After getting second place in the MARTH competition, I had planned on polishing and bugfixing my entry before making a full public release. I never really got around to that, so instead I just decided to release the hack as-is so that it can at least be played. I did remove some weapons/skills that I knew caused softlocks, but that’s the extent of the changes. And so I present Fire Emblem: Into Madness!
Fire Emblem Heroes-based combat, including unit colours and a buffed weapon triangle
16(+1?) playable characters, each with unique weapon and skill layouts
There is no minimum number of chapters a hack has to be to be a worthy hack. The arbitrary standard set by you does not warrant a comment from you. If you’re not in the market for a one chapter hack, fine. But don’t complain about the existence of one chapter hacks, short experiences are valuable in their own right. Have you ever heard to six word short story “for sale, baby shoes never worn”? If even 6 words have value to others and can be analyzed to exhaustion then there is no reason a one chapter hack can not be the same way.
This is just spreading useless hate based off of nothing but an arbitrary standard. When talking about it, you didn’t care about the hack’s actual contents but rather the surface level appearance of it. The comment you made was less than worthless to not only the creator, but also anyone looking at this post. If you don’t have anything constructive to say then do not post.
First of all, I apologize to the author (and only to him) of this hack, if my words were too harsh and provocative; in reality they expressed surprise and disappointment.
Instead, to those who intervened and attacked me, replying that mine was a constructive criticism, which implicitly suggested adding a few chapters to make it become a complete game (with storyline and all), but now I understand that It was a simple proof of concept , so that’s fine.
Why all this negative controversy over slightly provocative and ironic words; these have awakened interest in this thread and opened a comparison of opinions. Isn’t this a positive result?
And then in what I wrote there is not a shadow of offense or malice, as instead appears later towards me. I advise someone to be more open-minded and receptive to those who think and judge differently.
For the rest, I apologize again to the author and promise that I will try his innovative hack to judge it with full knowledge of the facts.
For context, there was competition called MARTH, where the gimmick was that hackers would enter a one chapter hack. This hack was created for the competition, and so was designed around only having one chapter. MARTH hacks tend to be quite longer than a single normal FE map because of this, but it will still be pretty short.
There was absolutely nothing constructive about it. You offered no ideas or good, informed recommendations.
Is the game not labeled complete in bold already? There is no set definition of a “complete” game, other than what the creator decides. You could make the same argument for making a 15 chapter hack over 30.
it says in the title “One Chapter Hack” any disappointment over it should be kept to yourself, as the one singular chapter aspect is integral to the hack’s identity right now as it is shown.
one chapter does not equate to a proof of concept. It does not say as such in the OP, don’t assume that it has inherently less value than a multi-chapter hack and a proof of concept would be the only reason a one chapter hack would be done.
They were negative words based not off of constructive criticism, but off of the base length, you had no idea of the hack’s actual contents and still yet chose to post negativity.
your negativity was not seeking a positive result, and it did not bring a positive result.
Oh please. Nothing you said was constructive. You don’t have the privilege of having your opinion be respected by others if you yourself don’t even show projects that people put real time and effort into the bare minimum amount of respect. You are not above this hack, and you are not above us.
@Nikokaro reading the first post and title should have been enough to inform you what this project was about. Your initial comment was fairly dismissive and unecessary; like others have stated if you had nothing to add outside of a backhanded insult to the creator
Then it shouldn’t have been posted. Had you left this part out, I doubt this sort of reaction would have ever occurred. I’m unsure what your following post was trying to achieve; the right response was to simply apologize and move on.
@vilk I understand your frustration, but the rules go both ways;
(Now, if this was a healthy conversation or not, debatable)