's core though.

[Lord Raven]

Keep in mind it's not 5-6 in a straight line but the fact that monster AI is random in general is what makes TRS' summoning system so bad. TRS in general has a plethora of flaws in terms of gameplay, but I also really love the game anyway.

[FrostyFireMage]

Considering yourself a good player for using characters like Seth and Marcus feels pretty contradictory to me

Edited January 1, 2017 by FrostyFireMage

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

in FE4's Gen. 1 most foot units are easier to train than each horse unit - Sigurd, Lex and Cuan.

[Harvey]

For my most unpopular opinion, this will probably be similar to that of what I argued last year...

I understand why people like Final Fantasy Tactics due to its very complex strategy that it offers more complex mechanics than what Fire Emblem will ever have.

...but to say that FFT is better than FE in every single angle is ridiculous. You can't compare them and claim that one is better than the other because they both play differently...not to mention that FFT is more dormant than FE since...what? 2007? And let's not forget that FFT's mechanics is loosely based on Tactics Ogre with the exception of the class change.

FFT gives you chance to revive your fallen units so should anything happen to your units, you can always revive them and things will work out so in that aspect,

FFT doesn't force you to think twice when units suffer critical damage.....

FE on the other hand DOES force you atleast on Classic mode. That extra layer of tactic depth that you have to keep your units alive throughout the whole battle is more rewarding than to defeat/rout the enemies.

Then there's the simplicity of the game mechanics. FE is the simplest RPG series I've played besides Pokemon. Its stats are straightforward and while I don't understand a few things here and there, its a lot more understandable than FFT which requires the player to understand the mechanics better.

FE puts in simple mechanics in favor of making the maps challenging. FE has a lot of map diversity and each map is memorable enough that players can do a second playthrough of them on harder difficulties.

Since FFT's maps are smaller in size, there isn't really a whole lot of variety in them besides very few different objectives but this puts it to an advantage over FE as more maps mean the story can be longer which personally I wish FE can have more chapters like FE7

But the reason FE has less chapters is because the maps in FE are generally long that those maps can last quite a while and that it forces the player to think carefully of who to train since resources are limited. Of course FE now has that unlimited resources starting from Sacred Stones, Awakening and Birthright but for the most part, FE often has limited resources that make the player think carefully.

Sure FFT has weather Terrain that is implemented more than FE, but really, FE doesn't need it that much as FFT simply because FE's weapon triangle is tactical enough that there's no need for that extra tactics.

So to sum it up, each has its own merits but to me, I found FE more fun than FFT simply because again, I gave my reasons why I love FE and FFT simply can't emulate that FE feeling to me.

[NekoKnight]

*snip*

I don't think "FE isn't a worse series than FFT" is going to be unpopular on a Fire Emblem fan website.

[Irysa]

5-6 tiles? Yikes! I don't think I've ever seen that before. I would have guessed 3 tiles at most. Yeah, that level of randomness is definitely not acceptable. I still think it's a rather good system at it's core though.

Gaiden's implementation was better since they only spawn around the summoner, even if the amount is random. I do like TRS but Kaga kinda seemed to have a somewhat unhealthy obcession with adding even more randomness into the game...the worst shit is Mogalls randomly deciding to split instead of attack.

Edited January 1, 2017 by Irysa

[Harvey]

So I noticed in a very old thread of how some people complained that Raven is not a mounted unit......um...just what the hell was all that about?

Raven has good move for crying out loud. let's keep in mind that FE7 doesn't have that many mounted units and the ones that do have them are the not really that strong enough except for maybe three of them.

I can understand the argument that Hector should be a mounted unit since his move is a little low, but Raven? Sheesh!

He's already sexy enough and can tear down anyone even the final boss! making him a mounted unit only makes him as broken as Ryoma(who doesn't need to be mounted btw)

And also, this aint FE4..this is FE7!

Edited January 3, 2017 by Harvey

[Magical Glace]

Raven has basic foot unit move.

Also FE7's mounts are almost all very good. Isadora is the only one that might be considered somewhat sub par, and even then, she's decent. Marcus, the Christmas Cavs, Lowen, Rath, and Priscilla are all viewed positively overall last I checked.

[Harvey]

Raven has basic foot unit move.

Thus my argument of why people complained that he's not a mounted unit....I mean, have you ever seen a mounted mercenary before?(besides Bewoulf...and his son.)

[Magical Glace]

Being mounted is automatically an advantage though.

Unless you're Fiona, due to FE10 mechanics really being against mounts for the chapters where she can be used.

[Vaikanfu]

-I don't think Path of Radiance is as great as everyone hypes it up to be. As a standalone game, it's pretty fun and worth the play, but as a Fire Emblem game, it just feels lacking. Both in story and gameplay, it just didn't do very much for me.

-Fates story is not bad by any means. In fact, it's really rather good. Conquest was great and goes into a lot of issues that most Fire Emblem games (at least the ones I've played) don't cover very well or at all.

-The original Mystery of the Emblem is one of the best games in the series, due to the fact that anyone can be viable with the star shards and a little bit of work, and for the fact the story is so well written even with its simplicity. Akaneia as a whole was great.

[Thane]

-Fates story is not bad by any means. In fact, it's really rather good. Conquest was great and goes into a lot of issues that most Fire Emblem games (at least the ones I've played) don't cover very well or at all.

Feel free to expand upon this, I'm genuinely curious to hear what you have to say and what you consider important in a story in general.

[Vaikanfu]

Feel free to expand upon this, I'm genuinely curious to hear what you have to say and what you consider important in a story in general.

Well, one instance was in Conquest, when the Nohrian army is marching through the Hoshidan capital in the opening of chapter 24. The citizens watching in fear and heckling at Corrin while Hans and Iago keep them at bay with intimidation tactics just feels very fitting and well done. Not only that, how often are you on the invading side in a Fire Emblem game? For example, when Bern was making rounds in Binding Blade, or Akaneia invading Aritia in the earlier chapters of Mystery of the Emblem.

The picking between the family that raised you and blood family thing was honestly fairly interesting too, even if Birthright didn't do much other than make Corrin out to be some justice seeking fool, bent on taking down Garon. I loved how Conquest was the clear morally wrong choice, and everything was done to try and make things work out and they don't. There's genuine conflict going on with Corrin. He/She knows what they're doing is wrong, and they want to make things right, but because of the circumstances, they don't, and that's entertaining and enjoyable.

I mean, Birthrout sort of had that, but it was less actual moral problems and more "Oh god what about my siblings, what if I have to fight them." I genuinely wish Elise didn't sacrifice herself like that, that way we could have our FE standard "Long, draining battle with the Camus" archetype.

[twistedxgrace]

Well, one instance was in Conquest, when the Nohrian army is marching through the Hoshidan capital in the opening of chapter 24. The citizens watching in fear and heckling at Corrin while Hans and Iago keep them at bay with intimidation tactics just feels very fitting and well done. Not only that, how often are you on the invading side in a Fire Emblem game? For example, when Bern was making rounds in Binding Blade, or Akaneia invading Aritia in the earlier chapters of Mystery of the Emblem.

The picking between the family that raised you and blood family thing was honestly fairly interesting too, even if Birthright didn't do much other than make Corrin out to be some justice seeking fool, bent on taking down Garon. I loved how Conquest was the clear morally wrong choice, and everything was done to try and make things work out and they don't. There's genuine conflict going on with Corrin. He/She knows what they're doing is wrong, and they want to make things right, but because of the circumstances, they don't, and that's entertaining and enjoyable.

I mean, Birthrout sort of had that, but it was less actual moral problems and more "Oh god what about my siblings, what if I have to fight them." I genuinely wish Elise didn't sacrifice herself like that, that way we could have our FE standard "Long, draining battle with the Camus" archetype.

While it's neat that in Conquest, your country is the one that invades, Nohr's still not neccissarily "bad," and Corrin being both a pacifist and a self-insert lord (meaning the player can't decide what Corrin does - what if they wanted to be pure merciless like Iago and Hans? Or in my case, just attack Garon straight on as soon as possible in order to prevent said more bloodshed instead of obeying everything he says) brings in much of the criticism for Fates' story. The main reason they invade at all is because of a plot device that serves as an advertisement for the third path, so to see Corrin fail to stop the violence for that motivation alone makes them and Azura look not very bright.