Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

Games with randomized elements should be included in E-sports. I know what you're thinking; "But then what about matches won based primarily on luck?", to which I reply, play round robin style. Have every player play every other player. Then, whoever has the highest win percentage wins the tournament.

@Artwark: 1 million is rather small. Although, that proves that there is more demand for TRPG games.

The entire point of competitive anything is skill, something that people feel like is lessened when there's random elements involved.
Event then, your solution sounds time consuming and boring for players not involved and people watching.

But that reduces the impact of the randomness to the point that it doesn't matter anymore. Let's take poker for instance. The difference between a Poker player who's in the top 10% in the world, and the normal players at your usual card game, is that the top player knows what he's doing, how he's doing it and when to do it. And that's just as true for Poker as it is for Hearthstone or pretty much any other competitive game that has random elements.

@arronishere: I said FE is the definitive series to enjoy the genre which means that the other games need to follow the direction that FE is going to and make it better. So if FE is gone, then the genre is dying.

For instance, Valkyria Chronicles lacks in character charm something which FE always has been known for.

Vantage Master.

Just because no-one develops games for a particular genre, doesn't mean that genre is dead. Just means that its potential is unrecognized.

I've never been a huge fighting game guy (not counting Smash Bros since I've loved that series), but I've played a few over time including Street Fighter, Soul Caliber, Mortal Kombat, Clayfigher, Killer Instinct (I can hardly remember it honestly though since it's been so long), and some others. My favorite of them all though is still....Clayfighter 63 1/3. It would probably be Scuplter's Cut actually but I haven't played that in many many years (whenever we rented it from Blockbuster...kind of wish we would have accidently forgot to return it now). I just always thought it was more interesting than the rest, but again, I never have gotten real deep into these kind of games with pulling off combos and such all that well. The rest of them almost all looked the same to me, and I've never been much of an anime kind of guy.

I accidentally like a lot of games that are other people think are hard, but I still don't think I agree with the opinion that games should all be some kind of monumental challenge and that all attempts at accessibility should be thrown out the window.

Like, one of my favorite game series is Umihara Kawase. They have a reputation for being brutally difficult, but I love that they do a lot of things to make the games accessible. There are little intro stage tutorials, and a branching path system that ensures that you're only playing on levels you have the skills to even access. Someone who isn't that great can still at least beat the game and feel a sense of accomplishment.

I'm speaking as a person who tries to get my friends to like my games, though. I personally see huge benefits in companies making a go of being more accessible.

As long as it's unintrusive and avoidable, what's the difference? Games are about fun, not JUST finger-breaking challenge.

(My friends all hate Umihara btw )

@arronishere: Here's the problem with that argument.

Every game in the genre isn't nearly as fun as FE. One of the reasons is because of lack of character development for the stories. Now while Shadowdragon might have interesting things going on there, its gameplay is nearly identical to that of Jagged Alliance and I stopped playing the former because of its unforgiving fact that your health doesn't restore when you go to the next chapter.

Valkyria Chronicles...... a game that did do something different but fails to deliver engaging story something that is needed for an RPG whether its TRPG or not. Permadeath is not at all punishing because certain characters have to die to get new ones and since the game rescues your defeated units so you can use them for the next mission.

Not to mention that the way the units die in the game isn't really engaging and what I mean is that the models are just static and the animation works like a basic 3d software testing, nothing special in other words. Then the game has several levels that drag and worsen the experience and its for this reason that I used a guide to just end the game quickly.

Then there's Vantage Master. Again, another flaw this game has is obviously lack of story, lack of leveling up through grinding and to top it off, its all scripted so you're forced to fight opponents at your level. I can't get my main unit stats increasing because when I try to beat one of the Natials, it won't do much damage. But if I clear the other levels,

I can't revisit the matches that I won. Items can't be bought which means no armor, no weapons and no basic items although that's fine because you can regenerate MP so that's not an issue.

But the issue is that you can't finish all your units turns at the start of your turn like Final Fantasy Tactics....speaking of which. Oh man. Tactics is even worse.

Every single basic thing you need to get requires you to get job points and since you can't get them so easily, you're forced to make progress with what you have. The game itself doesn't even give you a preview of the map that you're gonna play which means positioning your units is more frustrating than ever.

The AI units that you have are broken like literally broken. They can't even do anything tactical let alone help you. If you are starting on this game, trust me on this, GET THE ITEM AND PHEONIX DOWN ABILITIES ASAP! screw tactics here cause you need to be alive given the situation that you have horrible AI units.

The interface of the game itself is cumbersome. Tutorials are like long videos and instead of teaching you during gameplay, you have to see them as long lectures. Now I get that the genre requires you to learn a lot of these types of games, but when you see FE simplifying the tutorials, it makes you wonder why can't everyone else do it like FE?

I admit that the first time I played FE, it took me some time to get used to but it was in no way any bad as tactics because it felt so damm engaging.

So yes, FE is pretty much the definitive way to play games of this genre.

I agree

Permadeath is stupid and overrated...unless there is an option like Casual mode in Fire Emblem Awakening.

@LztheQuack: It adds a greater since of weight to decisions. When a big mistake is just a small nuisance that can be resolved in a button push, I don't really care, or get much better at the game. It greatly helps me enjoy games. Should it be necessary in every game? No, but when the mechanics work well with permadeath, it's a worthwhile addition.

@LztheQuack: I agree! I like games where there's something permanent at stake when your characters die (like in Mystery Dungeon where you lose all your stuff or even sometimes your levels!), but permadeath is a thing that sounds fine in theory but in practice it just means spamming soft resets.

@DarthNocturnal: By engaging, I mean the way the animation shows for death or the way death is presented. Chronicles just shows a rigged character being pushed to the x,y or z axis.

Forget the GBA, Genealogy of the holy war also had fading but the way its done is what matters as the character says a few words before death. Chronicles also has this but since the characters don't interact, it doesn't really matter.

I haven't played Shadow Dragon but I guess that since the permadeath thing is too much, they thought of doing that way to reward the player in some form.

While I played Awakening in casual at first, I understand now that the series should be played in permadeath to enjoy it better.

Pokemon Trading Card Game Online (look it up) is the most underrated Pokemon game out there. Just like the original, accept a free to play MMO with no pay to win.

@DarthNocturnal: Yeah, I guess you have a point there. Still though, it looks a bit odd in chronicles to me atleast.

And Vantage Master isn't really that bad either. Just some flaws that stop it from being perfect.

Wow, where do I start with this comment.

Lack of story, of course because it's not translated, but the story cutscenes I guess look like they wouldn't amount to anything anyway. In its defense though, it was programmed in the late 90s; very few games in that time had fantastic stories. But damn the music is pretty good, and the sprites + animations are absolutely awesome.

"A flaw this game has is lack of levelling up through grinding"

I'm seriously failing to see how the lack of grinding is a flaw. The G in TRPG stands for Game, not Grind. The T stands for Tactical - you know, beating your opponent with intelligence and learning from your mistakes, rather than masking them with superior gametime and arbitrarily increased numbers.

"its all scripted so you're forced to fight opponents at your level."

Again, what's wrong with this? If you fought opponents way below your level, the game would be too easy, if you fought them way above your level, the game would be too hard. The way stages unlock in groups already gives you the choice of fight an enemy the same level, 1, or 2 levels higher than you to gain a level, then go back to the stage you are stuck on, now one level stronger. And then there's the case of the early maps heavily scaled in your favor. Who cares if the enemy has the same amount of starting mana as you? You've got more Magic Stones. (and in the later levels, hopefully you've learnt how to quickly capture the ones that are on the middle of the field, and at the very late game, capturing stones from your opponent's starting area)

I can't get my main unit stats increasing because when I try to beat one of the Natials, it won't do much damage.

I think you're forgetting the main point of the game, that is to keep your Master protected by picking your battles not shoving him right into the fight. (and especially not challenging the high tier Natials from your currently unlocked summon subset) If you're trying to attack a D-Alma or Tentarch guarding a magic stone with 30% defense increase, from the front, even when using a Palladine or something, of course you're not going to do much damage. Your Master isn't all-powerful, and not checking your attack compared to the opponent's defense before committing to a move (something you definitely should be used to doing since you talk up Fire Emblem so much) is incredibly foolish.

See where I am, noting how I've sent Oonevievle and Blexe to deal with that Regna-Croxe and staying the F away from it altogether, opting to get the drop on the Gia-Bro and Ae-Ferrion with a Currier-Bell rather than waste precious Master turns and HP dealing with them personally.

"I can't revisit the matches that I won."

Just set up the match in the fully customizable Free Play mode.

"Items can't be bought which means no armor, no weapons and no basic items although that's fine because you can regenerate MP"

So arbitrary features that you want in the game but aren't in, is apparently a game flaw? You have a class-specific weapon, (kunai, sword, bow, whatever) and your hero has spells. And then you have a whole freaking book of summons, some of which even have their own magic. I think you're annoyed that there's no overarching character progression, but for a tournament-style gameplay with very balanced single-match focused mechanics, closed system fights work perfectly.

One of my biggest complaints about Fire Emblem is that with all the extra crap that you can do, your characters are too powerful for everything that comes their way. (Normal and Hard are too easy, but Lunatic is totally broken, plus some of the abilities are hella overpowered) In Vantage Master, every piece has its place, especially the slow-moving but fast-acting Reque, combat-useless but fast capturing Pelitte. (and you better freaking get one if you don't have one and your opponent summons a Ba-Mado)

Then there's the random crit and accuracy system in Fire Emblem. You're lulled into a false sense of security with all those 80 and 90% accuracy hits succeeding, and then that one time you need to hit, you miss, and lose a character or some BS. (Why is there no "quit to title" option? Seriously.) Vantage Master is entirely deterministic, no randomness at all. You always hit, and you always deal the damage implied by Attack minus Defense. If your opponent is to beat you, they will do it through strategy, not luck.

"But the issue is that you can't finish all your units turns at the start of your turn like Final Fantasy Tactics.."

What does this even mean? I'm assuming you're talking about "Turn Order" which has existed in various RPGs, especially JRPGs, since forever. Some I can list off the top of my head that came out on Nintendo in the last decade are the Shin Megami Tensei series, Etrian Odyssey, Conception II, and the Digimon DS series.

@DarthNocturnal

Yeah, I agree that Fire Emblem: Awakening is so much more "casual" than the rest of the series. That's not a bad thing, I just don't think the hardcore original TRPGs should be compared to them because the targeted audience is different.

@Blathers: Ok. Yeah, I guess you're right that Vantage Master is just as good as FE. But I don't know if I can agree with you on the sprite animations though. They look as though they come from an online game but the sprites are drawn well enough I guess.

None of what you wrote contradicts what I said about the distinction between tactics and strategy games. Fire Emblem does not feature resource management, unless you consider weapon durability a resource. Switching weapons to take advantage of your enemy's weapon type is an example of tactical play, not strategic. This supports my claim that FE is a TRPG.

And I said that pure tactics games are niche, and they are. FE is not a pure tactics game. It is also a handheld JRPG on 3DS, which sell reasonably well.