Fire Emblem: RD Vs Valkyria Chronicles

[nordlead]

whooo, way to much to read, but I will state this for starters. I love both games, but FE provide the deeper strategy and higher difficulty, which for a strategy game should be the primary decider in which is "better", but either way I hope to get sequels to both of these titles. As for my "qualifications" I think beating FE PoR and RD 4 times each (along with beating GBA Fire Emblem, and Dragon Sword on DS), qualifies as some knowledge of the game. I've beat VC twice.

I'll let Rolstoppable argue the merits of the strategy in Fire Emblem, as I don't feel I need to.

As for VC, great game, great graphics, great story, but lacking in the difficulty and strategy department. If memory serves me right (haven't booted it up in a while, but on my list to play again this winter) only the extra hard difficulty was actually hard, but only because they surrounded you and swamped you with enemies. A little unfair in my opinion.

As for the general strategy, you had 6 classes (not including tank) and 3 characters you should always choose for bonus badges. Throw in an extra scout/shocktrooper/lancer/engineer/sniper/medic, and you're set for pretty much any and every stage. Yes you can mix it up a little bit, but generally you'll be using your primary characters anyway. The variation between individual units is minimal and they all progress evenly, so no one character is stronger/weaker than another. You always choose highest accuracy for weapon improvement (as 3 headshots beats 3 strong misses any day), so the biggest variation in strategy is how you approach the stages. There is no growing of characters, or punishment for losing a character due to poor strategy.

Now, I'm not saying there is no strategy in VC (as that would be just wrong), but the depth of strategy isn't as deep as the many character/weapon combinations that you can bring into FE to approach the stages differently. Also, decisions earlier in FE bear a great weight on how you play the game later. Losing a character, not fielding them, using bonus items all have a long lasting effect on the game. The same can't really be said about VC. If I lose a character in VC, I replace them with another person who has equal stats just different character affinities.

so it goes something like this

Strategy - FE > VC
Graphics - VC > FE
Innovative/original - VC > FE
Difficulty - FE > VC
Story - toss up, I like both but I'm not the type of person that reads into the "depth" of the story and all that other crap, I just like to be entertained

which is overall better? It depends on what you want. If you want a hard traditional game, then obviously FE, if you want an innovative fresh take on the genre, then VC.

As for the praises on this website, VC fails to collect the sheer number of posts that FE does once a "let's talk about FE" thread kicks off.

oh, and anyone who thinks that Rolf is useless doesn't know what they are talking about