Fire Emblem

Conquest vs. Birthright plot comparison is basically a question of if you prefer a bad plot to no plot whatsoever.

With Revelations banging on the door trying to be let in.

Matchmaking shenanigans > All other plots.

Birthright: Boring roadtrip to kill Garon

Conquest: Nonsensical mess of bad plot points

Revelation: Boring roadtrip to kill Anankos featuring a nonsensical mess of bad plot points

Revelation really is an amalgam between Birthright and Conquest, and not just in its playable cast.

Edited by Anomalocaris20 on Oct 21st 2018 at 11:40:23 AM

Truuuuuth.

At the very least, Fates had some gems to keep me entertained, but I'm looking forward to Three Houses moving things on.

Edited by erazor0707 on Oct 21st 2018 at 8:48:53 AM

Same here. There were things I enjoyed about Fates, but I'm really looking forward to Three Houses.

I'm looking forward to Triplicate Domiciles, but I hope the title doesn't suggest they're doing another route split or choose-your-faction kind of deal. I'd rather they just focus on making one solid plotline.

Also, it bears saying, I know I shit on Fates' writing a lot but I do love the game(s) despite its flaws. I just enjoy taking the mickey out of it.

It seems like there might be some degree of branching - didn't they say this one would be more open? But yeah, I'd prefer not having multiple routes. If they do, I'd prefer it be more Sacred Stones and less Fates.

At least if they do that, it'll all be in the same game instead of making you buy three. That was obnoxious.

Edited by SapphireBlue on Oct 21st 2018 at 8:54:17 AM

Yeah, I'm saying this right now: If Three Houses is "one game for the price of three" like Fates, I ain't buying it.

Fool me twice, shame on you.

Edited by erazor0707 on Oct 21st 2018 at 8:59:51 AM

Okay if there's one thing that annoys me, it's when people complain that Fates is one game for the price of three.

Because that absolutely isn't the case.

Each game has it's own set of unique maps (albeit with reused assets) and unique cutscenes, story, characters, etc. And Revelations comes at a discounted price despite having the most new assets and the most stuff in it.

It is so much closer to being Three games for the price of two since you get the whole Fate set for 80 bucks.

Fates was three games for the price of two, so from a gameplay standpoint I loved it. Aside from Rev's complete lack of balance. They could've taken an extra month to polish that.

Honestly speaking, I did read the criticisms of CQ's story and what was wrong with Corrin and Azura's characters. And I agreed with those criticisms for the most part. Then when I replayed CQ, I came back liking the story even more with Corrin moving up in my list of favorite lords. I make fun of Corrin's sudden no-killing abilities, and the excuse for going along with Nohr in the second half derails the entire plot, but it still works for me. I get why everyone does what they do, even if they're stupid more often than not. Following through on the premise (to an extent) for me this time.

Eh, I disagree. You still have to buy all three routes to get the full experience on top of DLC like Heirs of Fate and that one with Laslow/Selena/Odin, which explained plot-relevant details.

Different characters and stories, sure. I'll give you that. But, I expect more, especially with some reused assets.

Agree to disagree though.

Edited by erazor0707 on Oct 21st 2018 at 9:12:35 AM

I'm not going to defend the DLC. The DLC was supreme bullshit.

The games themselves though are fine and justified. "Full experience" or not, they were all their own games. No different from Sequels in my eyes.

Edited by EpicBleye on Oct 21st 2018 at 12:13:43 PM

>"The DLC was supreme bullshit."

At least we agree on that!

One thing I will say, however, is that Fates' DLC- overpriced, incomplete, and mandatory for understanding the story though it may be -is still better than the nonsense they pulled with Echoes and its Overclass DLC.

Overclass should've been part of the main game, that's for sure.

We're at a point on what's allow to DLC now. Which just makes hate this generation of gaming even more.

I... don't really get how dispensable, only relevant yet not crucial bonus dungeon overclasses are worse than actual story content needed to properly contextualize fate's story ? The more I think about it, the less I see it.

Fates had the issue of there being two/three different paths, but they follow the same cast of characters. the different being what side Corrin (among others, but Corrin's choice is the point of divergence) is on.Which would determine who is friend and who is foe. I'd not be surprised if people'd compared it to Pokemon titles not just for the One Gamefor The Price Of Two aspect, but the fact that there are characters only playable in one version.

Continuing the comparisons, Revelations could also be compared to the games like Platinum, Emerald and Crystal, with a way to play as most of the version-exclusive characters (at the expense of characters being playing in both versions being unavailable) as well as a different experience via altering the story.

Of course there are some differences. First, As previously mentioned, the initial versions of Fates are more different between each other in terms of plot and content which is far more than what could be said for most if not all Pokemon's paired versions. Secondly, The 3rd version, Revelation, is only available as DLC, whereas its Pokemon equivalents are for better or worse, able to be bought without requiring the base version (on a more minor note, the other path can also be bought as DLC). The third other difference being that that GF doesn't add Peninsula of Power Leveling or lore DLC to their games (or any at all) make of that what you will.

Edited by MorningStar1337 on Oct 22nd 2018 at 8:56:25 AM

I honestly never thought that the DLC of Fates was "needed" to contextualize the story. Then again, most of what was said in the DLC was stuff I could kind of guess from the main story, and I always felt the DLC just gave an already enjoyable story more details to make it even better.

Then again, I'm also surprised that Fates in general hasn't become the Mass Effect 3 of this particular thread (AKA the game no one can really talk about anymore due to the excessive wonking). Makes me kind of morbidly curious to see if some future game causes so much whining that a thread lock happens.

Locking Anankos's character and backstory was behind yet more DLC was a boneheaded move. That's now how you treat your main villain when the player isn't given a reason to care about him during the main game itself.

Eh, to each their own. I felt that the main games certainly gave him enough characterization to make him interesting, and I didn't need extra DLCs to make me care about him. The extra DLCs just made him even better for me, and he's still may absolute favorite villain in the series to this day.

Then again, I feel like I'm the sort of person who, if I had played Binding Blade before Blazing Blade, I wouldn't have needed Blazing Blade to show more of Zephiel's backstory to make me feel for him in Binding Blade.

To each their own indeed because, at least to me, Anankos and the presence of the Awakening trio made far more sense with the DLC.

I do appreciate how we're all able to agree to disagree though.

You know, since Bandits are really common enemies in the series. I kinda wanna see a game where their lack of intelligence is parodied.

I mean, something like... Bandits that are so dumb that they mistake inanimate objects for people.

Going back to the topic of mooks, I kind of want the Three Houses mooks to do some funny things in the background in certain circumstances. For example, if you're playing on the day of a character's birthday, defeating an enemy unit has the mooks put on party hats and bring out a big cake.

Yes, even for the villains.

Also, if the Bandit Twins come back, their mooks need to look exactly like them.