What would you like to see?

[FlamingZelda]

I wasn’t being combative…

EDIT: I agree it’s not right to shame players for how they choose to play a game. I haven’t really been around the casual mode shaming so it wasn’t on my mind in my post. I’ll agree there was lack of tact in my wording however.

I also now realize my " “tHaT’s YoUr OpInIoN!”" comment comes off as inflammatory, I didn’t mean that specifically targeted at you (theghostcreator), it was moreso a kneejerk pre-emptive response to the type of replies I usually get on FEU (and youtube and reddit, and pretty much the rest of the internet), and thus was meant to be targeted at the random passerby reading my post.

[LeskLyfeld]

point and despair at feu discourse

my main issue with ‘easy’ modes (or unintended modes altogether as games tend to have an ‘intended’ difficulty) is that the nuance often takes the fall in hopes to be more approachable/challenging.

That unit you designed to be your prime early game doubler? Easy mode might mean everyone else has an easier time doubling with higher offenses, so they fall, while ‘Hard-er’ modes might kill that doubling gap for them (with their bulk not warranting further use).

Difficulty toggles are not exactly my happiest thought in the sense of stat jackups or jackdowns, even less when they lead to “maybe I’ll reduce enemy amounts/spawns” as that can also lead to less exp gains and a potentially less leveled party to fight against enemies.

Casual modes feel like a better option than Easy toggles for “approachability”, and for anyone who considers that maybe this kills the concept of Fire Emblem permadeath, classic mode always remains a thing.

And we can reduce savestate stonks.

[Ysor]

I want to see casual mode players admit that playing with what is essentially a cheat code skews their perception of the game and that, in the context of Fire Emblem specifically, games cannot be “designed around casual mode” in any way. That’d be like if bowling was “designed around” the gutter guards, it would somewhat defeat the purpose. Not to say that casual players are not valid in their preferred way of playing the game, they are; they’re just not entitled to any respect beyond the fact that it is a decision they are allowed to make.

[LeskLyfeld]

@Ysor

That’d be like if bowling was “designed around” the gutter guards

Unlock the secret strike mode from Wii Bowling and we could have something

otherwise agreed

[DATonDemand]

I have a hard time knowing if this is sarcasm or not lmao

[Donlot]

@Ysor

Not to say that casual players are not valid in their preferred way of playing the game, they are; they’re just not entitled to any respect beyond the fact that it is a decision they are allowed to make.

I would agree here. I don’t really mind people playing on easy, casual, or normal mode unless they try to be all in your face about how big of an expert they are while doing so.

[theghostcreator]

@Ysor

Not to say that casual players are not valid in their preferred way of playing the game, they are; they’re just not entitled to any respect beyond the fact that it is a decision they are allowed to make.

Translated: “not to say that casual players are not valid, but they aren’t valid. Because I said so. Because this video game needs to be played my way for it to count.”

[NKORiko]

How did we get from thinking of things we wanna see more in hacks to roasting casual players LMAO.

[DATonDemand]

Yea. Can yall just like chill and let comments lie? Yall do realise it takes 2 to debate right?

[Ysor]

That’s not even remotely close to what I said. Let me reiterate what I said in a way that won’t go over your head.

You’re free to play the game however you like. I respect your decision to play in a way different to how I play. The way you enjoy the game is just as valid as how I enjoy the game and you are free to make any future decisions with regards to how you find that enjoyment. I respect your autonomy to make your own decisions, those decisions are fully valid.

But thats it all you get and from what I can tell that’s what you want. Casual mode is an alternative way to play fire emblem and I fully respect your choice to play that way.

What more could you possibly want?
(This is your chance to make a real argument. I’m begging you.)

[theghostcreator]

You want a real argument? Fine, let’s talk about tone.

@Ysor

dmit that playing with what is essentially a cheat code

@Ysor

in the context of Fire Emblem specifically, games cannot be “designed around casual mode” in any way.

@Ysor

That’d be like if bowling was “designed around” the gutter guards, it would somewhat defeat the purpose.

Your entire comment drips with antagonism and disrespect. Someone who thinks casual mode is a perfectly valid way to play wouldn’t make a false equivalence to bowling, or say it is a cheat code when it’s in reality no more a cheat code than playing on hard mode instead of maddening, or completely deny that Fire Emblem can’t be designed around casual mode (it can).

If you’re going to be this antagonistic towards people who play casual mode just admit that you don’t respect it, don’t pull this nonsense of essentially throwing shade at casual players for half a paragraph and then go “let me reiterate it in a way that won’t go over your head” (thanks btw) proceeds to say something completely different with much less blatant negativity “now make a real argument”.

If you want people to engage with what you’re trying to say, try not talking down to them or making your strong, strong distaste for what they enjoy at least less obvious, it goes a long way I assure you.

[Contro]

Figured I’d mention this before we get deeper into a slap fight.

@dancer_A

Please avoid:

• Name-calling.
• Ad hominem attacks.
• Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content.
• Knee-jerk contradiction.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’d rather this thread stay on topic and not hit the gutter. That’s what I would like to see.

[Seliost1]

Oh lord, I’m not going to ask what happened earlier but try to civil please? I wasn’t expecting anything like this happen from it haha…

[LeskLyfeld]

@theghostcreator

You want a real argument? Fine, let’s talk about tone.

@theghostcreator

Your entire comment drips with antagonism and disrespect.

@dancer_A

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But, remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

• Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content.

Anyways, now that I have my mandatory Mod Diss track, I do not believe with the notion of needing to be held back by decorum in order to voice an opinion.

It is a truthful statement that one of the pivotal points of Fire Emblem is its Perma-Death mechanic tied to unique individualized characters (to the point people like @FuriousHaunter say that Ironman is the intended gameplay).

Casual and Ironman as their “intended” gameplay are a contradictory statement as is.

Additionally, criticizing the concept of Casual modes as is is something entirely valid - as one can consider that it removes one of the pivotal stakes of Fire Emblem - mistakes taking a toll.

Thus it is, in my opinion, fine to hold Casual players/Easy Mode players on a different light when they put any arguments in regards to difficulty or how playable a hack is, as the ‘vanilla’ difficulty (or as intended) can be left unplayable as a consequence.

Some games take different outlooks on perma-death lately, with some holding all characters as a game over condition, while some instead asking you to keep everyone alive - and others giving you enough replacement tools in case your plays are suboptimal (ironman-friendly games)

Chastising Classic players due to them not being forced to respect Casual players despite games changing entirely with a mechanic change or stat swings is not justified behaviour.

Lesk out

[amema003]

Anyhoo, I’d like more platonic and familial paired endings, like Saleh & Myrrh or Duessel & Amelia in Sacred Stones.

[OverZealous]

I would love to see more stories that break away from conventional Fire Emblem storytelling. Nothing wrong with the typical “prince goes on a quest to stop evil empire from conquering the world by defeating the dark cult in charge”, but its just very simple, and feels more like a framing device to explain why you’re fighting in various locations rather than a story that wants to explore interesting themes.
Hacks like Drums of War really go the extra mile in grounding the story and making the world feel alive rather than being the narrative equivalent of Mario Odyssey.
As for gameplay, I think it would actually be fascinating to play a hack designed around permadeath not being a feature. Yeah, it is a core part of Fire Emblem’s identity, but its also a pretty contentious part at that. (Exhibit A: see the arguments above)
Something like Triangle Strategy, where every unit has an irreplacable niche that you can mix and match for different fights without needing to worry about redundancy. I also think that it would make for a far less punishing experience for many players who often choose to save state away deaths rather than play through them (myself included). I also generally prefer having a smaller cast of characters anyways, which would be easier to faciliate in such a game.

EDIT: Ooh, you know what else I’d love to see? More Puzzle hacks, where you have a cast of generics on every map that don’t carry over anything onto the next, and you have to try to win with the tools available to you. Something similar to Bandit Emblem, basically.

[Ysor]

Thread contribution:
I’d honestly like to see more early game female archers party splits in fire emblem. Not to be confused with a route split I want a 2 part chapter where you play the first with some of your units and the other half with the rest of them. Fire emblem never sold that whole large scale battle thing because we’re always severely outnumbered. I wanna see games lean more into the whole detached unit vibe.

Wall of text

@theghostcreator

You want a real argument?

Yes, finally!

@theghostcreator

Fine, let’s talk about tone.

A swing and a miss. We will come back to this though. I’ll start by responding to you, explaining why you’re wrong, and then clarifying and recontextualizing my original thought AGAIN.

@theghostcreator

say it is a cheat code when it’s in reality no more a cheat code than playing on hard mode instead of maddening,

See you seem to be conflating difficulty settings with gameplay settings, which is fair. It happens all the time. Lets think about how difficulty in fire emblem is selected in your favorite game Fire Emblem: Fates

Now casual may seem like a “Different difficulty” but its actually a completely separate mode because you can’t play on two difficulties at the same time. IT EVEN SAYS MODE. I called casual a cheat code because it undermines the challenge of fire emblem by changing how the game functions. Merriam Webster defines a “Cheat Code” as such:

Obviously its not a “Code” but games have togglable cheats all the time.
Why is casual mode a cheat code? Because it removes a set of lose conditions and an entire facet of the game difficulty. Fire emblem difficulty come from map design primarily but its also got resource management in the form of units and items. Lets do a direct comparison because the most people don’t grasp what the differences are. In vanilla when you lose a unit you lose, them, all their exp, their entire inventory, in some cases access to an entire class/prf/chapter/other unit, a deployment slot, and whatever supports they had with other party members. What do you lose on Casual? Nothing. Maybe a turn or 2 at most. So I we were to play the exact same, THE EXACT SAME mistakes and all. I’d get punished and you wouldn’t you no longer need to manage your resources, AT ALL. And if you do, you don’t have to do it carefully. THAT’S CHEATING. Infinite/Near Infinite resources is the most common cheat code there is, and its RIGHT THERE.

@theghostcreator

or completely deny that Fire Emblem can’t be designed around casual mode (it can).

Now normally when you make an argument, you support it. I made a statement, you made and argument against it. BUT YOU’RE WRONG ANYWAYS. WHY because we already established that casual mode undermines the resource management aspect but it also completely removes the Risk/Reward dynamic of fire emblem with NO EXCEPTION. You may say, “well what about restarting every time, that pretty much casual” and you’d still be wrong. You lose progress, the penalty for restarting the map is restarting the map. There’s no penalty to casual because there is no risk. A strategy game with no risk reward is hardly a challenge, we know this. Its why permadeath exists. Without it the fire emblem becomes a series of Mini, self contained challenges where you always have access to all your resources. Each map only really matters on its turn, the difficulty is no longer dynamic because the game no longer gets easier/harder depending on your performance.
Lesk says it best here:

@LeskLyfeld

Additionally, criticizing the concept of Casual modes as is is something entirely valid - as one can consider that it removes one of the pivotal stakes of Fire Emblem - mistakes taking a toll.

Fire emblem as it was “intended” would allow for a FINITE amount of mistakes before you could no longer complete the game. Your run DIES. If I’m designing a strategy game to have a challenge why would I account for your actions NOT having consequences. Why would I NOT punish bad strategies.

@theghostcreator

“let me reiterate it in a way that won’t go over your head” (thanks btw) proceeds to say something completely different with much less blatant negativity “now make a real argument”.

I wasn’t making fun of you or being antagonistic. I was serious. Lets read them both together shall we. I EVEN BROKE IT UP FOR YOU

@Ysor

Not to say that casual players are not valid in their preferred way of playing the game, they are

This sentence means the same thing as the one below. I admit that “preferred way of playing the game” is “valid”

Lets analyze it piece by piece and break it down as we go!

Column 1	Column 2
Not to say that	[I am not saying]
Casual players are not valid	[Casual players are invalid]
in their preferred way of playing the game	[by playing how they want]
they are	[they are fully valid]

Resynthesize!

[I am not saying][Casual players are invalid][by playing how they want][they are fully valid]

I say this again, four times.

You’re free to play the game however you like.

I respect your decision to play in a way different to how I play.

The way you enjoy the game is just as valid as how I enjoy the game and you are free to make any future decisions with regards to how you find that enjoyment.

I respect your autonomy to make your own decisions, those decisions are fully valid.

LETS DO THE SECOND HALF!

@Ysor

they’re just not entitled to any respect beyond the fact that it is a decision they are allowed to make.

Column 1	Column 2
they’re just not entitled	[Others are not required to provide]
to any respect beyond the fact	[anything further than]
that it is a decision they are allowed to make	[basic recognition and acceptance of their choice]

Resynthesize again!

Others are not required to provide][anything further than][basic recognition and acceptance of their choice]

What do you know I said that again twice

But that’s it all you get and from what I can tell that’s what you want.

Casual mode is an alternative way to play fire emblem and I fully respect your choice to play that way.

So when you read this

@Ysor

Not to say that casual players are not valid in their preferred way of playing the game, they are; they’re just not entitled to any respect beyond the fact that it is a decision they are allowed to make.

And “Translate” it into this

@theghostcreator

Translated: “not to say that casual players are not valid, but they aren’t valid. Because I said so. Because this video game needs to be played my way for it to count.”

I can only assume you either can’t read or didnt understand it. also this

@theghostcreator

proceeds to say something completely different

Proves my point. You didn’t understand it. It went your head as defined by the Merriam Webster thesaurus

You’re punching above your weight. Don’t.

@theghostcreator

a false equivalence to bowling

Sometimes I think you just talk to talk. The comparison is that gutter guards in bowling serve the same purpose as casual mode. It removes the biggest aspect of difficulty from the challenge. In bowling that’s the gutter; in Fire Emblem that’s unit death. Bowling with gutter guards it completely fine, its a single lane and other people don’t have to use them. Just like casual mode. But neither are designed around its use because it undermines the the challenge in such an invasive way. The gutter exists to pose a problem for the player. Players performances cannot be influenced by other players, just like in fire emblem. So the only thing stopping you from getting a perfect score is yourself. With gutter guards you will hit at least 2 pins every frame, you can’t lose. Just like in casual mode. “But wait” , you might think, “I can lose if my lord dies!” Yeah and you can still gutter ball with the guards up. That analogy was not an accident. My point with the analogy was it would serve no real purpose to create a challenge with no real lose condition if the goal of the challenge is to test a skill of some sort.

@theghostcreator

If you want people to engage with what you’re trying to say

I don’t want “people” to engage with me I want you to engage with me. Answer this question within the context of the discussion:

@Ysor

What more could you possibly want?

Another thing.

@theghostcreator

try not talking down to them or making your strong, strong distaste for what they enjoy at least less obvious, it goes a long way I assure you.

You seem to think I care if people think I don’t like them. Let me clarify I have no issue with casual players, I never have. With regards to specific people I also don’t care if the think I don’t like them. I’ll clarify it even more

I Don’t Like You @theghostcreator

You argue dirty, you’re passive aggressive, you’re needlessly condescending and you’re a hypocrite. You don’t get to tone police, at all. Don’t do it.

We will come back to this though
Remember that?

Your "Tone"

@theghostcreator

Imagine actively shaming players for choosing something you put in the game

@theghostcreator

Christ can’t go in any thread without the same five stale ass takes showing up unprompted

@theghostcreator

Random chance allows for emergent storytelling, if you were truly as “intellectual” as you sell your arguments to be then you’d at the very least try to understand why so many people find value on such randomness.

@theghostcreator

This is the last post I’m making on these asinine threads

@theghostcreator

I will say a lot of discussion about casual mode leads to people being so up their own ass about some notion of purity or challenge

To those who haven’t been paying attention here’s a recap:

RECAP

I make a statement, ghost cherry picks a part of that statement to misconstrue and mock. I clarify that part of the statement in so much detail that it cannot, in good faith be misconstrued and then pose a question toward ghost. Ghost then ignores that question, goes back to the original statement and then beings to address the tone of that statement rather than the content within it.

TL;DR Bro is running

Now either argue the point or don’t respond.

[Donlot]

@Ysor

Thread contribution:
I’d honestly like to see more early game female archers party splits in fire emblem. Not to be confused with a route split I want a 2 part chapter where you play the first with some of your units and the other half with the rest of them. Fire emblem never sold that whole large scale battle thing because we’re always severely outnumbered. I wanna see games lean more into the whole detached unit vibe.

I agree with both parts of your post, but i’ll only comment on the First one:
I absolutely agree and would love to see more party splits. I love to mention kaga games and i will have to mention tear ring saga once more here, but that’s just because it does a good job at this compared to say Radiant Dawn.

From a storytelling perspective a party split obviously gives you different perspectives so that’s great, be it different armies showing you that both of the countries fighting each other have their good and bad sides, or just two friends fighting for a common goal under different circumstances.

The other thing that may not be as apparent at first: You simply get to try out and use so many more units. Usually due to the way FE is designed you tend to never really train more than say 12-18 units at any given time. Maybe you’ll rotate your roster every now and again depending on the maps, but some units just hit the bench and stay there. Having split parties means you can up the amount of “actively” used characters to 24-36, which shows you so many more of a game’s often quite fun cast of characters, and makes extremely competitive deployment slots less competitive (just think of units like Miledy, Rutger or Haar, who can sometimes “hurt your mind” so to speak, to not use atleast a little bit).

That being said it is not super easy to implement as you’d essentially be developing two games in paralell to each other, while also having to somehow fit together again at times, or “unite” the two somehow so at the end.

Would still absolutely love to see more FE projects give this concept a try, even if not executed perfectly.

[LeskLyfeld]

@Ysor

Fire emblem never sold that whole large scale battle thing because we’re always severely outnumbered. I wanna see games lean more into the whole detached unit vibe.

While it might not exactly be what you look for, Swords and Peace has that, somewhat.

And joint chapters featuring 40+ units by the end of content (you only get half the preps, suffer)

[4bundy]

All the discussions itt aside, I agree when it comes to mainline games/traditional hacks that more or less strive to emulate them. But Server 72 ([LT] Server 72 [COMPLETE]) shows that you can make an “FE” game that’s balanced around casual mode, it fundamentally wouldn’t work in Classic Mode and even in “forced casual mode” it’s one of the most challenging FE-likes I’ve played. Although it is arguable if it can even still be called “FE” when a lot of the systems are very different, otoh a lot of the systems are still classic FE, so I think its worth mentioning as a counter argument.

Also I guess a game definitely can’t be balanced around both, if a game is reasonably completeable in permadeath mode, casual mode IS akin to a cheat code that makes the game a lot easier.