I don't feel entirely satisfied with the current direction of FE

[Lord Raven]

3: What was angry about any of my posts? I've been calm, I've been cool, I've been collected, and I've been concise. Yes, I've used some mildly strong sentiments, but never expressed these sentiments hostilely. If anything, you and others have been hostile to me for disagreeing with my opinion, as if my belief that casual mode is a bad idea is an affront to your very existence.

You're awfully defensive, saying stuff like bullet point #2. "If you don't like it, I don't care, let me keep talking." At any rate, I'm not trying to tone police, you're just pretty upset over something, and I don't think anybody is making that claim, so much as you're asserting that Casual Mode is Scrub Mode.

Saying what's in bold is pretty much indicative that you're defensive for no real reason.

4: What am I trying to say? I've already said it several times - casual mode and reclassing dilute and cheapen the core strategy elements of Fire Emblem and detract from the intended experience the franchise is built upon. I've been saying that since my first post in this thread (along with some other stuff noone seems to have been upset about). Yes, actually, I think in this specific case, this isn't a choice players should have. Fire Emblem isn't a game that's supposed to hold your hand and tell you it'll be ok if you make a mistake. Its a game where choices have consequences, and those consequences can not be easily rectified without giving something up. I've made the Dark Souls comparison before, and that's how I feel about it. No, gaming is not a hobby that needs to contort to my standards, not as a whole, but I'd rather like it if games with established reputations didn't lower their standards either.

Cheapens how? Nobody is forcing you to play casual mode, and casual mode doesn't change the design elements of any chapter. If it somehow did, then the onus is on you to prove how it would have changed the design elements of the game. Does casual mode honestly affect your experiences in this game?

How is casual mode hand-holding anyway? You still have to finish the chapter... This is pretty much asserting that casual mode is scrub mode, rather than any sort of substantial argument. You're setting a standard for FE that isn't universal and you're saying that casual mode caters to a lesser crowd. You're pretty much saying that a game is wrong for not being held to your standards - which doesn't seem logical anyway, since again the choice assures that your experience isn't cheapened.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Lord Raven

[eclipse]

You mean that single use staff that only a specific character can use in a single specific chapter at the very end of the game whose most practical application is at best to revive someone who got killed in said chapter?

A more practical comparison would be the Valkyrie staff in FE4. I actually -like- that, because the staff implements the ressurection into the mechanics of the game: you can revive anyone, but only one at a time. The staff breaks, but can be repaired, but this repair costs a substantial amount of gold. Said staff comes late, but not TOO late in the game to have impractical use. It's meant to break you out of a bind, but it can not be easily abused either. Spamming the Valk Staff requires large amounts of gold which means either some serious Arena power on the user's end (which isn't likely because they'll be Claude or Claude's child and Claude has no skills for fighting with), a lover with serious arena power, pre-planning village visits, or making good use of your thief, or some combination thereof all this. It isn't just a handicap - its part of the strategy, part of the game. You can use it to undo a mistake, but you better be ready to pay the price for it. That is good game design. That is implementing a safeguard crutch as a MECHANIC. That is giving both incentive and consequence to your actions. That is what casual mode lacks, and is why I dislike it.

Yes. The staff that spits in the face of permadeath, which means that death is no longer permanent (since you can kill one character, and have him/her come back later). In FE11, it's part of a very interesting loophole.

[spoiler=3DS stuff]Conquest, the game that's supposed to appeal to the older, hardcore crowd, also has a one-use staff with a similar mechanic, that's restricted to a single class (though given the requirements, it might as well be a PRF weapon). I don't think it's an accident.

[Thane]

You missed my point. Will answer you as well as part of Thane's post. Particularly me, the closest pure/classic FE experience I think of (because I haven't played FE1-3 and 5), is the GBA era, specifically FE7. In 3 words: a simple game. A standard story, mid sized cast, a straight forward/linear experience, a small (and limited) room for grinding, varied classes, etc. What I define as a modern experience is right from the 3DS era where they introduced a bunch of features (most of them in a flawed way) that makes FE feel overloaded: grinding without boundaries, loads of class changing, (the debated) casual mode (don't remember if it was in fe12), a children system pulled off kinda meh, dlc (further grinding), etc. I feel it is being ruined because it feels way too artificial and overloaded of stuff that wipes out its simplicity and twists in so many ways the strategic part.

Yes, for you that's the "pure" Fire Emblem experience, but not for a lot of fans, myself included.

This is not an argument, just a list of arbitrary criteria which has no place in a debate about the merits and flaws of an optional casual mode.

@Thane Regarding your friend's example, do one find death so frequently in FE? It's ok that some might find it stressful to avoid death by coming up with different strategies. But the point of the game is to strategize and overcome the enemy, there are plenty of tutorials, tutorial modes that soften the difficulty. If she wants to play FE for pairing up characters, building supports up and whatnot, it's totally ok, but permadeath doesn't ruin her experience at all if she progresses through the game because units don't automatically die nor the game kills you every turn. For some reason there are difficulty modes.

She's still playing Birthright. She doesn't play very often, forgets thing during the large gaps in which she doesn't play and grinds for support conversations. Why should her enjoyment be hindered because you say so? Why should she be forced to deal with an element of the series she just doesn't like?

[The Geek]

In my opinion this is definitely a case of "don't knock it til you try it" for the new games. Casual mode is optional, and anyone that tries to tell you that the new games are balanced around it is full of it, if you want to play classic (as I do because I am fully determined to not have fun while playing Fire Emblem) nothing is stopping you.

Reclassing is a bit of a mixed bag for me because I feel differently about it depending on the game. I don't like how it worked in Shadow Dragon and New Mystery largely because most characters in FE1/3 are defined almost entirely by what class they are. Awakening and Fates did it better because every character except the Avatar has a limited pool of class options they have access to even if all their options don't always make sense (Cordelia why can you be a Dark Mage?) but it usually does (ie: Cherche's base class is Wyvern Rider but she can reclass into the Cleric and Troubadour lines because of her domestic training). It's an interesting mechanic and there's a whole new level of strategy based around deciding who to reclass and when.

[Magical Glace]

I'm just going to pop in and say:

I like that Permadeath encourages me to reset until I'm perfect. I want to be perfect. (Except with things like NPC Treck where them dying isn't really my fault, and I don't plan on using them anyway).

I want non-perfect play to be treated as such.

Casual mode removes non-perfect play's treatment as non-perfect. If your units come back, what's the point of playing as well as you can from a survival standpoint?

Ecouraging resets =/= bad game design. It's a means of encouraging the player to play better.

[Jave]

Visual novels still require player input in the form of choices and a lot of them have branching pathways? There's player agency involved. Not the same thing as letting a strategy RPG play itself with characters that can't die.

Not all of them. I've played at least two Visual Novels with no choices or branching paths whatsoever. They're still catalogued as Visual Novels and are part of their own sub-genre "Kinetic Novels" among the VN community.

[Jotari]

Not all of them. I've played at least two Visual Novels with no choices or branching paths whatsoever. They're still catalogued as Visual Novels and are part of their own sub-genre "Kinetic Novels" among the VN community.

That name's always confused me. Kinetic implies there is motion or action of some sort. Static or Linear Visual Novels seems like it'd be a more appropriate term.

[OliKad]

As long as the Gameplay remains good, thats all that matters to me.

Pretty much this, honestly. :P

[Florete]

I'm just going to pop in and say:

I like that Permadeath encourages me to reset until I'm perfect. I want to be perfect. (Except with things like NPC Treck where them dying isn't really my fault, and I don't plan on using them anyway).

I want non-perfect play to be treated as such.

Casual mode removes non-perfect play's treatment as non-perfect. If your units come back, what's the point of playing as well as you can from a survival standpoint?

Ecouraging resets =/= bad game design. It's a means of encouraging the player to play better.

It may be fun for you, but it's not good game design. There's a fundamental disconnect if a player feels the need to reset in order to continue; it literally pulls them out of the game. If resetting is required to play "perfectly," there should be a reasonable incentive to continue playing "imperfectly."

[Darros]

I've never had a problem with casual mode existing for one reason: I can ignore it.

I'm not a fan of casual mode. I'll probably never play it because it doesn't feel right to me. But it being included is drawing people in without alienating the old fans by making it forced. So really I think that casual mode was implemented right. Phoenix is something else but once again, I can ignore it so whatever ((I did play conquest on phoenix once for shiggles. it was interesting))

It's sad but factual that Fire Emblem can't go back to what it was if it wants to thrive and survive as a series. There was a lot of downfall once the games came to North America. No, I'm not exactly thrilled with where the games are going ((especially the stories)) but they're not awful games and it beats nothing IMO.

[Jave]

That name's always confused me. Kinetic implies there is motion or action of some sort. Static or Linear Visual Novels seems like it'd be a more appropriate term.

I think it refers to the fact that you can set the text to auto-scroll and you will get through the whole game like that without pausing. It technically never stops "moving".

[Quintessence]

Yes, for you that's the "pure" Fire Emblem experience, but not for a lot of fans, myself included.

This is not an argument, just a list of arbitrary criteria which has no place in a debate about the merits and flaws of an optional casual mode.

She's still playing Birthright. She doesn't play very often, forgets thing during the large gaps in which she doesn't play and grinds for support conversations. Why should her enjoyment be hindered because you say so? Why should she be forced to deal with an element of the series she just doesn't like?

Uh, no. It is a fact, it is not an opinion. Classic FE is classic FE and modern FE is modern FE whether you began playing through FE7 or FE13. It's the same thing if you play Pokemon Red/Blue and play Pokemon X/Y; classic is classic, modern is modern.

My question is: where does permadeath kill her experience? It is as if permadeath destroys her ability to enjoy the story, conversations, pairings and supports. The root cause reason here is more that she doesn't like the mechanic or has fears upon facing it. On the other hand, regardless of what I say or not say she will play as she like because it is her choice, and mine as well, regardless of what is discussed here, so what's your point? I'm not forcing anyone to play in a way, just showing that most concerns about permadeath aren't inherently for difficulty (because huge help there is) but rather for personal tastes, habits or ways of playing games. Problem is that it became a paradigm that FE is hard and hostile to newcomers. If it were true then there would have not existed quite a niche playing FE pre Awakening, because it even had casual players (not in the same amount as now but still).

[Jotari]

It may be fun for you, but it's not good game design. There's a fundamental disconnect if a player feels the need to reset in order to continue; it literally pulls them out of the game. If resetting is required to play "perfectly," there should be a reasonable incentive to continue playing "imperfectly."

If players are deriving enjoyment from it then it is good game design. And if players aren't deriving enjoyment in it (in some way, even if its subconscious) then they simply wouldn't do it so it wouldn't even be a feature of the design.

I think it refers to the fact that you can set the text to auto-scroll and you will get through the whole game like that without pausing. It technically never stops "moving".

Doing some (light) research on the matter, I think it might be due to a company called Kinetic that primary makes predetermined visual novels. Which is a pretty satisfactory explanation. Kinetic sounds like one of those buzzwords companies like to associate themselves with (regardless as to how much sense it makes with the products they make).

Edited December 11, 2016 by Jotari

[Jave]

Uh, no. It is a fact, it is not an opinion. Classic FE is classic FE and modern FE is modern FE whether you began playing through FE7 or FE13. It's the same thing if you play Pokemon Red/Blue and play Pokemon X/Y; classic is classic, modern is modern.

Define "Classic".

Not in the context of FE, but in general. In a way that not only applies to Fire Emblem and Pokemon, but also stuff like The Simpsons and Looney Tunes.

Doing some (light) research on the matter, I think it might be due to a company called Kinetic that primary makes predetermined visual novels. Which is a pretty satisfactory explanation. Kinetic sounds like one of those buzzwords companies like to associate themselves with (regardless as to how much sense it makes with the products they make).

That makes sense. The other explanation was always my own belief, but if that's the case I'm cool with it.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Jave

[Quintessence]

By classic I think of something that sticks to its original form, or close to it. Not like when one refers to a classic novel, or a classic of ages or something, which is mostly referred to something set up on high regards and standards (which is also interpreted as superior). When I say classic I'm not intending to say that it strictly is superior than any other form of experience because in the end it is subjective. But one feels when something feels classic and when something feels innovative or offers a brand new experience.

= EDIT =

And it is not like FE1 IS CLASSIC REST IS A DISTORTION OF ITS ORIGINAL FORM

Edited December 11, 2016 by Quintessence

[CappnRob]

You're awfully defensive, saying stuff like bullet point #2. "If you don't like it, I don't care, let me keep talking." At any rate, I'm not trying to tone police, you're just pretty upset over something, and I don't think anybody is making that claim, so much as you're asserting that Casual Mode is Scrub Mode.

Saying what's in bold is pretty much indicative that you're defensive for no real reason.

Why is it your posts are constantly targeting ME and not what I'm talking about? Honestly, if I'm coming off as defensive to you, its because you're putting me on the defensive - saying I'm soapboxing, asking why I'm even posting here for, accusing my posts of being angry rambling when they've been anything but. Yeah, I think Casual Mode is scrub mode. I've laid out why I think that. You (and others) disagree, and I disagree with why you disagree,, and I've explained WHY I disagree. The points are made, and it seems neither of us are going to budge on the matter - not that I ever intended to budge or be budged. The topic is about what we dislike about modern Fire Emblem, I never intended my posts to be a moving motivational essay on why you should all agree with me about why Casual Mode blows and it being an option is a detriment to the game. Its just how I feel, and that is that. You and others are ones that have made arguments out of it, not me. Now, have you anything else to add to this, or are you going to keep bothering me about me?

Cheapens how? Nobody is forcing you to play casual mode, and casual mode doesn't change the design elements of any chapter. If it somehow did, then the onus is on you to prove how it would have changed the design elements of the game. Does casual mode honestly affect your experiences in this game?

How is casual mode hand-holding anyway? You still have to finish the chapter... This is pretty much asserting that casual mode is scrub mode, rather than any sort of substantial argument. You're setting a standard for FE that isn't universal and you're saying that casual mode caters to a lesser crowd. You're pretty much saying that a game is wrong for not being held to your standards - which doesn't seem logical anyway, since again the choiceassures that your experience isn't cheapened.

It reduces one of the defining consequences of the franchise's legacy to a slap on the wrist and I don't really like that. I really can't put it any simpler than that. This is how I feel. This is my personal standard, based on what previous games did and established. If all you get from my mountains of text from previous pages about how why I think Casual mode is bad is "lol its scrub mode" then honestly I'm done arguing with you, because I'm tired of you reducing my points to something they are not.

Yes. The staff that spits in the face of permadeath, which means that death is no longer permanent (since you can kill one character, and have him/her come back later). In FE11, it's part of a very interesting loophole.

There is a difference between a limited, strategic game mechanic that requires careful planning and use and a mode that effectively makes death meaningless. Resurrection items are DELIBERATE mechanics with limited utility designed to let a player reverse a single death that can not be easily abused. It is designed to work WITH the permadeath system because even with their presence you can't just let people die willy-nilly because you only get one chance at bringing someone back. Even FE4, which I went into detail about, which let you repair their resurrection item for repeated use, couldn't be easily abused due to its high maintenance cost.

Not all of them. I've played at least two Visual Novels with no choices or branching paths whatsoever. They're still catalogued as Visual Novels and are part of their own sub-genre "Kinetic Novels" among the VN community.

Be that as it may, Fire Emblem is decidedly not a visual novel. It is a strategy based role playing game. There's an expected amount of player agency and interaction needed to experience the game as intended.

[Lord Raven]

Why is it your posts are constantly targeting ME and not what I'm talking about? Honestly, if I'm coming off as defensive to you, its because you're putting me on the defensive - saying I'm soapboxing, asking why I'm even posting here for, accusing my posts of being angry rambling when they've been anything but. Yeah, I think Casual Mode is scrub mode. I've laid out why I think that. You (and others) disagree, and I disagree with why you disagree,, and I've explained WHY I disagree. The points are made, and it seems neither of us are going to budge on the matter - not that I ever intended to budge or be budged. The topic is about what we dislike about modern Fire Emblem, I never intended my posts to be a moving motivational essay on why you should all agree with me about why Casual Mode blows and it being an option is a detriment to the game. Its just how I feel, and that is that. You and others are ones that have made arguments out of it, not me. Now, have you anything else to add to this, or are you going to keep bothering me about me?

Chill the fuck out, your first post was defensive as it stood.

A lot of the stuff where you say "this is how I feel" is a) taking away discussion because there's no sense of trying to say anything but what you feel as an argument (does not work; scroll above to see how discussion actually works) or b) impossible to respond to because how do you respond to some who insistently says "I feel it is this way" by saying "okay but can you give a definition." There are legitimate arguments against why permadeath is flawed and there are legitimate arguments to be had about how casual mode is abstractly a symptom of times. Or even something else that I'm not thinking of. You've touched on none of them, and by insisting that casual mode is bad because you FEEL like it isn't FE is void of all semblance of argument and insists that you just want to soapbox.

It reduces one of the defining consequences of the franchise's legacy to a slap on the wrist and I don't really like that. I really can't put it any simpler than that.

So.. don't play casual mode? Can't put it any simpler than that.

This is how I feel. This is my personal standard, based on what previous games did and established. If all you get from my mountains of text from previous pages about how why I think Casual mode is bad is "lol its scrub mode" then honestly I'm done arguing with you, because I'm tired of you reducing my points to something they are not.

Is your point that this is an objective fact? Or is your main point that this is how you feel then?

The previous games established much more than just permadeath by the way - and there is significantly more that defines Fire Emblem than just permadeath. Will you conveniently ignore those and just harp on one feature because it's easy to do so? There's plenty of flaws with modern FE, and casual mode is not one of them.

You're also ignoring the point I made where you're given a choice to play casual mode and it's not forced upon you. What do you make of that? Why is it an issue when you're given a choice? In fact why is the Dark Souls community so highly against easy mode? It is legitimate elitism where people, if they make a choice to play it, HAVE to enjoy it in the same way you do, but isn't there beauty in people enjoying the same framework in a different way?

This is coming from someone who plays classic because in my personal experience FE doesn't feel right without it - but I'm also saying that my feelings toward this aren't unique or special and it's irrelevant to someone who found permadeath to be tedious or something and wants to play casual mode. If I ever play casual mode it'll be strictly in the context of doing actually stupid shit to see if it works.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Lord Raven

[shadowofchaos]

It reduces one of the defining consequences of the franchise's legacy to a slap on the wrist and I don't really like that.

Looking from the other side, there are those that aren't completely "newbie" that prefer casual. Simply because while they enjoyed playing the other titles even with permadeath, they see it as an obstacle to enjoyment in regards to their perspective. The option to choose is objectively giving the player more of an ability to customize their own experience of playing Fire Emblem.

I live with someone who feels that way.

Not liking the concept of casual mode is your right and opinion. But if you are on the side of taking the option away from others, it's very easy for someone to spin your stance as a "no fun allowed" stance.

[CappnRob]

Chill the fuck out, your first post was defensive as it stood.

This was my first post in the topic about casual mode, and I really don't think it was defensive at all. In fact I was originally talking about Reclassing and just threw in a mention of Casual/Phoenix mode on the side, and it snowballed because everyone got mad at me for being "judgmental" and "elitist" :V So if anything, I've been hella chill, its everyone else who wanted to get mad at me.

So why don't you chill out instead, dude?

and by insisting that casual mode is bad because you FEEL like it isn't FE is void of all semblance of argument and insists that you just want to soapbox.

Again, I didn't come here to argue, I came here to express my opinion. Which I guess maybe I was low-key soapboxing, heh.

But really, I've said that it goes against the spirit of the series. I've said how it reduces consequences to a slap on the wrist. It enforces bad habits if noobies ever upgrade to classic mode. Casual mode is at a best training wheels, training wheels that provide no incentive to take off. I'd rather casual mode have some sort of drawback to encourage players to get the "full, true" experience. A lot of games with an easy mode don't let you get the best endings if you play easy mode, why not do that? Or hell, someone mentioned casual mode having a catch, like people can only get KO'd so many times before dying for real. Personally, I'd love to bring back the Valkyrie staff, because it gave players a form of control over characters dying but had to be managed responsibly.

the point I made where you're given a choice to play casual mode and it's not forced upon you. What do you make of that? Why is it an issue when you're given a choice?

See above. I'm not even against making Fire Emblem more accessible, but again, reducing death to a slap on the wrist is not one of them.

In fact why is the Dark Souls community so highly against easy mode?

In Dark Souls' case, the challenge is literally the point of the game. You die, a lot. That's intended design, so making the game easier kind of goes directly against that. It isn't supposed to be easy, it's very much a game that hinges itself on "git gud or go home". The game is elitist by design, though it does have plenty of built in methods to help people progress (multiplayer coop and all that).

Making this into a point about Fire Emblem, Fire Emblem is about careful use of your army. They only live once and when they're gone, that's it. Casual mode goes directly against this - yeah, there's more to Fire Emblem than just this, but I certainly believe this careful management of your resources is certainly the crux of Fire Emblem's core, the foundation by which the games are built upon.

Not liking the concept of casual mode is your right and opinion. But if you are on the side of taking the option away from others, it's very easy for someone to spin your stance as a "no fun allowed" stance.

I do think Casual mode should be removed or at least modified, but I mean, I don't work at Intelligent Systems or anything, my opinions hold no danger of actually taking or changing anything in Fire Emblem :Y If you see it as No Fun Allowed, well, maybe you're right. I don't see it that way, but we all have different ways at looking at something.

Edited December 11, 2016 by CappnRob

[The DanMan]

EDIT: This post ended up pointless.

Edited December 11, 2016 by The DanMan

[CappnRob]

>finds an old tumblr post of mine

>uses it as evidence I'm being confrontational

>despite the fact not a single post of mine in this thread has been typed anything like said tumblr post

>memearrows

really guy? you're going to go there? I've been hella civil all through this thread and you're gonna dig up some dirt and throw shade at a dude? My angry rants about there being too many Fire Emblem characters in Smash Bros on tumblr a year ago hold no bearing on this topic at hand.

[Lord Raven]

This was my first post in the topic about casual mode, and I really don't think it was defensive at all. In fact I was originally talking about Reclassing and just threw in a mention of Casual/Phoenix mode on the side, and it snowballed because everyone got mad at me for being "judgmental" and "elitist" :V So if anything, I've been hella chill, its everyone else who wanted to get mad at me.

So why don't you chill out instead, dude?

It wasn't chill, but the rest of this post is.

Again, I didn't come here to argue, I came here to express my opinion. Which I guess maybe I was low-key soapboxing, heh.

Yeah I am personally of the mentality that if you post something in public then you are consenting to having your viewpoint challenged, and you should be expected to back up your opinion with more than just feelings.

But really, I've said that it goes against the spirit of the series. I've said how it reduces consequences to a slap on the wrist. It enforces bad habits if noobies ever upgrade to classic mode. Casual mode is at a best training wheels, training wheels that provide no incentive to take off. I'd rather casual mode have some sort of drawback to encourage players to get the "full, true" experience. A lot of games with an easy mode don't let you get the best endings if you play easy mode, why not do that? Or hell, someone mentioned casual mode having a catch, like people can only get KO'd so many times before dying for real. Personally, I'd love to bring back the Valkyrie staff, because it gave players a form of control over characters dying but had to be managed responsibly.

This is fair. Casual mode as it stands is incomplete and not a stepping stone. I have no issue with "going against the spirit of the series" so that's not enough of an argument, but providing game incentive while keeping it like 90% the same is a practical suggestion that I don't disagree with.

In Dark Souls' case, the challenge is literally the point of the game. You die, a lot. That's intended design, so making the game easier kind of goes directly against that. It isn't supposed to be easy, it's very much a game that hinges itself on "git gud or go home". The game is elitist by design, though it does have plenty of built in methods to help people progress (multiplayer coop and all that).

Is Easy Mode really that easy though? I actually don't know a thing about the Souls series, so don't mind me here. I have heard that they have excellent world building and atmosphere, and if people want to play the game to experience that rather than deal with the gameplay, why shouldn't there be a more accessible mode?

Making this into a point about Fire Emblem, Fire Emblem is about careful use of your army. They only live once and when they're gone, that's it. Casual mode goes directly against this - yeah, there's more to Fire Emblem than just this, but I certainly believe this careful management of your resources is certainly the crux of Fire Emblem's core, the foundation by which the games are built upon.

I do think Casual mode should be removed or at least modified, but I mean, I don't work at Intelligent Systems or anything, my opinions hold no danger of actually taking or changing anything in Fire Emblem :Y If you see it as No Fun Allowed, well, maybe you're right. I don't see it that way, but we all have different ways at looking at something.

The point of these discussions is to not hope for a change but to hopefully understand the point better or think critically about certain things in hobbies we like.

Though, accessibility is easiest through Casual Mode - "easy" mode has still been quite hard for first timers and permadeath really puts people off. Some way of mitigating permadeath while possibly still punishing permadeath a little bit (to the extent where making a bunch of mistakes will screw you in the long-term, like a minor stat reduction) seems the best way to go rather than blindly removing Casual Mode.

My personal view on actually playing Casual Mode is that I may consider playing it in a Casual-Classic hybridized sort of way. If some bullshit crit of 95% miss happens towards the end then I'd just continue along and not worry about losing the character but I would reset if someone dies due to OCD, which is something I've put thought towards. But that means that there are other parts of FE they really need to fix (like 1% criticals because they're really kind of stupid) before they honestly remove Casual Mode. I really think Casual Mode's issue is that it's a patch to an otherwise faulty system with some questionable design decisions (even if they're "classic" design decisions), and in the context of the latter casual mode is the only patch that can really work because it prevents getting punished for what amounts to bad luck.

I think we should also focus on fixing certain parts of FE that forced us to have casual mode rather than removing casual mode itself but I digress.

http://cappnrob.tumblr.com/post/135282895487/tramampoline-did-fire-emblem-fans-even-want

Sometimes, it's really best to just not try to argue with certain people- specifically, those who just express things as confrontationally as possible.

This is pretty fucking petty, did you see the dude's post right above you where he was 100% reasonable?

And I argue with who I damn well please, I've been on the internet longer than you've been in school so I know what I should and should not do. I just prefer not to exist in a bubble where everyone around me agrees with my viewpoint, regardless of the kind of shitlord that I'm arguing against. As it stands, the person I'm arguing with, in the end, happens to actually be reasonable when all is said and done, as of the post right above yours.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Lord Raven

[eclipse]

http://cappnrob.tumblr.com/post/135282895487/tramampoline-did-fire-emblem-fans-even-want

Sometimes, it's really best to just not try to argue with certain people- specifically, those who just express things as confrontationally as possible.

Hey, we have standards here. In other words, dismantle the argument, but don't drag external things into this.

[The DanMan]

>finds an old tumblr post of mine

>uses it as evidence I'm being confrontational

>despite the fact not a single post of mine in this thread has been typed anything like said tumblr post

>memearrows

really guy? you're going to go there? I've been hella civil all through this thread and you're gonna dig up some dirt and throw shade at a dude? My angry rants about there being too many Fire Emblem characters in Smash Bros on tumblr a year ago hold no bearing on this topic at hand.

Your first post in the thread itself was attacking people for playing with casual mode and reclassing while using hyperbolic language ("a smear against the series' identity", "they're playing the game wrong"). While certainly without as much profanity and generalizations as your tumblr post, it still was written in a way more or less guaranteed to whip stuff up. And as you just said yourself, you didn't make the post on this discussion board to discuss.

I'd enjoyed the discourse of differing opinions in this thread, and then after your post it basically went sideways-- I wanted to show that arguing with you wouldn't go anywhere.

EDIT:

This is pretty fucking petty, did you see the dude's post right above you where he was 100% reasonable?

And I argue with who I damn well please, I've been on the internet longer than you've been in school so I know what I should and should not do. I just prefer not to exist in a bubble where everyone around me agrees with my viewpoint, regardless of the kind of shitlord that I'm arguing against. As it stands, the person I'm arguing with, in the end, happens to actually be reasonable when all is said and done, as of the post right above yours.

Actually, I did not until after I had already posted and the response had been autoloaded. It certainly does change things.

Edited December 11, 2016 by The DanMan

[CappnRob]

Yeah I am personally of the mentality that if you post something in public then you are consenting to having your viewpoint challenged, and you should be expected to back up your opinion with more than just feelings.

You're certainly free to challenge my viewpoint, but I'm under no obligation to accept your challenge, I guess is how I'd put it. But that's beside us now :)

I have no issue with "going against the spirit of the series"

I do, because if the spirit is changed too much, is it even the series I used to love anymore? It's happened to plenty of games in the past, I wouldn't want it to happen to Fire Emblem too. That may be selfish, but I do ultimately care about my enjoyment with the series over anyone else's.

Is Easy Mode really that easy though? I actually don't know a thing about the Souls series, so don't mind me here. I have heard that they have excellent world building and atmosphere, and if people want to play the game to experience that rather than deal with the gameplay, why shouldn't there be a more accessible mode?

Well, Dark Souls doesn't have an easy mode, so eh, lol. TBH I wouldn't mind an Easy Mode in Dark Souls if it wasn't.... well, TOO easy. Like instead of getting killed by a boss with 2 hits, you can take 3 or 4, hurr hurr. Either way, I'm of the opinion that people that want to experience the lore and atmosphere of Dark Souls without the challenging gameplay are missing the point and are out of luck. There's no obligation to make the game accessible, especially when again, the difficulty is part of the whole allure of the series. But we're getting off topic, lol, this is about Fire Emblem, not Dark Souls.

Though, accessibility is easiest through Casual Mode - "easy" mode has still been quite hard for first timers and permadeath really puts people off. Some way of mitigating permadeath while possibly still punishing permadeath a little bit (to the extent where making a bunch of mistakes will screw you in the long-term, like a minor stat reduction) seems the best way to go rather than blindly removing Casual Mode.

A "wounded" system would be pretty awesome tbh. If a character falls, they get a stat reduction for X chapters and if they die again while wounded, they stay dead. Along with aforementioned limited "lives", or bringing back a useable but limited resurrection system - these are all far better ways to soften Fire Emblem's hardball permadeath system without invalidating it.

Your first post in the thread itself was attacking people for playing with casual mode and reclassing while using hyperbolic language ("a smear against the series' identity", "they're playing the game wrong"). While certainly without as much profanity and generalizations as your tumblr post, it still was written in a way more or less guaranteed to whip stuff up. And as you just said yourself, you didn't make the post on this discussion board to discuss.

I'd enjoyed the discourse of differing opinions in this thread, and then after your post it basically went sideways-- I wanted to show that arguing with you wouldn't go anywhere.

Actually, my first post in the thread was a giant wall of text explaining why I dislike Avatars, Waifu Wars, Reclassing, special skill creep, and how the series doesn't take itself as seriously as it used to. Also, despite the fact I never intended to argue my points so hard with people, I've been rather civil with discussing things with other people and they've been chill in turn.

So it seems to me you moreso just wanted to be a dirt-slinger with nothing of value to contribute to the topic. Take your hate and anger somewhere else, punk. Let the moderators decide if someone is being obstructive to the conversation or not, yeah?