Next Fire Emblem Expanding Casual Options, Dropping Breakable Weapons

[StewShearerOld]

Next Fire Emblem Expanding Casual Options, Dropping Breakable Weapons


Fire Emblem If will add new character powers, a casual-aimed "Pheonix" mode and weapons that don't break.

Fire Emblem: Awakening was about <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/122726-Fire-Emblem-Awakening-Breaks-Franchise-Sales-Records>as big of a hit as the Fire Emblem franchise has ever had. The arguable source of its success? A collection of new features, modernizations and play modes aimed directly at making the franchise more palatable to wider audiences. Now it's looking like it's follow-up, the <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/139457-Next-Fire-Emblem-Coming-to-3DS>recently announced Fire Emblem If, will be pushing even harder to court less hardcore players.

According to recent reports, Fire Emblem If will apparently be bringing back the "Casual"difficulty that the series debuted in Awakening. Prior to Awakening, characters who died in battle stayed dead permanently. While playing the Casual mode however, dead characters revived at the end of each battle. In addition to Casual mode, If will apparently also have a new "Phoenix" mode where slain characters revive at the end of each turn.

The game will likewise completely do away with breakable weapons, while adding in new "Dragon Pulse" skills that will allow select characters to make permanent alterations to the battlefield such as building bridges, removing mountains and more. Add in the fact, that the game will be split <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/140329-New-Fire-Emblem-Will-Have-Black-and-White-Versions>into two versions (White Kingdom/Black Kingdom) and Fire Emblem If is looking to like be one of the most radical entries in the franchise in years.

The big question, of course, is how its fans will react to these proposed changes. Speaking personally, I like the idea of adding more options for players who'd rather not deal with the franchise's more merciless elements. That said, I will admit that removing the breakable weapons does somewhat rub me the wrong way. Granted, weapons in Awakening were easy to replace, so this could just be seen as removing that bit of busy work. Even so, it still smells a bit to me like fixing something that's not broken. What do you guys think?

Source: Famitsu via Siliconera


Permalink

 

[otakon17]

Okay, resurrections at the end of each turn make the bloody thing sound like a cakewalk. Then again, Awakening had Lunatic+ mode which far as I know, NO ONE has completed to date(at least without losing folks). Well, the easy modifications sound like they make the game TOO easy to be honest, and I felt the last game suffered from the lack of tight battle designs like the Fire Emblem that came out on the GBA. Without grinding, you had a certain set of folks that were useful. Sure, it more or less made each map a "use this strategy to win" affair eventually but I felt it was better balanced than Awakening in that regard.

Still, what does rub me the wrong way is the games story split up into two games. Great so I'm gonna have to shell out $80 for the complete experience, thanks Nintendo!

 

[Shanahanapp]

Casual mode is fine as long as it stays an option. I can see why people would want it. I liked the breakable weapons though. Keeping track of your troops equipment and having to stock up at shops really made me feel like I was in charge of an army.

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

I don't remember if we could craft weapons in Awakening, but if we can in this game, I can't wait to craft my unbreakable weapon of super doom.

Still, what does rub me the wrong way is the games story split up into two games. Great so I'm gonna have to shell out $80 for the complete experience, thanks Nintendo!

Two at first there will be a third version later on (yeah it rubs me the wrong way as well).

 

[tippy2k2]

All that sounds great; keep them optional and they can make it as easy as they want for new players. I'm not so sure with the breakable weapons but I found that was more tedious than fun so I'm fine with that. But...

Will they make the AI have some intelligence this time? That'd be great. Putting Frederick in front and letting bad guys literally throw themselves onto his lance just broke the last game. Protip game; you attacking a man when you have 0 max damage is not very intelligent game...

 

[otakon17]

I don't remember if we could craft weapons in Awakening, but if we can in this game, I can't wait to craft my unbreakable weapon of super doom.

Still, what does rub me the wrong way is the games story split up into two games. Great so I'm gonna have to shell out $80 for the complete experience, thanks Nintendo!

Two at first there will be a third version later on (yeah it rubs me the wrong way as well).

...a THIRD?! $120 for the complete game Nintendo!? REALLY? Oh come ON.

 

[Aerosteam]

Removing breakable weapons is a HUGE thing for Fire Emblem, I'm not sure how I feel about that just yet. Granted this means I don't have to give one character 4-5 swords to make sure I'm not using a powerful one to use on a weak enemy and wasting its durability, which I guess is nice.

As for Phoenix Mode... Jesus Christ now that's a casual mode if I've ever seen one. As long as they keep both of the other modes I'm fine. I don't see myself using Phoenix Mode unless in Lunatic+.

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

Putting Frederick in front and letting bad guys literally throw themselves onto his lance just broke the last game. Protip game; you attacking a man when you have 0 max damage is not very intelligent game...

Fredrick fits a series stereotype called the Jagan, it's a pre-promoted paladin you get at the beginning of the game. They traditionally don't have as much growth potential as your cavaliers. They're there specifically to help you with worse case scenarios and if you spent too much time using them, they'd cripple your army later on, because they stole valuable XP from units that needed it more.

But grinding is a thing in FE: Awakening, and you no longer have perma-death if you don't want it, so by all means.

 

[Scarim Coral]

Honestly I think casual mode is fine the way it is but Pheonix mode just seen unnecessary. What? You don't want to do another mission or skirmish to level up your character who was killed in the last mission thus missing out the experienced it would had earn if it had stayed alived longer?

Making the weapon unbreakable is a turn off for me since I kind of like that mechanic since it kind of make it realistic (weapon do get worn down if left uncheck). What else can we spend on our money on how? The stats increase items? They become useless once your characters can't used them anymore!

 

[Mahorfeus]

Call me excited. Awakening was admittedly my first Fire Emblem game, but I thought it was great. After doing one playthrough on Casual and one on Hard, I have to say that I honestly don't understand the appeal of the latter. Characters either arbitrarily die or "retire" if they're deemed plot essential. It just struck me as lazy that permadeath would even be a thing if it couldn't affect the plot in any way. Unless these new ones do anything like that, I'll be sticking with Casual.

As for no more weapons breaking... I'm perfectly fine with that. Upgrading weapons always felt like a waste in Awakening, unless I was just doing something terribly wrong. I can understand that micromanagement is a thing, but it was plain tedious.

 

[Slycne]

The one aspect I will miss with durability/uses is that it let them have more freedom with the weapons, since they knew you can't keep it forever. Deciding when you use some of your weapons with high damage or unique effect that also had a low number of uses was part of the strategy.

 

[go-10]

everythin, everything sounds awesome!

I hope they do a similar thing with the next Pokemon game and actually give me a reason to buy both versions

 

[Covarr]

Breakable weapons should only be removed in casual. I don't mind this feature if it's not mandatory, but it absolutely should not affect Classic mode.

P.S. Thanks

 

[And Man]

The arguable source of its success? Shipping!

FTFY

OT: I hope that breakable weapons are only removed from casual. It'd be kinda lame if they removed them from harder difficulties.

Captcha: Very doubtful. Well, let's hope not...

 

[Novus Ultimus]

I think these changes are mostly fine, I'm a bit iffy about making weapons unbreakable, but it's not a major issue.

What IS a major issue is the whole "splitting the game into different versions to get more money" thing. It's not satisfying to play a game and finish it and then think I'm going to have to pay for it again to see the rest of it. So it seems like they have decided to monetize a choice which is part of the gameplay of many RPGs, namely the choice between two factions.

Edit: after receiving more information, I guess it's not as bad as all that, provided the developers can deliver true quality.

 

[PunkRex]

As someone who's played every rendition since the GBA version (apart from the one on the Wii, which I still own) I always considered the breakable weapons as a more shallow aspect. If they ACTUALLY wanted to do something with the idea then make it that the weapons loose power over time, like Monster Hunter for example, breaking only after repeated usage at the lowest durability... or something, I dunno, what I'm saying is I won't miss it to much, probably would have been better if they made it an option as opposed to straight up removing it.

I think these changes are mostly fine, I'm a bit iffy about making weapons unbreakable, but it's not a major issue.

What IS a major issue is the whole "splitting the game into different versions to get more money" thing. It's not satisfying to play a game and finish it and then think I'm going to have to pay for it again to see the rest of it. So it seems like they have decided to monetize a choice which is part of the gameplay of many RPGs, namely the choice between two factions.

THIS is what irks me, this isn't Pokemon, you're not trying to encourage trading Nintendo!

 

[DrOswald]

I don't remember if we could craft weapons in Awakening, but if we can in this game, I can't wait to craft my unbreakable weapon of super doom.

Still, what does rub me the wrong way is the games story split up into two games. Great so I'm gonna have to shell out $80 for the complete experience, thanks Nintendo!

Two at first there will be a third version later on (yeah it rubs me the wrong way as well).

...a THIRD?! $120 for the complete game Nintendo!? REALLY? Oh come ON.

That is not exactly right. Basically, there are two paths, each the full size of a typically Fire Emblem game. The first path you get is the standard price of $40, and the second path is ~$20 dlc if you want it.

I would say it is closer to 2 separate games, like Zelda's Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages, that are closely linked, with the addition bonus that you get the second one half off.

The third path will come later, and also be the length of a full fire emblem campaign and cost ~$20 again.

So, basically 3 full length Campaigns for $80. I think that is fair, since they are not charging the full price for the second and third campaign. It is basically a second full game, but there will be no new mechanics (as far as I understand) so half the normal price seems fair.

 

[Lightspeaker]

I really, really don't like this "breaking the game into different versions" thing. Its horrible.

Anyway, Fire Emblem was just a series I never bothered even looking at until Awakening. Not for any particular reason, its just something that never really came up on my radar (which is weird considering how much I've always loved that gameplay style). But honestly I couldn't imagine playing it in non-casual mode. Permadeath of unique characters rapidly turns me off a game because if I lose one I know I'm losing interactions and parts of the plot; which results in me just save scumming ad nauseam to get through without losing anyone.

I can sort of understand making weapons unbreakable. For one I didn't upgrade ANYTHING in FEA because eventually I'd lose it so it felt like a waste. Also it meant having to keep at least like four of each type of weapon on their respective users, generally a main weapon, a replacement for that and then two specialist ones for specific circumstances which I couldn't routinely use because they were too valuable. It was a lot of inventory muddling and having to constantly replace broken basic weapons was just busywork.

That being said I also understand the argument that its a bad thing because it means it removes a factor that can be used to balance the weapons. Although I don't like the argument that "well it means they can add in some crazy powerful unique ones". I've always hated unique breakables or consumables in games purely because they basically always end up falling into the trope of being too awesome to use (TV TROPES ALERT, DO NOT CLICK IF YOU VALUE THE REST OF YOUR DAY) [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TooAwesomeToUse].


Although honestly Phoenix mode seems to be a little over the top. Regardless this news is pretty good.

 

[DrOswald]

Breakable weapons should only be removed in casual. I don't mind this feature if it's not mandatory, but it absolutely should not affect Classic mode.

P.S. Thanks

Presumably they are redesigning the entire inventory system around non breaking weapons. Assuming removing breakable weapons is a casual gamer appeal thing is kind of misguided in my opinion. Just because a mechanic is simplified does not mean it was done to appeal to the casual element, often simplifying a mechanic allows much more design space to work with, allowing for greater depth. And lets be fair, breaking weapons in Fire Emblem was never a strategically deep mechanic. Personally, I think that non breaking weapons will increase the depth of the game precisely because it will allow for better design.

I think these changes are mostly fine, I'm a bit iffy about making weapons unbreakable, but it's not a major issue.

What IS a major issue is the whole "splitting the game into different versions to get more money" thing. It's not satisfying to play a game and finish it and then think I'm going to have to pay for it again to see the rest of it. So it seems like they have decided to monetize a choice which is part of the gameplay of many RPGs, namely the choice between two factions.

Personally, I think most games that allow you to choose between factions are weaker for it. Neither faction receives the full attention their story deserves because there is only so many development resources to go around. By making them separate projects both should get the attention they need to stand on their own. In addition, from what we have heard both will offer very different experiences in terms of campaign and story structure. It is not like they made a game and then ripped half the missions out to sell separately.

I mean, it might be crap. But Nintendo has been very, very good with DLC and this sort of thing historically. I think it is overly cynical to assume the worst in this case.

Honestly I think casual mode is fine the way it is but Pheonix mode just seen unnecessary. What? You don't want to do another mission or skirmish just level up your character who was killed in the last mission thus missing out the experienced it would had earn if it had stayed alive longer?

Making the weapon unbreakable is a turn off for me since I kind of like that mechanic since it kind of make it realistic (weapon do get worn down if left uncheck). What else can we spend on our money on how? The stats increase items? They become useless once your characters can't used them anymore!

Well, Pheonix mode isn't for you. It is for people like my wife who just are very bad at tactical games but want to play for fun. I don't see why it is a bad thing it is in there.

As for what we spend our money on, that is the good part of removing the breaking inventory. Other things to spend our money on didn't exist before, because we had to spend all our money re buying all the weapons we already own because they break. Now they have much more design space to work with. Think of all the actually interesting things they could design for us to buy since we no longer have to blow it all on pile of steel spears.

 

[Novus Ultimus]

That is not exactly right. Basically, there are two paths, each the full size of a typically Fire Emblem game. The first path you get is the standard price of $40, and the second path is ~$20 dlc if you want it.

I would say it is closer to 2 separate games, like Zelda's Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages, that are closely linked, with the addition bonus that you get the second one half off.

The third path will come later, and also be the length of a full fire emblem campaign and cost ~$20 again.

So, basically 3 full length Campaigns for $80. I think that is fair, since they are not charging the full price for the second and third campaign. It is basically a second full game, but there will be no new mechanics (as far as I understand) so half the normal price seems fair.

Oh, if that is the case, It's far more reasonable than I first thought. If they manage to deliver good quality I won't complain about paying for 20$ DLC.