LegitHyperbole said:
Oh well, without the calander progression I doubt I'd like it as much. The tactical play while good and addicting wasn't really what made that game great. It was one of three pillars. That, the calander progression and the characters. I would hope for a Three houses sequel that expands on these ideas, namely expanded on exploration during the calander cycle, having an open world instead of just a hub town/school would blow skulls wide open. |
Unfortunately the cast on Engage is terrible. 3 Houses features one of the best casts in the series, and my personal favorite tied to Path of Radiance. Engage could be a fun experience though because it features older FE main characters who fight as your allies in the form of spirits called "Emblems", they give you extra stats and exclusive abilities, it's really fun to find combinations
Because of Engage mechanics and the large host of characters, numerous classes and skills I have over 400 hours on Engage (I have 600h on 3H for comparison)
I've found Engage to be harder and more tactical compared to 3H, but also more balanced. Specially on Maddening.
3H is like Hard = Easy, Maddening = Hell since the beginning
Engage is like Hard = Fair, Maddening = Start a bit harder than Hard and finishes extremely hard, but the difficulty curve is balanced
In 3H I always felt you need to truly master the game's "Meta" to be able to play on Maddening
While on Engage you can actually play non optimally and still beat if you play smart. That's said some maps (DLC maps) can be obnoxiously hard. Soren's and Camila's paralogues drove me crazy
But of course only people who play on the hardest difficulties will care for those things
Last edited by IcaroRibeiro - 14 hours ago