Topic: Fire Emblem: Three Houses

@Late That's the thing though, Mario was intended for you to start over once you ran out of lives. Fire Emblem is not. The intention is for you to beat individual levels without losing anyone. Otherwise they'd have the auto save function save after every turn with no ability to load a previous save at all. Something they could easily do. When a character dies and you get to the end of the game and it just says "Serra: Died in Chapter 22" it clearly says to me they aren't meant to die, there is no story component. You're supposed to finish the game with her alive. The idea of clearing the entire game without losing anyone is like a Nuzlocke in Pokemon, a fanmade challenge. Now I am sure there are die hard fans out there who would like it, but by no means is it the intended way to play. If you want to self impose those rules on yourself, that's on you. But as far as I can see, they allow you to reload the start of a level on purpose, they have at least since the GBA games. So they intended to allow the player to do so.

My problem is that 90% of the time I lose units to RNG BS. Enemies get crits galore and gang up on some random unit that's not my lord.

Casual FOREVER!

...on the flip side, if I know I screwed up and made a mistake, I'll start over the chapter.

@LzWinky I get the distinct feeling you don't like card games. Or Pokemon. Seems like you really hate RNG.

To be fair, no one likes dying to that random crit but...

Hate to break it, but it's completely random. They could target one of my middle strong characters

There was one chapter where they ran past my lord and the weakest unit to gang up on another unit. I wish I was making this up!

My luck in Yu-gi-oh was legendary at my university

@LzWinky Don't forget the times enemies just spawn right text to your units and get in a free turn, killing your units because you had no way of knowing in advance where they'd show up...

Not specifically, but I do remember them being in the middle.

Fire Emblem Conquest was fairly complex. Mostly because of how common Skills were. The game would force you to constantly keep track of many many skills, Terrain changes (in some case), weapon triangle (which they bloated a lot), stat changes, the Pair Up mechanic, etc. I’d easily say it’s a complex game that demanded a whole lot of thought to beat on higher difficulties

The most persuasive point of view is the one that can empathize with other points of view. When you adamantly reject what someone else enjoys and try to beat your point of you into them as being “correct”, the only thing you ensure is that people will be twice as likely to reject the view you espouse, even if just out of spite.

There is plenty of appeal in casual mode. I fell in love with the series in casual mode. You don’t need the threat of losing someone permanently to gain the motivation of performing your best and not losing someone. Pride of accomplishment is a very heavy motivator. And that’s all one needs to play the game on casual and enjoy it just as much. Whether or not that’s your preference, or whether you can relate as your own personal motivator, I would hope most people would at least understand (or try to understand) that this is a truth for many, if not the majority.

Saying you “can’t understand” something that holds true for the vast majority only proves a lack of understanding, which I suspect is due more to a lack of willful effort than an actual lack of capacity.

@JaxonH Hey I think you make some really great points, especially in your first two paragraphs.

I feel like a lot of people treat their own opinions as facts. "like" and "dislike" are subjective things. People don't have to agree on everything to accept each other.

But as to your comments about understanding someone else's opinion, for example do you have any food you dislike? I can't stand fermented beans, I think they taste like a mix between snot and rotten veggies. But there are people who love them. I don't really understand why, but they find that taste appealing. I think it's like that.

As to the whole casual, classic, let characters die thing that we've all been talking about, I think we can probably all agree we have different way we enjoy the game? Let's follow JaxonH's advice and not try and demand others enjoy it the way we do.

Thing is, @RedderRugfish ... You always had the option to reset, whether you chose to or not So, now, you can choose hardcore or casual mode; you don't have to play the later way
Unfortunately, I missed out on the Tactics Ogre games but I'm a huge fan of TRPGs

@Tsurii There's always that guy who gets a copy early in Turkmenistan or something, somehow. That guy who steals a copy out of a the box at the local Walmart. That lucky dude who's copy arrives in the mail early.

Whoever was asking about the special edition coming back in stock, here it is

https://m.gamestop.com/product/nintendo-switch/games/fire-emb...

@Tsurii I've noticed these types of things making appearances and actively trying to ignore them too. While I like hearing more about the game, I really only want to hear from people who are respecting the embargo. I'd hate for there to be a ruined plot point or similar.

Yeah, I was reading the impressions of character previews on reddit and some people were already spoiling plot points on the game. So I’m officially done with Reddit

I can admit I play some games a bit weirdly or at least differently from many others. Mostly RPGs as some of you may have noticed if you've ever read how I play Pokémon or Final Fantasy. I'm also an item hoarder.

I wonder what the original reason for adding perma-death was and how they thought people would play the game? They always give more than enough units that you can finish the game even if you play badly unless you're playing on Lunatic or something. I've seen more recent interviews where the developers say that they reset maps too but I still wonder if it was always meant to be that way. I personally feel like death is pretty pointless if you just go and reset anyway. @Heavyarms55 said that my way of playing feels like a self imposed challenge run like Nuzlocke (which I personally don't find fun but that's an another discussion altogether) but I always saw it the other way around. In the end, both are just different playstyles.

Death is part of the game but I feel like it still lacks impact, regardless of how you play the game. The characters have their short speech before dying but the next time they even acknowledge death is at the end of the game. They could do something more exciting with the mechanic. Maybe there could be skills that unlock when a character dies. Someone's sibling dies and they get a skill that gives a attack boost against the type of enemy that killed their sibling.

EDIT: Forgot to mention one thing so I'll just add it here. They still seem to want the players to actually know how it feels to lose a unit since they had that one thing in Fates where one of the character dies unless you know it's coming or happen to have what it takes to prevent that from happening. Keeping it vague so I don't need to bother with spoiler tags.

I like how certain story character deaths are handled — for example, Soren in Path of Radiance doesn't die if he falls in battle, he just retires from battle for the rest of the game. I think it'd be easier for me to accept if that was the case for all characters, since part of the issue for me is losing out on story sequences that would feature the dead character.

But I'm definitely still a casual boy. As I mentioned on the last page, it's in your best interest not to do suicide attacks, even with permadeath disabled, given the way most maps and objectives are set up. You want your units alive and taking useful actions. The strategy never goes away.

I kind of like that you can miss out on side plots and other smallish game details depending on whether you lose certain characters or not. The permadeath mechanic in Fire Emblem plays really well into this and into IS constantly wanting to chase after the ‘Your Decisions Really Matter’ tagline. If handled right it just feels very organic and makes you value the characters even more

The only FE games I've played are Blazing Blade (FE7 on GBA) and Sacred Stones but I thought I'd give my two cents to this discussion. In those games, I occasionally reset when a character died if the character was a particular favourite, or my only character of a specific class, or if it was due to a stupid mistake on my part near the start of the battle - but most of the time I just carried on. That's partly because having to reset the entire battle would be time-consuming and frustrating, but the main reason is because it makes it feel more like my story. If Little Timmy gets killed halfway through the game, that's not because it's a scripted event, but because of my mistakes, and I like how that makes my experience with the game unique to me.

As for what people have said about RNG/crits, I may be forgetting something but I don't think I ever felt like it wasn't my fault when I lost a character. The game tells you the probability of each individual opponent getting a crit so in my experience I think I was generally able to plan around the possibility of that happening.

Of course I completely understand why people choose to reset or play on casual mode, but to me that would reduce the fun and excitement of the game, so when I eventually get round to playing one of the recent games I'll play on classic mode right off the bat.

Lol do they get paid based on house-popularity or something?