-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Post your searing hot takes
- Thread starter Yung Dramps
- Start date
Engage, along with the non-remake 3ds FE games, puts more focus on building up any given character than the earlier games. I feel that this ends up helping the player have concerns that extend beyond a given map, since there's less expected pressure from losing units with rewinds and casual mode. Also I need somewhere to fool around in endgame/postgame because pokemon isn't doing it right now.
3 houses gets skipped over because trying to do skills from multiple sources is extremely tedious, and I somehow had a better time using off-class weapons in Engage. I don't think its campaign works particularly well under the assumptions of the older games either.
3 houses gets skipped over because trying to do skills from multiple sources is extremely tedious, and I somehow had a better time using off-class weapons in Engage. I don't think its campaign works particularly well under the assumptions of the older games either.
Last edited:
Fire Emblem gameplay in of itself cannot carry the game to me. I want a good story. period. If a Fire Emblem game does not appeal to me with its story, I will not care about it, and I will probably call it bad. Fire Emblem Engage's characters and story are laughable, and as someone who is a hobbyist writer, it makes my writing look like fucking Shakespeare. It makes Avengers: Endgame look like a story made for sophisticated people; its writing is almost so bad it turns into something ironically good.
i think that's where the fundamental difference lies, i enjoy FE gameplay enough to go "ya i can like this game despite its story being comically bad."
it's also why you'll see me defend conquest every once in a while.
on a colder topic i think as a collective tellius is pretty great and i doubt anyone will fight me on this one in good faith
it's also why you'll see me defend conquest every once in a while.
on a colder topic i think as a collective tellius is pretty great and i doubt anyone will fight me on this one in good faith
yeah that's all fair
I don't think any FE game really has a good story bar 3H. Awakening is bland characters without relatable motivations and some weird evil dragon god stuff, FE7 is some evil organization or some shit, I don't even remember. Mind you I only played the FE games that released in the west, maybe the older japanese games habe good stories but idk. It's all very bland JRPG shit to me
On a side note, JRPGs have the worst fucking stories man. It's all generic and bland, the characters are usually just walking stereotypes that have no depth or anything interesting. Most of these stories aren't character driven but base themselves on tropey narrations that start at point a and somehow end with killing God
The original Xenoblade for example, despite trying to subvert and play with some of those tropes, falls to these shortcomings pretty hard. The amount of times the game completely shifts focus and "twists" the plot is indicative of this. What's at first a simple story about wanting to protect your home and getting revenge ends with some weird narrative about new universes and becoming a God or something
On a side note, JRPGs have the worst fucking stories man. It's all generic and bland, the characters are usually just walking stereotypes that have no depth or anything interesting. Most of these stories aren't character driven but base themselves on tropey narrations that start at point a and somehow end with killing God
The original Xenoblade for example, despite trying to subvert and play with some of those tropes, falls to these shortcomings pretty hard. The amount of times the game completely shifts focus and "twists" the plot is indicative of this. What's at first a simple story about wanting to protect your home and getting revenge ends with some weird narrative about new universes and becoming a God or something
I actually wasn't satisfied with 3 houses' story either (though I care more about the gameplay shortcomings). I wanted more discussion on the Argathans, likley requiring a recruitable character or two, particularly since series-wide trends would indicate some extra reasoning behind their original conflict against the dragons (several games [including the lore around the shared world of the first 5] have dragons going crazy and needing to be put down after manifesting their power for too long).
Tellius had an excellent story, though I agree Awakening and FE7 are horrible plots.
I like Sacred Stones’ plot aswell but it’s not perfect and I’m a blindsided fangirl.
Three Houses’ biggest flaw is simply not having enough time. The game would have benefitted so much from ~6 months extra in the hyperbolic oven.
I like Sacred Stones’ plot aswell but it’s not perfect and I’m a blindsided fangirl.
Three Houses’ biggest flaw is simply not having enough time. The game would have benefitted so much from ~6 months extra in the hyperbolic oven.
"Sacred Stones is very easy" yeah because you ran through the game with Seth. The man is a promoted class with insane stats that you get in chapter 1, using him throughout the game is like picking easy mode. He's made as crutch for newcomers, seeing people who are interested in playing FE games optimally and refuse to use units like Ross saying how Sacred Stones is super easy seems so dumb to me
Also, talking about FE like its a competitive game with tiers for units and talking about how to play it optimally... why. None of the games are particularly difficult, you can just take the units you like and go through the game as you like. Maybe its slower or more difficult but its a game where you can ultimately choose the units you like, develop them the way you like and play it as you want. Its like saying that you should never run Pidgeot in RBY because you can Dodrio, like yeah maybe but if you just like Pidgeot more, why not
Also, talking about FE like its a competitive game with tiers for units and talking about how to play it optimally... why. None of the games are particularly difficult, you can just take the units you like and go through the game as you like. Maybe its slower or more difficult but its a game where you can ultimately choose the units you like, develop them the way you like and play it as you want. Its like saying that you should never run Pidgeot in RBY because you can Dodrio, like yeah maybe but if you just like Pidgeot more, why not
To be fair:
1) Sacred Stones would still be easy without Seth. The enemy quality is still super low, and you have access to a litany of other extremely powerful units (Franz can snowball into a Paladin as strong as Seth, Vanessa has flier utility + becomes Wyvern Knight which is a stupid broken class, Artur snowballs super fast and has ridiculous offensive stats + triple effectiveness on the lategame, Ephraim in particular is ridiculous [broken prf, amazing bases and growths, access to supply functionally giving him 105 inventory slots if you go Ephraim], Kyle can do something similar to Franz, Duessel can substitute for Seth nicely if you feed him like a single Speedwing, Cormag is Vanessa with much better combat, Gerik (altho he’s less relevant on Ephraim) is the best foot combat guy anyone can ask for, Knoll can become a summoner in c15 preps/turn 3 c15 and summoners are broken, Myrrh can wipe 50 enemies off the map in the remaining 7 maps) While Seth does make the game easy, no Seth doesn’t make it hard.
2) Ross actually does have a niche in efficient play! If you get him to Pirate before c7, he can assist with the Waterside Renvall skip (where you ferry Eirika and Seth over the water, skipping 80% of the map.
DSFE:
Seriously though, FE11/12 are very hard, especially on H5/Lunatic Reverse. FE11 Hard 1 was an intense challenge for me.
For more pertinent examples:
Awakening Lunatic+ is an inherently bullshit difficulty, and bullshit leads to challenge in some twisted sense of the idea.
Conquest, though objectively not a good game, has a decent (and challenging) Lunatic mode.
Three Houses Maddening isn’t *hard* in the midgame, but the first couple of chapters are like trying to beat c7 of Sacred Stones with just Eirika and 8 Amelias. It’s miserable.
Engage Maddening no DLC is also quite hard aswell.
Thracia.
Binding Blade Hard Mode is also rather difficult.
My point is that not only are there challenging Fire Emblem games, but most of them are the highest difficulty. You see all these tierlists and efficient play because many highest difficulties, especially the ones for DS/3DS FE, kind of mandate it. I agree most fire emblem games aren’t hard on their normal modes (I’d still wager that FE12 Normal is hard as fuck tbh), but nearly all efficient play is centered around Lunatic/Maddening.
You can’t really run through every single game with your favorites on the hardest difficulty. Not unless you know what you’re doing. Even stuff like the Forever Draft Mekkah participated in didnt all have highest difficulties bc who would play CQ Lunatic without the entire roster. And that’s why tierlists exist.
Apples to apples is and always has been a better game than cards against humanity
Yeah that is also true. I think something additional is how much exp you can get without any issues, the ressources in the game really aren't limited. I played the game first time at age 14 and didn't use Seth, still got through the game relatively easy despite not understanding stats. FE7 was much harder for me, still not very difficult but much more so than Sacred Stones
Actually heard of that. I think I did that in my first run and felt like a genius for coming up with this
Yeah I didn't think of that tbh. I usually just play the games on normal, sometimes on regular hard difficulty. I suppose it would be like playing a hardcore nuzlocke in Pokemon, where certain mons really are unviable and couldn't be used effectively
It is basically just this, yeah. On normal everyone is viable, on Lunatic/Maddening/(FE5/6)Hard not everyone is.
Tierlists typically don’t take into account the tower of Valni, because in the tower everyone is automatically good.
been very slowly playing thru engage. At first i thought it was very stupid and dumb because the story was very stupid and dumb, but now that i'm around chapter 20 i think the story is still stupid and dumb, but in a fun, campy way. 3H just gave me the wrong expectations, probably would have had acclimated to the game earlier if I came in knowing its lowkey conquest 2 (and i LOVE conquest its so fun!!!)
It's kind of equal with 3H as far as switch fire emblem games go, 3H has a far better story/world but from a pure gameplay standpoint I think I far prefer engage's map design and mechanics. I actually have to think decently hard on my blind hard/classic playthrough, something that never happened with 3H outside of dlc (never played lunatic cuz it looked unfun, im a hard/classic guy). backup units are broken but in a fun way
It's kind of equal with 3H as far as switch fire emblem games go, 3H has a far better story/world but from a pure gameplay standpoint I think I far prefer engage's map design and mechanics. I actually have to think decently hard on my blind hard/classic playthrough, something that never happened with 3H outside of dlc (never played lunatic cuz it looked unfun, im a hard/classic guy). backup units are broken but in a fun way
I have a love hate relationship with this description, because as similar as it is to conquest I really don’t want to associate it with Fates as a whole and I think it’s hard to break it apart from that shackle.
Conquest is pretty awesome though.
Three Houses has a weird difficulty curve where Hard is pretty easy, and Maddening is brutally hard. It’s a poorly designed difficulty, which is a shame as it had more time in the oven than the rest of 3H.
Engage Maddening is actually super good though ! Recommend it a lot, once you beat it on hard. The early game is very tightly designed, and the midgame is a brutal challenge but not one that’ll leave you feeling outgeared.
Take Over is a better song than Last Surprise
There's a reason Persona 5 heavily encourages you to ambush enemies, and it's not for the combat advantage
It's for the B O P
There's a reason Persona 5 heavily encourages you to ambush enemies, and it's not for the combat advantage
It's for the B O P
I really liked 3H but haven't played Engage yet. Also they should remake Binding Blade cuz Fae is the best character.
edit: Also hot take Cocoa Pebbles are better than Cocoa Krispies cuz they don't get soggy as quickly.
edit: Also hot take Cocoa Pebbles are better than Cocoa Krispies cuz they don't get soggy as quickly.
Last edited:
The "will they won't they" part of romance/romance-adjacent stories is the most boring part IMO. The stuff that happens after the couple gets together is so much more engaging and yet so many romances wait until right at the end when there is no longer time to explore how their relationship evolves to have them get together.
I'm a big fan of shows where the couple get together between 1/4 and 1/2 of the way through (or right near the beginning in the case of certain light sitcoms) and then have the rest of the intrigue revolve around their trials and tribulations as a couple, whether it's relatively tame with squabbles over little things, a turbulent relationship between two people whose bond is strong enough that they ultimately stay together, or a dysfunctional relationship that falls to pieces before the story is over.
I get why it's so common to structure it with the will they/won't they so dominant for a film, short story, novella etc., as it needs to commit to one or the other approach early enough for there to be enough time to let the story play out, and a first kiss or confession or whatever provides a pretty satisfying climax for a (relatively) short form story, but when you have so much screen time it's so much more worth just letting the couple rock decently early on IMO.
I'm a big fan of shows where the couple get together between 1/4 and 1/2 of the way through (or right near the beginning in the case of certain light sitcoms) and then have the rest of the intrigue revolve around their trials and tribulations as a couple, whether it's relatively tame with squabbles over little things, a turbulent relationship between two people whose bond is strong enough that they ultimately stay together, or a dysfunctional relationship that falls to pieces before the story is over.
I get why it's so common to structure it with the will they/won't they so dominant for a film, short story, novella etc., as it needs to commit to one or the other approach early enough for there to be enough time to let the story play out, and a first kiss or confession or whatever provides a pretty satisfying climax for a (relatively) short form story, but when you have so much screen time it's so much more worth just letting the couple rock decently early on IMO.
Silent Hill 2 aged really bad. I think it actually aged worse than Silent Hill 1, as SH1 felt a lot more fluid and easier to play. SH2 meanwhile... I know the clunky combat is meant to add to the atmosphere and the horror but its just frustrating to me
In general, I don't think the survival part in survival horror should be bigger than the horror. I like the limited ressources because its usually fun to manage them but I don't feel like a game is scarier when its easier to die in it. It just makes it harder. And if its not harder because of genuine challenge but because of clunky controls and slow combat, yeah idk, I am not feeling it
I feel it most in the bossfights. Pyramid Head is a scary bastard but fighting him doesn't scare, just kinda annoys me
Something else I really dislike about every SH game is how reliant on the map you are. I always need to pull it up every few seconds. I wish there was a minimap, something optional that would help people like me who feel that needing to menu every few seconds hinders the atmosphere
That said, the game's a masterpiece for its soundtrack, atmosphere, characters, story, set pieces... It's just the core gameplay that I really dislike and makes it hard for me to return to the game
I hope the SH2 remake will be good but considering the development team and the current state of Konami... I don't think so
In general, I don't think the survival part in survival horror should be bigger than the horror. I like the limited ressources because its usually fun to manage them but I don't feel like a game is scarier when its easier to die in it. It just makes it harder. And if its not harder because of genuine challenge but because of clunky controls and slow combat, yeah idk, I am not feeling it
I feel it most in the bossfights. Pyramid Head is a scary bastard but fighting him doesn't scare, just kinda annoys me
Something else I really dislike about every SH game is how reliant on the map you are. I always need to pull it up every few seconds. I wish there was a minimap, something optional that would help people like me who feel that needing to menu every few seconds hinders the atmosphere
That said, the game's a masterpiece for its soundtrack, atmosphere, characters, story, set pieces... It's just the core gameplay that I really dislike and makes it hard for me to return to the game
I hope the SH2 remake will be good but considering the development team and the current state of Konami... I don't think so
Call of Duty has a predatory business model but the game itself is actually really fun