|
CptWedgie posted:Yukimura I'll concede was probably a bad idea. Garon may be boring, but at least he'd make SENSE while simultaneously giving some level of closure. Kiragi as the last boss would actually improve him, partly because it'd give him at least SOME plot presence even if it isn't in his own route and partly because it'd show that the Deeprealms aren't exclusive to the Avatar (who gets too much special treatment by the plot already); if you want to keep the gimmick, just have him find the Fujin Yumi before he shows up and he should be able to pull it off. Or if you're THAT insistent that the last boss just HAS to be Takumi, go with inthesto's suggestion and just have Takumi NOT BE DEAD. considering Iago already doesn't affect the map enough as is with Staff Savant outside of Lunatic, that map is totally fine. lol at complaining about that being cheating compared to literally anything in FE5, enemy holy weapons in 4, entrap staffs, or some of the hilarious stuff in Echoes. The rest of your story meltdown has been covered by other posters. I make fun of you since you manage to consistently spit out stuff just as bad as Conquest when not saying the obvious that the rest of the thread has discussed. RevolverDivider fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Jun 15, 2017 |
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Emperordaein posted:I could only see the Conquest plot working as is if it was made into a Spec Ops/NieR style deconstruction, where the game treats it's cast as awful, broken human beings, and even then it could easily come off as wanky to alot of people. I'd like to see Hinoka and Sakura make it clear that they despise Corrine and all her Norhian siblings, and make it clear that they will never forgive them, but for the plot at large, it's an attempt at a deconstruction that comes out of nowhere in a vacuum, and you'd need to go back further and further to make more changes to support it, and by that point, you've rewritten the entire plot. Conquest needs some pretty deep rewriting to salvage it, but you don't need to go quite that far. The most straightforward ways to make Conquest not terrible are to either make Garon not cartoonishly evil (not difficult) or for Corrine's army to plan and execute a coup much earlier in the game (also not difficult). There's just so many ways to write the story of a reluctant soldier, plenty of which have shown up in previous Fire Emblem games, that Conquest's cop-out of "everyone's pure of heart but knuckle-draggingly stupid, which is why they follow the cartoon villain king" was pretty much the worst choice possible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Now I'm free from any compulsion to finish this game. Thank you Tae.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Finally caught up. I only played Birthright and was thoroughly unimpressed with the plot, so I didn't bother with Conquest. I'm really impressed with how much dumber the plot is. Please tell me Revelations is even worse
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
RevolverDivider posted:considering Iago already doesn't affect the map enough as is with Staff Savant outside of Lunatic, that map is totally fine. Ah. I see where you're coming from now. You're one of those "challenge for its own sake, even if the computer has to blatantly cheat" guys. Let's just drop it and agree to disagree, then; I'm more on the "there has to be some in-story justification before things happen" side, and there is no reason for Iago to even be capable of USING staves. Really, I'd have to say that the only thing keeping me from accepting Zombie Takumi as a last boss is that this is the first and, thus far, ONLY indication that zombies are even a thing in this setting. If it was like Final Fantasy 10, where dead people can explicitly get back up through sheer force of will, or if Iago had previously reanimated the dead to fight for him or something I'd probably let it go. RevolverDivider posted:lol at complaining about that being cheating compared to literally anything in FE5, enemy holy weapons in 4, entrap staffs, or some of the hilarious stuff in Echoes. Cheating is still cheating, no matter the degree to which it is so. Setting my HP to the legal maximum for my level is different from setting my level and stats arbitrarily high or pulling a million stat boosters out of my rear end, but is still cheating if I did not actually EARN those HP through in-game means, to use a save-hacking example. (Incidentally, bringing Echoes into the conversation is meaningless to someone who has never played it, and has no intention of buying it after this train-wreck.) And I still fail to see exactly HOW my suggestions are even remotely as bad as the actual Conquest (and, despite your assertion to the contrary, I have not seen any convincing reasons given for why they would be), but, as previously stated, I'm aiming more for closure and in-story consistency; there has to be some explanation for them being strong enough to be the last boss, but that's simple enough depending on who the last boss turns out to be (in theory, at least), and there has to be an explanation for why the last boss is even there, which also varies depending on who, exactly, it is. To be honest, the only reason I didn't suggest "just have Takumi not be dead" myself is that it kind of breaks my suspension of disbelief to have a living Takumi be strong enough to challenge the entire party completely solo all of a sudden when you've fought and beaten him no fewer than four times already (completely aside from my previously-stated animosity towards a recurring boss- especially one you explicitly win against every time- simultaneously being the LAST boss), and Zombie Takumi was possibly the worst last boss they could've chosen because it comes completely out of nowhere (Kiragi, at least, has the excuse that we already know the Deeprealms exist). Hell, if a living Takumi winds up as the last boss, just explain his AOE (and probably his boss-exclusive weapon) as him going off the deep end and using the Fujin Yumi full power, where he had previously been restraining it to prevent collateral damage (such as hitting his own allies); there, map gimmick justified for living Takumi. The same explanation would work for Kiragi armed with the Fujin Yumi, too, conveniently enough (possibly switching "going crazy" for "less disciplined, and thus unable to properly restrain it"). U-DO Burger posted:Finally caught up. I only played Birthright and was thoroughly unimpressed with the plot, so I didn't bother with Conquest. I'm really impressed with how much dumber the plot is. Please tell me Revelations is even worse I honestly can't see any way Revelations could possibly be stupider than Conquest. I'll admit I could be surprised, but I doubt it'll happen. Look on the bright side, though: At least we won't have to put up with in-game advertising anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
Emperordaein posted:I could only see the Conquest plot working as is if it was made into a Spec Ops/NieR style deconstruction, where the game treats it's cast as awful, broken human beings, and even then it could easily come off as wanky to alot of people. Nah, I think the plot is so mind numbingly stupid and bad at being dramatic it needs to swing the other way from grimdark. Just have it embrace the stupid and go full goofy, "oh that hans, always murdering people! If only there was some way to stop him! I KNOW! I'll make dad sit in a chair!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
 You know where this is going, if you remember the end of Birthright.  It doesn’t seem like it will stop anytime soon. I’d better take a little break….   It reminds me of the lake where I first met Azura. I wonder where she is right now. Azura… *Suddenly, singing was heard*   Hello, kinda-sorta-Azura  It’s really you! You’ve come back! Where have you been all this time?! … Azura? Hello, Corrine. What do you think of my song? What do I think of it? It’s um…very pretty? I see. But if you listen carefully…you might sense a power you didn’t notice before. Really? Yes. I’m sure you’ll feel it this time.  But I don’t— Please, Corrine. Just do as I say. OK… *Corrine closes her eyes* Azura… I’m really happy you decided to come back to us. Just having you by my side again reminds me of all we’ve been through. You were always there for me, even when my whole world was falling apart.  I don't really remember any specific savings by Azura long ago outside of the pep talk after killing Kaden. To me you’re—   Well, Conquest is consistent about having Azura suddenly disappear at least. Was that…an illusion? Azura!!... Yes. I’m sure we will. And when we do, I’ll tell you how much you mean to me……Despite never having a sub-plot about Azura being in danger of disappearing after singing, Corrine just accepts that she's gone out of thin air.   I’m about to lead a group of nobles into town. Will you join us? Of course! Sounds fun! Hey, Xander! Wait up! Haha, don’t you dare leave without me! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7O52Cftjrk  And your reward for beating Conquest   CONQUEST     There's no wrong clothes gag for the third time. I guess they're just above that, clearly.  You’ve always had a gift for that. No doubt you always will.Reaction shots!     "But I was too much of a coward to actually do anything until Daddy wasn't watching"  If the speech from last update didn't make you roll your eyes, oh boy  But…it’s a lie. Told by those who profit from bloodshed. In my reign as Nohr’s new king, I vow to seek peace and understanding.  I guess??    Wow Benny, isn't that like...desertion?   Be prepared to see "Official Records" a lot.   You'd really think having Gunter back as a Conquest exclusive would be more relevant but alas.   christ, Beruka. How were you so goddamn slow.   Niles, you were basically built to be the MVP of Conquest but nooooo, I would be denied healers and archers for a long time!   Man, Ophelia was in a lot of battles for how late she joined.   I cannot believe these two made it to the endgame, considering how Birthright went.  HOW THE gently caress DID ELISE DISAPPEAR FROM PUBLIC RECORDS THE gently caress  What the hell is this "radical new policy" that's never brought up? I wish this was hinted at ANY POINT IN THE STORY  Wives get the bad end of the ending stick like crazzzzy  ....WHAT?!  And an insulting ending to the best killer of the team.  ...I need a break.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Reading Elise and Effie's endings just makes things even more needlessly confusing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Xander posted:
Fixed for you Xander.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Verant posted:Reading Elise and Effie's endings just makes things even more needlessly confusing. To be fair, I feel like Elise might've disappeared because Owain brought her home to meet his mother. This also explains Inigo and Severa's endings: They went home afterwards. Effie, on the other hand, is inexcusable. Anyway, for all we know the "radical new policies" might be along the lines of "don't fight Hoshido any more, you retards."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
Arthur returned to his true calling, justice. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
Well, time for Revelations, and the 100% completion run you promised.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
A thing I find funny about Xander's war speech, other than the fact it makes him a hypocritical piece of poo poo, is how it's the opposite of Chrom's speeches last game. Chrom tried to make peace, but ultimately had to deal with the fact sometimes the only way he could cope with problems was stabbin' dudes in the gut. Xander spends the game doing murders since his dad asked, and then makes a speech on how war is always bad. Then again, the whole game is thematically opposed to Awakening despite constantly trying to mimic it. Why should it be a surprise now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 06:19
|
|
|
Yeah, go back and read Chrom's speeches to Gangrel and Walhart, and compare with anything here. It's ugly. Everyone's getting a horrible image of Fates, and while they're completely correct when it comes to the story, it's worth defending the gameplay as shittons of fun, even as it has its own kinks and weird decisions. Conquest really could use a breather chapter or two, and Birthright could use some variety and twists, but the games are just fun to play.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
theshim posted:Everyone's getting a horrible image of Fates, and while they're completely correct when it comes to the story, it's worth defending the gameplay as shittons of fun, even as it has its own kinks and weird decisions. Conquest really could use a breather chapter or two, and Birthright could use some variety and twists, but the games are just fun to play. I, for one, haven't really dissed the gameplay ITSELF much (other than complaining about Conquest blatantly cheating at times, but at least there I'm justified in that it IS blatantly cheating, and I can actually prove it); I've mostly been reserving my complaints for how irredeemably stupid the plot is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 06:35
|
|
|
CptWedgie posted:Really, I'd have to say that the only thing keeping me from accepting Zombie Takumi as a last boss is that this is the first and, thus far, ONLY indication that zombies are even a thing in this setting. Takumi gets possessed on birtright in the same way though Azura heals him, and then through conquest we signs of this possession but Azura doesn't cure it. While zombie Takumi isn't particularly interesting and the writing surrounding it is awful, the concept itself is not out of nowhere and actually foreshadowed. And imo, Iago having a skill that lets him use staves isn't any more cheating than Garon having a skill that makes him take half damage or those bosses you can't debuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
CptWedgie posted:I, for one, haven't really dissed the gameplay ITSELF much (other than complaining about Conquest blatantly cheating at times, but at least there I'm justified in that it IS blatantly cheating, and I can actually prove it); I've mostly been reserving my complaints for how irredeemably stupid the plot is. it's still an incredibly stupid complaint considering the entire series does it and who gives a poo poo, it's necessary to create enemies that aren't just boring rear end blob of stats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
I dont even understand how its cheating. The game clearly defines what it does and fire emblem has never pretended it doesnt have am asymetric ruleset.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
Yeah, I was going to post 'your army is a bunch of cool smart attractive people and your enemies are chumps' in a more specific fashion, and 'asymmetrical ruleset' is right on the mark. I mean, for the sake of appearances I would probably give Iago a unique class to explain how he can use staves (Advisor fits fine), but it's nitpicking at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 07:07
|
|
|
It's definitely a dumb complaint, especially because it's all laid out for you in plain English when you click on their skills. CptWedgie seems to be concerned with his own definition of "cheating" because he doesn't understand what the game's rules are. The "rule" in Fire Emblem is that information about the enemy army is always in plain view, you make educated decisions based on what you know, and so it's your fault when something goes wrong. It's not cheating if an enemy equips a weapon that you can't, as long as you can see the weapon in their inventory. A sorcerer that can use staves or an archer that counterattacks in melee range would be a nasty surprise... if they surprised you with it, but they don't because that would be breaking the rules. There are times when the series strays away from that, and that's where you should be directing your outrage. Enemy reinforcements arriving and attacking on the same turn without warning, fog of war, enemy HP being listed as "???" (though that's a very minor one) and enemies wielding weapons whose effects are a complete mystery (Radiant Dawn) are the real offenders because these surprises totally ruin the player's ability to predict how the enemy phase might play out, which is the crux of the gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Takumi gets possessed on birtright in the same way though Azura heals him, and then through conquest we signs of this possession but Azura doesn't cure it. While zombie Takumi isn't particularly interesting and the writing surrounding it is awful, the concept itself is not out of nowhere and actually foreshadowed. Foreshadowing doesn't count if it's from supplementary material (which, in my book, includes alternate routes of the same game). People who played Conquest first were probably heavily biased against Takumi when switching to Birthright, since they have no idea why he's so evil in Conquest due to lacking any context beyond Azura's word that he's possessed and his dickishness in the pre-route-split scenes. And anyway, "possession" does not imply "zombies" last I checked. Basically, the "possessed Takumi who later becomes a zombie for Reasons" thing falls flat for the same reason as all the advertising for Revelations detracts from Conquest: IN A VACUUM, there is no explanation whatsoever for what's going on with Takumi; the "when" and "how" of his possession is only explained in Birthright (unless it's mentioned in Revelations), and the "what" will almost certainly only be explained in Revelations, along with "why is he a zombie?" (unless I'm giving the game too much credit). Avalerion posted:And imo, Iago having a skill that lets him use staves isn't any more cheating than Garon having a skill that makes him take half damage or those bosses you can't debuff. Not really helping his case here. At least Garon has "last boss privileges" as a justification for his cheating, though; after all, you EXPECT the last boss to be stronger than anything else in the game, right? Iago, on the other hand, is just this smug troll who blatantly flaunts the fact that he's not constrained by the same rules you are in your face; all considered, he actually isn't even important to the game's plot. RevolverDivider posted:it's still an incredibly stupid complaint considering the entire series does it and who gives a poo poo, it's necessary to create enemies that aren't just boring rear end blob of stats. Again: You're a "challenge for its own sake even if it doesn't make sense" type, I'm a "why are these things happening, and if you can't answer (preferably using only information given in this specific route of this specific game) don't do them" type. Just drop it; odds are we will never agree on this. Hell, the GBA games didn't even have equippable skills and they managed fine. Really, in my mind it's not "what abilities does this otherwise-completely-interchangeable unit have to challenge me" that makes an enemy something other than a "boring rear end blob of stats," it's "who does this otherwise-completely-interchangeable unit represent in the story?" If I took Garon's exact unit setup (class, skills, stats, equipment, and anything else I may have missed other than cosmetic stuff like portrait and characterization) and stuck it on a generic Berserker (or anything else; Berserker's just a convenient example), that wouldn't make that Berserker anything other than a "boring rear end blob of stats," unless you count "frustrating blob of stats." While there are players who play games and beat the enemies therein purely for its own sake (challengers, let's call them), others can only invest themselves in stories where they actually care about who they're playing as and beating whoever they're fighting. Conquest (possibly Fates as a whole, but even if that's the case Conquest is by far a worse offender than Birthright), quite frankly, fails utterly at both of those, despite its gameplay being good on average; honestly, I care more about what happened to Kellam (insert obligatory "who?" joke here) after Awakening than I do about the entire world Fates takes place in. FoolyCharged posted:I dont even understand how its cheating. An asymmetrical rule set is, by definition, cheating. Using poker as an example: You get five cards. The machine you're playing against gets six, or seven, or ten, because it's not a human, and it wins off of any combination of five cards that would normally beat yours. How is this NOT cheating, even if you know it's coming? ungulateman's thought of giving Iago an exclusive class (or at least a distinct name for it, if he's already got one- Vizier, maybe? It describes his rank pretty well, and has appropriately unsavory connotations due to literature) would fix many of my complaints about his staff usage; if his class is obviously not available to the player, then logically its abilities wouldn't be available either. I mean, this is how previous games justified giving important enemies exclusive abilities; why couldn't Fates have done the same? Really, Fire Emblem is more about strategizing to overcome the game's cheating (enemy reinforcements being among the least of the ways it does this) than it is merely strategizing. As I already said: Cheating is cheating, no matter how blatant OR EXPECTED it is, and NO MATTER WHAT THE SOURCE IS. Lemme put it this way: If, hypothetically speaking (and completely ignoring the rules placed by the guys running the servers), you went online and found a castle where someone has, as a random example, Flora equipped with Staff Savant and carrying Silence, Enfeeble, Bifrost, and Fortify, with an otherwise completely legit team (if likely capped in every stat because no doubt they hacked in stat boosters while they were at it), you'd be calling bullshit. However, you are forgiving it in this case SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE it is an NPC with the ability and not another player. It's not that I have a "dumb complaint," you guys're just using a double-standard and I'm not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
Takumi does go all argh argh in the water chapter in conquest, so it shows you that something is wrong even if only taking that into account. Plus the "no body found" is pretty blatant too. And Iago can use staves because he has a skill that lets him use staves, this is consistent with the rules of fe (similiarly witches learn a skill that lets them use tomes regardless of class). You are overthinking it.  Would you say enemies in an fps never running out of ammo while the player does is cheating too? Avalerion fucked around with this message at 08:19 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 08:09
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Takumi does go all argh argh in the water chapter in conquest, so it shows you that something is wrong even if only taking that into account. Plus the "no body found" is pretty blatant too. Yes, but Conquest players have no reason to think that the real Takumi is any better, just like nobody has any reason to buy that "kind, generous Garon" talk (hell, Garon is a pretty villain-y name to start with, come to think of it). For all we know (using only Conquest knowledge), he could've been wounded, or poisoned, or having some kind of non-combat-related health issue, or SOMETHING other than possession (at least until Azura outright confirms his possession... when was that again?). As to the "no body found" bit... well, that's just bad horror movie material, really. It gives no reason to suspect that Takumi's a zombie now beyond being a horror movie cliche, though it does at least foreshadow that he hasn't left the plot yet. I still believe that his subplot would've been satisfactorily concluded if he hadn't come back, though. Avalerion posted:And Iago can use staves because he has a skill that lets him use staves, this is consistent with the rules of fe (similiarly witches learn a skill that lets them use tomes regardless of class). You are overthinking it. The witch's skill is specifically for DARK tomes (read: Nosferatu), and requires that you first be capable of equipping tomes in the first place. By this logic, Iago's skill shouldn't give him the ability to use staves if he normally couldn't. As I said before, I wouldn't be complaining so much if they hadn't called him a Sorcerer. Also note: Even in Birthright, where Iago doesn't have a staff to use, he's got a Staff rank of C, with no Staff Savant in sight; this indicates that his Staff rank is actually innate rather than derived from a skill (and thus further evidence, albeit somewhat circumstantial due to being an enemy-exclusive skill, that it wouldn't actually do anything if you put it on a unit that can't use staves on its own). Call it overthinking if you must; I just refuse to hold the game to a different standard of fairness than I hold the player in. For example, note that I specifically called ENEMY REINFORCEMENTS, of all things, cheating, even though I actually have little to no problem with it in practice, due to the fact that the player can't do it outside of certain scripted events. Avalerion posted:Would you say enemies in an fps never running out of ammo while the player does is cheating too? Since the enemies are doing something the players are unable to in normal play, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 08:31
|
|
|
theshim posted:Yeah, go back and read Chrom's speeches to Gangrel and Walhart, and compare with anything here. It's ugly. Eh. I mean, Conquest was well worth playing, but looking back, with another Fire Emblem around to be newest (even if it is a Gaiden remake), I think it's got some problems from the gameplay standpoint even ignoring the writing. One thing that's been brought up already, which kinda ties into my feeling that Conquest wasn't built to be balanced around classic, is how many maps, especially lategame, entirely revolve around a one-off gimmick. Even if the kitsune map was good, it doesn't help the player build up any skills to deal with ninja hell or the cave of infinite faceless. Echoes has jank maps too, (to put it mildly) but they build on each other. Sure, infinite teleporting witches suck, but once you figure out how to deal with them, you'll have that knowledge for later. Fates also feels much less holistic than a lot of other Fire Emblems, if I don't look like too much of an rear end in a top hat for using the term. Things like the paralogues and my castle don't mesh at all with the main game, forging invalidates silver weapons, pairup is less busted, but it makes a lot of units primarily useful as stat backpacks where Awakening's broken system encouraged actually using both units... The maps are clever enough to be worth a look, assuming you're willing to deal with a certain level of difficulty, but I think there's problems with it even aside from the incredibly lovely writing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 08:43
|
|
|
chiasaur11 posted:...forging invalidates silver weapons... You're talking about Fates with this, right? If so, then Silver-tier weapons are invalid for player usage to begin with, because of that -2 Strength/Magic (whichever the weapon uses) and Skill thing (which, last I checked, stacks, thus reducing your offense to 0 pretty drat fast); the enemies can get away with it solely because you are almost invariably outnumbered, and they're 100% expendable (allowing them to suicide without hesitation in order to deal even the slightest bit of damage) while your guys generally aren't unless you spam einherjar, especially on Classic. Personally, I'd rather use Steel, even if it makes doubling harder, because it doesn't reduce how much damage I do when I hit or make it unduly hard to do so; however, Iron's probably the best out of the weapons that don't have gimmicks, since it doesn't do anything special, positive OR negative. Now, the various weapons with gimmicks throw things into unclear territory, but for a go-to standard-issue weapon? Iron or Steel, every time. In fact, I'm reasonably sure that I have NEVER used a Silver-tier weapon in Fates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
I used silvers in Birthright to make a kill that forged steels couldn't (no speed penalty and more accurate) because Birthright actually gives you some.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 09:35
|
|
|
CptWedgie posted:Yes, but Conquest players have no reason to think that the real Takumi is any better, just like nobody has any reason to buy that "kind, generous Garon" talk (hell, Garon is a pretty villain-y name to start with, come to think of it). For all we know (using only Conquest knowledge), he could've been wounded, or poisoned, or having some kind of non-combat-related health issue, or SOMETHING other than possession (at least until Azura outright confirms his possession... when was that again?). Like those enemy units that "appear suddenly" and have purple auras and are quick to try killing the player characters. And when Takumi gets swathed in the purple he gets forced to fall off a wall while he loses his biscuits. None of this was subtle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 09:40
|
|
|
blankd posted:You mean in the same game a king is possessed by an evil goo monster? And Takumi's mentioned headaches and "hrrrgh argh" talk as a purple aura engulfs him? Even without Azura stating it outright, purple auras set enough precedence in conquest that it's something otherworldly/bad. Sorry for nitpicking, but... Magical attacks. Yes, I know, it IS a magical attack of a sort (specifically, the purely mental or spiritual kind), but without being informed that Takumi is behaving abnormally (since, purely from what's seen in Conquest, he isn't) the player's as likely as not to assume that he's been hit with Nosferatu or some other dark tome that doesn't actually appear in the game. Granted, it's obvious from the start that there's something wrong with him in Birthright, but, as previously stated, I am ignoring that in order to judge Conquest on its own (and frankly there's no real reason out-of-universe for Takumi to be possessed in Conquest in the first place).
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 09:51
|
|
|
CptWedgie posted:Sorry for nitpicking, but... Magical attacks. Yes, I know, it IS a magical attack of a sort (specifically, the purely mental or spiritual kind), but without being informed that Takumi is behaving abnormally (since, purely from what's seen in Conquest, he isn't) the player's as likely as not to assume that he's been hit with Nosferatu or some other dark tome that doesn't actually appear in the game. CH 10-C, end of the fight Takumi randomly yells in agony (while he was previously, very sanely lamenting the loss of the battle), Corrine asks what's wrong, Takumi mentions his head then angrily yells at her not to touch him. Previous to that all of the encounters he has fairly level, and unfriendly way of speaking. It's not hard to infer that something is WRONG and that it takes advantage of him when he's emotionally weak. I should know since previous to this LP I'd only played through and been disappointed with Conquest and that's how I judged that sequence of events.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 10:21
|
|
|
CptWedgie posted:An asymmetrical rule set is, by definition, cheating. Using poker as an example: You get five cards. The machine you're playing against gets six, or seven, or ten, because it's not a human, and it wins off of any combination of five cards that would normally beat yours. How is this NOT cheating, even if you know it's coming? No? If I pick protoss after you go zerg, that doesn't make me a filthy cheat. Does the player having units that throughout the series typically have a serious stat advantage against enemy mooks make the player a filthy cheater? Cheating is a violation of the stated ruleset. So for your example, because poker has a rule set that machine violates, it is cheating. If there was no poker before that machine and it told you the computer got extra cards to make things a challenge, then it wouldn't be cheating because it acts within the stated ruleset that it gets to define.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 13:18
|
|
|
Takumi being the final boss of CQ was really neat, I just wish it was actual Takumi so we could go "yeah, you invaded his kingdom, he's convinced you killed his mother and that you've betrayed him. He hates you and wants you dead." Also asymmetric design is perfectly fine in FE? The AI is not the player and is not capable of the same level of intelligence as a human. Thus, it needs cheats to propose a decent challenge. Fire Emblem, at it's core, is pretty simple but there are plenty of things the AI won't realise that the player will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 13:41
|
|
|
CptWedgie posted:An asymmetrical rule set is, by definition, cheating. Using poker as an example: You get five cards. The machine you're playing against gets six, or seven, or ten, because it's not a human, and it wins off of any combination of five cards that would normally beat yours. How is this NOT cheating, even if you know it's coming? Man, fighting games would make your head explode. Also, while I understand why people dislike some of the design decisions in this game (I agree a breather map towards the end would have been nice), the one thing I won't budge on is how guard pairs work. Awakening pairs were really swingy, and heavily in favor of the player. Fates pairing actually forces you to make a choice between extra stats+defense vs extra actions. In Awakening, you just strap two units together and watch enemies vanish.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
I found guard stance is still superior in fates, just less so than it was in awakening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
I used guard stance 99% of the time in Birthright, then in Conquest normal I did mostly attack stance because honestly you needed the extra attacks and actions to make it. The exceptions were if someone was holding a checkpoint or if they were going against another unit in guard stance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
Mysticblade posted:Also asymmetric design is perfectly fine in FE? The AI is not the player and is not capable of the same level of intelligence as a human. Thus, it needs cheats to propose a decent challenge. Fire Emblem, at it's core, is pretty simple but there are plenty of things the AI won't realise that the player will. Not saying it doesn't need to give itself an advantage to compete with the average human player, just that that doesn't make said advantage not cheating. FoolyCharged posted:No? Except enemy units in Fire Emblem generally follow the same rules as the player; the main advantages this series gives itself to challenge the player are numbers (there are pretty much ALWAYS more enemies than deployment slots, especially if you include reinforcements) and, to varying degrees, higher stats than you're expected to have by the point you get there (to force you to use your units wisely). When enemies blatantly ignore the player's rules AS THE EXCEPTION (like Iago's "use staves infinitely" which is, from what I've seen, exclusive to him), those units are cheating because, generally speaking, enemies follow the SAME RULES AS THE PLAYER. To use the poker comparison again, most hands (generic enemies) give the machine six cards and one SPECIFIC hand (Iago) additionally switches the machine, and ONLY the machine, to draw poker (his immunity to the "limited usage of staves" rule). Or, to turn your Starcraft comparison back on you, one player starts with pre-constructed buildings in addition to their hatchery (or racial equivalent), additional starting currency, a better starting location, and/or scripted unit spawning (the various races being loosely comparable to Fire Emblem's class system, with each race being equivalent to a Fire Emblem team that primarily relies on one class... or maybe weapon triangle corner; pick the analogy you feel more appropriate). "I make the rules" is the ultimate cheat, because anyone who tells you otherwise is in violation of any rule you make up to give yourself an unfair advantage (for example, the only thing stopping the guy who makes the rules from declaring that anyone who plays against him automatically loses is the fact that nobody would play with him if he did so). Let us not forget: Wars have been started over this sort of thing. IN REAL LIFE. (Probably not anything petty like the rules of a game, but a country's laws are similar enough to apply to this conversation.) Or, to keep it to pure gaming, if the player who invented the game and thus makes the rules unilaterally declares that he gets twice as many points for the same actions as any other player, you're probably not gonna play with him anymore even if he only scores half as often, because he's giving himself an unfair advantage and thus cheating. Point is, as I mentioned before, you guys are using a double standard (things that are cheating for the player are fair when done by the computer because it's the computer), while I am judging both sides by the SAME standard (anything that is cheating when done by the player is cheating when done by the computer) and consciously FORGIVING it for cheating IN CERTAIN WAYS so it can keep up. The only possible way for something to be not cheating is for both sides to start perfectly even in starting resources of every kind (in Fire Emblem terms, start with perfectly identical units, such as, hypothetically speaking, a Fire Emblem Awakening map where you have Robin, Chrom, Lissa, and Frederick, each of them with a Second Seal or Master Seal and a high enough level to use it, and your enemies are all perfect copies of them right down to their equipment, with no additional members) AND follow exactly the same rules throughout the game (continuing the example, both sides are either capable of leveling up if they perform well enough or incapable of leveling up at all, both sides follow the same death rules, and so on); if one player is exempt from even one rule (say, one side in my example ALSO gets a baseline Donnel), that player is cheating even if everyone else agrees to it. inthesto posted:Man, fighting games would make your head explode. While it's true that I don't generally like fighting games (not the competitive type), the most appropriate metaphor to use with them to illustrate my point is comparing the playable version of a character to its boss-only version. Two players picking two different characters is perfectly legit because either player could have selected the character the other is using and both are intended to be relatively even (in the vein of one player using Xander as a Great Knight while another leaves him as a Paladin, with each of them being statistically identical while using the same class); one player picking one character while the other uses a code to use the boss version OF that character (who is far more powerful than the player is meant to have access to due to being a boss, and often has moves which the legitimately-playable version can't use) is NOT (Xander as a Paladin versus a version of him using a hypothetical enemy-exclusive super-class which gives +10 to every stat and cap relative to Paladin and has the entire weapon triangle at A-rank... which happens to ALSO be named Paladin).
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
 http://www.strawpoll.me/13196712
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
CptWedgie, you seem really mad about the definition of 'cheating' in FireEmblem, which could be semantic or opinion, depending on where you stand. Maybe you should take a break?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
At this point you ought to just throw together the most ridiculous-looking Corrin(e) the character-creator will let you generate. Whatever the other merits of the game, there's no dignity to the story worth preserving.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
CptWedgie posted:"I make the rules" is the ultimate cheat, because anyone who tells you otherwise is in violation of any rule you make. So we should sit down with intsys and hold a committee to determine the fair rules of every game they make? Someone has to write them. quote:Point is, as I mentioned before, you guys are using a double standard (things that are cheating for the player are fair when done by the computer because it's the computer), while I am judging both sides by the SAME standard. Yes and our point is that your way is stupid because the computer rather openly isnt playing the same game as you and that calling amything that isnt a lovely boring mirror match cheating is retarded. quote:The only possible way for something to be not cheating is for both sides to start perfectly even in starting resources So the ai cheats by existing in a non boring fashion?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
oh man, Bowser is such cheating in Mario. I can't jump on him!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:45
|
|