Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Even as somebody who would never use either of those options, I don't get why them being options in the game is so offensive to it.
I already said why. Its offense is not restricted to Fire Emblem. Game mechanics in the name of accessibility that remove challenge is offensive to game design as a whole.
I already said why. Its offense is not restricted to Fire Emblem. Game mechanics in the name of accessibility that remove challenge is offensive to game design as a whole.
but why is it offensive to game design? Granted Phoenix Mode is a bit extreme on the easy part, but easy difficulty is something that games have been doing for decades.
It's the best solution to the varying skill levels and wants of each player, because not everybody wants to have high levels of challenge.
As long as we can still choose to get our challenge, I don't see the harm in it. It brings players in that might not have otherwise played the game and ensures that we keep getting more Fire Emblem.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
but why is it offensive to game design? Granted Phoenix Mode is a bit extreme on the easy part, but easy difficulty is something that games have been doing for decades.
It's the best solution to the varying skill levels and wants of each player, because not everybody wants to have high levels of challenge.
As long as we can still choose to get our challenge, I don't see the harm in it. It brings players in that might not have otherwise played the game and ensures that we keep getting more Fire Emblem.
Again, I just said why. Easy difficulty is not what this is. This is a legit win mode that completely takes challenge out of the game because you can't lose from what the Phoenix mode describes. And because you can't lose the sense of accomplishment players get overcoming a challenge that they can fail is gone. They already had the best solution to varying skill levels and wants of each player when they implemented casual mode along with the option to remove the permanent death mechanic from your playthrough. If after that they still need to further hold someone's hand with "You win, enjoy that story mode with no justifiable reason to play" option them maybe you're designing your game for the wrong people. That'd be like NBA 2K implementing some difficulty where the A.I. didn't play defense just to accommodate some special kind of gamer who can't bother with trial and error and wants to see what MyCAREER is. You're not even designing for people who play video games at that point. Which is fine. But I thought this was Fire Emblem and not some random mobile game off of Google Play some random mom who's never picked up a Dualshock in her life might get a kick out of.
I don't understand how people can justify a compromise this extreme with "it's just an option" because the mindset behind it is a slippery slope of sorts.
Again, I just said why. Easy difficulty is not what this is. This is a legit win mode that completely takes challenge out of the game because you can't lose from what the Phoenix mode describes. And because you can't lose the sense of accomplishment players get overcoming a challenge that they can fail is gone. They already had the best solution to varying skill levels and wants of each player when they implemented casual mode along with the option to remove the permanent death mechanic from your playthrough. If after that they still need to further hold someone's hand with "You win, enjoy that story mode with no justifiable reason to play" option them maybe you're designing your game for the wrong people. That'd be like NBA 2K implementing some difficulty where the A.I. didn't play defense just to accommodate some special kind of gamer who can't bother with trial and error and wants to see what MyCAREER is. You're not even designing for people who play video games at that point. Which is fine. But I thought this was Fire Emblem and not some random mobile game off of Google Play some random mom who's never picked up a Dualshock in her life might get a kick out of.
I don't understand how people can justify a compromise this extreme with "it's just an option" because the mindset behind it is a slippery slope of sorts.
I'm going to agree with Reezy here -- A game is a game as long there is some form of challenge in completing it, otherwise it might as well be anything but a game. Even casual games like Peggle, Angry Birds or Tetris carry a challenge with them in order to fulfill any sense of accomplishment to their respective audience.
The inherent problem is most games tendency to appeal to too many people at once, usually ending with a mess of a designed game.. Stealth games becoming action-adventure titles with pseudo stealth elements, where one can't help but think that said game kinda resents you for playing it the way it probably should be played.. like a stealth game. Splinter Cell Conviction or Hitman Absolution are prime examples of games that go about with the pretense of saying "You play it the way you want, but really you should play it like this" because the game's design doesn't reflect that of the stealth game they used to be, especially not how the maps were laid out, or the elaborate action set pieces where you are forced into combat.
EDIT: It shouldn't be hard to sneak past all the guards and everything in Ground Zeroes, but the implementation of slow-mo dead eye mode, seeing through walls etc. sort of alludes to the fact that the game expects you to pop all guards instead of the sneaky route which is just uggh..
In retrospect, Fire Emblem Awakening isn't THAT difficult on the higher difficulties, which I think is reflected in its modern design to appeal to newbs.. like ME! 
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
I'm going to agree with Reezy here -- A game is a game as long there is some form of challenge in completing it, otherwise it might as well be anything but a game. Even casual games like Peggle, Angry Birds or Tetris carry a challenge with them in order to fulfill any sense of accomplishment to their respective audience.
The inherent problem is most games tendency to appeal to too many people at once, usually ending with a mess of a designed game.. Stealth games becoming action-adventure titles with pseudo stealth elements, where one can't help but think that said game kinda resents you for playing it the way it probably should be played.. like a stealth game. Splinter Cell Conviction or Hitman Absolution are prime examples of games that go about with the pretense of saying "You play it the way you want, but really you should play it like this" because the game's design doesn't reflect that of the stealth game they used to be, especially not how the maps were laid out, or the elaborate action set pieces where you are forced into combat.
We don't talk about Hitman Absolution. Remember when disguises were actually useful and weren't tied to some stupid incognito meter that lasts for two seconds?
Again, I just said why. Easy difficulty is not what this is. This is a legit win mode that completely takes challenge out of the game because you can't lose from what the Phoenix mode describes. And because you can't lose the sense of accomplishment players get overcoming a challenge that they can fail is gone. They already had the best solution to varying skill levels and wants of each player when they implemented casual mode along with the option to remove the permanent death mechanic from your playthrough. If after that they still need to further hold someone's hand with "You win, enjoy that story mode with no justifiable reason to play" option them maybe you're designing your game for the wrong people. That'd be like NBA 2K implementing some difficulty where the A.I. didn't play defense just to accommodate some special kind of gamer who can't bother with trial and error and wants to see what MyCAREER is. You're not even designing for people who play video games at that point. Which is fine. But I thought this was Fire Emblem and not some random mobile game off of Google Play some random mom who's never picked up a Dualshock in her life might get a kick out of.
I don't understand how people can justify a compromise this extreme with "it's just an option" because the mindset behind it is a slippery slope of sorts.
You were actually just repeating that it was offensive to game design, but not specifying why that was the case =P
In either case you can still get a sense of accomplishment from beating the game on a higher difficulty, unless you're somebody who feels that is ruined for them because other people can beat it on a game mode you're never going to play.
I do think that Phoenix Mode is stupid and that nobody should be that bad at the game to actually need it, but it seems like an afterthought of a game mode that basically just turns difficulty off. It's not who they're designing the game for, they're just throwing it in there. I would be curious to know if it is possible to actually lose in that game mode by losing every single unit in 1 turn.
I just don't see it as some unforgivable offense of "dumbing down" the game. Maybe it's because in my opinion Fire Emblem has already been getting easier ever since it hit North America. At least this one is optional.
The games still remain fairly difficult though as long as you ignore the optional things that make it easier like Casual Mode and don't abuse the DLC map that offers free XP too much.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
You were actually just repeating that it was offensive to game design, but not specifying why that was the case =P
I'll read what else you said in a second but first, no. I did. You missed it. Not my fault.
Keeping up with this game for another month might be the worst thing I can do. Read a siliconera article on Phoenix mode and felt like punching something. Accessibility is not inherently wrong but this need to appeal to everyone to the point that you take challenge completely out of a game is borderline disrespectful. A sense of accomplishment has been inherent in game design since its inception as far as I know and without challenge that's gone. You literally can't lose.
And I hope they worded it wrong because apparently all three separate campaigns amount to as much story as Awakening's one.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
You were actually just repeating that it was offensive to game design, but not specifying why that was the case =P
In either case you can still get a sense of accomplishment from beating the game on a higher difficulty, unless you're somebody who feels that is ruined for them because other people can beat it on a game mode you're never going to play.
I do think that Phoenix Mode is stupid and that nobody should be that bad at the game to actually need it, but it seems like an afterthought of a game mode that basically just turns difficulty off. It's not who they're designing the game for, they're just throwing it in there. I would be curious to know if it is possible to actually lose in that game mode by losing every single unit in 1 turn.
I just don't see it as some unforgivable offense of "dumbing down" the game. Maybe it's because in my opinion Fire Emblem has already been getting easier ever since it hit North America. At least this one is optional.
The games still remain fairly difficult though as long as you ignore the optional things that make it easier like Casual Mode and don't abuse the DLC map that offers free XP too much.
Except they're not "just throwing it in there". One of the co-director said they're putting it in to appeal to even MORE people. It's obvious they're running with the success of Awakening's casual mode to what is an unnecessary extreme to me.
“We’d like to have more and more fans of videogames get to enjoy Fire Emblem,” he continues. “That idea is even bigger now than it was with Fire Emblem Awakening, and with Fire Emblem If, we’d like to have a widening of our horizons serve as the foundation for the game, and this is one of the concepts that went into its development.”
Read it in full here.
You're still stuck on this assumption that I don't like easier modes when that's not exactly the problem here.
lets look at this pragmatically. Phoenix mode allows scrubs to play FE:if and the NORMAL difficulty is for everybody else with an IQ higher than a cup of water. Its a win-win for the company. If letting jimmy no-talent hitch on the fire emblem bandwagon is what it takes for another fire emblem to come out that still plays like hardcore fire emblem, then really, why should phoenix mode matter? Its not like the game got watered down. Normal difficulty isnt going anywhere, neither is Lunatic.
No offense to any jimmies.
Speaking of jimmies, lets talk about Camille, designated Onee-san of Nohr. Or her LACK of jimmies.
Thats right, your big sister runs into battle with an axe, wearing a thong. Did I mention she lacks any sort of concept of personal space?
Honestly don't give a crap either way as long as it's still only sold in two iterations, unless that practice isn't followed through in the west then I couldn't care less about Fire Emblem If.
Settle for the Shin Megami Tensei crossover.
im hoping they sell the full game instead of this dlc nonsense once it reaches the western hemisphere.
Except they're not "just throwing it in there". One of the co-director said they're putting it in to appeal to even MORE people. It's obvious they're running with the success of Awakening's casual mode to what is an unnecessary extreme to me.
“We’d like to have more and more fans of videogames get to enjoy Fire Emblem,” he continues. “That idea is even bigger now than it was with Fire Emblem Awakening, and with Fire Emblem If, we’d like to have a widening of our horizons serve as the foundation for the game, and this is one of the concepts that went into its development.”
Read it in full here.
You're still stuck on this assumption that I don't like easier modes when that's not exactly the problem here.
What I'm saying is it sounds like the mode was thrown together in a couple of weeks, and that the game was not actually designed around the kind of players that will be using it like you've been suggesting. It's just a gimmick to get new people into the game.
As Jaeger said, Lunatic isn't going anywhere and the series needs new fans so that it can continue being a series. If letting people play the game with no challenge does that, then I don't see the issue.
Plus, anybody choosing that mode is going in knowing full well that there will be no sense of accomplishment.
As for the part of it being "one of the concepts that went into its development", that's been pretty standard for the series as a whole since it came to North America to remove/adjust features to make the game easier.
and that concerns me far more than optional idiot mode being included because those aren't optional. That and splitting it up into two versions.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Pretty much that as well. I don't know what Pokemon fairy dust they were on when they thought selling two gimped experiences was a good idea when they're both parts of a divergent storyline.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
What I'm saying is it sounds like the mode was thrown together in a couple of weeks, and that the game was not actually designed around the kind of players that will be using it like you've been suggesting. It's just a gimmick to get new people into the game.
As Jaeger said, Lunatic isn't going anywhere and the series needs new fans so that it can continue being a series. If letting people play the game with no challenge does that, then I don't see the issue.
Plus, anybody choosing that mode is going in knowing full well that there will be no sense of accomplishment.
As for the part of it being "one of the concepts that went into its development", that's been pretty standard for the series as a whole since it came to North America to remove/adjust features to make the game easier.
and that concerns me far more than optional idiot mode being included because those aren't optional. That and splitting it up into two versions.
Agreed. But Phoenix mode makes this issue more glaringly obvious than ever, I think. Well, Awakening did the same. So this is just adding onto the frustrations of dumbing down this entire series in the name of accessibilty.
Phoenix mode is a bit silly but optional is optional is optional.
The lack of limited weapon uses is a little concerning though. I was hoping for a repair system at the very least. It's like Skyrim's invincible weapons all over again.
If they compensate by making more varied enemies and giving more specialized weapons (lance slayer, horse killer, in the older games), I'll let it go. More layered customization would be nice.
Thats right, your big sister runs into battle with an axe, wearing a thong. Did I mention she lacks any sort of concept of personal space?
That little dance she does in the trailer seems telling.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Phoenix mode is a bit silly but optional is optional is optional.
The lack of limited weapon uses is a little concerning though. I was hoping for a repair system at the very least. It's like Skyrim's invincible weapons all over again.
If they compensate by making more varied enemies and giving more specialized weapons (lance slayer, horse killer, in the older games), I'll let it go. More layered customization would be nice.
That little dance she does in the trailer seems telling.
Another red flag for sure. I don't know what they're thinking over their at Intelligent Systems.
I personally like the fact they removed the limited weapon system. Never understood why they thought that was a great idea in the first place.
I personally like the fact they removed the limited weapon system. Never understood why they thought that was a great idea in the first place.
I liked it since it added another layer to the management of the army and overall strategy. You had some very powerful weapons with the downside that you weren't going to be able to use them forever, so you wanted to be smart about which enemies you used them on.
Admittedly this was something Awakening kind of already killed because shops on the map offered very easy access to high end equipment.
wait I thought the weapon limit was only for scrub Phoenix mode. I know they were just going to give each weapon type a perk but I didnt know they were gonna use that to replace weapon stranth
For Fire Emblem in general, there is a point in late game where the character would just need a steel or even iron weapon to do work on an enemy army and only worry about the boss. With unlimited weapon uses, they could add more of a unique flavor to each weapon to take on different types of enemies.
Or heck, maybe even weapon customization that can't potentially break the game. There's also a chance we could get weapons exclusive to single characters and not just lords.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
wait I thought the weapon limit was only for
scrubPhoenix mode. I know they were just going to give each weapon type a perk but I didnt know they were gonna use that to replace weapon stranth
>Playing Saints Row 3.
>Playing FE: Awakening afterward
Language warning...
http://www.nintendol...mblem_awakening
As of December 2014 FE: Awakenings has sold 1.79 million units globally.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
>Playing Saints Row 3.
>Playing FE: Awakening afterward
Language warning...
Lol. Saints Row 3 still sucks though.
Lol. Saints Row 3 still sucks though.
Still waiting on that fite. 1v1.
Retour en haut