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

Forums - Nintendo - Why I'm not buying "Fire Emblem Fates"

IIIIITHE1IIIII on 15 February 2016
MohammadBadir said:
It was obvious from the get-go that this was gonna be shitty. I hate what's happening to Fire Emblem :/

Exactly this. The pair-up system alone completely ruined Awakening's gameplay, while the art-style and "edgy" dialogue was incredibly off-putting. Not to mention the thousand year old pre-pubescent girl who potentially became a mother. Now Fates is pushing it even further with new "features" that let you undress the characters.

Frankly, anyone who admits to being a fan of this new, revitalized Fire Emblem is part of the relatively small crowd that justifies Anita Sarkeesian's existence.



Around the Network
bigtakilla on 15 February 2016
Volterra_90 said:
Awakening had free DLC? I think you had to pay the levels, just like Fates. But I can't remember.

Well, the Marth DLC was free if you got it close to release, and there were a few maps and weapons you could get for free.



IIIIITHE1IIIII on 15 February 2016
Bandorr said:
Ok I have a question. I have only played one fire emblem game. That was awakening.

Awakening had the strangest difficulty curve I've ever seen. Really hard at the beginning (damn near impossible on lunatic plus) and then I'd say about 25% into the game? It just gets easier and easier.

I beat it on normal, and wanted to try it on lunatic plus. The problem was the beginning was so near impossible for me I couldn't keep trying it to see if the rest of the game was any harder.

Is that typical for a Fire emblem game?

No, it is not typical. Awakening has by far the worst difficulty curve to date. The way the first few missions work is that you have to find the optimal strategy, and even then greatly rely on luck to succeed.

If you want a game that is challenging but fair you might want to look into Binding Blade, a Japan-only release that's been translated by fans. You'd have to play it on an emulator, but Nintendo won't be missing out on any revenue since they haven't released the game in the west.

If that's too much work, Fire Emblem (GBA) offers a variety of difficulties from easy to hard. The downside is that the hardest mode requires tons of playthroughs to be unlocked, although that may be a good thing if you want to master the gameplay and learn where certain enemies spawn and how they tend to move.



qwertyDANIELqwerty on 15 February 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe484J_BWaU



Faelco on 15 February 2016
Bandorr said:
Ok I have a question. I have only played one fire emblem game. That was awakening.

Awakening had the strangest difficulty curve I've ever seen. Really hard at the beginning (damn near impossible on lunatic plus) and then I'd say about 25% into the game? It just gets easier and easier.

I beat it on normal, and wanted to try it on lunatic plus. The problem was the beginning was so near impossible for me I couldn't keep trying it to see if the rest of the game was any harder.

Is that typical for a Fire emblem game?

 

Nope. Awakening had no difficulty management at all, maybe because of all the extra maps and infinite XP. It's just a bunch of enemies thrown on a wide open map anf you have to kill them all, so if you did enough battles before and have a lot of XP it's too easy. You just have to give some XP to Chrom and the MC, put them in a duo, and congrats, you won. 

 

Previous games like Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn had some difficulty management, they knew how much XP you had at each battle and the difficulty was adapted for it. There was some variety in the objectives (defense, timed attack...) and the maps (town, castle... a lot less wide open square maps). And no OP duo... 



Around the Network
bigtakilla on 15 February 2016
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Bandorr said:
Ok I have a question. I have only played one fire emblem game. That was awakening.

Awakening had the strangest difficulty curve I've ever seen. Really hard at the beginning (damn near impossible on lunatic plus) and then I'd say about 25% into the game? It just gets easier and easier.

I beat it on normal, and wanted to try it on lunatic plus. The problem was the beginning was so near impossible for me I couldn't keep trying it to see if the rest of the game was any harder.

Is that typical for a Fire emblem game?

No, it is not typical. Awakening has by far the worst difficulty curve to date. The way the first few missions work is that you have to find the optimal strategy, and even then greatly rely on luck to succeed.

If you want a game that is challenging but fair you might want to look into Binding Blade, a Japan-only release that's been translated by fans. You'd have to play it on an emulator, but Nintendo won't be missing out on any revenue since they haven't released the game in the west.

If that's too much work, Fire Emblem (GBA) offers a variety of difficulties from easy to hard. The downside is that the hardest mode requires tons of playthroughs to be unlocked, although that may be a good thing if you want to master the gameplay and learn where certain enemies spawn and how they tend to move.

Not only that, but there are levels in which the player is GREATLY outnumbered. Hopefully you leveled up the pegasus knights or wyvern riders because if not...



Faelco on 15 February 2016
Bandorr said:
Faelco said:

 

Nope. Awakening had no difficulty management at all, maybe because of all the extra maps and infinite XP. It's just a bunch of enemies thrown on a wide open map anf you have to kill them all, so if you did enough battles before and have a lot of XP it's too easy. You just have to give some XP to Chrom and the MC, put them in a duo, and congrats, you won. 

 

Previous games like Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn had some difficulty management, they knew how much XP you had at each battle and the difficulty was adapted for it. There was some variety in the objectives (defense, timed attack...) and the maps (town, castle... a lot less wide open square maps). And no OP duo... 

That sounds a lot better actually. The mission I enjoyed in awakening was like the "green"(whatever that was) 11. It wasn't a "survive, then kill" mission. You had to protect someone from a bunch of griffons. That ment you had to put a lot of thoughts into your classes, where people want, when to kill etc. Was great.

Of the two games coming out - which is more similiar to something like what you described, and less like awakening?

 

Conquest is supposed to be like the previous games (no extra maps, less XP and gold, more different objectives...). Birthright is Awakening 2.0.

 

And yeah, the previous games were a lot better (more TRPG, less dating sim), you should play them! I remember one battle in which we're vastly outnumbered and I was having a bad time, until I found one character and one precise spot on the map allowing this character to hold one third of the enemy army without being badly hurt. This battle and reflexion alone means more to me than all the Awakening battles... 



outlawauron on 15 February 2016
Jranation said:
We are hyped because How awesome Awakening was! And from the looks of it, Fates would have much more content to it = More Expensive. And they are fixing one of the main flaws of Awakening...... The Story!

If you liked Awakening, i don't see the reason of not buying Fates. That also means that you don't have to buy Fates in DAY 1. or buy all the Versions when they came out. You can buy one version next year, then the other in the year after that.

If you don't like Awakening, then Fates will probably not for you. Unless the fixed something where you really hated it in Awakening.

The additional content arguement is pretty cheap. Fire Emblem Fates still has less content across the 3 campaigns than Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn. That was $50 instead of the $100 you're required to pay for all of FE Fates. It's chopped up to take advantage of the success of Awakening.

My problems with Fates are more than the nickel and diming, even though I didn't think they'd be bold enough to try it here.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Yerm on 15 February 2016

let me clean this up-

Fire Emblem Awakening had a $40 retail price with some cheap DLC that was unneeded to fully experience the game.

Fire Emblem Fates has 2 versions both costing $40 plus DLC that costs $20 that is necessary to fully experience the story. you end up paying $100 for the full game or $80 if you get lucky enough to find a Special Edition copy



Illusion on 15 February 2016

I don't understand why people are so angry over Birthright and Conquest being separate purchases. These are both full games with complete (albeit related) stories and even very different battle dynamics (Conquest being much more challenging). Each game is going to give you a full 30+ hours of gameplay (which is exactly what you got with Fire Emblem Path of Radiance) and a combined 60 hours between the two versions:

http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=28381

I can see people being mad if we were only getting two 15 hour games and being charged twice, but these are clearly full Fire Emblem experiences in themselves: it's just that Nintendo has made two Fire Emblem games at the same time instead of spacing them out over a couple of years as they have done in the past. The fact that we are getting a discount on the other version after buying one, I think is actually a really good deal for gamers.