The Missed Potential of Fire Emblem Fates' Choice

[JWeinCom]

MTZehvor said:

JWeinCom said:

Yes, you do have to make the decision at the point of sale.  You have already paid for whichever version you wanted.  You own that version.  You are free to buy the other version if you want, and you could even play that one first.  Doesn't change the fact that you already decided to purchase one version over the other.  

You keep bringing up "before we knew it was being sold in two separate versions" and I don't have the slightest idea why that's relevant.  By the time the game was released, you had much more clarification.  By then it was well established that the purpose of the dual releases was to have a game to appeal to more hardcore fans and one for more recent fans who started with Awakening.  It was also established by that point that the choice is made fairly early in the game, so I don't know how you expected them to form deep and meaningful relationships by that point in the game.  Aside from that, I'm not sure why you would think of an advertising slogan as gospel anyway.

Regardless of what you thought based on the first trailer, it was clear by the time the game released that this would not be what you had in mind, could not be what you had in mind, and was not intended to be what you had in mind.  You can be disappointed if you want, but that's entirely your fault. 

Then allow me to explain myself again, because I'm not sure my point is coming across.

The reason why what was brought up earlier on is revelant is because much of our expectations of the game are formed by the trailers we watch throughout the entirety of the development process. You act like what we form expectations on is simply just what we know about the game at launch, but that's simply not true. It's entirely possible for a game to show us one thing in an early trailer, show us something else in another trailer, and to be disappointed that what was shown or suggested in the aforementioned earlier trailer is not in the game. Mighty No. 9 is arguably the best recent example of this; by the time the game's final trailer was shown off, pretty much everyone expected it to be a mediocre game at best. But that still didn't stop people from being disappointed in it, because of what was shown off in other trailers was so much better than what was shown in the days leading up to launch. That's what I'm largely getting at.

Secondly, though, even if they hadn't suggested some sort of moral dilemma in early trailers, my entire OP would still be just as valid, because the point of the OP is not "Intelligent lied to us and I'm upset at them," but rather "Intelligent missed an opportunity to do something cool and that's kind of disappointing." Even if making a complex moral dilemma had never been the intention or advertised in any way, shape, or form, it can still be a shame that an interesting and unique take on a relatively underexplored concept of storytelling wasn't taken advantage of.

Lastly, as for the point of sale thing, you'll note that I put "if you're an FE fan and plan on playing both routes anyway," which is largely what this would appeal to and what I'm talking about in the first place. In other words, for the target audience, the version you purchase is largely irrelevant, as they were going to play both versions anyway.

Mighty No. 9 was a whole different stroy, where people many actually paid for the game up front.  They actually had to choose whether or not to buy it based on the initial batch of data they were given.  Also, people weren't disappointed because they were expecting something unrealistic.  They expected a good game, and they didn't get it.  Perfectly justified disappointment.

I understand that you think it would have been better that way.  If the point is just that you would have liked a moral choice system in the game, fine.  But it's a bit odd to complain about a feature that wasn't promised or really necessary.  And, this game was being made for everyone who would buy it, not just those who would purchase both versions.

Hiku said:

JWeinCom said:

You do not understand correctly.  It's not like Sacred Stones where you can actually choose after the first few missions.  

If you buy Birthright, you have Birthright and you have access to that path which is on the cartridge.  Even if you digitally downloaded Fire Emblem, you can only play the path of the version you purchased.

After Chapter 5, you can make your choice, but that choice is limited.  If you bought Birthright, you can only choose Hoshido.  If you bought Conquest, you can only choose Nohr. 

If you really want, you could go to the DLC shop and purchase the other quest before Chapter 5.  If you bought Birthright but you decide you like Nohr better, you can pay an extra 20 bucks and play that one first, but you've still already paid for the Birthright quest. 

So yeah, if you really want to play Conquest when you purchased Birthright you can.  But when one option is locked behind a paywall, I think it's accurate to say you chose at point of sale.  

Are you sure that even the digital download version is locked? I'm sure I've read/been told on numerous occasions that there is a Fire Emblem Fates version where you can chose a side, and the game will lock to it forever, until you buy the second /third version on DLC.
At first I thought that only applied to the digital version, but the person you quoted made it sound like it applied to the cartridges/as well.

Here's a quote from an article I read about a year ago: "When you buy the digital version of the game, you don’t choose a version up front. Rather, when you pick your side, the game locks to that respective version— an interesting way of handling it that I wish could happen on the physical copies as well."
http://kotaku.com/fire-emblem-fates-big-choice-makes-for-great-storytell-1717662370

So that info is innacurate?

I don't know if maybe they're talking about the Japanese release, but I have the US version of Birthright, and I was locked into the choice unless I wanted to pay for the DLC.