Why are individual characters so important?

[Kagetura]

21 minutes ago, The DanMan said:

The difference is, being a crossover is a huge part of Smash's identity.
And also, since I'm that guy, I tend to prefer characters in Smash due to their movesets. My most wanted SSB4 character was Robin-- not out of any attachment to him, but because he'd be a mage and greatly standout among the cast. 

This again. I'm not sure why people act like it's impossible to enjoy Musou gameplay. You've got 1 VS 100 hack and slash combat with light strategy aspects. Are single-player shooters repetitive and unengaging because all you do is shoot enemies with basic resource management on the side? 

Law of inverses; SF (and places that were more neutral/defensive of the game) didn't really like it, but the broad "public" that had been trashing the game did a temporary 180 on it.
Though previous PR played a big part in hijacking any hype that could be born from it.

Because there's more to a Warriors game than just characters; how do you think the franchise every took off when it had (basically) OCs inspired by historical figures? A lot of people's favorites there have just as much/more to do with playstyle than character and personality.

There's a lot of differences that are obvious if you're familiar with the series. But if you can't see those differences, maybe it just wasn't ever for you?
My dad listens to quite a bit of old, folk music and can wax on about individual pieces and artists and their differences. But I don't really care for folk music, so all that goes over my head.

There have never been straightforward elemental spellcasters in Warriors games. Besides Link and Epona in HW, there has never been a character who primarily fights on a horse (they're just for transportation in mainline Warriors games, massively gimping your moveset)-- and that's before you get to pegasi and wyverns. And even besides that, there's characters like Ryoma and Takumi who manage to stick out due to their animations.
Being able to control and switch between four characters while being able to order them and NPCs feels like a full realization of the strategic elements from other games in the series. 

From the perspective of a Warriors fan, there's a lot of unique things about the game.

i agree there is more to warriors games,If your looking at it for being just a warriors game, but the main complaint is that it doesn't do fire emblem justice, half of the puzzle is solved and the other half is a mess. Its not like Nintendo hasn't or won't get warriors games, but people wanted that as a good mix with a good representation of a fire emblem game and some just don't see this as a good representation of a fire emblem game. I have looked at game play time and time again, it looks nice but ive also felt this way looking or playing other musuo. If your really excited to play a musuo game with your favorite awakening and fates characters by all means no one can blame you, but its hard to justify it to someone who cares little for those characters and could have easily been convinced with characters they connect with more.

Edited October 3, 2017 by Kagetura

[Folt]

4 minutes ago, The DanMan said:

Being able to control and switch between four characters while being able to order them and NPCs feels like a full realization of the strategic elements from other games in the series. 

Oh yeah, being able to order the NPCs (or at least the ones you bring into the game) around is something I think I'll really love because the inclusion of certain elements means certain characters could be more vulnerable than others if they're under the computer's control!

[shadowofchaos]

4 hours ago, Jave said:

I did see that.

Just not here on SF. 

Compared to the amount of negativity that came with it even with joy on other platforms, it gave me the "it's still not enough" vibe from people.

It's frustrating that even now when I have a sealed copy of it on my table waiting for me to play (life circumstances has led me to not be able to play it even though I want to so badly) I am still followed by "characters characters characters roster roster roster" with from at least one person when the subject of FE Musou comes up.

[Sayyyaka]

If I cared about good gameplay I wouldn't look in the direction of a musou

[shadowofchaos]

1 hour ago, Sayyyaka said:

If I cared about good gameplay I wouldn't look in the direction of a musou

Then all you care about is the surface.

I'll just point you in the direction of @Jedi

[Baron the Shining Blade]

2 hours ago, Sayyyaka said:

If I cared about good gameplay I wouldn't look in the direction of a musou

That's purely subjective. It's fine if musou gameplay is not your cup of tea, but your tastes are not our tastes, and implying we should be sharing a taste as if it were fact is foolish. Musous may not look like much on the outside, but actually delving in and playing one is a whole 'nother ball game, which Jedi can easily attest to. I take his word for it that FEW looks great and plays fantastically.

Musous have been mistaken for mindless games. That said, mindless games aren't a bad thing. Sometimes we just need a simple game space in which to clear our thoughts. Don't you have a game like that? It could be simply careening down a track at high speeds in a racing game, flying around in a 3D space (or swinging around the city in a Spiderman game, for instance) in whatever genre that may be, or tearing down hordes of enemies in a shooter (be it schmup or FPS). Now I suppose one could play a musou like FEW "mindlessly" by going to Coliseum Mode or Free Mode (...does FEW have a Free Mode?), setting it to easy, and cut down hundreds of soldiers with a nigh-invincible juggernaut of your choice. Now that, and this game as a whole personally, sounds like my cup of tea.

[Tsak]

On 10/1/2017 at 8:35 PM, Callisto said:

I pre-ordered this game solely because of the Fire Emblem name and because of the fact that some of my favorite characters are in it (Cordelia, Elise, and others). 

I've never played a Warriors game before, I hardly understand how a Warriors game works to be quite honest, but the game looks good enough, and the support conversations look like a good enough reason to play the game to me, so from my perspective, I can understand 100% why someone wouldn't want to play this game if their favorite character wasn't included.

Basically its a great way to kill stress away without having to be too invested in the gameplay
You either command a general (in this case iconic fire emblem characters) and tackle a insurmountable about of other enemy generals and just random fodder. Your character is heightened to hilarious levels of power and will sling people around like they weigh about 10 pounds. Main objective tends to be defeat the enemy commander while defending your own. Racking up 1,000+ kills is normal, occasionally they'll throw conditions or side missions to keep it interesting.
That's a warriors game in a nutshell, and i've been playing warrior games since DW2 appeared on the PS2. They're really fun tbh

Edited October 5, 2017 by Tsak

[TheWill]

On 05/10/2017 at 8:41 AM, shadowofchaos said:

Then all you care about is the surface.

I'll just point you in the direction of @Jedi

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here?

It's completely fine to 'only' care about the roster for a Musou game. In comparison to other action games that actually focus on integrated mechanics and seamless combat, Musou games pale in comparison. 

[Jedi]

17 hours ago, SlipperySlippy said:

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here?

It's completely fine to 'only' care about the roster for a Musou game. In comparison to other action games that actually focus on integrated mechanics and seamless combat, Musou games pale in comparison. 

I mean I already described how Musou games differ from your standard action games, so if you're just going to ignore it then by all means do that.

[TheWill]

6 hours ago, Jedi said:

I mean I already described how Musou games differ from your standard action games, so if you're just going to ignore it then by all means do that.

Nah, I agree with what you said entirely and didn't have anything to add, so I didn't reply. I'm a die-hard action game fan and what you said doesn't personally appeal to me, but I can see the appeal for other players. I think it's fair of me to say Musou games lack 'gameplay' in a very broad  sense (eg. if someone is looking for seamless combat that other action games tend to offer), taking purely combat experience into account. There are other areas of which Musou makes up for its gameplay in unique aspects no other games do, however I'm just trying to reiterate that it's not unreasonable for people to want a game for purely the roster. 

Someone mentioned earlier that they would play Smash Bros even if they didn't recognise the roster, and whilst that's fair for them (and speaking as someone who loves Smash Bros 4 combat), I'd be hard-pressed giving the preferential treatment I give to it over other fighting games if not for the roster being comprised of gaming icons. 

[Jedi]

1 hour ago, SlipperySlippy said:

Nah, I agree with what you said entirely and didn't have anything to add, so I didn't reply. I'm a die-hard action game fan and what you said doesn't personally appeal to me, but I can see the appeal for other players. I think it's fair of me to say Musou games lack 'gameplay' in a very broad  sense (eg. if someone is looking for seamless combat that other action games tend to offer), taking purely combat experience into account. There are other areas of which Musou makes up for its gameplay in unique aspects no other games do, however I'm just trying to reiterate that it's not unreasonable for people to want a game for purely the roster. 

Someone mentioned earlier that they would play Smash Bros even if they didn't recognise the roster, and whilst that's fair for them (and speaking as someone who loves Smash Bros 4 combat), I'd be hard-pressed giving the preferential treatment I give to it over other fighting games if not for the roster being comprised of gaming icons. 

Fair enough, my mistake, and yeah its just an appeal sort of thing, however I am going to state that this game is probably done the best in terms of fun movesets so pure gameplay people might find a home here too.

[Res]

I said I'd only buy this game if a certain character was included and I'm sticking by that.

This game has the type of gameplay I'd normally not touch. I've learned over the years what genres I do and don't like and generally life's too short to waste my time and money forcing myself to play a game simply because it's highly regarded. In general, aside from pure puzzle games I have a tough time playing games if there's not a character or story element that captures my interest.

I do get attached to certain characters and I like to learn as much as possible about certain characters. If dialogue/supports weren't included in this game I probably wouldn't have preordered it, but since dialogue/supports have been included, it became a must-buy. And actually, I may dislike this game. I may slog through simply for the sake of supports. I hope to still gain enough pleasure from witnessing the supports first hand to justify the purchase, though!

[Sentinel07]

Games that are primarilly built on a roster of characters are obviously going to be judged by that mostly.

For example, you wouldn't care about character rosters in something like Super Mario Odyssey or something like that, because the game isn't built around something like that.

However, for games like Smash Bros, Soul Calibur, Dynasty Warriors, or basically any other roster-based game, those typically are judged by the kinds of characters they have, because if they have a bunch of characters that you really don't like, whose to say the gameplay will be enjoyable to you.

Part of the appeal of Dynasty Warriors is taking characters you like and ravaging the battlefield. If you don't like the characters...well then everything kind of falls apart.

[HK Motendra]

1 hour ago, Sentinel07 said:

However, for games like Smash Bros, Soul Calibur, Dynasty Warriors, or basically any other roster-based game, those typically are judged by the kinds of characters they have, because if they have a bunch of characters that you really don't like, whose to say the gameplay will be enjoyable to you.

Part of the appeal of Dynasty Warriors is taking characters you like and ravaging the battlefield. If you don't like the characters...well then everything kind of falls apart.

One thing I've been meaning to ask for everyone who makes this argument. How then, does anyone even get into Dynasty Warriors, (or anything at all, really, with any such case that may be similar) when you don't even have that? Where's the appeal then, if you quite literally don't know the cast? Not to deny favorites don't play a factor in some way, but everyone who makes this argument seems to imply that that's the most important thing, which, if it actually were a matter of favorites, then a majority of many series wouldn't be what they are today and said potential favorites would never even get the chance, if the very concept/idea of the game (ya know, the ACTUAL most important thing that people seem to be ignoring) doesn't take off.

I'll use Kingdom Hearts as an example. Not counting sequels, side games, etc. The initial concept of the game is an original crossing of Final Fantasy and freaking DIsney of all things. Without hindsight, its a rather bizarre idea, don't cha think? But it somehow worked. Now, with the mindset that most people are employing in regards to Warriors and applying it here,  thats basically saying that they'd throw a fit and wouldn't bother at all with it just because it didnt feature a Toy Story world, or, hell, even Pocahontas. "But character roster and world selection aren't the same" not directly no, but the idea is still there, since, apparently one you get past all the "lol KH plot so laughably convoluted" drivel, the DIsney movies that are picked are all that matter to people lik that.

But to use a better example, such as Soul Caliber, as you mentioned, as far as I know, all of the characters in the game are more or less original, barring guests, such as Link in II, Star Wars in IV, and Ezio Auditore for V. If you're really judging the game solely by its characters, then I say again how exactly can you do so, when, until you actually play the game, you don't know any of the characters? At that point, why are you even playing the game/still are if neither the its concept, or gameplay was enough? And its not like Soul Caliber's known for having a story (which it apparently has, but isn't well shown, if at all, from my knowledge) and the only thing you can go off of is the character's play style and design.

[Jedi]

8 hours ago, Sentinel07 said:

Part of the appeal of Dynasty Warriors is taking characters you like and ravaging the battlefield. If you don't like the characters...well then everything kind of falls apart.

This isn't true at all actually considering no one knows the characters in Dynasty Warriors unless they've read Romance of the Three Kingdoms or actually studied Chinese history. 

I know plenty of people who could care less about any of the characters and simply see movesets they like.

[wissenschaft]

It boils down to a lot of FE fans just have no interest in this type of game unless it has characters they like. Which is fine. Dynasty Warriors isn't for everyone.

[The DanMan]

18 hours ago, Sentinel07 said:

Part of the appeal of Dynasty Warriors is taking characters you like and ravaging the battlefield. If you don't like the characters...well then everything kind of falls apart.

As Jedi said, that couldn't be further from the truth. Main series Warriors games draw from history and more or less make up interpretations whole cloth. The fact you'd claim this shows a thorough lack of understanding. Most of my favorite characters in the series are purely for their moveset/weapon types and very little to do with their actual character.

[Azure Sen]

11 hours ago, Jedi said:

This isn't true at all actually considering no one knows the characters in Dynasty Warriors unless they've read Romance of the Three Kingdoms or actually studied Chinese history. 

I know plenty of people who could care less about any of the characters and simply see movesets they like.

2 hours ago, The DanMan said:

As Jedi said, that couldn't be further from the truth. Main series Warriors games draw from history and more or less make up interpretations whole cloth. The fact you'd claim this shows a thorough lack of understanding. Most of my favorite characters in the series are purely for their moveset/weapon types and very little to do with their actual character.

While this may be true of mainline DW/SW (it isn't, but we'll discuss that below), this is absolutely not true of the crossover games. The entire appeal of any crossover with another IP is playing a Warriors games as your favorite characters. Even if that's not the reason why you personally play them, it doesn't change the fact that a lot of people's purchase of FE Warriors was banking on their favorite characters being in.

Also, you two forget that you and other Western fans aren't the primary audience for Warriors games. The main audience is Japanese/Chinese people who do know the history and want to play with their favorite historical figures. It's why Koei has been adding so many characters based on Japanese fan demand of late, and why the mainline games play into mythological/psuedo-historical portrayals that the audience would be familiar with for the most part.

[wissenschaft]

13 minutes ago, Azure Sen said:

While this may be true of mainline DW/SW (it isn't, but we'll discuss that below), this is absolutely not true of the crossover games. The entire appeal of any crossover with another IP is playing a Warriors games as your favorite characters. Even if that's not the reason why you personally play them, it doesn't change the fact that a lot of people's purchase of FE Warriors was banking on their favorite characters being in.

Also, you two forget that you and other Western fans aren't the primary audience for Warriors games. The main audience is Japanese/Chinese people who do know the history and want to play with their favorite historical figures. It's why Koei has been adding so many characters based on Japanese fan demand of late, and why the mainline games play into mythological/psuedo-historical portrayals that the audience would be familiar with for the most part.

In which case its likely that the game features the roster it does because those are the characters the japanese fans want?

[Azure Sen]

Just now, wissenschaft said:

In which case its likely that the game features the roster it does because those are the characters the japanese fans want?

Pretty much. Awakening, Fates and Akaneia (specifically New Mystery) are probably the three most popular entries in the series in Japan. Aside from Frederick and Celica, every FE character in Warriors has scored in the top ten of various popularity polls or are incredibly popular/well-known regardless.

[Green Tees]

When I played Hyrule Warriors I just wanted fast paced action. I love games like Kingdom Hearts, Devil May Cry, and it says a lot when Bayonetta 2 got my game of the year all because of how ambitious it was. For me, I feel like some people were really petty when it came to the roster and what people wanted. I remember people saying "Leif needs to get in!" and my first response was looking up who that character was. I haven't played much FE behind Blazing Blade except for Genealogy and if you can count it, Shadow Dragon (only through the remake) but I'm just glad that the characters feel great.

People deciding not to buy a game based on a roster is a usual complaint but sometimes it just does not really matter. Fighting games are a big one. When I have a character I love who's not in the game I just pick a different character. Something like this, a spinoff that focuses on a select few games and also some original characters? I wonder where I've heard that before...

If there's anything I can complain about the roster it's the variation. All the lance fliers function the same, almost all the sword infantry units are the same (Marth  and Corrin are, as far as I know, haven't unlocked Celica and Lyn, the only unique ones) and I really wish reclassing let you use a different weapon like the main games. It makes me mad that I have all these great lances and I can't use them all because I don't like how the Lance Fliers play.

I genuinely don't understand this idea of "If this character isn't in the game, I wont buy it." I don't think it ever affects sales unless it's actually a problem (See Marvel Vs Capcom Infinite: Disney pretty much restricted the use of X-Men and Fantastic 4 which is pretty much half the roster of MVC2's Marvel side, and considering how popular they were to play as, and how they made the series what it is now...) But seeing it here just looks like pettiness. I never thought Fire Emblem elitists existed but man was I wrong. I just thought people made jokes about it because the series never really caught on until suddenly Awakening came out and then people who originally played the series thought "Let's make up some fake controversy about how now it's popular it's bad!" That's some /v/ entitlement right there.

[eclipse]

20 hours ago, Green Tees said:

When I played Hyrule Warriors I just wanted fast paced action. I love games like Kingdom Hearts, Devil May Cry, and it says a lot when Bayonetta 2 got my game of the year all because of how ambitious it was. For me, I feel like some people were really petty when it came to the roster and what people wanted. I remember people saying "Leif needs to get in!" and my first response was looking up who that character was. I haven't played much FE behind Blazing Blade except for Genealogy and if you can count it, Shadow Dragon (only through the remake) but I'm just glad that the characters feel great.

People deciding not to buy a game based on a roster is a usual complaint but sometimes it just does not really matter. Fighting games are a big one. When I have a character I love who's not in the game I just pick a different character. Something like this, a spinoff that focuses on a select few games and also some original characters? I wonder where I've heard that before...

If there's anything I can complain about the roster it's the variation. All the lance fliers function the same, almost all the sword infantry units are the same (Marth  and Corrin are, as far as I know, haven't unlocked Celica and Lyn, the only unique ones) and I really wish reclassing let you use a different weapon like the main games. It makes me mad that I have all these great lances and I can't use them all because I don't like how the Lance Fliers play.

I genuinely don't understand this idea of "If this character isn't in the game, I wont buy it." I don't think it ever affects sales unless it's actually a problem (See Marvel Vs Capcom Infinite: Disney pretty much restricted the use of X-Men and Fantastic 4 which is pretty much half the roster of MVC2's Marvel side, and considering how popular they were to play as, and how they made the series what it is now...) But seeing it here just looks like pettiness. I never thought Fire Emblem elitists existed but man was I wrong. I just thought people made jokes about it because the series never really caught on until suddenly Awakening came out and then people who originally played the series thought "Let's make up some fake controversy about how now it's popular it's bad!" That's some /v/ entitlement right there.

Okay, that's fair, good to see some opinions of the gameplay. . .wait, what?

Look, you're a part of the fandom, too.  Bitching about it doesn't make it better.  If it bugs you so much, either make the fandom a better place through your actions, or find another group of fans.

[Green Tees]

On 10/15/2017 at 6:08 AM, eclipse said:

Okay, that's fair, good to see some opinions of the gameplay. . .wait, what?

Look, you're a part of the fandom, too.  Bitching about it doesn't make it better.  If it bugs you so much, either make the fandom a better place through your actions, or find another group of fans.

What I was saying was others keep saying things like "Ike should be in the game since he's a very popular character, and Roy too since without him and Marth we wouldn't have Fire Emblem, and since they're not, the game is shit and I wont buy it." Yes this is a real thing I saw. Anyways, what I'm doing is giving constructive criticism where I mentioned almost all the characters play the same, their attacks, their moves, everything. Not a lot of them have their strengths or weaknesses that you'd normally see and except for a small handful of characters (All three axe users, Xander, Ryoma, Marth, Tiki, Corrin, and the Twins if you count them as one character, really, and this doesn't count future DLC, unlockable characters, and characters we see in story mode except Niles who I know plays exactly like the other archers), all the other characters play almost exactly the same and it hurts to see that. Hyrule Warriors had a more diverse weapon selection and I feel that some characters would've benefited off of getting the ability to use two weapons like how some characters can. I just don't understand why they thought this would be a good idea when there were pretty much no clone characters like this in Hyrule Warriors. The game is still fun, don't get me wrong! I just don't like that characters are limited to their uniqueness based on how important they are, since it seems Lords and Robin got the special treatment.

[wissenschaft]

From what I understand, some weapons were just better than others in Hyrule Warriors and some characters are much easier to use than others. In FE warriors, they limited the number of movesets and all of them seem equally good. While there are clones, the stats between clone characters are different enough to give different build options. Some skills activate based on the luck stat so between clones, one might have a higher luck stat to make better use of skills while the other has higher overall offensive stats. In other words, the moveset might be the same but how you build the character can be different.

Edited October 18, 2017 by wissenschaft

[Interdimensional Observer]

1 hour ago, wissenschaft said:

From what I understand, some weapons were just better than others in Hyrule Warriors and some characters are much easier to use than others. In FE warriors, they limited the number of movesets and all of them seem equally good.

Chrono Trigger, the classic SNES RPG with only 7 PCs has better characters and worse ones. Crono-Ayla-Robo (or Frog) is better than Magus-Lucca-Marle (the worst character). Any and all games are going to have better and worse playable characters unless they play identically. I don't want WO3 Sanzang bad PCs in FEW, but if given the choice between 5 clones of Xiahou Ba (he's powerful right?) and 1 Xiahou Ba and four characters character with distinct movesets, all of whom are inferior to Ba, I would take the latter unless they were all really crappy.

The only character in HW (didn't play Legends) who was really bad if you ask me was Fi. The rest, even it there was better and worse, were good enough that is wasn't a chore using any of them.