Awakening/Fates or Classic?

[Lucario666]

Which do you want this game to play closer too? Awakening/Fates or Classic FE? 

[Jedi]

This is a bit of a loaded question considering none of the older FE's played that much similarly, that and Fates changes to the formula Awakening started made it, its own thing as well.

[Magical Glace]

Not Awakening, really.

Fates at least had some good gameplay even if the story sucked, Awakening had nothing.  So just not Awakening.

But yeah as Jedi said this question is pretty vague.

[Michelaar]

What if I want a mix of everything that was good of all games?

[Azz]

4 minutes ago, Michelaar said:

What if I want a mix of everything that was good of all games?

Pretty much this.

But yeah, I don't get why you put all the classic games together when the likes of FE4 plays nothing like FE10 or FE5 and FE11. Same with FEA and FEF which are more different then similar.

[Light Strategist]

Couldn't really give a proper answer to this.

Awakening had various features I enjoyed (if that's not obvious though...) and Fates made refinements to most of Awakening's features but some felt like downgrades to me. The forge for example, feels needlessly complex when compared to Awakening or Tellius.

My Castle is sorta how I feel a hub should be done except not making it a castle. For a hub, I think what we REALLY need is a campsite.  That's something that I feel Fates should've really had, since a lot of support conversations state there being a campsite but you're always in My Castle and it takes away from the immersion of it. Awakening and the Tellius games had a great level of immersion for me because they didn't have this problem. The forge system these games used is also more ideal, especially with the nice little touch of customising weapon colour in Tellius.

I suppose really, I'd be satisfied with a combination of the Tellius games, Awakening and the GBA games.

[Slumber]

Something new. 

The core of the franchise hasn't changed much since FE5, but pretty much every era of FE games is vastly different. 

All of the SNES FEs are wildly different from each other. The GBA games are all very simplified and that era has its own style. 9 and 10 went back to being more complex, and resembled the SNES games a bit more, but still did a lot of unique stuff. The DS games are weird, since they're kind of hybrids of everything before while being remakes. 

So yeah. Something new. If they ape Awakening again, I think it will be to the detriment of the game. They failed to catch lightning in a bottle twice with Fates(Not that I consider Awakening lightning, but in the eyes of a lot of people, Fates is weaker than Awakening), and trying again will probably alienate more people than it will bring in. 

I side more on "classic", though, since I'm not a fan of a lot of things they tried in Awakening and Fates. I'd rather they bring back older mechanics like rescue, handle skills like PoR/RD, limited supports more along the lines of the GBA games, split magics and not make them part of a triangle with bows and knives, remove the overworld and overworked grinding, bring back base conversations, and a bunch of stuff that boils down to "Bring back X mechanic from *insert pre-Awakening game here*" and "Remove/completely overhaul Y mechanic from Awakening/Fates". 

Edited October 22, 2017 by Slumber

[Ren_Ambrose]

Yeah, I'm with the others on this being kind of a loaded question. While I adore Awakening, I can't argue that it simplified a lot of the mechanics from the older games like rescue and magic. I honestly think that combining the best elements from each game would probably be the best route to go. For instance, support conversations being limited to 5 per character in the GBA games felt arbitrary, but having each character be assigned a set stat for rescues made more sense than just pairing up a paladin with a pegasus rider and having them fly over a pit. 

42 minutes ago, Light Strategist said:

My Castle is sorta how I feel a hub should be done except not making it a castle. For a hub, I think what we REALLY need is a campsite.  That's something that I feel Fates should've really had, since a lot of support conversations state there being a campsite but you're always in My Castle and it takes away from the immersion of it. Awakening and the Tellius games had a great level of immersion for me because they didn't have this problem. The forge system these games used is also more ideal, especially with the nice little touch of customising weapon colour in Tellius.

This. It makes way more sense than "oh hey i have a magic time dragon castle thing" and opens itself up to more customization options. What if you could set up a camp on any map in the game for others to try and take over your camp or something? Tents would also make more sense than just random buildings being indestructible for no reason (looking at you, lottery shop) while the ones that would make sense to be indestructible (the prison) aren't.

[YingofDarkness]

I chose Awakening/Fates, but I'd prefer if they did something new. I would think that they would keep some of the things that made those two more popular. Well I mean besides the advertising. Keeping Casual mode (like it or not), the S-support system with marriage being left for the end slate (hopefully), no children if they can't do it right (preferably none though), lower the amount of supports but put no limit on them, and the hub world from Fates but maybe have it as a group of caravans or something more mobile. I mean the army is lugging around weapons, multiple soldiers, feed for the animals, water, food, tents, and everything else soldiers would need to survive around. Realistically they would be doing this using horses and caravans, carriages, or something similar. So why not use that to create a hub world? We can spend money to create shops in them or in tents. Maybe have small touches of decoration around the area, or customize our tent personally because why not.

12 hours ago, Slumber said:

I'd rather they bring back older mechanics like rescue, handle skills like PoR/RD, limited supports more along the lines of the GBA games, split magics and not make them part of a triangle with bows and knives, remove the overworld and overworked grinding, bring back base conversations, and a bunch of stuff that boils down to "Bring back X mechanic from *insert pre-Awakening game here*" and "Remove/completely overhaul Y mechanic from Awakening/Fates". 

I feel like a bit of an idiot asking this, but what do you mean by removing the overworld? I thought most games had some sort of overworld, or do you mean the free roaming we can do in Awakening and Fates, and instead just go chapter to chapter?

[Dandy Druid]

What do you mean? If the next FE's gameplay and level design is on par with Conquest, it'd be a playable game.

If the story is more reminiscent of older FEs, like PoR and Genealogy, it would be a good story. 

Combine the two and we have a great, modern FE.

[Slumber]

14 minutes ago, YingofDarkness said:

I feel like a bit of an idiot asking this, but what do you mean by removing the overworld? I thought most games had some sort of overworld, or do you mean the free roaming we can do in Awakening and Fates, and instead just go chapter to chapter?

All games have a map, but SS, Gaiden/Echoes, Fates and Awakening are the only ones where you actually do stuff on them.

And they're pretty much 4/4 with misses and making it feel like it actually belongs in the game. In fact, in Fates and Awakening, it felt like an excuse for putting in DLC.

[Zasplach]

18 minutes ago, Slumber said:

All games have a map, but SS, Gaiden/Echoes, Fates and Awakening are the only ones where you actually do stuff on them.

And they're pretty much 4/4 with misses and making it feel like it actually belongs in the game. In fact, in Fates and Awakening, it felt like an excuse for putting in DLC.

Sacred Stones has an overworld too, and I don't think they feel horribly out-of-place in all the games they were placed in; they just tend to open up grinding for people who want grinding.  

[Jave]

16 minutes ago, Slumber said:

All games have a map, but SS, Gaiden/Echoes, Fates and Awakening are the only ones where you actually do stuff on them.

And they're pretty much 4/4 with misses and making it feel like it actually belongs in the game. In fact, in Fates and Awakening, it felt like an excuse for putting in DLC.

Actually, Fates doesn't have an interactive overworld. The world map is just a menu. What it has that's interactive is the base aka My Castle.

I also don't mind the interactive overworld. I feel it's nice to have a way to look freely at the world map in order to get to know the game universe better. Considered it's been implemented as early as the second game in the series, I don't see how it doesn't belong.

[Slumber]

6 minutes ago, Jave said:

Actually, Fates doesn't have an interactive overworld. The world map is just a menu. What it has that's interactive is the base aka My Castle.

I also don't mind the interactive overworld. I feel it's nice to have a way to look freely at the world map in order to get to know the game universe better. Considered it's been implemented as early as the second game in the series, I don't see how it doesn't belong.

The maps in Fates is functionally the same as it is in other games, just without being blocked by other battles on the map to get to other battles.

And there were a lot of things in Gaiden that they introduced that they never brought back. Again, I wouldn't have a problem with it if they actually did something with it beyond just mindless grinding. Echoes/Gaiden actually did the most with it because there's actually an incentive to go explore areas off the beaten path and sidequests in villages, but even Gaiden has issues with this, like tons of redundant battles being in the way. It's also pretty immersion breaking in Sacred Stones and Awakening, where there are plenty of plot points where you're supposed to be on the run, or have to get somewhere ASAP, but you can just run back through the armies that are chasing you to go grind in a magical portal or a giant tower. They contribute to why it's hard to feel like there are any stakes in those games.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Slumber

[Jave]

2 minutes ago, Slumber said:

The maps in Fates is functionally the same as it is in other games, just without being blocked by other battles on the map to get to other battles.

And there were a lot of things in Gaiden that they introduced that they never brought back. Again, I wouldn't have a problem with it if they actually did something with it beyond just mindless grinding. Echoes/Gaiden actually did the most with it because there's actually an incentive to go explore areas off the beaten path and sidequests in villages, but even Gaiden has issues with this, like tons of redundant battles being in the way. It's also pretty immersion breaking in Sacred Stones and Awakening, where there are plenty of plot points where you're supposed to be on the run, or have to get somewhere ASAP, but you can just run back through the armies that are chasing you to go grind in a magical portal or a giant tower.

I can see where you're coming from, but I feel those are just situational issues that can be solved by simply not allowing you to use the map between certain chapters (FE8 and FE15 actually work like this in some instances) instead of just removing it outright, since I do like having an interactive overworld.

Perhaps the most offending instance of what you describe was in Awakening where you go from Ch.9 to Ch.10. Not only you are allowed to fully traverse the map, but you even unlock a Paralogue that has no place at being played at that point in the game. It's incredibly stupid since given the events that just transpired, you shouldn't be taking any detours.

[ElectiveToast]

Awakening/Fates sold better than the classics, so it should be a no brainer as to what Nintendo should do from a business standpoint. 

[Etrurian emperor]

Why make it a zero sum game? Why not just make a game that adds the best of both worlds?

I don't believe the majority of the older fans scoff at Awakening and Fates so much because they have negative feelings for the strong points of those games. The negativity comes more from those games lacking a lot of points earlier games were strong in such as story, villains and world building. Had Conquest had a decent story the old fans would be much more positive about it and if Conquest or even Awakening had the world building and story of Tellius is would likely be universally adored. 
Likewise is it the fanservice in general that is the problem. Its the excess of fanservice over quality(best symbolized by the deeprealms and being able to marry the Hoshidan royals) which is the problem. 

I don't think the newer game look down upon the older games either. I think they too can spot the weakness of the newer style and if those weaknesses can be resolved by implementing features from the older game I doubt they would find that problematic. 

Tone down the exeses of fanservice, add a good story with good villains, give the game a detailed world on top of the Awakening or Conquest gameplay and I think everyone will be happy. 

If I had to make a choice I would go for the classic style because I think the newer games have much more obvious flaws but I'm convinced that it doesn't have to be so black and white. The two styles don't have to be in open conflict and can compliment each other quite well if given the chance. 

Edited October 23, 2017 by Etrurian emperor

[Anacybele]

More like classic, except I'm definitely cool with pair-up. So I'd like that to continue being a thing. But bring back the cool stuff RD introduced like ledge mechanics and all. I miss all that!

[Silverly]

I’m impartial to Awakening and Fates because I’m simply more comfortable with them from a gameplay perspective. However, I wouldn’t mind things reintroduced from older games.

[Tolvir]

Why not both?

kind of a silly question really. It’s not like there has been drastic changes to the formula like Final Fantasy. The core strategy gameplay is still there across the series, it’s not like we have gone from tactical grid based strategy to real time strategy or anything. 

Edited October 23, 2017 by Tolvir

[JimmyBeans]

It would be unrealistic to expect them to get rid of all the features awakening and fates added, I'm ok with the way Fates played, solely because of conquest. If they throw in a deep story and make the map design conquest level, or at least make it an option, I will be fine with it.

 

Also no matter how bad the game could possibly be if it has good music I'll probably buy it anyway :^)

[Jedi]

48 minutes ago, JimmyBeans said:

It would be unrealistic to expect them to get rid of all the features awakening and fates added, I'm ok with the way Fates played, solely because of conquest. If they throw in a deep story and make the map design conquest level, or at least make it an option, I will be fine with it.

Well usually when FE jumps console it changes its formula up a fair bit, so I think that has some possible chance of happening. Plus I think some of the features staying would make Awakening and Fates in the long run stand out less when people look back.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

Classic as in Kaga era? GBA? Tellius? I've played enough of those. And 3DS era is blatantly obsessed with bringing everything from previous games back. They even checked the box next to: let's have the Pugi in as a random weapon drop. How far down the list do you have to go to reach that one?

Hook me with something new. Then I'll be cool with callbacks.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Glennstavos

[JimmyBeans]

5 hours ago, Jedi said:

Well usually when FE jumps console it changes its formula up a fair bit, so I think that has some possible chance of happening. Plus I think some of the features staying would make Awakening and Fates in the long run stand out less when people look back.

True. Not to mention even though sales were lower for Echoes, from what I've seen it was well received from the newer fans as well. I'm thinking that the new fans didn't only care about waifu emblem after seeing echoes success.

So that is a possibility

[NoirCore]

I'm just gonna choose C: Something different. As said before, Fire Emblem tends to change things up a bit each "era". I personally would favor the PoR style, but I'm betting the new game's going to make another original difference somehow.