Which FE game was better?

[NintendMaster]

.

[NekoKnight]

A bold opinion stated in the OP there.

As for the games, Fates has the worst story of the whole series but some of the best gameplay (barring Revelations) so...sometimes better than Awakening?

Edited October 2, 2017 by NekoKnight

[NintendMaster]

Fates had the better gameplay

Awakening had the better story(Even tho it wasn't original)

They both have ups and downs, but are fine games over all. I didn't include Echoes cause it was very lacking

[Reality]

Fates was better for game play reasons. Conquest is the big one, but while Rev's gimmicks were mostly annoying, on Lunatic it still prevented the kind of challenge that anyone could work up the experience needed to handle. Awakening's Lunatic (and especially Lunatic+) are okay if you think of them in terms of being normal RPG/ setup challenges (which is still more difficult than what the GBA games provided) rather than strategic map challenges. 

Awakening as a game really sold me on the 3DS because I had low faith in the graphics of handhelds after semi-let downs from stuff on the original DS (Super Mario 64 DS, Okamiden, Rayman 2 DS, Starfox Command, etc) 

[DolphinDingus]

Plots of both games were bad, so, even though Awakening's plot was marginally better, the gameplay of Fates makes it win out. I guess I went into Awakening with too high expectations, which made me dislike it more, whereas I knew Fates was going to be terrible going in, so it was less of a letdown... but my point still stands.

[Captain Karnage]

congrats, nobody cares

we all have mixed feelings on those games

[Book Bro]

Fates > SoV > Awakening for me. 

Fates had the best gameplay despite a shit plot. I love the cast of both Fates and SoV. SoV wins in world building and writing, but the maps really drag the otherwise enjoyable gameplay down. And Awakening really doesn't do much for me beyond a few characters I like.

[Magical Glace]

Fates' story may suck but at least it's not bad at nearly everything like Awakening was.

So... Fates.

[Michelaar]

Fates,definitly: I still love Fates.

[Harvey]

I'll say it like this.

Awakening is better than Fates: Birthright simply because inorder to make a broken unit in Awakening, you atleast need Robin to invest in skills that will take a while to do so and is more grindy than that of Birthright. In Birthright, once you get Ryoma, the rest of the units you either get or train are either redundant or become less reliable since he can practically solo the rest of the game regardless of which difficulty you choose.

That being said, Conquest is better than Awakening simply because it has one thing that Awakening somewhat doesn't have which is variety and memorable map design.

3 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

Fates' story may suck but at least it's not bad at nearly everything like Awakening was.

So... Fates

How can awakening do nearly everything bad if 

1.  Its the highest rated game of the entire series.
2. It is the first game to do voice acting and cutscenes in the most professional way possible.
3. Of all the Fire Emblem games released at different timings, it was the only one before Fates that was released at the best time possible.
4. Is the first game where Nintendo/IS decided to do some serious marketing for once.
5. Is the first game to properly implement the Avatar( New Mystery is technically the first but again, Awakening just did it better.)
6. Was the first game to appeal to the casual market and successfully did so.

Now if you only stated this for the actual gameplay, then I can understand your opinion. But to say it did everything wrong is factually wrong.

 

 

[Arthur97]

8 minutes ago, Harvey said:

I'll say it like this.

Awakening is better than Fates: Birthright simply because inorder to make a broken unit in Awakening, you atleast need Robin to invest in skills that will take a while to do so and is more grindy than that of Birthright. In Birthright, once you get Ryoma, the rest of the units you either get or train are either redundant or become less reliable since he can practically solo the rest of the game regardless of which difficulty you choose.

That being said, Conquest is better than Awakening simply because it has one thing that Awakening somewhat doesn't have which is variety and memorable map design.

How can awakening do nearly everything bad if 

1.  Its the highest rated game of the entire series.
2. It is the first game to do voice acting and cutscenes in the most professional way possible.
3. Of all the Fire Emblem games released at different timings, it was the only one before Fates that was released at the best time possible.
4. Is the first game where Nintendo/IS decided to do some serious marketing for once.
5. Is the first game to properly implement the Avatar( New Mystery is technically the first but again, Awakening just did it better.)
6. Was the first game to appeal to the casual market and successfully did so.

Now if you only stated this for the actual gameplay, then I can understand your opinion. But to say it did everything wrong is factually wrong.

 

 

She hates Robin, so maybe not the best idea to bring that up.

[DolphinDingus]

7 minutes ago, Harvey said:

How can awakening do nearly everything bad if 

1.  Its the highest rated game of the entire series.
2. It is the first game to do voice acting and cutscenes in the most professional way possible.
3. Of all the Fire Emblem games released at different timings, it was the only one before Fates that was released at the best time possible.
4. Is the first game where Nintendo/IS decided to do some serious marketing for once.
5. Is the first game to properly implement the Avatar( New Mystery is technically the first but again, Awakening just did it better.)
6. Was the first game to appeal to the casual market and successfully did so.

Now if you only stated this for the actual gameplay, then I can understand your opinion. But to say it did everything wrong is factually wrong.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure what Glaceon Mage meant was that Awakening was bad at both story and gameplay, which is what this thread has been focusing on so far.

As for your points, number 1 can mostly be explained by all of the other points. Although number 6 is technically incorrect, because New Mystery had casual mode and an avatar, I'm not going to be picky because we all know you meant in the West (although now I see that "successfully" is the important word in that sentence, so you are wholly correct there).

I will rephrase Glaceon Mage's comment into my own opinion: Awakening did relatively badly at everything that previous games had done well. Fates, on the other hand, at least has good gameplay going for it.

Finally, I will have to agree with you, that it is the first game with good voice acting/cutscenes, and it is the first game that Nintendo actually marketed well. However, since this is a comparison thread between Fates and Awakening, just because Awakening was "first" at these points doesn't mean it was better than Fates, because Fates also had good voice acting/cutscenes and marketing. (also, ratings usually don't mean much. I may be biased, but a good rule of thumb is that just because something is rated highly doesn't mean its good. Awakening is still a good game, its just that good ratings don't make for a good argument)

[Thinks Their Own Way]

In terms of gameplay, Fates is the only 3DS FE game I enjoy playing.

[Magical Glace]

53 minutes ago, Harvey said:

1.  Its the highest rated game of the entire series.
2. It is the first game to do voice acting and cutscenes in the most professional way possible.
3. Of all the Fire Emblem games released at different timings, it was the only one before Fates that was released at the best time possible.
4. Is the first game where Nintendo/IS decided to do some serious marketing for once.
5. Is the first game to properly implement the Avatar( New Mystery is technically the first but again, Awakening just did it better.)
6. Was the first game to appeal to the casual market and successfully did so.

1. I don't really care what critics think.  I found the maps bland, most of the characters mediocre at best, the mechanics needlessly broken, the difficulty balancing atrocious, the story not-so great, and the approach to magic a step in the wrong direction.  This is all my opinion.

2. I turn voices off in Awakening. The only game I keep them on 24/7 is SoV, because the lines are fully voiced instead of kinda jarring "yeahs" and similar things in the middle of cutscenes.  This actually goes for all games where the lines aren't fully acted for me (or if the voices are outright awful like in say DQ8).

3. what does this even mean?  Sure, some games have had the short end of the stick timing wise (most obviously Thracia), but that's not the case for all of them.  Either way, it's irrelevant to the quality of the game.

4. That has nothing to do with the quality of the game.

5. My opinion of Robin... is not positive, to say the very least.  While I do think Robin during the Gangrel and Valm arcs is better than Kris and especially Corrin, the last story arc of the game kinda dragged my opinion of them through the mud since they still usurp poor Chrom and become this super special person that cannot be lost for some reason.

6. That also has nothing to do with what I think of the quality of the game is.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Glaceon Mage

[DolphinDingus]

3 minutes ago, Glaceon Mage said:

3. what does this even mean?  Sure, some games have had the short end of the stick timing wise (most obviously Thracia), but that's not the case for all of them.  Either way, it's irrelevant to the quality of the game.

Not going to speak for Harvey, because I don't know exactly what he means, but Awakening came out at a time when the 3ds was losing steam. Awakening not only saved the Fire Emblem series from cancellation, but also partially helped the 3ds to increase in popularity. The success of Awakening led to a number of RPGs being made for the 3ds that would have originally found their way to other systems, simply because there hadn't originally been much of a market for RPGs on the 3ds until Awakening came out.

[Sasori]

I'd say Fates wins this one. Yeah its story sucked, but I think IS at least learned some things from Awakening when it came to gameplay.

I think most of Awakening's gameplay problems where because its mechanics weren't perfected yet. It was the first time they tried out something like the pair up mechanic and as a result it was still rough around the edges. Fates refined the pair up mechanic into a much better balanced mechanic and I think it helped out the game as a whole.

 

[Harvey]

3 hours ago, DolphinDingus said:

Finally, I will have to agree with you, that it is the first game with good voice acting/cutscenes, and it is the first game that Nintendo actually marketed well. However, since this is a comparison thread between Fates and Awakening, just because Awakening was "first" at these points doesn't mean it was better than Fates, because Fates also had good voice acting/cutscenes and marketing. (also, ratings usually don't mean much. I may be biased, but a good rule of thumb is that just because something is rated highly doesn't mean its good. Awakening is still a good game, its just that good ratings don't make for a good argument)

The way the OP said it meant that it did practically everything wrong which is not completely true. Again, if its gameplay, then I guess its a subjective matter and I have to agree to that. If the OP had mentioned gameplay wise that it did everything wrong, then I suppose I'd have to agree.

Ratings may not always be accurate to determine a good game but they can certainly help get the games attention to the public more so than a lot of games that don't get reviews and that people don't know of said games and Awakening got a lot of attention.

My point still stands that its still better than Birthright though.

4 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

I don't really care what critics think.  I found the maps bland, most of the characters mediocre at best, the mechanics needlessly broken, the difficulty balancing atrocious, the story not-so great, and the approach to magic a step in the wrong direction.  This is all my opinion.

Funny because I can say the same thing for FE6 and whatever bashing I do to that game, you defend it even to the extremes.

4 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

I turn voices off in Awakening. The only game I keep them on 24/7 is SoV, because the lines are fully voiced instead of kinda jarring "yeahs" and similar things in the middle of cutscenes.  This actually goes for all games where the lines aren't fully acted for me (or if the voices are outright awful like in say DQ8).

Then by your logic, about 70% of games pretty much do that and yet they don't give you the option to turn off the voices. So then if Awakening gives you the option, then its only good for you because you don't have to listen to them.

Also, whether you like it or not, Awakening did proper voice acting.

4 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

what does this even mean?  Sure, some games have had the short end of the stick timing wise (most obviously Thracia), but that's not the case for all of them.  Either way, it's irrelevant to the quality of the game.

Let's see. Every game except FE1,3,4,6,7,8 and 11 have come at the worst possible times. So out of all 15 games that have showed up, only seven have come at the best timing which for an IP like this is bad quite frankly. It may not do much for the quality of the game but it certainly does a lot with the image of the overall IP because an IP exists to make money and FE for a long time was not making money for IS until 13 showed up.

4 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

That has nothing to do with the quality of the game.

You're wrong. It has a LOT to do with the quality of the game. At the end of the day, games need to sell and if low numbers showed up and if those numbers don't do a whole lot whether it showed up on an ageing system or not, then the devs did something wrong. Why do you think that the devs decided to simplify FE6 as a whole? Because Thracia sold poorly due to how a lot of people somehow found it hard to play it and so FE6 supposedly toned down the difficulty compared to FE5.

Franchises need to sell so they can grab companies attention that there is a demand for such crowds. A franchise that doesn't do this is a series asking it to come to an end.

 

4 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

My opinion of Robin... is not positive, to say the very least.  While I do think Robin during the Gangrel and Valm arcs is better than Kris and especially Corrin, the last story arc of the game kinda dragged my opinion of them through the mud since they still usurp poor Chrom and become this super special person that cannot be lost for some reason.

Whether your opinion on Robin is positive or not doesn't matter. The point is that it just did the Avatar better that's it.

4 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

That also has nothing to do with what I think of the quality of the game is.

If you can't appeal a game as globally as possible, then it doesn't appeal to everyone which doesn't have to do with quality, but it has to do with quantity and FE for a long time lacked the quantity amount untill FE13 showed up.

Look, if you don't like Awakening, that's fine. But don't say that it did everything wrong because it didn't do everything wrong. If you atleast said that the gameplay and story were bad, that would have sufficed.

 

[Dunal]

IMO Conquest >>>>> SoV >>> Awakening > Birthright >>>>> Rev.

I consider gameplay to be the most important thing so Conquest definitely wins. SoV wins in everything but gameplay. Awakening technically has better/fun core gameplay then the former, just a lot more broken (making it less engaging overall), and everything else is worse. Birthright is one of the most bland/forgettable games in the series, even if the gameplay is an upgrade from Awakening. Rev is Rev.

Grouping all campaigns in Fates into one singular entity doesn't really work since Conquest is just that much better than the other two. Not even an exaggeration -- Conquest probably had the most replay value of any game in the series so far. But I honestly don't know if I'd care to play BR/Rev ever again.

Edited October 2, 2017 by DLuna

[Magical Glace]

24 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Funny because I can say the same thing for FE6 and whatever bashing I do to that game, you defend it even to the extremes.

I defend it because your criticisms don't make sense oftentimes.  What you said is "critics say it's good" rather than saying why.  I'm saying I disagree with those critics because of all those reasons why I found Awakening to be bad as a FE game.

24 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Then by your logic, about 70% of games pretty much do that and yet they don't give you the option to turn off the voices. So then if Awakening gives you the option, then its only good for you because you don't have to listen to them.

Also, whether you like it or not, Awakening did proper voice acting.

I can always mute the game and play the music via youtube.

And I'm saying I don't really care about the voice acting.  It has no effect on my opinion of the game.

24 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Let's see. Every game except FE1,3,4,6,7,8 and 11 have come at the worst possible times. So out of all 15 games that have showed up, only seven have come at the best timing which for an IP like this is bad quite frankly. It may not do much for the quality of the game but it certainly does a lot with the image of the overall IP because an IP exists to make money and FE for a long time was not making money for IS until 13 showed up.

...And?  What does the "image of the IP" have to do with me finding Awakening's gameplay/story bad?

I fail to see your point.

24 minutes ago, Harvey said:

You're wrong. It has a LOT to do with the quality of the game. At the end of the day, games need to sell and if low numbers showed up and if those numbers don't do a whole lot whether it showed up on an ageing system or not, then the devs did something wrong. Why do you think that the devs decided to simplify FE6 as a whole? Because Thracia sold poorly due to how a lot of people somehow found it hard to play it and so FE6 supposedly toned down the difficulty compared to FE5.

Franchises need to sell so they can grab companies attention that there is a demand for such crowds. A franchise that doesn't do this is a series asking it to come to an end.

No, marketing is not the game itself.  Just because a game was marketed well doesn't make it a good game.  

"Simplifying" FE6 has nothing to do with marketing.   Thracia's poor sales were iirc primarily due to its bad release timing, it was a SFC game released on the eve of the Gamecube for gods' sake.

Awakening was marketed well.  That doesn't mean the maps aren't bland, the mechanics aren't broken, etc.  

24 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Whether your opinion on Robin is positive or not doesn't matter. The point is that it just did the Avatar better that's it.

And guess what my preference is?  No avatar.  I'd rather they be gone.  So doing the avatar better isn't really that much of a boon for me, especially since I find Robin to be as Sueish as the other two at times.

Also Robin's my least favorite of the three gameplaywise so there's that too.

24 minutes ago, Harvey said:

If you can't appeal a game as globally as possible, then it doesn't appeal to everyone which doesn't have to do with quality, but it has to do with quantity and FE for a long time lacked the quantity amount untill FE13 showed up.

Look, if you don't like Awakening, that's fine. But don't say that it did everything wrong because it didn't do everything wrong. If you atleast said that the gameplay and story were bad, that would have sufficed.

Am I everyone?  No, I'm not.  I don't really care when forming an opinion of the game itself whether it is appealing to casuals, so long as classic stays and the game isn't a snoozefest.  Unfortunately, the game happens to be the latter.  

I said nearly everything.  There are things I like in Awakening (Owain's one of my favorite characters, for instance), but when I said nearly everything, I meant in terms of what's in the game itself, not the marketing or appealing to people who aren't me or whatever.  

Edited October 2, 2017 by Glaceon Mage

[Slumber]

Fates.

It fixed most of the gameplay problems, while not improving anything on the characters/story. But since those were weak to begin with, nothing was lost.

[Dandy Druid]

I voted Fates. Awakening has a much better story, but it's not strong enough to beat out the superior gameplay that Fates had. In terms of characters, Fates had a lot more lows, but also had a quite a few highs in there as well. Meanwhile, I felt like everyone in Awakening was decent for the most part, but flatlined. I'd consider them even had Fates not repeated personalities from Awakening (and even Sacred Stones, but I give that a pass since it's been a minute since SS released), I would like the Fates cast more. But eh, they're even in that regard.

So Fates win.

[Ae†her]

I liked Awakening's cast of characters better, and found them to be far more interesting than Fates characters. In terms of Story element, Awakening has Fates beat in three different ways, but in terms of Gameplay Fates is better than Awakening for having a more balanced system, and especially for removing a lot of annoying stuff like (literal) Counter, easily accessible Galeforce, and sword/axe/lance/bow usage limitations. There are also more interesting map designs in Fates, than in Awakening, but I think Awakening was marketed, and presented so much better than Fates too, so there's that to consider. I also liked the design, and layout of Awakening's UI more than I did with Fates. With all things considered, I still would have to give it to Awakening, for having an actual story that manages to be somewhat meaningful, a better cast of characters, and for still having fairly decent gameplay.

[Skyla]

Fates, simply because unlike Awakening, despite its flaws, it did a lot of things right and was at the very least enjoyable.

Whereas Awakening was just bland in every aspect.

Boring characters, bland gameplay, boring and predictable storyline.