EPTFire Emblem - Page 151
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Duka08
3391 Posts
On July 30 2019 08:33 TheYango wrote: Map design is definitely not the best the series has ever had. Its not Gaiden-level awful but its not particularly outstanding either. Enjoying the game is largely rooted in exploring the auxiliary systems and getting invested in the characters/world. So the inverse of Conquest | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
No, that would be Echoes. Three Houses' gameplay is not bad. On the contrary, I think it's actually very good. But it is decidedly rooted in very different aspects of the game than "traditional" Fire Emblem. Fire Emblem historically has been rooted heavily in the "S" part of "SRPG" and solving the turn-by-turn tactical problems of each map, with the RPG mechanics largely as a means to introduce per-playthrough variance, and represent very minimal parts of the experience. Mechanics like reclassing are clearly auxiliary mechanics, not mandatory aspects of the core gameplay loop. Three Houses pulls the "RPG" part of the game much more into the foreground, where the exploration/training cycle is fundamentally integrated into the core gameplay loop, and resource management/character building aspect of the game is actively part of the problem you have to solve, not just part of the backdrop. The 3DS games (and FEH if you want to count that) were already moving more in this direction, but 3H is a much larger step than any of the 3DS games were. Whether this is "bad" is largely up to what you expect to get out of the game. While I'm enjoying the game and everything is fantastically put together, part of me also feels like the game's resounding success has to be the death of "traditional" Fire Emblem. SRPGs post- Final Fantasy Tactics have largely derived from FFT's taxonomy where the JRPG problems of character-building and resource distribution are primary problems to solve, and Fire Emblem was always the last bastion of "traditional" SRPGs which were fundamentally strategy games with character progression systems. With Fire Emblem moving into the space of being another character building-focused game, it seems like traditional SRPGs are well and truly dead. | ||
|
Duka08
3391 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4209 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5261 Posts
RE: map design - I'm not really an expert on FE or gameplay, but from my impressions lurking on reddit, people judge both per game and specific chapters. Like Conquest is considered a good map design game, and people reference Ch 10 (camila port map) specifically. Most well regarded games will still have some bad levels. Like I think I remember the kitsune level being really annoying. If you compare and contrast maps from say, FE13 Awakening, and Conquest, the differences are pretty clear. It's been a while, but from memory the majority of FE13 maps are just big ol open fields. Maybe there's an interior, maybe theres a bunch of forests, but the general strategy is "go from point A to point B as fast as possible, killing everything". More thought is put into optimizing your units stats in pre-prep, then in the actual movement and decision making in maps. Meanwhile, Conquest has stuff like the level with all the pots, that when you break have different effects. Ch 10 with the defensive position, with side quest houses that if you want have to face strategically. Situations are introduced where you have to really think about how to distribute your units, how to use the map's mechanics to get through optimally. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18676 Posts
| ||
|
TomatoBisque
United States6290 Posts
On July 30 2019 17:04 sharkie wrote: Does Three houses have villages where you get items? Because if they completely got rid of them thats quite some change. It was always a good race between thieves/brigands and yourself to get them doesn't seem to be the case. Anyway, I mostly agree with Yango. Map design is kind of hard to put into words. A lot has to do with how much is the terrain being used to my advantage or disadvantage and how does it make the map flow. Echoes and Awakening maps are mostly bad because there isn't really any thought there, it's often just wide open spaces with some forests. And while forests do direct flow of a map, they do so in a soft way where you are just beelining towards the enemies and meeting them on an open field. It's difficult to make interesting enemy formations here. For comparison, the games with the best map design in the series (Thracia, New Mystery Lunatic, and Conquest) have tons of spot where the enemy layout is supported by the terrain to make interesting and unique encounters. But a big factor in this is that the actual strength of enemies and how much of a threat they are to your army plays a large part in this, and so the main problem with the Part 1 maps in 3H is that the enemies are just not a threat outside of 2 maps, + Show Spoiler + The Red Canyon Paralogue and the final Part 1 map Another issue is maps are reused between paralogues/optional battles and the main story, sometimes with the same enemy layout and starting position, which feels pretty repetitive Overall, I'm waiting to see Lunatic before giving a final verdict. | ||
|
Alventenie
United States2147 Posts
Maps that are just wide open route maps can be very bland and slogs to get through. I liked the overall smaller design of the maps so far in 3H. So far on my 2nd route on hard it definitely is tougher than my first route (I am not doing any extra battles except quests/paralogues), so my regular exp levels matter way more than the first time through where I out leveled everything by 6-8 levels and could rofl stomp things. It's also a thing that maps may feel smaller just because like 80% of your army by the end game are mounted/flying. The fact that you can dismount at any time makes flying so good, since you can go in, dismount and not face the problems of archers. So maps are much easier to traverse than all your foot locked units. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5261 Posts
Have you guys had the chance to play around with Warp and Rescue? Turns out that forcing Bernadetta into White Magic wasn't a great idea, her poor magic makes rescue have a range of like 5. It's still kinda useful though. Warp on the other hand has been quite useful in making sure I can save all villagers or do certain tasks quickly. The most OP "movement option" though is the Stride gambit. I can't believe it gives 5 mov, just like wat. | ||
|
Frudgey
Canada3367 Posts
On July 30 2019 10:14 TheYango wrote: No, that would be Echoes. Three Houses' gameplay is not bad. On the contrary, I think it's actually very good. But it is decidedly rooted in very different aspects of the game than "traditional" Fire Emblem. Fire Emblem historically has been rooted heavily in the "S" part of "SRPG" and solving the turn-by-turn tactical problems of each map, with the RPG mechanics largely as a means to introduce per-playthrough variance, and represent very minimal parts of the experience. Mechanics like reclassing are clearly auxiliary mechanics, not mandatory aspects of the core gameplay loop. Three Houses pulls the "RPG" part of the game much more into the foreground, where the exploration/training cycle is fundamentally integrated into the core gameplay loop, and resource management/character building aspect of the game is actively part of the problem you have to solve, not just part of the backdrop. The 3DS games (and FEH if you want to count that) were already moving more in this direction, but 3H is a much larger step than any of the 3DS games were. Whether this is "bad" is largely up to what you expect to get out of the game. While I'm enjoying the game and everything is fantastically put together, part of me also feels like the game's resounding success has to be the death of "traditional" Fire Emblem. SRPGs post- Final Fantasy Tactics have largely derived from FFT's taxonomy where the JRPG problems of character-building and resource distribution are primary problems to solve, and Fire Emblem was always the last bastion of "traditional" SRPGs which were fundamentally strategy games with character progression systems. With Fire Emblem moving into the space of being another character building-focused game, it seems like traditional SRPGs are well and truly dead. Yangers I can't help but see a somber tone in your post. I'm assuming the main draw for you in Fire Emblem games was more the "Strategy" and less the "RPG" side of things, correct? I could be reading into this too much, but it seems that, while you might enjoy the game, you're a little sad to see 'Strategy' take the forefront as it used to. I'm excited to sink my teeth into this game in any case. I have it, but I just haven't gotten around to it. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
With that said, if I dive immediately into this game, I think I'd be at 4 straight Japanese games with amnesia as a plot point. Maybe I need a break. | ||
|
TomatoBisque
United States6290 Posts
On July 31 2019 11:51 andrewlt wrote: It's kinda funny, though. Fire Emblem is taking this tack after outlasting all the other SRPGs out there. Tactics Ogre, Final Fantasy Tactics, SMT: Devil Survivor, all in hibernation. I can't say I mind the new direction. If it was just one of many SRPGs, I'd be sad to see it focus away from the series' core gameplay. But it's currently the only one filling the void of all the other SRPG series that have fallen by the wayside, some of which I honestly prefer over Fire Emblem. As long as they tone down all the fucking lolis and annoying waifu personalities from Fates, I'm good. With that said, if I dive immediately into this game, I think I'd be at 4 straight Japanese games with amnesia as a plot point. Maybe I need a break. the reason FE has become so popular while other SRPG series failed is is FE gives all the characters personality and the marketing is focused around that, whereas in FFT you only have like 2 units with a personality and then an army of generics. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18676 Posts
On July 31 2019 14:39 TomatoBisque wrote: the reason FE has become so popular while other SRPG series failed is is FE gives all the characters personality and the marketing is focused around that, whereas in FFT you only have like 2 units with a personality and then an army of generics. But everyone else around you has deep personalities and the story is Incredible:0 But i guess dating sims are the way to go | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On July 31 2019 14:39 TomatoBisque wrote: the reason FE has become so popular while other SRPG series failed is is FE gives all the characters personality and the marketing is focused around that, whereas in FFT you only have like 2 units with a personality and then an army of generics. Also, because IS kept making them for for 30 years, even in spite of not being the most popular series for a long time and a few less-than-popular releases.When you keep a series running that long, you're going to build up some attachment to your brand that you won't get if you kill your series after 2-3 titles just because it isn't a smash hit in a relatively niche genre. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + I sided with Edelgard, and I think the programmers and writers must have gotten annoyed by having to make this. Instead of the cutscene other routes get (well I assume Blue Lions gets it), Rhea turns into a dragon in the ingame engine, Hubert and Edelgard say "oh no Professor" and it cuts to black. Then rather than a detailed Jeralt overview of the state of the world with character portraits popping up you get a brief narrative. The fact that there's a Church vs Edelgard choice also kind of hurts Black Eagle (and other House members you can recruit) characterization. I got the entire faculty besides Catherine/Cyril/Flayn/Seteth (unrecruitable for Black Eagle) to join me and after the timeskip their excuses for abandoning Rhea were less than convincing. I can only imagine how the Faergus students. I do like the "for want of a nail" situation going on, and hope it gets fleshed out further. Rhea absolutely flipping out was convincing and it's somewhat amusing [other routes spoiler] + Show Spoiler + the only way to keep her from being imprisoned and tortured for 5 years is to take Edelgard's side. | ||
|
lestye
United States4209 Posts
On July 31 2019 14:39 TomatoBisque wrote: the reason FE has become so popular while other SRPG series failed is is FE gives all the characters personality and the marketing is focused around that, whereas in FFT you only have like 2 units with a personality and then an army of generics. Yeah, not really a fair comparison when the other are spinoffs when those other franchises/companies just dabbled in SRPG, while Fire Emblem is IS flagship product. I think Disgaea is the best comparison? Regardless, I did find an interesting hot take twitter thread (which I subsequently lost) that criticized Three Houses of becoming too much like a JRPG instead of an SRPG. I'm not an expert of the genre by any means, but I think the distinction being that some people are using JRPG solutions to overcome problems instead of SRPG solutions, if that makes sense? | ||
|
chocorush
696 Posts
I thought the series was moving in a great direction with conquest, but I'm not excited for new games any more. The game took so long to release, and the info that trickled out more or less killed my enthusiasm for the game because it was looking more like a bootleg persona rather than a fire emblem game. I'm also pretty irritated with the controls, because apparently a nintendo firmware patch disabled support for the converter I used to use, and the only controller I have that works doesn't have any analog sticks, which is mostly fine for the maps themselves, but that has been less than half of the gameplay so far. This wouldn't have been an issue if it was a regular fire emblem game, but the game has become something it wasn't. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18676 Posts
| ||
|
Duka08
3391 Posts
Maybe I'm the problem D: | ||
| ||
