That statement has me wondering if this is all just marketing...
I'm just playing this now, after having played the previous 10 games in order. I remember people talking about some kind of S-Link Persona-ish system, and it's not there. People always said that was a big reason that the game sold so well, and I was always doubtful. But, now I even see that the system they're referring to isn't really much different than that of previous Fire Emblem games. It's just conversations between characters, which has been in quite a few of the...
I own #FE, but don't own a Wii U...because that's the only game I want for it...
I'm going to borrow my brother's Wii U to play it, and I'll buy one many years down the road, for cheap.
Yes. PS3 games are held back by Vita. Let this game shine on PS4, as much as a mid-tier game can.
I don't know how you make a list like this without Final Fantasy on it...
"They'll be fine as they already have their fans largely figured out."
ROFL! No, they don't. There are more blind industry leaders in the gaming industry than any other industry.
Sex does not always sell. If you take it too far, it pushes people away. Not everyone wants it to be a major selling-point of our video games. If that's a "major selling point", then I don't expect the game to be very good. At that point, I fell insulted, and feel that the publishers are trying to take advantage of people. It's like they're saying, "just throw some half-naked girls in there, and they'll buy whatever we give them".
That character is gone. I can no longer use him, even if he was my favorite character. He also vanishes from the story. It has nothing to do with the game being "harder" without that character. I'm similarly anal about getting hidden characters. If I miss one, I go back to a previous save.
Because they're permanently dead.
Thanks, but I already have a Gamecube, and a Wii (which also plays Gamecube games). I'll also be keeping an eye out for the NX reveal. If that's backwards compatible, that'll give me some incentive to jump back in with NX.
This isn't your own private "positive statements only" echo-chamber. Grow up.
ROFL! You're delusional, Square.
Well, I don't think it matters if it's turn-based or action, in that case. It just depends on how each individual game is designed.
Yeah, this is killing me. I have the Collector's Edition sitting on my shelf, but I don't own a Wii U. This is the only Wii U game I want, so I'm waiting until I can find a used one for ~$100. Of course, by that time, Persona 5 will probably have been out for quite a while.
I disagree. Everyone knows I want strategy in my games. But, I don't want to be required to have a completely flawless strategy 100% of the time. I don't want a single screw up to require me to reset the game. And, yes, that's exactly what it does. I'm not going to continue playing if a character permanently dies.
So, for me, it's just a time-waster.
I thought that's what you meant by this:
"You hit a wall unless you become more powerful. But in an action-RPG if you are really good it might let you play all the way through without leveling, like in the Souls series."
I agree that it will mostly be the die-hard fans that watch it. But, that's the problem. Square intended this to basically be a commercial for the game, and were okay with losing money on it. But, how does it work as a commercial, when only the die-hard fans are watching it? Those people will be buying the game anyway.
My issue is not that "older gamers > younger gamers"; it's that "older games > newer games". The modern industry is complete crap, and could very easily be course-corrected if industry leaders would pull their heads out of their asses.
I haven't seen a whole lot of improvement from Matsuda. Final Fantasy is in the middle of an identity crisis, and they're pumping out shovelware titles like World of Final Fantasy and I am Setsuna, thinking that they'll please the fans they abandoned. They don't even seem to understand why people love the types of games that made them a household name in the first place.
"Turn-based RPGs were a product of the hardware limitations of the time."
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Don't let people who don't like turn-based (the origination of that argument) pull the wool over your eyes. That's not even close to true. ARPGs and turn-based RPGs have coexisted since the 1970's. It had nothing to do with hardware. It was a design decision. They wanted them to be like pen and paper RPGs, like Dungeons & Dragons.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.