should FE go Mainstream or stay Niche?

[AlexArtsHere]

Mainstream.

Let's not kid ourselves here with elitist opinions and old was better bullshit. Going mainstream is what saved the series from becoming dead. The old games, while good in its own right and are great games, didn't draw enough attention. Part of that was Nintendo's fault for not localizing sooner, and for not putting the right amount of focus on it, but let's not act like these games were ideal forms of perfection while the new stuff is mainstream shit.

The new direction has allowed for a larger amount of play styles. Casual players can sit down and enjoy the game now, which was never really capable before, while there is still plenty for the hardcore players to enjoy. Don't forget Awakening still had the Apotheosis DLC and Lunatic+, which clearly was not for the average player.

Fates took a lot of steps in the right direction. We love to bash the game for its story, but Fates, if you ignore the story, was a great next step for the series. It reintroduced map objectives, it made a difficult game with memorable maps like Conquest chapter 10 that is up there with some of the most difficult entrances in the series. It refined and balanced reclassing, it refined and rebalanced pair up, it introduced a much more strategic system than weapon durability (though it still needs touch ups, but if Fates is what came from Awakening, then we will be fine. IS took criticism very well and fixed a lot of what needed it. The new weapon system will get the same treatment)

It also tried some new and interesting things. As much hate as My Castle for taking you out of the story, it's hard to deny it isn't a bad idea. Base building and management has a place in the series, it just needs some work. If IS takes My Castle and refines it for 15 like they did Pair Up and Reclass, then we will be set. Revelation, though lacking in any real memorable maps and story, did try some new and interesting things as well. The moving platforms and puzzle like design for some of its maps are an interesting idea I would love to see built off of. The new personal skills are also an interesting step forward for the series as it will add even more uniqueness and difference in strategy for characters, builds, and team make up.

Overall, mainstream has done nothing for the series but help it. If Fates is what came from Awakening, then the next game will only get better. And don't forget how well IS took criticism, while Fates story sucked, it was their honest attempt at fixing Awakenings story issues. So they will likely take the criticism of Fates story seriously going forward. So let's drop the hipster attitude and enjoy the fact that Fire Emblem is finally getting the attention and credit it deserved for so long.

This is so much more worthy and elegant than the text block I posted. I have nothing to add except that I forgot about My Castle and is definitely a promising concept as a central hub with all the commodities players could need (personal I love the slice of life feel in the married barracks exchanges), though I think travelling Annas could still have a place on the map in selling higher grade items.

And, to reiterate something that's already been said a bunch; In terms of success, going mainstream has only done good things for the Fire Emblem series.

[Folt]

Chalk up another one for mainstream. Only good things can come out of that.

Also, if I'm to be frank, I think that with Awakening, and Fates, IS probably focused on a couple gameplay ideas when they developed both games that probably helped make some decisions:

With Awakening, they wanted to celebrate the history of Fire Emblem, thus we got the introduction of the Outrealm and the Einherjar system so that veteran players can have battles with and recruit some of their old favorites. With the introduction of the Outrealms and a focus on the history of Fire Emblem, it also probably influenced the decision of reintroducing the marriage system from FE4 and to have time travel as a plot point in addition to referencing stuff from across the series, like having Jugdral's 12 Deadlords return as fightable opponents and placing the game thousands of years in the future of the world where Fire Emblem began and have one character literally dress up as the first Fire Emblem protagonist.

With Fates, while they didn't know where to take the series from there, they looked back to the Arran and Samson choice and decided to develop Fates with that as the focus: So, literally from the point where you go to purchase the games from the stores, you make a choice, the main character is an Avatar who in-game has connections to both Kingdoms, which nicely ties in with having the player make a choice (how does the main character look like in the game) and the fact that the player character ultimately makes the choice (which Kingdom do you join) that decides how the story (and what kind of gameplay experience) unfolds. From there, the casual-friendly Birthright Campaign and the hardcore Conquest Campaign gives the kingdoms you choose (Hoshido for Birthright, Nohr for Conquest) different appeal from a gameplay perspective which can help sway people, and the Kingdoms themselves are designed hereafter: Hoshido is peaceful and abundant with resources, while Nohr rewards the strong and resourceful, who can survive it's harsh weathers and unforgiveable terrain. And of course, with the Avatar being the main character of the game, the decision to make My Castle is naturally a logical choice to further personalize your game and enhance your part in the world.

[Baldrick]

@Thane (sorry for the format, on phone)

Whatever you think of Awakening clones, it's clear they're there because of that game's sales.

Do you think there's no correlation between Awakening sales and FE being considered a main IP?

Sacred Stones made dramatic changes too, but that game was very safe.

Thinking about it, the last three games have a similar progression to the GBA games.

It's too early to judge Awakening's legacy; after SS one may have thought the series was becoming formulaic.

But the threat still looms; for all we know, another flop could kill the series.

Therefore, it's a sensible business decision for future games to keep Awakening's soul.

PoR also had limited supports. Unless supports are limited in number or length, I believe base conversations will be seen as extraneous.

[Thane]

Whatever you think of Awakening clones, it's clear they're there because of that game's sales.

Do you think there's no correlation between Awakening sales and FE being considered a main IP?

What kind of question is that? "Do you think this massive success led to Nintendo taking notice?" Of course I do.

I don't quite understand what you're trying to say here. We're discussing Fire Emblem being a part of the mainstream gaming industry and the potential pros and cons such a step into the limelight means. We're not debating whether or not it's actually there yet.

Sacred Stones made dramatic changes too, but that game was very safe.

Alright, then let me ask you what you would consider an unsafe game. I'd also like to know what those risks are that would benefit the series so but can't be done while the series is mainstream, which is what this entire topic is about.

You keep just saying "nah, I don't think so", so please expand upon your own thoughts so we can have a proper discussion.

But the threat still looms; for all we know, another flop could kill the series.

Nintendo just called Fire Emblem one of its major IP's, so we can rule out the risk of one flop killing the series.

Therefore, it's a sensible business decision for future games to keep Awakening's soul.

I disagree. Stagnation and a repetitive formula would alienate too many fans. Of course, it is a series, so the good elements of earlier entries should be kept, but if people end up feeling new games are just more of the same, that's a bad thing for both the developers and sales.

Edit: of course, this all depends on what you mean by "soul".

You seem to make a lot of assumptions based entirely on the Awakening influence of Fates, but it's just one game using the same engine, much like the GBA games are rather similar.

PoR also had limited supports. Unless supports are limited in number or length, I believe base conversations will be seen as extraneous.

Yes, that is indeed what I wrote in my previous post.

Edit: pardon me, I meant I wrote that the support system needs to be fixed, since it's detrimental to the quality of the writing, and that base conversations need to return. On that we agree, though I don't think the'd be seen as superfluous; having minor characters react to what's going on is what made the Tellius games have the best sense of progression and scale in the series

Edited January 15, 2017 by Thane

[Darros]

Eh. It's definitely gone and is going to stay mainstream but the Niche artstyle and whatnot catered more to me. Of course I'll buy all the new Fire Emblem games until they stop being produced but it's gotten really anime-y lately and the story quality has nosedived.

i don't think you know what eccentric means

What the fuck does eccentric mean in this context?

In mathematics, the eccentricity , denoted e or ε, is a parameter associated with every conic section. It can be thought of as a measure of how much the conic section deviates from being circular. In particular, The eccentricity of a circle is zero.

[Dark Holy Elf]

To play the Devil's Advocate, being mainstream has its downsides, such as:

-causing the series to be more formulaic and less risky mechanically (Kaga's games may have had some weird choices, but at least he tried many new things).

-insistence on keeping fanservicey features like marriage and children simply because they were popular, even if they are shoehorned in.

-more melodramatic storylines focused on a few characters rather than proper political conflict because mainstream audiences dislike political stuff.

-more features along the lines of face-rubbing (i.e. more things appealing to otaku).

-even tropier (is that a word?) characters.

-more frequent releases leading to less development time.

I could probably list more, but that is all that comes to mind as of now.

Edit: I believe eccentric means more niche with crazy ideas.

These things are pretty much all independent of how niche a game is.

-Fates, the first game in the series developed with the expectation of being a million seller, nevertheless took more mechanical risks than any other FE released in the 21st century with only the possible exception of Awakening itself. Revamped weapon triangle, scrapped weapon durability, significant new mechanics like debuffs, etc. By comparison FE7-12 were all relatively safe refinements of the FE6 model, with only Radiant Dawn being particularly daring out of the bunch due to the perspective switching and third tier.

-Fanservice and otaku-pandering is NOT the exclusive purview of mainstream games at all. If anything it's the opposite; the most egregious games in this regard tend to be quite niche (since they're fanservicy to the point of being offputting to many players). It just so happens that FE becoming more mainstream has happened simultaneously to fanservice becoming more common from Japanese games.

-Release time/development time, again, isn't really a property of how mainstream a series is. Almost nothing is bigger than Mario Kart, for instance, and yet those have been limited to one release per console since the series' inception. Meanwhile the relatively niche Tales series has almost annual releases.

About the only thing I might agree with is that you're less likely to get political stuff in a mainstream game, but even then I have my doubts; Game of Thrones is mainstream, after all. If IntSys actually WANTED to do a serious political plot, I have no doubt they could.

[Baldrick]

What kind of question is that? "Do you think this massive success led to Nintendo taking notice?" Of course I do.

Why do you deny that Awakening clones are there because of Awakening's success?

Alright, then let me ask you what you would consider an unsafe game.

An unsafe game is one that's unlikely to appeal to the fans of the previous game.

In gameplay terms, removing key features that limit your options.

Gaiden (wholesale changes) Genealogy (trading, vulneraries) and Shadow Dragon (rescuing) are all unsafe. Weapon durability is the only thing Fates removed, only a few masochists would miss that.

As an example, if Conquest had no S-ranking/children, no avatar or an avatar treated like Pyro Micaiah in-story, and no reclass/other customisation, it would have been unsafe. That is how I would define Awakening's soul, the stuff that makes Awakening what it is.

I should note I don't think being safe is inherently a bad thing; obviously I hate how safe Fates was, but I wouldn't mind if I liked Awakening's soul.

Nintendo just called Fire Emblem one of its major IP's, so we can rule out the risk of one flop killing the series.

Fair enough. Still, a flop hurts sales and puts pressure on the next game, so playing it safe is a smart move for IS.

I disagree. Stagnation and a repetitive formula would alienate too many fans.

The mainline Pokemon, Marino and Zelda series seem to do well enough.

fire emblem seems to be following in their footsteps of leaving the risks to spinoff games.

You seem to make a lot of assumptions based entirely on the Awakening influence of Fates, but it's just one game using the same engine, much like the GBA games are rather similar.

I suppose you missed the part where I said it's too early to judge Awakening's legacy. But I can hardly make assumptions based on any other games after Awakening.

Based on how the children were handled, I make a prediction. I could be wrong, I hope I am.

[Truthblade]

Mainstream. I see literally no benefit of the series becoming obscure again.

[Quintessence]

I think there's no issue with FE being mainstream.

I also think people make a huge shitter and scandalize stuff (internet's specialty). Whenever people dislike Awakening's or Fates' marriage system, children, avatar implementation, excessive fanservice, etc., people jump on saying veterans want to keep the franchise niche and obscure, and find the franchise being mainstream disgusting, which is imo a wrong generalization and a means to further divide the fanbase.

[Tolvir]

Another thing I wanted to add to my earlier post. I don't think the avatar is all that bad. Or at least I don't want to see it removed. Having my own unit I can design and create is still enjoyable to do. It also adds a little more investment into the story or characters in a way. I just think they need to be scaled back. Unless IS is looking to do something on the level of Mass Effect with an avatar being the main character, the avatar needs to be brought back a bit. Something more along the lines of Robin's role in Awakening before the big Grima scenario where Robin becomes the focus. So stay as just the main tactician/advisor type to the main lord.

Edited January 15, 2017 by Tolvir

[AlexArtsHere]

Another thing I wanted to add to my earlier post. I don't think the avatar is all that bad. Or at least I don't want to see it removed. Having my own unit I can design and create is still enjoyable to do. It also adds a little more investment into the story or characters in a way. I just think they need to be scaled back. Unless IS is looking to do something on the level of Mass Effect with an avatar being the main character, the avatar needs to be brought back a bit. Something more along the lines of Robin's role in Awakening before the big Grima scenario where Robin becomes the focus. So stay as just the main tactician/advisor type to the main lord.

In my opinion, Robin's endgame focus was pulled off pretty well, all things considered. While the first two arcs of the story were primarily focused on the current conflict, it was made very clear Robin was important to the story beyond being an amazing tactician, and I feel Robin's plot and the plot of the story intertwine very nicely, even if the story is rather paint-by-numbers and predictable.

But yeah, I love the tactician. Honestly, I'm a sucker for character creation in general, so that, and Robin's appearance in Smash, was a pretty big factor in getting me into the series. I would never want to see that idea leave, but I'm in total agreement it could do with paring down. I think being something of a deuteragonist to the plot is very appealing in its own way, and we've seen what happens when IS is too overbearing with the avatar (New Mystery and Fate's avatar worship, anyone?).

[Thane]

Why do you deny that Awakening clones are there because of Awakening's success?

What? I've done no such thing; your question made no sense, and that's not what you asked. You said, and I quote:

Whatever you think of Awakening clones, it's clear they're there because of that game's sales.

Do you think there's no correlation between Awakening sales and FE being considered a main IP?

And I said of course Awakening's success made Nintendo take note. I also told you earlier that it was a mistake on Intelligent System's part to shove in characters where they weren't needed, as well as use characters of Awakening as a base, like Tsubaki effectively being a male Cordelia.

I had already answered your first statement, so I mostly addressed your second, which is almost an undebetable point. What I'm saying is that Awakening being popular is the reason why those characters are in Fates, not because Fire Emblem is now mainstream, which is what this thread is about. It's also not the first time characters from older games appear in new ones, if you'll remember Est, Catria and Palla who all appear in Gaiden.

An unsafe game is one that's unlikely to appeal to the fans of the previous game.

In gameplay terms, removing key features that limit your options.

Gaiden (wholesale changes) Genealogy (trading, vulneraries) and Shadow Dragon (rescuing) are all unsafe. Weapon durability is the only thing Fates removed, only a few masochists would miss that.

As an example, if Conquest had no S-ranking/children, no avatar or an avatar treated like Pyro Micaiah in-story, and no reclass/other customisation, it would have been unsafe. That is how I would define Awakening's soul, the stuff that makes Awakening what it is.

I should note I don't think being safe is inherently a bad thing; obviously I hate how safe Fates was, but I wouldn't mind if I liked Awakening's soul.

Dude, what? I agree with Gaiden here, but those other elements aren't what I'd call enormous changes to the point where it'd appall fans.

I don't understand what we're talking about here anymore. Why is your arbitrary list of what you consider dramatic changes relevant to the discussion at hand? I get it, you think Fates played it safe - I think they tried appealing to everyone, which was a huge mistake - but a lot of the changes it brought with it were rather important and drastic. If your point is that Fates didn't try anything new because Fire Emblem is now mainstream, I must say I just don't see your point.

Also, the avatar is Awakening's soul even though it was introduced in FE12?

Fair enough. Still, a flop hurts sales and puts pressure on the next game, so playing it safe is a smart move for IS.

That goes for literally every franchise ever. Even the Zelda series felt the disappointing sales and later critique against Skyward Sword to the point where the upcoming game is going to be an almost exact opposite in playstyle.

The mainline Pokemon, Marino and Zelda series seem to do well enough.

What the? Have you even played the Zelda series? The installments share characteristics but they all play very differently from each other with huge changes and features removed and added to suit the next game - wasn't that your very definition of playing it unsafe? You've got Ocarina of Time which is fairly standard but the first game in the series which was 3D, then you've got Majora's Mask which has a completely different tone and writing, with a lot more focus on side quest, the bloody three day time limit, being able to transform into three other races, etc. After that you've got Wind Waker which has a completely different art style, fighting system and method of exploration. Now we're waiting for the first true open world entry in the series.

I could go on, but I'm pretty sure you get the point. Zelda does not qualify even by your own previously mentioned criteria.

Pokémon just had its most different game to date, moving forward and breaking a stagnation the fanbase had felt for quite a while. The last time they tried that was in Black and White, the fifth entries in the series, where they wanted a clean start and didn't allow you to catch any old Pokémon until the post game.

I don't play that much Super Mario anymore, but I do know that Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario Galaxy are all rather different - New Super Mario Bros. are all very samey though, I've heard.

Regardless, you compared a relatively small series to three of the industries' best known franchises; the playing field isn't even, but like I finished telling you, it's not like even those giants don't adapt or try new things, especially the Zelda series.

I suppose you missed the part where I said it's too early to judge Awakening's legacy. But I can hardly make assumptions based on any other games after Awakening.

No, I merely pointed out that you seem to assume a lot in spite of your claim.

Based on how the children were handled, I make a prediction. I could be wrong, I hope I am.

You and me both. I'm going to be cautiously optimistic here since it seems like not too many people were interested in a second generation in Fates and the characters scored far lower on Intelligent Systems' popularity poll - which they, as we have seen, take very seriously - than their Awakening counterparts. Not to mention the babyrealms have been no small source of ridicule.

[Tolvir]

That goes for literally every franchise ever. Even the Zelda series felt the disappointing sales and later critique against Skyward Sword to the point where the upcoming game is going to be an almost exact opposite in playstyle.

What the? Have you even played the Zelda series? The installments share characteristics but they all play very differently from each other with huge changes and features removed and added to suit the next game - wasn't that your very definition of playing it unsafe? You've got Ocarina of Time which is fairly standard but the first game in the series which was 3D, then you've got Majora's Mask which has a completely different tone and writing, with a lot more focus on side quest, the bloody three day time limit, being able to transform into three other races, etc. After that you've got Wind Waker which has a completely different art style, fighting system and method of exploration. Now we're waiting for the first true open world entry in the series.

I could go on, but I'm pretty sure you get the point. Zelda does not qualify even by your own previously mentioned criteria.

Pokémon just had its most different game to date, moving forward and breaking a stagnation the fanbase had felt for quite a while. The last time they tried that was in Black and White, the fifth entries in the series, where they wanted a clean start and didn't allow you to catch any old Pokémon until the post game.

I don't play that much Super Mario anymore, but I do know that Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario Galaxy are all rather different - New Super Mario Bros. are all very samey though, I've heard.

Regardless, you compared a relatively small series to three of the industries' best known franchises; the playing field isn't even, but like I finished telling you, it's not like even those giants don't adapt or try new things, especially the Zelda series.

No, I merely pointed out that you seem to assume a lot in spite of your claim.

You and me both. I'm going to be cautiously optimistic here since it seems like not too many people were interested in a second generation in Fates and the characters scored far lower on Intelligent Systems' popularity poll - which they, as we have seen, take very seriously - than their Awakening counterparts. Not to mention the babyrealms have been no small source of ridicule.

Games do that all the time, switch things up to make it different. Final Fantasy is a big one for this, as the magic system and battle system undergoes a lot of changes each game. Materia, Espers, traditional mp and class based magic, 15's magic (whatever the hell its supposed to be).

Games also do this when something is regarded as a failure, or when its regarded as something that needs to be changed. Mass Effect changed drastically between 1 and 2 to adapt a more streamlined battle system, and 3 did some touch ups on what 2 did. Diablo 1, Diablo II, and Diablo III are all drastically different in their play, mostly because of technology advancing a lot between those three releases. Game series change all the time, its the nature of the business. You dont try something new, you aren't going to sell anything. Even Mario has changed over time.

(not arguing you Thane, just adding to your point)

I doubt Second gen will make a return in 15. Maybe as DLC, but other than that probably not. S support and the current support system are likely to stay though(they arent about to abandon waifus, it is one of the many things that help sell their game and they know it, especially in Japan.)

Edited January 15, 2017 by Tolvir

[AlexArtsHere]

If child units don't come back, that'd give the writers time to, y'know, write better supports because, let's be honest, they're not add as many extra characters as there would have been child units. Despite all the criticism they receive, the supports in Awakening and Fates did have some genuine diamonds in the rough which offered deep and introspective moments for what was otherwise a group very archetypal characters.

Also, most of Fates' child units kind of sucked; Their lack of relevance to the story only served to increase the disconnect and, compared to Awakening, where the children had at least known their parents for some amount of time, all of Fates' children are very stock, spouting off the same lines about not knowing mummy and daddy (when they're not referring to their informed personality traits, that is).