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

[CappnRob]

Like I said, I liked Sacred Stones' branching promotions for the most part. Ross as a berserker or as a warrior is still an axe swinging axeguy after all.

[NekoKnight]

While I like the skill system in the 3DS titles, I do feel there is something lost by re-classing, particularly into classes that have nothing to do with each other. So rather than focus on making anyone reclassable into anything, they could give us diversity through interesting/varied growths and bases, weapons that work better on certain units or a more developed personal skill (perhaps several)? It would be neat if characters' portraits changed with their promotion and they kept their unique color pallets.

[Quintessence]

I think that'd work better in really small casts, like a cast of 15 max or something where each character is deeply developped in terms of characterization, classes, skills and weapons. In fact, I think that these features that expand customization go better on selected casts rather than large ones, while classic features go well with medium to large casts.

Idk, maybe it is me loving so much Mirage Sessions that I'm preferring this type of setting and game rather than main FEs.

[Taprus]

While I like the skill system in the 3DS titles, I do feel there is something lost by re-classing, particularly into classes that have nothing to do with each other. So rather than focus on making anyone reclassable into anything, they could give us diversity through interesting/varied growths and bases, weapons that work better on certain units or a more developed personal skill (perhaps several)? It would be neat if characters' portraits changed with their promotion and they kept their unique color pallets.

This is one thing that I slower have started to come to terms on. While I could understand having plenty of options for a different experience on multiple playthroughs, I have a hard time taking the game seriously when I see an option to reclass Chrom to an Archer/Sniper (I could have been seeing things honestly). Sacred Stones I thought had a good split class branch (much like Secret of Mana 2) option for most of the classes/characters. I did however feel there were a couple of awkward instances, those being Artur and Moulder, because of the alternate option. They both could go Bishop but then there was Sage as well, which I don't really think it's 'as' fitting for the starting class that they were, Monk and Priest respectively. On the other hand, Tana and Vanessa could go Wyvern Rider instead of Falcon Knight...so there's that too. That being said, I don't think it took 'too' much away.

[Ryo]

I am okay with how Fates handled reclassing (which is a major improvement from Awakening), however the skill system of the 3DS games still leaves much to be desired. There are simply too many unnecessary/trivial skills that feel like they exist for the sake of having a skill for each class (I'm not talking about the personal skills which I think is a nice touch). Imo each base class should only learn one skill, while promoted classes can learn two. Some special abilities (e.g Locktouch) don't even need to be a visible skill and can exist as command only (which would also encourage players to use the Thief class lines, similar to how Dancers can only dance in their base class, as opposed to everyone can open a chest as long as they have the skill).

[eclipse]

So if you don't want to reclass, don't? Just like grinding, leave the option for those who like it, and ignore it if you don't. Even Conquest is winnable with everyone in their default classes!

[CappnRob]

While yes the fact you don't HAVE to use it is true, the fact reclass exists at all is a smear against the nature of the series IMO. Plus, people who do use it are, for lack of a more graceful phrase, "playing the game wrong". I'm sorry, but they are. Same with Casual/Phoenix Mode too, tbh. Making games easier or more approachable for newer players is fine, but when these crutch mechanics undermine the spirit of the game itself, something is wrong. You wouldn't play a shooter game that gave you unlimited ammo as a crutch, would you? Or a racing game that autopiloted you? Why have these mechanics that undermine the purpose of the game?

[DoctorSpectrum]

While yes the fact you don't HAVE to use it is true, the fact reclass exists at all is a smear against the nature of the series IMO.

I can kinda see what you're getting at here, but the nature of any series can change. I don't use reclass much myself (I didn't touch it at all in Awakening and I've probably barely used it five times in Fates), but by providing the option to people I think it's a cool idea. And what you identify as the nature of the series might not be what someone else identifies it as; are you saying you don't want there to be any new mechanics or changes in gameplay? Because there's plenty of ROMhacks you can go with if that's all you want out of Fire Emblem.

Plus, people who do use it are, for lack of a more graceful phrase, "playing the game wrong". I'm sorry, but they are. Same with Casual/Phoenix Mode too, tbh. Making games easier or more approachable for newer players is fine, but when these crutch mechanics undermine the spirit of the game itself, something is wrong.

I don't touch Casual/Phoenix mode myself, but in that case, what would you do to help ease new players into the game? Just change enemies stats to be lowered? Like eggclipse said above, you don't have to touch those mechanics if you don't want to, so if you don't like them, don't.

You wouldn't play a shooter game that gave you unlimited ammo as a crutch, would you? Or a racing game that autopiloted you? Why have these mechanics that undermine the purpose of the game?

Well, context helps; rail shooters often have unlimited ammo but they're still a challenge because you have to avoid getting shot and you need to time your reloads correctly. And I don't really think your comparisons work; the Fire Emblem equivalent of what you're describing would be the ability to control the enemy during their turn, or something else just as trivial.

[Jave]

While yes the fact you don't HAVE to use it is true, the fact reclass exists at all is a smear against the nature of the series IMO. Plus, people who do use it are, for lack of a more graceful phrase, "playing the game wrong". I'm sorry, but they are. Same with Casual/Phoenix Mode too, tbh. Making games easier or more approachable for newer players is fine, but when these crutch mechanics undermine the spirit of the game itself, something is wrong. You wouldn't play a shooter game that gave you unlimited ammo as a crutch, would you? Or a racing game that autopiloted you? Why have these mechanics that undermine the purpose of the game?

Why do you even care how others play the game?

Edited December 10, 2016 by Jave

[Refa]

If anything, the people who are using reclass are playing the game right considering it is a feature the developers intentionally put into the game with the express purpose of people using it...

[Pixelman]

While yes the fact you don't HAVE to use it is true, the fact reclass exists at all is a smear against the nature of the series IMO. Plus, people who do use it are, for lack of a more graceful phrase, "playing the game wrong". I'm sorry, but they are. Same with Casual/Phoenix Mode too, tbh. Making games easier or more approachable for newer players is fine, but when these crutch mechanics undermine the spirit of the game itself, something is wrong. You wouldn't play a shooter game that gave you unlimited ammo as a crutch, would you? Or a racing game that autopiloted you? Why have these mechanics that undermine the purpose of the game?

How does one play Fire Emblem "right"

[Jotari]

While yes the fact you don't HAVE to use it is true, the fact reclass exists at all is a smear against the nature of the series IMO. Plus, people who do use it are, for lack of a more graceful phrase, "playing the game wrong". I'm sorry, but they are. Same with Casual/Phoenix Mode too, tbh. Making games easier or more approachable for newer players is fine, but when these crutch mechanics undermine the spirit of the game itself, something is wrong. You wouldn't play a shooter game that gave you unlimited ammo as a crutch, would you? Or a racing game that autopiloted you? Why have these mechanics that undermine the purpose of the game?

This is coming across as extremely judgemental considering you've never even played a game where it's even an option.

[HillaryForPrison]

Without adding too much because this topic is hard in itself, there is no right or wrong way to play something, not using a feature doesn't make you play "wrong", if I go through conquest for example with everyone in their default classes it doesn't mean I did something wrong, in fact it makes the experience closer to how fire emblem always was, making the best from what little you have.

however I think the series has changed too much from the original formulas with the reclassing, min-maxing and emphasis on "builds" to the point where you can solo-curb stomp that last DLC super boss, I thought awakening could be trivialized until fates added things like marriage and friendship seals, I find it so uncreative that when I look up how people finished Vanguard Dawn on things like youtube, everyone has all darkfalcons with galeforce or snipers with point blank at lv99 or some other "broken" set up.

I also don't like the whole "if you don't like it don't play it" argument when it comes to things like phoenix or casual mode, just because its optional doesn't mean I'm not allowed to criticize it or say I don't like it and why, if Dark Souls ever implemented a similar feature, I can guarantee that a lot more people would complain about it than when casual and phoenix mode came in Fire Emblem, I don't like neither especially phoenix mode.

This may just be a nitpick but I hate how they are labeling the difficulty in the newer games, it's confusing and I have to look up how people compare each mode so I know what the real Normal mode is, I mean Hard should be Normal and Lunatic should be Hard and Normal should be Easy, it's like they're afraid to tell people they're playing on Easy mode.

Edited December 10, 2016 by Retro-Remy

[ping]

I'm sorry, but that really comes across very elitist. I think it would be a valid complaint if the newest FE game was actually balanced around casual mode (i.e. having fights in which sacrificing a unit is basically unavoidable), but as long as it's just an option, it's an option that a) helps newer players or even experienced players that don't want to restart because of a BS crit on turn 29 and b) doesn't affect players that don't want to use it.

Saying 'I don't like to play casual mode' is one thing, saying 'playing casual mode is playing wrong' (as CappnRob did) is another.

Making games easier or more approachable for newer players is fine, but when these crutch mechanics undermine the spirit of the game itself, something is wrong. You wouldn't play a shooter game that gave you unlimited ammo as a crutch, would you? Or a racing game that autopiloted you? Why have these mechanics that undermine the purpose of the game?

I don't play shooter games at all, but I don't see why unlimited ammo would be so repulsive. It removes one aspect from the game (resource management) while keeping the others, so if you don't want to bother counting bullets, it seems like a reasonable game mode. And I do remember that, as a kid, I used to play a racing game with automatic gear change enabled, because I was too clumsy to multitask steering, accelerating/braking and gear changing at the same time. I guess I ruined racing games forever? ;)

And that's how I see casual mode: It ruins Fire Emblem forever removes one potentially frustrating aspect from the game while leaving the rest intact. That's all.

[HillaryForPrison]

I'm sorry, but that really comes across very elitist

There is nothing elitist about not liking a feature whether it's new or old, I don't see how you can decide what is a "valid complaint" and what isn't, I can criticize and not like something that's aimed for casual players or experienced players without immediately being called an elitist, just like I can criticize and not like a plot or any other game mechanic, as long as I'm not bigoted or hateful towards people I don't see why I'm an elitist, this whole "you can't dislike it if I like it" argument is getting tiresome to see.

[eclipse]

There is nothing elitist about not liking a feature whether it's new or old, I don't see how you can decide what is a "valid complaint" and what isn't, I can criticize and not like something that's aimed for casual players or experienced players without immediately being called an elitist, just like I can criticize and not like a plot or any other game mechanic, as long as I'm not bigoted or hateful towards people I don't see why I'm an elitist, this whole "you can't dislike it if I like it" argument is getting tiresome to see.

You're free to criticize something (as long as you don't break any rules while you post on SF). And everyone else is free to criticize your opinions. One can't exist without the other.

As for your actual opinion, if those options don't directly affect you, what exactly is the problem?

Edited December 10, 2016 by eggclipse

[HillaryForPrison]

You're free to criticize something (as long as you don't break any rules while you post on SF). And everyone else is free to criticize your opinions. One can't exist without the other.

I am aware of that, I simply was reinstating it to the person above, I don't see why this was directed at me.

As for your actual opinion, if those options don't directly affect you, what exactly is the problem?

There is no problem, as I already said before in my previous comments, anyone can not like or criticize a feature, the "it doesn't affect you, it's optional" argument doesn't mean I can't say I don't like a feature whether it's optional, casual oriented or even directed at experienced players, saying I'm an elitist for criticizing any such feature doesn't hold any argument is all, I don't really see why I'm being asked this by a moderator.

[CappnRob]

lol wow I went from everyone agreeing with me to everyone going against me

#thuglife

More seriously though... yes, the nature of games can change. However, when I feel that nature has fundamentally drifted away from what I enjoyed about the game, I do feel I have the right to complain about it. This IS the "What doesn't satisfy you about the new direction of Fire Emblem" thread after all, and things like Casual Mode and Reclassing are a part of I greatly dislike about Fire Emblem's current direction. There's a reason why games like Dark Souls have a vocal fanbase against having an easy mode - because the difficulty is a core part of the game experience, and making Dark Souls easier would rob people of that experience. I feel the same way about these things in Fire Emblem: when you reclass Hadrian into an archer, or Doga into a swordfighter, or class change Robin 20 times in Awakening to max out every stat they have and give them a full selection of OP skills, you are robbing yourself of the true Fire Emblem experience. The game is ENABLING this, and I don't like it. So, like I said, for lack of a gracious, more better way to do it: you're playing the game wrong.

Yes, the developers put it in. But honestly, developers can get it wrong sometimes. A lot of times, honestly. New features can distract from the core spirit of a game. MORE features is not always BETTER features. Call it pretentious if you want, but there's a reason why the first 10 games of the series needed none of the things I listed in my original post that bothered me, and that's because they're all poorly implemented concepts. Reclass dumbs down the strategy. Now you don't need to carefully manage your units and have a balanced army of classes, you can just make anyone into anything. Casual mode literally defies what has been the series SELLING POINT: permadeath. Phoenix mode just takes that to a whole another level.

And yeah, I said before I haven't PLAYED the more recent games (rather, owned. I did take a swing a friend of mine's copy of FE11 a few years ago because he asked for help and I figured my rudimentary knowledge of FE1/3 Book 1 might help there), but I don't have to play a game to criticize a concept, if the concept is off putting to me. Of course its judgmental - I'm making a judgement call! I'm judging a concept, and sure, maybe one day I'll own and play these newer FEs and eat my own damn words about Reclassing - but until then, I still have the right to judge based on what I feel is appropriate or not. This isn't a sweeping generalized damnation, my criticisms are rooted in what I believe Fire Emblem is supposed to be, and what I've enjoyed about Fire Emblem for the 13 years I've been playing it.

So maybe it is elitist. I don't particularly care, or have the inclination to care. I hold Fire Emblem to high standards of conceptual integrity, and seeing that integrity violated upsets me. I'm elitist because I love Fire Emblem, and I'm critical because the series has done things over the last half decade that's put me off, things I feel are wrong. If you don't like it, well, that's your disposition. I'm sorry you can't see it the way I do, but I'm not budging on the issue, even if my analogies were probably half baked and not terribly well thought out.

And yes, a far better "ez mode" would be to just reduce enemy stats. It worked for Blazing Sword when it came Stateside - in fact I'd consider Blazing Sword's Lyn/Eliwood normal mode to be the bar standard for how "easy" Fire Emblem should be, and that's preeeeetty damn easy in my opinion. Lowering stats works because it doesn't alter the core of the game: people still die if you screw up, and they stay dead, so you learn to be careful and plotting. The only thing that's made easier is the degree to which you can engage the enemy. Casual mode by comparison totally defies the point of Fire Emblem and renders death and poor mistakes meaningless. What's the point of caring for your party if they're never in any real danger? There is none.

[ping]

There is nothing elitist about not liking a feature whether it's new or old, I don't see how you can decide what is a "valid complaint" and what isn't, I can criticize and not like something that's aimed for casual players or experienced players without immediately being called an elitist, just like I can criticize and not like a plot or any other game mechanic, as long as I'm not bigoted or hateful towards people I don't see why I'm an elitist, this whole "you can't dislike it if I like it" argument is getting tiresome to see.

Bolded: I didn't make that argument. Don't make shit up. Of course you're free to dislike anything, but I don't see how more options are a bad things if they don't influence the gameplay when you choose to disable them. I actually do not like playing on casual mode (in FE12, that is - can't tell you how it would be in 13 or 14, but I consider a fight lost if any unit dies), but the only discomfort it brings me is one additional button to press when starting a new game. As far as I can tell, all FE games that feature a casual mode are still balanced around permadeath gameplay, so yeah, I find it silly to complain about an option that makes the game more accessable for other players.

Yes, the developers put it in. But honestly, developers can get it wrong sometimes. A lot of times, honestly. New features can distract from the core spirit of a game. MORE features is not always BETTER features. Call it pretentious if you want, but there's a reason why the first 10 games of the series needed none of the things I listed in my original post that bothered me, and that's because they're all poorly implemented concepts. Reclass dumbs down the strategy. Now you don't need to carefully manage your units and have a balanced army of classes, you can just make anyone into anything. Casual mode literally defies what has been the series SELLING POINT: permadeath. Phoenix mode just takes that to a whole another level.

I can agree that more isn't always better. I didn't like the mastery skills in FE10 because of the added RN roll for (usually) instakills and they're a part of the game that you cannot ignore. But Casual mode is literally one checkbox in an entire playthrough.

Also, is permadeath really THE selling point? I mean, I don't disable it either, but I can see why others find it more annoying and frustrating than anything, especially because low%-crits are a thing and FE games tend not to have permanent battle saves. From what I've seen in this forum, people play FE for a variety of reasons, but I don't know if permadeath would be high on a list.

So maybe it is elitist. I don't particularly care, or have the inclination to care. I hold Fire Emblem to high standards of conceptual integrity, and seeing that integrity violated upsets me. I'm elitist because I love Fire Emblem, and I'm critical because the series has done things over the last half decade that's put me off, things I feel are wrong. If you don't like it, well, that's your disposition. I'm sorry you can't see it the way I do, but I'm not budging on the issue, even if my analogies were probably half baked and not terribly well thought out.

Well, I value variety in my gaming series. Say what you will about Final Fantasy, but I absolutely love how no game of the franchise is like its predecessor. And I'm really happy that the Archanea remakes play distinctly different from the GBA games. And while I don't agree with every design decision in Radiant Dawn, I appreciate that they tried to not make it the same game as PoR.

And that's another reason why I'm happy that FE11 introduced reclassing. While they probably went overboard with the execution (especially in FE12 where every character can change into anything you want), it's a new toy to play around with - or even to ignore if you don't like the idea.

[eclipse]

There is no problem, as I already said before in my previous comments, anyone can not like or criticize a feature, the "it doesn't affect you, it's optional" argument doesn't mean I can't say I don't like a feature whether it's optional, casual oriented or even directed at experienced players, saying I'm an elitist for criticizing any such feature doesn't hold any argument is all, I don't really see why I'm being asked this by a moderator.

Besides bopping accidental double posts and being the bane of spam bots, I'm otherwise a normal poster. I asked this for my own personal curiosity. I'm still baffled by your stance, but this might be because it's stupidly late here.

Long post. I'm going to use my absolute favorite game to complain about, FE4. If I said that I didn't like FE4 because it was a waifu simulator, I'd expect to be laughed out of the room. Yes, FE4 has pairings, but they serve a somewhat meaningful purpose in game, which is most definitely NOT a waifu simulator. However, my dislike of FE4 comes from its maps, which require more empty travel than I care for - something that I wouldn't have known unless I'd either studied the game in depth, or actually played it. I expected to like FE4, due to its mechanics, but instead I dislike it due to actually giving it a shot. Likewise, I've seen people dislike something, only to try it and like it later. Hence why being extremely judgmental over something you haven't played is something I can't really get behind.

[Thane]

Casual mode by comparison totally defies the point of Fire Emblem and renders death and poor mistakes meaningless. What's the point of caring for your party if they're never in any real danger? There is none.

Hate to break it to you, but nothing here has changed. The people who wanted everyone to survive in the older games simply restarted and tried again; the implementation of an optional Casual mode just removed a lot of hassle for them.

This is not Pillars of Eternity where you can let the game delete your save file if you die.

Edited December 10, 2016 by Thane

[HillaryForPrison]

Besides bopping accidental double posts and being the bane of spam bots, I'm otherwise a normal poster. I asked this for my own personal curiosity. I'm still baffled by your stance, but this might be because it's stupidly late here.

I understand, I thought for some reason I said something that didn't comply with site rules, looks like that wasn't the case.

[HillaryForPrison]

Bolded: I didn't make that argument. Don't make shit up.

I never said you did, relax, I find it funny that you say that yet you were saying I came off as an elitist, that's not making shit up is it?

and sorry for the double post.

Edited December 10, 2016 by Retro-Remy

[Jotari]

It's not elitist to dislike something, regardless of what it is you're disliking. What is elitist is criticizing another person for liking something. That immediately establishes a tier of sorts for how something is experienced and says that you're opinion is more valid than someone else's. At least the way I view things.

Hate to break it to you, but nothing here has changed. The people who wanted everyone to survive in the older games simply restarted and tried again; the implementation of an optional Casual mode just removed a lot of hassle for them.

This is not Pillars of Eternity where you can let the game delete your save file if you die.

I'm fine with casual mode existing but I actually would enjoy if there was an iron mode version like that too.

Edited December 10, 2016 by Jotari

[Quintessence]

How is permadeath not set high on FEs nature? Sure, it isn't removed. But the implementation of Casual and Phoenix Mode basically kills it, because while the main idea of FE is setting an army to defeat the enemy and keep everyone alive, now you simply can throw everyone to a slaughter and get them back in the next turn or chapter. So what's the point? Where the strategy core of the game. Believe it or not, they are slowly fainting the light of strategy. You whine about a 2% crt killing your lord on turn 1000? Man, that's the nature of FE and you basically have to deal with it, it is part of the learning process of the game and there's nothing wrong in it. I'm not saying that because I lived it, I have to make other people live it as well; but rather that such feature is slowly killing the core of the game. And tbh counter arguing it by saying "it is optional, so if you don't want to, just don't" is kind of a weak argument, isn't this a debate?

= EDIT =

I'm not saying as well what is the way to play FE, but it is a fact that new additions are killing the pure FE experience. You can play as you want to, but that's how I see it.

Edited December 10, 2016 by Quintessence