By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Fire Emblem Fates to have two versions in the West as well

TheWPCTraveler on 18 June 2015

Funny, I was actually thinking of a way to do this that would get fans praising it, other than delaying the second game.

Introduce online multiplayer a la Code name: STEAM, against players of either version or the opposite version.
Have one game create extra data for the other game to take advantage of, by introducing an AI that acts like you to fight against.
No other DLC content whatsoever.

See?



 
I WON A BET AGAINST AZUREN! WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:3

Around the Network
RenCutypoison on 18 June 2015
Darwinianevolution said:

This is really dumb. Fire Emblem, until Awakening, was not a very popular IP on the west. Why would you discourage people into buying two versions? In Pokemon it works because the game is based on trading and battling with other people, it's supposed to be a multiplayer experience. You're not supposed to buy both versions, you only need one and find a friend with the other version, that's the point of the pokemon versions. Fire Emblem is a single player game, every attempt they made to add multiplayer was insignificant to the main experience. The bad news just keep coming...


Fire Emblem is a single player franchise with heavy emphasis on storytelling. 2 stories told from 2 point of views,  2 games. That makes more sense than having every pokemon data in both cartridge, but some blocked so that you need to have friends that play the game.



Darwinianevolution on 18 June 2015
RenCutypoison said:
Darwinianevolution said:

This is really dumb. Fire Emblem, until Awakening, was not a very popular IP on the west. Why would you discourage people into buying two versions? In Pokemon it works because the game is based on trading and battling with other people, it's supposed to be a multiplayer experience. You're not supposed to buy both versions, you only need one and find a friend with the other version, that's the point of the pokemon versions. Fire Emblem is a single player game, every attempt they made to add multiplayer was insignificant to the main experience. The bad news just keep coming...


Fire Emblem is a single player franchise with heavy emphasis on storytelling. 2 stories told from 2 point of views,  2 games. That makes more sense than having every pokemon data in both cartridge, but some blocked so that you need to have friends that play the game.

I don't agree with that. From that point of view, every game that has an story that can be affected and moddified by the player's choices would need to branch itself into two or more games on the bigger choices. It's like making two games with the Sacred Stones because Eirika's and Efhraim's stories are separated during most of the game. The two editions in Pokemon are there to guarantee that, if you want to camplete the game, you'll need to find another pokemon user with the opposite edition at least once, encouraging the social aspects of the game.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

RenCutypoison on 18 June 2015
Darwinianevolution said:

I don't agree with that. From that point of view, every game that has an story that can be affected and moddified by the player's choices would need to branch itself into two or more games on the bigger choices. It's like making two games with the Sacred Stones because Eirika's and Efhraim's stories are separated during most of the game. The two editions in Pokemon are there to guarantee that, if you want to camplete the game, you'll need to find another pokemon user with the opposite edition at least once, encouraging the social aspects of the game.


The pokemon two versions make it so that you can't complete either version without elements of the other. Here you have the possibility, if you really like the story, to spend money to get another point of view on it.

Actually the question is not wether or not the process is ethic, but if the both games as standalones are worth the price they will cost.

Also story branching DLC is the future of visual novel. Imagine only buying the route you want to complete after the free common route (tm) /jk



ShadowG78 on 18 June 2015

Well, that means I will never play the White Version.



Around the Network
Mnementh on 18 June 2015
Acevil said:
Platina said:
Does 2 versions mean to separate games? a bit ambiguous, but that is probably the case..


They way they seem to have sold it so far it seems two different story paths that most likely lead to similar conclusion. I think it is unfair to compare it to Pokemon which is the same game in a nutshell.

Light is for Awakening Fans

Dark seems to be designed for the old Fire Emblem fans, from how they were describing the two.

From the Wiki:

The Hoshido path will have a traversable map similar to Awakening, Sacred Stones, and Gaiden. The player can level up characters outside of the storyline chapters by paying a fee to initiate a Skirmish, similar to using a Reeking Box. Like Awakening, map victory conditions will mostly be either rout the enemy or defeat the boss.

The Nohr path will be more structured, having no external battles outside of the storyline chapters much like most previous Fire Emblem titles. Experience and funds are much more limited and more victory conditions will be present such as defending a base, breaking through the enemy lines, and turn restrictions for certain maps.

 

 


Thanks for this info, it really sounds great to have two very different games.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

Faelco on 18 June 2015
Acevil said:
Platina said:
Does 2 versions mean to separate games? a bit ambiguous, but that is probably the case..


They way they seem to have sold it so far it seems two different story paths that most likely lead to similar conclusion. I think it is unfair to compare it to Pokemon which is the same game in a nutshell. 

Light is for Awakening Fans

Dark seems to be designed for the old Fire Emblem fans, from how they were describing the two. 

From the Wiki: 

The Hoshido path will have a traversable map similar to Awakening, Sacred Stones, and Gaiden. The player can level up characters outside of the storyline chapters by paying a fee to initiate a Skirmish, similar to using a Reeking Box. Like Awakening, map victory conditions will mostly be either rout the enemy or defeat the boss.

The Nohr path will be more structured, having no external battles outside of the storyline chapters much like most previous Fire Emblem titles. Experience and funds are much more limited and more victory conditions will be present such as defending a base, breaking through the enemy lines, and turn restrictions for certain maps.

 

 

So the Nohr path will be a real, full Fire Emblem game, and the Hoshido path will be another casual "Fire Emblem-ish" game... Could save me some money that way. 

 

Except that they talked about something like 26 chapters per path, where previous games had up to 40 or more chapters. So we might have only two different halves of a game, sold separately, because they want to sell 1 game to 2 different audiences... Really not a fan of the move, they should make 2 full different games (with the same length than the previous ones).

 

It's like cutting Bloodborne in two parts, make one of these parts easier and keep the other untouched, sell them separately and be happy because you just opened your original game to a new audience. 



Super_Boom on 18 June 2015
Cloudman said:

What? I don't remember any FE games having elt paths like Fates does, and I've played most of them...

Yeah, that was my thought too, haha. I can think of Sacred Stones...and that's about it.



NNID: Zephyr25 / PSN: Zephyr--25 / Switch: SW-4450-3680-7334

Cloudman on 18 June 2015
Super_Boom said:
Cloudman said:

What? I don't remember any FE games having elt paths like Fates does, and I've played most of them...

Yeah, that was my thought too, haha. I can think of Sacred Stones...and that's about it.

Yeah, same. I don` remember how that one works though. It`s been too long, and it kinda wasn`t one of my more favorable FE games....



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

the_dengle on 18 June 2015
Hiku said:

People really need to stop proclaiming this as "two different games" until we can make a proper comparison, because from what we've already heard, a big portion in both games is supposedly the same.
We're not doing anyone any favors by parroting Nintendo's PR for them before they've shown that it's warranted.
They are of course going to say what they've been saying. But as a consumer, you should trust what you see rather than what they tell you.

And there are a lot of potential problems here, regardless of how different the games end up being. One of the biggest concerns is if one game will feel like a full experience without the other. Many games these days rip out content that was supposed to be in the original game, and sell it back to us as DLC later. (Destiny for example.)

So rather than proclaiming "They are two different games, I see (before even seeing it) no problem" or "This is bullshit. They're trying to sell us the same game twice", we need to wait until the games are out to make a proper assessment.

Just stop the assumptions and proclamations in general.

Each game, on its own, is a full game worth $40. This much is promised. Doubting that is as good as calling Intelligent Systems a bunch of liars without cause. If it was only one game being released, obviously everyone would believe them when they say it is a full-length retail game. This is no different.

The two games share some content. The first six chapters (out of 28 in the main story, from what I hear) are the same. Of course the early chapters will most likely be shorter than the later chapters, so maaaybe 15-20% of the games are "shared." After those 6 chapters, the stories diverge in drastically different directions.

"No, there aren't minor differences between these versions. Each game (...) is a completely different set of maps, set of characters, it's a completely different story."

Again, unless we are to dismiss everything we're being told as blatant lies, the story we're being told is that after chapter 6 each version is entirely unique in every regard. This is all we have to go on right now, other than the Famitsu reviews which don't go into any detail in this matter, but certainly didn't complain about the two games being too similar.

So while the prospect of buying each version at $40 might seem unpleasant given a small part of the game is the same, the option to buy 80-85% of a new game for $15 exists and sounds awfully compelling to me.

This is my analysis given the information we have now. That information may change in the future, but it does not mean we shouldn't discuss it at all until we have all of the answers.