Fire Emblem need some innovation don't you think so ?

[xXIke-SamaXx]

Fire Emblem a great franchise of gaming in the nintendo system,got a handful number of fans,hardcore game to the most,tactic is you only weapon and it got one of the best characters cast i ever seen in "a video game. But there is one big problem and that's it "how much does this game appeal to gamers?","How known the name Fire Emblem is outside the houses of the franchise fans?","How much simulating this game is ?" these are some of the question I want to answer and give some solution (based on my opinion).


First I shall introduce Fire Emblem to you :

Fire Emblem is a franchise that involve strategic game play and it's known as the father of turnbased RPG gaming and it was a hit in japan although the first 6 games didn't see the light in US even though the 6th game featured a character which we all know as Smash fans "Roy". The franchise begun it's life in a system called the Famicom (NES in US) the first game was titled Fire Emblem: Ankoku Ryū to Hikari no Tsurugi (Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon and the Blade of Light) it was released at November 20, 1990
.It was received well in japan but it never saw light in the US because you know nintendo alway skeptical about releasing hit games in japan to the US (to not become a Raderscope-esqu).Anyways the first game starred your lovable tiara prince Marth.
(the first and third game got remakes on the DS make to not waste your time playing the famicom ROM and look for translation instead go play the DS ROM if you were intrested).After this game came 9 more games with different stories and 2 remakes.



Characters most people know from Fire Emblem:

With the help from Super Smash Bros. Melee which featured Roy from Fire Emblem: The Sword of Seals (only for japan) and Prince Marth the main protagonist of the first original Fire Emblem with these factors the 7th installment of the franchise came to the US with strong steps ready to be translated.


Marth :

(that's the latest design for marth too bad it wasn't included in brawl)


Roy :

Lyndis (the assist trophy chick)

Ike :

(Young Ike)

(3 years older better fit for smash TBH)

(that was a hell long of an introduction sorry for that )


Let's get into business :

Fire Emblem have a load of characters (you can make 5 fighting games with 40 character each at least from the rooster of Fire Emblem)
but of course they all differ in role but considering big roles Fire Emblem have a lot of characters with big roles and mostly different from each other. The point is Fire Emblem got a great deal of great characters with personalities,great stories,great mythology and have a big fun factor.Than we must ask ourselves that question "Why than the franchise is unpopular ?" the answer is are two simple words "Strategy+Boring" a lot of gamers don't tend to give this genre a chance and I will consider myself one of them before (but thank goodness pokemon was sold out and I had to buy a game at the time and I got stuck with Fire Emblem and it was one of the few games that I didn't regret buying) well to sell well the franchise need to do spin-offs than of course you have a question in your mind "What do you mean with spin-offs" I mean they need to give the series games that are not strategy oriented in e.g : If I were responsible of Fire Emblem I will make a game that is all about Fighting where a mix of Fire Emblem characters join in a fight between each other and I'm sure this thing will boost the reputation of the franchise.Another example of a spin-off : Action-RPG game that let you as Ike (he is the only character that I know in Fire Emblem that fits in this genre because the ending of his story

Spoiler

He leaves everyone and venture the unknown lands

and it's all about slashing and hacking with Ike leveling him and make the game pure to the core.

To be continued.....

 

[Spire]

They just need to break the turn-based system. Make it a free-flowing action-packed series about all-out war, whilst getting to know a ton of characters. Take the transition from the Final Fantasy Tactics subseries to Final Fantasy XII. They exist in the same world (known colloquially as the Ivalice Alliance) so they are all part of the same canon. However, while the Tactics games are turn-based, FFXII was not. It was more or less a real time zoned action-RPG, similar to Phantasy Star Online in many regards. It properly translated the tactics of FFT into a streamlined adventure with a hint of turn-based fighting in the pacing of battle itself. This kind of transition is what Fire Emblem needs. FE needs to be Nintendo's darker, grittier fantasy series (as opposed to Zelda which is more colorful and whimsical).

 

[Johnny_C13]

Majora's Mask clearly demonstrated that Zelda CAN be dark, serious, and poignant.

I think in terms of turn-based gaming on the Nintendo platform(s), the Advance Wars series would be the more broad one (if they ever continue it), while FE would be geared towards players looking for a more serious, heavy-plotted game experience.

That being said, I do like the idea of breaking the turn-based system... a little. I'd like to see Nintendo try a hybrid of the system. Say, the game plays as it always plays when you're managing your troups' movements, but when you do engage in battle, you gain direct control of your unit. (Think Brutal Legend, but with more structure and basically more than one playable character, and no RTS thing). Or hey, better yet: make it an RTS! (Ok, maybe not... )

 

[Deleted member]

I strongly disagree on changing the turn based system. While Fire Emblem does need innovation to stay afloat in the modern market, changing the battle system is not the way.

I don't know about other people, but I play Fire Emblem kind of like chess. I examine every move and every possible outcome, and make a logical decision based on my knowledge of the game. Changing that after 12 games would be unwise.

I think a more modern time period and great storytelling is in order to keep Fire Emblem unique from other strategy games. Modernizing games has worked for other series (Call of Duty, Final Fantasy, etc.) so why not Fire Emblem?

 

[Rutger]

Being the Fire Emblem fan that I am, I would not like a genre shift. They can improve the game without changing the core mechanics, instead make the characters more customizable and add new mechanics.


A fighting game on the side would be awesome though.

 

[xXIke-SamaXx]

I strongly disagree on changing the turn based system. While Fire Emblem does need innovation to stay afloat in the modern market, changing the battle system is not the way.
Answer: I didn't said anything about changing the turn based system I just said how awesome would it be to have a fighting Fire Emblem game where it uses Fire Emblem rules or
I don't know about other people, but I play Fire Emblem kind of like chess. I examine every move and every possible outcome, and make a logical decision based on my knowledge of the game. Changing that after 12 games would be unwise.
Answer: It's not a it's just a Spin-off series like Final Fantasy tactics or Final Fantasy dissidia.
I think a more modern time period and great storytelling is in order to keep Fire Emblem unique from other strategy games. Modernizing games has worked for other series (Call of Duty, Final Fantasy, etc.) so why not Fire Emblem?

Answer : No Way Final Fantasy for me got ruined once they modernized from middle ages and Fire Emblem wouldn't be the same for me once they do that (except if they did a mix between steam ages and middle ages that would be awesome)

^
All comments are on quote

 

[teva]

I'd also be mad if they decided to change it from turn based to something else. I am still mad that they are kind of taking final fantasy away from turn based, I prefer no movement on the battlefield besides a giant leap across to smack the other person in the face. It's why i loved the final fantasy series and all other turn based RPGs, they were unique for that.

 

[Deleted member]

I'd also be mad if they decided to change it from turn based to something else. I am still mad that they are kind of taking final fantasy away from turn based, I prefer no movement on the battlefield besides a giant leap across to smack the other person in the face. It's why i loved the final fantasy series and all other turn based RPGs, they were unique for that.

Wait, what? The Final Fantasy series has only had 4 out of their 14 (15 if you count X-2) games be turn based. Final Fantasy is actually known for their ATB system, and has only released one turn based game in the last 20 years.

ON TOPIC: I wonder if any more Fire Emblem games will even be made. Demand doesn't seem too high, and sales have been unspectacular. Also, hardcore strategy games directly conflict with Nintendo's "anyone can play" image.

 

[Johnny_C13]

ON TOPIC: I wonder if any more Fire Emblem games will even be made. Demand doesn't seem too high, and sales have been unspectacular. Also, hardcore strategy games directly conflict with Nintendo's "anyone can play" image.

It would seem Nintendo lost faith to the franchise in NA/Europe... since the DS remake of the second chapter of Marth's story doesn't look like it will get released here (it released last year in Japan).

But I'm sure they will continue to make 'em in Japan. Sales of the series over there are significantly better.