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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Fire Emblem: RD Vs Valkyria Chronicles

Hephaestos on 28 December 2009

keep in mind the discussion isn't saying either game is bad, it's a praise to both ^^

(I won't comment more than that as I don't have VC and I haven't played my RD copy yet... still on the GC one. I did a reboot when I realized that my dead characters were just... dead... and I started playing other games so... that was 2 years ago...) I love FE though and bought RD just this summer (finaly under £20) so I'll get back to it... eventually



OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 28 December 2009
Torillian said:
I couldn't get through FE: RD. Found it way too annoying that people that died stayed gone forever instantly which drives me crazy because I always feel like I should restart a mission if I lose someone. Compound that with the fact I didn't really care about the story enough to make it through the difficulty of the game and I guess this would all lead to me disagreeing with your comparison of the two.

Yeah but... that happens in Valkria Chronicles too....



Kasz216 on 28 December 2009
naznatips said:
Khuutra said:
Torillian said:
Khuutra said:

All right, I guess I can take issue with this.

If you lose in Radiant Dawn, it's one hundred percent your fault. part of the tutorial for the level to which you refer shows you how to direct allied units - you set a yellow cursor that yellow units (like the merchants) run toward, so you direct where they move. It's very, very important for your strategies.

Radiant Dawn, more than any other game in the genre I've played, is fair. It is hard, but it is fair. If you lost, it's because you fouled up, not because the computer behaved poorly.

Perhaps I missed that, or attempted using that and still failed.  I'd tell you that I would give the game another shot, but I sold it a while ago since I felt no reason to get back into it so oh well. 

I trust you will not take offense if I say that, that being the case, you're not really qualified to make comparisons between the games.

Not that I am, of course. Only a handful on the boards have played both games for any length of time (though I plan to play Valkyria when I have access to a PS3).

He's far more qualified to be in this discussion than you who have no experience with Valkyria Chronicles whatsoever, whereas he has actually played both and made a decision that he doesn't like one as much.

Fire Emblem is certainly not harder on Easy, and Valkyria Chronicles' hard difficulty is harder than Fire Emblem on normal. As far as actual strategy and tactics go, Valkyria Chronicles offers all sorts of layers of depth that Fire Emblem doesn't touch with its relatively simple and completely unchanging gameplay formula. Yes, it's brutal within those limits, but only because they kill you for a single mistake within a simple set of rules. VC has a large set of strategic options available, and while you can fail and lose your characters you aren't forced to play a map completely formulaically to stand any chance of survival. Rather the game actually offers a diverse amount of tactical options for multiple play styles.  

I couldn't disagree more Naz.

Valkria chronciles is a walk in the park compaired to Radiant Dawn.


VC is poorly unbalanced in that the Computer doesn't really play on a level playing field as you.  The player in fact has the advantage because the computer pretty much never makes proper use of it's additional action tokens.

 

It also isn't any more deep tacitcs wise... I don't know where your getting that from.  Stuff like the mortar fire is stuff that exists in Fire Emblem actually.  The Arablests to be exact.

The only real "difference" that you could call more deep is the medal system lets you "cheat" a bit.



Kasz216 on 28 December 2009

As for which is the better game.

It really depends on how you define "better."

Radiant Dawn is the better game, but it comes from a long line of Fire Emblem games and doesn't change much.

Valkria Chronicles copies a style that only had one SRPG before it. (that no one has played but me apparently.)


The newest Madden is obviously better then past ones but is seen less favorably due to little innovation.



Torillian on 28 December 2009
Kasz216 said:
Torillian said:
I couldn't get through FE: RD. Found it way too annoying that people that died stayed gone forever instantly which drives me crazy because I always feel like I should restart a mission if I lose someone. Compound that with the fact I didn't really care about the story enough to make it through the difficulty of the game and I guess this would all lead to me disagreeing with your comparison of the two.

Yeah but... that happens in Valkria Chronicles too....

if you mean characters dying forever, yes it happens but most times it isn't instant, and that's a big part of what annoyed me in FE.  Sure someone will go down in VC, but that means I just have to adjust and get to them before the enemy happens upon them.

 

if you mean people not caring about the story, well yeah sure that happens with some, I can only go through my own personal experience.



...

Around the Network
Khuutra on 28 December 2009
Torillian said:
Kasz216 said:
Torillian said:
I couldn't get through FE: RD. Found it way too annoying that people that died stayed gone forever instantly which drives me crazy because I always feel like I should restart a mission if I lose someone. Compound that with the fact I didn't really care about the story enough to make it through the difficulty of the game and I guess this would all lead to me disagreeing with your comparison of the two.

Yeah but... that happens in Valkria Chronicles too....

if you mean characters dying forever, yes it happens but most times it isn't instant, and that's a big part of what annoyed me in FE.  Sure someone will go down in VC, but that means I just have to adjust and get to them before the enemy happens upon them.

 

if you mean people not caring about the story, well yeah sure that happens with some, I can only go through my own personal experience.

The solution in Fire Emblem is much the same, albeit in reverse: don't send weaker units out where the enemy can hit them unless you know they're going to make a kill and that they can be protected thereafter.



Khuutra on 28 December 2009
naznatips said:
Well I think you're full of crap about Fire Emblem allowing for multiple playstyles and you think I'm not good enough at the game, so we're not going to get anywhere with this conversation.

Also: one of these is pretty easy to falsify one way or the other



naznatips on 28 December 2009
Kasz216 said:
As for which is the better game.

It really depends on how you define "better."

Radiant Dawn is the better game, but it comes from a long line of Fire Emblem games and doesn't change much.

Valkria Chronicles copies a style that only had one SRPG before it. (that no one has played but me apparently.)


The newest Madden is obviously better then past ones but is seen less favorably due to little innovation.

I'm guessing you mean Zeonic Front. Check my profile I own it. You're correct that it copied the real-time damage while moving feature from Zeonic Front... but obviously things are a lot more fleshed out in VC.

As for your VC comments: enemies don't use all their command points because you are playing on normal, but they also start with a lot more than you do and a lot more troops, all of which are as strong as yours unless you are majorly overleveled.

As for the tactics comment, tactics refers to your actual actions in movement, rather than your grand overall strategy, and if you can't see how there aren't more tactics in VC's movement and use of terrain, cover, group fire, and real-time damage, then you are way beyond my help.



Zucas on 28 December 2009

Well I've only played half or Radiant Dawn and yet to start Valkyria Chronicles so can't say I'm completely qualified for this discussion despite getting a message about it. But from videos I've watched and knowledge of the FE series and a little insight on VC I can say a few things. First of all, the FE setup is your classic SRPG in about every way or form and it works flawlessly no doubt. VC is of course a different kind of SRPG with some more options. However, FE is one of the hardest series in the entire industry and Radiant Dawn is no different while VC probably doesn't even come close.

That's pretty much all I can say about it now is that the main difference is old school versus something new and of course the extreme difference in difficulty. From what I've watched in videos though, I must prefer the setup that FE provides because I guess I like the classic setup. I'm also tempted to say that FE is more for your hardcore SRPG gamers while VC can be enjoyed by lots of people but won't be definite on that. Or you can ask Outlaw how I tease him about it haha.



naznatips on 28 December 2009

I am a huge FE fan and played almost every game in the series, including some imports (though not to completion). I think it's a great and extremely difficult SRPG, but it's very by-the-books and I can't help but feel like I'm replaying the same game with a different plot (which is rarely good). I will never ever pick it over the Valkyria Chronicles series again assuming VC2 on the PSP turns out as good as the first. I've moved on.

@ Khuutra neither of those statements is provable because both are opinion statements. Baaaaka.