The most underrated Fire emblem game

[Pixelman]

1 hour ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Once again, I have yet to actually play SoV, but I just refuse to buy into it having worse map design than a game where literally every map falls into the same fundamental pitfalls. Also, I don't remember any complaints of no axes in Gaiden, ever. Also, let's not forget that Gaiden was a NES game.

SoV's maps fall into the same fundamental pitfalls

I was honestly reminded of FE4 when playing SoV. What didn't you like about FE4, again? Besides the maps.

[Azz]

Well this topic has gone straight down the shitter.

IMO, Thracia is not underrated. I mean the fan base it has hype the game a good amount and IMO the people that dislike have their reasons and said reasons are reasonable.

As someone who has played Thracia and loved it, I can see why fatigue is a turn off, how Chapter 24x is a bitch (And it is. My least favourite chapter in the game by far), some of the recruitments (Xavier) and the cheap mechanics which make the game falsely difficult like staffs missing are all turn offs that even turned me off on it for a while.

@Emperor I don't see why you are getting so annoyed at the fact people are just stating an opinion. You don't have to play a game to dislike it. I have never played a CoD game, but I know I dislike them. Just leave it off, cause you ain't gonna change no ones opinions.

[Emperor]

2 minutes ago, Azz said:

 

@Emperor I don't see why you are getting so annoyed at the fact people are just stating an opinion. You don't have to play a game to dislike it. I have never played a CoD game, but I know I dislike them. Just leave it off, cause you ain't gonna change no ones opinions.

I was not getting annoyed though? 

[Shadow Mir]

6 minutes ago, Pixelman said:

SoV's maps fall into the same fundamental pitfalls

I was honestly reminded of FE4 when playing SoV. What didn't you like about FE4, again? Besides the maps.

SoV's maps fall into the same fundamental pitfalls as FE4? Are you trying to make me laugh? About the only SoV maps that come to mind as being legit bad are the swamp maps and the desert fort - that's nowhere near as bad a track record as FE4 has in the maps department.

Besides the maps, FE4's mechanics are a huge dealbreaker.

[Sweet_Basil]

5 minutes ago, Pixelman said:

SoV's maps fall into the same fundamental pitfalls

I was honestly reminded of FE4 when playing SoV. What didn't you like about FE4, again? Besides the maps.

I was reminded more of Awakening than FE4, in FE4 the map goals are seizing but in SoV/Awakening they're just Route missions. 

[Azz]

8 minutes ago, Emperor said:

I was not getting annoyed though? 

Apologies, annoyed was the wrong word I suppose but you persistently reply to every point where people point out their personal dislikes about Thracia which they see as flaws and pretty much tell they are wrong for thinking it is a flaw in their opinion. Like so what if people don't like fatigue and if that being present is their deal breaker for not playing/liking the game. People have opinions and they are just as right as yours even if you don't agree with them.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Azz

[Pixelman]

19 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

SoV's maps fall into the same fundamental pitfalls as FE4? Are you trying to make me laugh?

No

Also, I did not say that SoV fell into the same pitfalls as FE4, rather it falls into pitfalls of its own. Perhaps I worded it weird.

Quote

About the only SoV maps that come to mind as being legit bad are the swamp maps and the desert fort - that's nowhere near as bad a track record as FE4 has in the maps department.

I disagree. Most SoV maps are uninteresting and needlessly flat, with terrain that give massive boosts to avoid, or forts which enemies run off to to heal HP from, prolonging the maps and making them tedious.

All desert fort maps in the game suck. Which one are you referring to specifically?

18 minutes ago, Sweet_Basil said:

I was reminded more of Awakening than FE4, in FE4 the map goals are seizing but in SoV/Awakening they're just Route missions. 

Ah, I was also reminded of Awakening too.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Pixelman

[Sweet_Basil]

What I didn't like about SoV was that all (or most except Alm I think) the foot units were locked to 4 move, but at least Warp exists early on (for Alm's side). 

[Armagon]

53 minutes ago, Emperor said:

if you dont want to rush and would rather the game reward you for sitting on your ass and turtling that is a casual MCwhooper with a side of fries.

Ow, the elitist edge.

53 minutes ago, Emperor said:

Git gud, to get the stat boosters or dont and not get them. Its meant to be a challenge. And you complaining about it being to hard is a casual deluxe.

Getting the stat boosters isn't hard. I'm not complaining about it being hard. It's not hard, it's just tedious, but only in the specific instances i mentioned.

53 minutes ago, Emperor said:

And you would not have to back track that much if you left some troops to guard the palace or near enough to run back.

You still have to backtrack because Sigurd has to seize the castles. Splitting your army ain't gonna do anything.

53 minutes ago, Emperor said:

And I never understood this whole "infantry does not get a chance to shine in fe4" statment. Marissa and Azelle were both my top dogs in the first gen. 

Marissa? Did you mean Mareeta? Because she's in Thracia. Marisa? Sacred Stones. There is no Marissa in FE4. Azelle gets a horse after promotion so he wasn't the best example.

31 minutes ago, Emperor said:

FE4 maps arent just a jpg of tree roots with nothing but has defense tiles, forts, castles, terrains, etc etc.

FE4 maps are also giant slogs to playthrough that just aren't fun, even if you add in all that stuff.

Funnily enough, SoV, a game with simple maps, emphasizes the terrain more than any other game in the series. There's a reason why SoV Mages nullify terrain bonuses when attacking.

31 minutes ago, Emperor said:

If the game confirms to the player shit gets boring. (Skyrim, Modern Mario) but if the world/game gives the player the middle finger at every turn and you come out of it gloriously shit is fun and feels good as well (Morrowind/ Your first Souls game)  

Modern Mario is still gonna outsell literally every game you just mentioned. Especially Super Mario Odyessy. That game is gonna end up being GOTY for a lot of people (not me though because Xenoblade bias and Xenoblade Chronicles 2 comes out this year).

24 minutes ago, Pixelman said:

What didn't you like about FE4, again? Besides the maps.

I know the question wasn't directed at me, but i'm basically in the same boat as Levant. The thing that makes FE4 so bad from a gameplay standpoint is not just the maps themselves, but how massively unbalanced the game is. The way it works is, units who have either a mount, Holy Blood, or Pursuit are automatically better than units who don't. If a unit has all three, then they are basically God.

Another really shitty part about FE4's gameplay is that, for whatever reason, the enemy is able to switch weapons during the player phase. For example, in this game, Generals can attack using all physical weapons (which is pretty neat tbh). So say they attack using a bow during the enemy phase. Once the player phase starts, you attack that same General at close range because bows can't attack at close range. All of a sudden, that General counterattacks with a Lance. Like, how? I don't remember player units being able to do that.

Emperor's gonna say something like "it's not a big deal, it adds challenge". Thing is, if that's the case, then it's a bad challenge.

6 minutes ago, Pixelman said:

Most SoV maps are uninteresting and needlessly flat, with terrain that give massive boosts to avoid, or forts which enemies run off to to heal HP from, and prolonging the maps and making them tedious

Yeah, this is true. But i still prefer SoV's maps over FE4's maps. FE4 maps are like 3x the size of SoV's maps, and that makes FE4's maps way more tedious to play through than SoV's maps.

I will say that i did like SoV's terrain boosts, because it was balanced by Mages being able to nullify it.

10 minutes ago, Pixelman said:

All desert fort maps in the game suck. Which one are you referring to specifically?

Wolff's Fort. That map sucks and i hate it. I did enjoy Grieth's Citadel though. It felt like a proper siege. That's what i like about fort maps in SoV. They really did feel like proper sieges. Rigel Castle was my favorite. It came with an amazing song too.

 

2 minutes ago, Sweet_Basil said:

What I didn't like about SoV was that all (or most except Alm I think) the foot units were locked to 4 move, but at least Warp exists early on (for Alm's side). 

Yeah, i didn't like the 4 move either. It made sense for Mages, because Mages are actually quite broken in this game, so they needed to be balanced. But then the Soldier line is forever at 4 move, even as Barons. Armor units sucked before but they arguably suck the most in SoV. But hey, they have God-tier defense, especially against Archers.

 

[Shadow Mir]

17 minutes ago, Pixelman said:

No

Also, I did not say that SoV fell into the same pitfalls as FE4, rather it falls into pitfalls of its own. Perhaps I worded it weird.

I disagree. Most SoV maps are uninteresting and needlessly flat, with terrain that give massive boosts to avoid, or forts which enemies run off to to heal HP from, prolonging the maps and making them tedious.

All desert fort maps in the game suck. Which one are you referring to specifically?

Perhaps you did.

To me, that isn't as bad a sin as having bloated maps that are also uninteresting. At least with SoV I might be able to move on in a matter of minutes, but FE4's maps require at least an hour because they're that bloated. It's an exercise in tedium.

The one I had in mind was the one where you have Celica's army and are assaulting Wolf's fort of archers.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Armagon]

3 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

but FE4's maps require at least an hour because they're that bloated. It's an exercise in tedium.

FE4's maps are garbage but i'm gonna play Devil's Advocate here real quick and say that you can permanently save during chapters.

But then again, every other game lets you bookmark, so you'll be able to take a break regardless of the game and if you're using emulators, then there's save states.

I just wanted to point out both sides of the argument here. I personally think that even with permanent saving, FE4's maps suck.

The ironic thing is that FE7 Hector's Tale pulled an FE4 with one of it's maps (the siezing multiple castles), except the map is greatly reduced compared to FE4. Conquering the three castles is now faster and you can do it in which ever order you want. It's great. A potential FE4 remake should learn from that.

[Emperor]

19 minutes ago, Armagon said:

 

Marissa? Did you mean Mareeta? Because she's in Thracia. Marisa? Sacred Stones. There is no Marissa in FE4. Azelle gets a horse after promotion so he wasn't the best example.

 

I meant Larcei I dont know why I got them confused. Shannan is another example. Infantry are not that bad in FE4 as some people make them out to be. since they were slower they can make it in time to defend your castle and thats what I used them for and they still got good levels. 

 

And by modern mario I meant stuff like the mario games on the hand helds/wii/wii u that are rehashes. And the cat mario game. I dont know if Oddesy will be as hard or have some hard stages like N64 or sunshine. But anyways well yea no duh a casual game will sell more. It appeals more to a broader audince hence why CoD sells so well. That does not make them good though. Or enjoyable if a game is piss poor easy what is the point of playing it you know? 

 

And as for the specifc instances you mentioned you were griping about how it rushed you. That sounds like a complaint about it being hard though. To me atleast. And yea ow elitist edge lmao but its true dude. If you cant handle the game pushing you to rush for them stat bonuses in chapter 11A of FE6 and would rather it be nerfed to make it easier, then thats casual. Nothing wrong with it (until it hurts the game) but dont deny it. 

[Shadow Mir]

35 minutes ago, Armagon said:

FE4's maps are garbage but i'm gonna play Devil's Advocate here real quick and say that you can permanently save during chapters.

But then again, every other game lets you bookmark, so you'll be able to take a break regardless of the game and if you're using emulators, then there's save states.

I just wanted to point out both sides of the argument here. I personally think that even with permanent saving, FE4's maps suck.

The ironic thing is that FE7 Hector's Tale pulled an FE4 with one of it's maps (the siezing multiple castles), except the map is greatly reduced compared to FE4. Conquering the three castles is now faster and you can do it in which ever order you want. It's great. A potential FE4 remake should learn from that.

I forgot about that, but yeah, it ain't enough to salvage FE4's maps. On another note, it doesn't help that FE4 literally has the slowest enemy phase of any FE game.

15 minutes ago, Emperor said:

And by modern mario I meant stuff like the mario games on the hand helds/wii/wii u that are rehashes. And the cat mario game. I dont know if Oddesy will be as hard or have some hard stages like N64 or sunshine. But anyways well yea no duh a casual game will sell more. It appeals more to a broader audince hence why CoD sells so well. That does not make them good though. Or enjoyable if a game is piss poor easy what is the point of playing it you know? 

 

And as for the specifc instances you mentioned you were griping about how it rushed you. That sounds like a complaint about it being hard though. To me atleast. And yea ow elitist edge lmao but its true dude. If you cant handle the game pushing you to rush for them stat bonuses in chapter 11A of FE6 and would rather it be nerfed to make it easier, then thats casual. Nothing wrong with it (until it hurts the game) but dont deny it. 

Saying that a game needs to be hard to be enjoyable or good is laughably narrow-minded.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Emperor]

Just now, Levant Mir Celestia said:

Saying that a game needs to be hard to be enjoyable is laughably narrow-minded.

Well for the most part yea. If the game offers no challenge and you can just breeze right on through it does not make for a thrilling and engaging experience does it? 

[Utzu]

52 minutes ago, Sweet_Basil said:

What I didn't like about SoV was that all (or most except Alm I think) the foot units were locked to 4 move, but at least Warp exists early on (for Alm's side). 

Don't forget mercs that turn into overpowered 7 move dreadfighters

[Armagon]

15 minutes ago, Emperor said:

since they were slower they can make it in time to defend your castle

Very rarely will you actually need to defend your home castle.

17 minutes ago, Emperor said:

If you cant handle the game pushing you to rush for them stat bonuses in chapter 11A of FE6 and would rather it be nerfed to make it easier, then thats casual.

I can handle it. That doesn't mean you have to like it.

2 minutes ago, Emperor said:

Well for the most part yea. If the game offers no challenge and you can just breeze right on through it does not make for a thrilling and engaging experience does it? 

By that logic, Kirby games suck because they offer no challenge. 

A game doesn't have to be hard to be good but i don't expect your elitist mind to understand that.

[Emperor]

10 minutes ago, Armagon said:

Very rarely will you actually need to defend your home castle.

 

Pretty sure half if not more maps of FE4, and if not maybe a third need you to defend it atleast once. And even then infantry dont suck as much as people say they do. 

10 minutes ago, Armagon said:

By that logic, Kirby games suck because they offer no challenge. 

A game doesn't have to be hard to be good but i don't expect your elitist mind to understand that.

I love how liking hard games makes me an elitist. And I never played a Kirby game but if they the game is trivial then yea, it will hurt how I view it and how much I will like it. Which is why I prefer the old school Mario games then lets say, the Mario 3D world or the super Mario world line of games for the DS/3ds/Wii/Wii U.  

 

And its not that it has to be hard, its just they cant be easy or atleast give me a nice challenge. 

 

Edited August 21, 2017 by Emperor

[Armagon]

3 minutes ago, Emperor said:

Pretty sure half if not more maps of FE4, and if not maybe a third need you to defend it atleast once.

Mmm nah. Most of the time, your castle is out of the way for the enemy to get to it. And besides, your Armors exist to protect that caslte, and they do a fine job.

5 minutes ago, Emperor said:

I love how liking hard games makes me an elitist.

You can like hard games all you want. But you said

34 minutes ago, Emperor said:

if a game is piss poor easy what is the point of playing it you know? 

If the game offers no challenge and you can just breeze right on through it does not make for a thrilling and engaging experience does it? 

This is the elitism.

[Shadow Mir]

26 minutes ago, Emperor said:

Well for the most part yea. If the game offers no challenge and you can just breeze right on through it does not make for a thrilling and engaging experience does it? 

As a video game connoisseur, I am disgusted and offended by this blatant display of elitism.

[Emperor]

Just now, Levant Mir Celestia said:

As a video game connoisseur.

This statement is fucking cringy as hell but hey if you like easy games that dont challenge you in away way shape or form and you can just breeze right on through it then w.e dude. 

[Shadow Mir]

2 minutes ago, Emperor said:

This statement is fucking cringy as hell but hey if you like easy games that dont challenge you in away way shape or form and you can just breeze right on through it then w.e dude. 

And THIS statement is cringeworthy AND stinks of elitism.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Levant Mir Celestia

[Emperor]

Just now, Levant Mir Celestia said:

And THIS statement stinks of elitism.

And THIS statement stinks of casual. 

Two can play at this game, but its a very boring game and adds nothing. Am honestly trying to think of an easy game that I enjoyed by myself and the closest thing was SoV for the writing and music but thats it. And SNES SMT for the atmosphere and world building. 

[Sweet_Basil]

42 minutes ago, Utzu said:

Don't forget mercs that turn into overpowered 7 move dreadfighters

and to top it off they can loop all over again

[Emperor]

Just now, Sweet_Basil said:

and to top it off they can loop all over again

It was from a bug in the original and the team thought it was funny that they added it in as a feature. I thought it was funny too since there was no need to loop around since dread fighters and Milla's turn wheel made the game a cake walk

[Sweet_Basil]

5 minutes ago, Emperor said:

It was from a bug in the original and the team thought it was funny that they added it in as a feature. I thought it was funny too since there was no need to loop around since dread fighters and Milla's turn wheel made the game a cake walk

I agree that it's funny, but I avoid using that (loop) and the turn wheel so I find the game challenging if you avoid those things. My only problem with the game is that all other characters are left with 4 move. I still appreciate that at least there's ways to make them contribute (Physic/warp/long range spells/bows) except for the Barons (as someone mentioned earlier) that are left completely disadvantaged :(.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Sweet_Basil