Support NeoGAF

[Emitan]

My Gameboy is Skynet. You have no idea. NO IDEA.

 

[Drkirby]

The CPU cheats in the since that it has access to information the player doesn't.

 

[MuddyDonut]

DoR, goes back to a more basic approach regarding CO's, and revamps the battle system as well. Air and naval combat get completely overhauled with the introduction of a few key units. Lessens the impact of infantry walls, and has some cool new ground units. Has a pretty cool campaign as well, even if it lacks all the extras DS had.

The campaign for Days of Ruin had nothing going for it, the interesting characters are not there and the charm is non existent, the only reason I played through it was because of the gameplay. The extras are gone, like you said, and I know that the tag power is indeed overpowered, buy it is exhilarating when you use it to completely destroy your enemy or your enemy uses it against you to completely change the tide of battle. Also, judging by my playtime I enjoyed and played more of Dual Strike than Days of Ruin.

 

[BatDan]

Okay, thanks for the tips. I'll just make sure people stay alive and be careful.

 

[Jintor]

The campaign for Days of Ruin had nothing going for it, the interesting characters are not there and the charm is non existent, the only reason I played through it was because of the gameplay. The extras are gone, like you said, and I know that the tag power is indeed overpowered, buy it is exhilarating when you use it to completely destroy your enemy or your enemy uses it against you to completely change the tide of battle. Also, judging by my playtime I enjoyed and played more of Dual Strike than Days of Ruin.

Out of interest, did you play Days of Ruin or Dark Conflict?

Because Dark Conflict's translation was by far the worst of the two.

 

[Codeblue]

Stupid question but what's the "correct" way to play Fire Emblem?
I know the main rule is "don't let anyone die".

I might start with Shadow Dragon contrary to what people think of it.

Shadow Dragon first would actually be a really good choice, since it gives you a chance to experience it without the expectations FE7-11 brought about. If you don't like it, just know that it gets way better.

 

[MuddyDonut]

Out of interest, did you play Days of Ruin or Dark Conflict?

Because Dark Conflict's translation was by far the worst of the two.

Days of Ruin

 

[Basileus777]

I've been playing through the GC/Wii Fire Emblem games for the first time recently. Even on hard, PoR was such an easy game, the last 1/3 of the game became really boring because of this. I found a save online to unlock hard mode for my first play-though of RD, and thankfully it seems to be more difficult so far. Though I imagine it will become much easier later on once I get access to some overpowered characters.

 

[mjemirzian]

Unfortunately the 3 most difficult FE releases are in Japan only. FE5, FE9 Mania mode (which was cut out of the NA version), and Mystery of the Emblem DS.

 

[Boney]

The campaign for Days of Ruin had nothing going for it, the interesting characters are not there and the charm is non existent, the only reason I played through it was because of the gameplay. The extras are gone, like you said, and I know that the tag power is indeed overpowered, buy it is exhilarating when you use it to completely destroy your enemy or your enemy uses it against you to completely change the tide of battle. Also, judging by my playtime I enjoyed and played more of Dual Strike than Days of Ruin.

Did you see the War Room conversations?

Those are hilarious

 

[Jintor]

I'm gonna start an LTTP on Days of Ruin when I finish it. I only got it a week ago (I had Dark Conflict but the translation was so banal I ended up trading it in) and I'm enjoying it quite a bit.

 

[Vuffster]

Don't post much, but where Advance Wars is concerned, Dual Strike is easily my favorite. I don't blame people for thinking the dual CO Powers thing is overpowered, because it is. But every other AW game often ends up playing out too much like a puzzle game rather than a strategy game. I don't enjoy trying a mission over and over and over to figure out the correct moves for the first five turns, which I *have* to follow if I want to even have a chance to win. And a lot of AW missions, especially ones in which you can't build additional units, end up like that, or pretty darn close.

Dual Strike, through the dual CO Powers and CO leveling system, let you play as your favorite COs regularly, and thus you can actually focus on using your preferred strategies. The almost-puzzle-game problem is practically non-existent. And it's not like the AI doesn't get to use the dual CO Powers against you.

 

[mjemirzian]

Don't post much, but where Advance Wars is concerned, Dual Strike is easily my favorite. I don't blame people for thinking the dual CO Powers thing is overpowered, because it is. But every other AW game often ends up playing out too much like a puzzle game rather than a strategy game. I don't enjoy trying a mission over and over and over to figure out the correct moves for the first five turns, which I *have* to follow if I want to even have a chance to win. And a lot of AW missions, especially ones in which you can't build additional units, end up like that, or pretty darn close.

Dual Strike, through the dual CO Powers and CO leveling system, let you play as your favorite COs regularly, and thus you can actually focus on using your preferred strategies. The almost-puzzle-game problem is practically non-existent. And it's not like the AI doesn't get to use the dual CO Powers against you.

Puzzles are strategy. You're professing that you like games with lower amounts of strategy to figure out than rather than higher amounts.

 

[Vuffster]

Puzzles are strategy. You're professing that you like games with lower amounts of strategy to figure out than rather than higher amounts.

I disagree. When there's only one solution that you have to discover via trial and error, that's a puzzle, and the AW games often include a lot of that. Actual strategy involves significantly more flexibility, and a lot less "Okay, the AI is going to do x, y, and z on turns 1-3. Now that I know that, I'll start over and do a, b, and c."

 

[mjemirzian]

I disagree. When there's only one solution that you have to discover via trial and error, that's a puzzle, and the AW games often include a lot of that. Actual strategy involves significantly more flexibility, and a lot less "Okay, the AI is going to do x, y, and z on turns 1-3. Now that I know that, I'll start over and do a, b, and c."

You are talking about the lack of strategy allowing the player to do whatever they want and still win. Strategy is the finding of an optimal solution to a stated goal given the choices available. The more you can do whatever you want and still win (or utilize imbalanced features), the less strategy is involved. It's all underlying mathematics. This is the same garbage tossed around when people start talking about Disgaea, a perfect example of a game with a high amount of strategic depth (options) but almost no strategic difficulty (problems requiring a specific strategic solution), because almost anything you can do will win in most cases. See SRPG 101 please.

 

[Ranger X]

Each time I see this thread it reminds myself that I shouldn't wish to play this game before NOA confirms it's coming over.

((((((((

 

[Vuffster]

You are talking about the lack of strategy allowing the player to do whatever they want and still win.

I never said anything about "allowing the player to do whatever they want and still win." I did say that players should have a certain amount of flexibility, and that actual strategy is a lot more about dynamic response and adaptation to circumstances than solving a rigid puzzle.

Strategy is the finding of an optimal solution to a stated goal given the choices available. The more you can do whatever you want and still win, the less strategy is involved. It's all underlying mathematics.

But again, when you have to discover the "optimal solution" by multiple attempts in order to win, that's not really strategy so much as trial-and-error. In any real-life strategic situation, you don't get multiple chances without consequences, so having a plan, executing it, preparing for contingencies, and adapting on the fly are paramount. I don't think "strategy" means such different things in real-life vs. video games as your definitions would indicate.

(or utilize imbalanced features)

Edit to your edit: And "imbalanced features" by your definition seem to be those that give the games dynamism and make them less puzzle-like.

See SRPG 101 please.

Sorry, but referencing a giant and often-patronizing article written by yourself isn't the best way to persuade people.

We clearly disagree on the nature of strategy, and that's fine. It's late; I'm not getting into some big argument about this.

 

[Jintor]

I think the main problem is that in Advance Wars the computer is a cheating bastard

YOU CAN'T SEE INTO WOODS, COMPUTER, STOP KNOWING WHERE ALL MY UNITS ARE

 

[MushroomSamba]

I think the main problem is that in Advance Wars the computer is a cheating bastard

YOU CAN'T SEE INTO WOODS, COMPUTER, STOP KNOWING WHERE ALL MY UNITS ARE

Ugh, fog of war maps. Can't stand 'em. It's an SRPG trope I'd like to see banished altogether.

 

[Giolon]

I just realized that I own at least 4 Fire Emblem games that I need to beat...2 that I haven't even started.

 

[Jintor]

Ugh, fog of war maps. Can't stand 'em. It's an SRPG trope I'd like to see banished altogether.

I don't mind them against humans, but computers ALWAYS fucking cheat. It's an AI limitation, I guess.

 

[mjemirzian]

I did say that players should have a certain amount of flexibility, and that actual strategy is a lot more about dynamic response and adaptation to circumstances than solving a rigid puzzle.

But again, when you have to discover the "optimal solution" by multiple attempts in order to win, that's not really strategy so much as trial-and-error. In any real-life strategic situation, you don't get multiple chances without consequences, so having a plan, executing it, preparing for contingencies, and adapting on the fly are paramount. I don't think "strategy" means such different things in real-life vs. video games as your definitions would indicate.

Sorry, but referencing a giant and often-patronizing article written by yourself isn't the best way to persuade people.

What you're talking about is dealing with randomness when figuring out an optimal strategy. If a puzzle is 100% deterministic it still involves figuring out a strategy. Trial and error has nothing to do with whether a challenge is strategic or not or how much strategy is involved in solving it.

Your definitions are absurd and you can't tell the difference between depth/balance and difficulty. It's especially ridiculous that you use the word "actual" to try to refer to deterministic non-random strategy as "not real" strategy. Deterministic strategy doesn't become "false" because you think randomness is better. Trial and error to figure out an optimal strategy doesn't make that strategy "false".

I wrote that article so I wouldn't have to explain concepts in detail to every person who starts making wrong statements. And then you devolve into ad homenim attacks and derision.

 

[ixix]

What you're talking about is dealing with randomness when figuring out an optimal strategy. If a puzzle is 100% deterministic it still involves figuring out a strategy. Trial and error has nothing to do with whether a challenge is strategic or not or how much strategy is involved in solving it.

Your definitions are absurd and you can't tell the difference between depth/balance and difficulty. It's especially ridiculous that you use the word "actual" to try to refer to deterministic non-random strategy as "not real" strategy. Deterministic strategy doesn't become "false" because you think randomness is better. Trial and error to figure out an optimal strategy doesn't make that strategy "false".

I wrote that article so I wouldn't have to explain concepts in detail to every person who starts making wrong statements. And then you devolve into ad homenim attacks and derision.

The internal mechanics of video games are almost completely opaque to the player. A heavily or entirely deterministic game in the vein of the typical console strategy title will inherently favor the AI simply by dint of this fact, and will leave a player with little recourse but to try various actions until they ultimately arrive at the pre-determined sequence that will grant them victory and permit them to progress in the game. This is the impetus for the near-universal practice of reducing the impact of pure determinism by introducing random chance, and for diluting the negative impacts on the player making an incorrect choice.

This is a basic concept, and it's clear that it is what the post you were responding to was criticizing in reference to Advance Wars. It's an obfuscated deterministic system that grants insufficient leniency to player error. It's not an unreasonable criticism, and it was clearly elucidated in context. It's certainly not the sort of comment that warrants launching a condescending prescriptivist broadside.

If you think that the common usage of certain terms that come up in these discussions is too vague to be of use that's certainly your prerogative. But if you want to promote precision in language by fostering the adoption of your preferred terminology then haranguing people who fail to live up to your narrow definitions of what constitutes acceptable usage of a term -- especially when the idea being communicated was by no means unclear -- is completely the wrong way to go about it.

 

[krYlon]

My cat's name is Mittens

 

[MuddyDonut]

Did you see the War Room conversations?

Those are hilarious

Cannot remember them at all
Edit: Man i cannot fucking wait for Fire Emblem, I am hungry for this!!!

 

[Nix]

I just wet myself. Lord, let this be mighty, and a string of SRPG's to follow. Shining Force for one.

I always group them together for some reason. Must be the units 'gonna die, oh no! Now I have to send in more men to be a meatshield, oh no! Now I have to blitz to the objective.'

 

[Dash Kappei]

So glad they ditched the AWFUL spritework of the DS games, if they can't go back to GBA's level of awesome then I prefer the 3d route, actually having the overworld in 2d is super neat

 

[PokéKong]

Does Nintendo publicize total gameplay time for 3DS games yet? I remember always being surprised how consistently RD's play time was around the top 10 back when Kotaku would keep track of all those. (Does anybody else track that data now?)

I'm interested to see how well this game will do when compared to the likes of Pokémon and other huge time-waster handheld titles.

 

[Boney]

You can check out my guide here or a site with screenshots here. My highest AW Advance Campaign score was 991 but I heard recently that people have gotten 993.

Missed this. I got stuck in Kanbei's Error, map was just bs with fog of war and couldn't manage to make things fast enough before he conquered.

 

[jay]

I wrote that article so I wouldn't have to explain concepts in detail to every person who starts making wrong statements. And then you devolve into ad homenim attacks and derision.

Stating that your article is patronizing is not an ad-hominem attack, it is factual.

 

[Alexios]

Is Fire Emblem the game shown 20 seconds through in this 3DS lineup trailer (posted anywhere?)? Because it shows actual shadows, not blobs, for a much better result.

 

[Cosmo Clock 21]

Yeah it is (then it cuts to Musou gameplay right afterwards, lol)

 

[mjemirzian]

If you think that the common usage of certain terms that come up in these discussions is too vague to be of use that's certainly your prerogative. But if you want to promote precision in language by fostering the adoption of your preferred terminology then haranguing people who fail to live up to your narrow definitions of what constitutes acceptable usage of a term -- especially when the idea being communicated was by no means unclear -- is completely the wrong way to go about it.

I really don't care to argue whether you think difficult deterministic games like AW Advance Campaign are fair or not. Declaring an opinion to be a fact by using factual adverbs such as "actually", "truly", or "really" is the most common mistake I see made on message forums.

Stating that your article is patronizing is not an ad-hominem attack, it is factual.

Opinions can't be facts. Sounds like you haven't learned a thing from the article. It's my opinion that people who find it patronizing are the ones who need to learn the most from it.

 

[Alexios]

Weird they have such improvements shown within days then... Proper shadows make it look less jenky than the first footage.

 

[Basileus777]

Opinions can't be facts. Sounds like you haven't learned a thing from the article.

That article mostly consists of you proclaiming your own opinions as facts, which is why it's so amusing how often you go around looking down at other people's subjective opinions.

 

[Sammy Samusu]

More generic than a Friday night fuck.

 

[Macstorm]

More generic than a Friday night fuck.

But better than not getting anything or just playing alone, no?

 

[ixix]

I really don't care to argue whether you think difficult deterministic games like AW Advance Campaign are fair or not. Declaring an opinion to be a fact by using factual adverbs such as "actually", "truly", or "really" is the most common mistake I see made on message forums.

I am delighted to find out that you don't care to argue about fairness in deterministic games, because that is pretty much the exact diametric opposite of the sort of conversation I would have any interest in ever having. This sentiment has nothing to do with the passage you are quoting, however.

My criticism was with the fact that you are trying to convince people to use a set of terms you have defined for discussing strategy games, and you are doing so by attempting to browbeat them into adherence. This is pretty much the absolute worst possible means to accomplish your ostensible objective. Adoption of language just doesn't work that way.

Opinions can't be facts. Sounds like you haven't learned a thing from the article. It's my opinion that people who find it patronizing are the ones who need to learn the most from it.

Take this, for example. You are defending your article from an accusation that it is is patronizing by implying that person calling it patronizing is too dumb to understand it. That is incredibly patronizing. It's practically the reference implementation of patronizing condescension.

If you want people to adopt your terminology for talking about this subject then taking them to task for using adverbs in a way that you do not approve of isn't the way to go about it. This tack you're adopting of brusquely hypercorrecting every perceived transgression against cold, hard logic is not an approach worth pursuing.

 

[mjemirzian]

how often you go around looking down at other people's subjective opinions.

I point out when someone is declaring an opinion to be a fact. This is not the same as "looking down on an opinion". I'd rather not know about whatever delusions, level of intelligence, or mental state brought you to that conclusion.

My criticism was with the fact that you are trying to convince people to use a set of terms you have defined for discussing strategy games, and you are doing so by attempting to browbeat them into adherence. This is pretty much the absolute worst possible means to accomplish your ostensible objective. Adoption of language just doesn't work that way.

Mistaking opinions for facts is related to basic grammar and English. It can be applied to any medium that mixes facts and opinions. It's not exclusive to "terms discussing strategy games".

You're taking words on a message board and trying to use that as evidence that the article contains patronizing language. I'd hope the absurdity of that claim is self evident. As for your interpretation of that post, in my opinion I don't agree.

 

[Jintor]

This is the most linguistically advanced bitchfight I've seen in a long time.

 

[ixix]

Aww, shucks. You're making me blush.

 

[Kunan]

I love everything I see, except for that girl's design. It will make the story impossible to take the slightest bit seriously.

Edit: that's a lot of big words up there

 

[MuddyDonut]

This is the most linguistically advanced bitchfight I've seen in a long time.

I love this shit too

 

[Boney]

I vote for vivi

no wait

he wants vivi dead, then the other guy

 

[Codeblue]

High School Vocab fight aside, does anyone know the origins of that table cloth looking thing on the female lead's head?

The closes thing I can come up with is this thing an Arab singer named Fairuz wore:

 

[ixix]

I'd rather not know about whatever delusions, level of intelligence, or mental state brought you to that conclusion.

This is also an excellent example of patronization.

Mistaking opinions for facts is related to basic grammar and English. It can be applied to any medium that mixes facts and opinions. It's not exclusive to "terms discussing strategy games".

You're taking words on a message board and trying to use that as evidence that the article contains patronizing language. I'd hope the absurdity of that claim is self evident.

I must confess to not seeing the self-evident absurdity in using words to make a judgement on language. Please explain it to me.

I'm hoping for a 50/50 split of Sapir-Whorf and solipsism, but feel free to surprise me.

I vote for vivi

no wait

he wants vivi dead, then the other guy

Everybody always assumes that I don't like Vivi just because I have an avatar called ihatevivi.gif. Nothing could be further from the truth. I simply wish that that soulless, dimwitted, spell-slinging automaton could get it through his dense mechanical skull that when you have a name consisting of a single two-letter syllable repeated twice that the correct order is vowel-consonant-vowel-consonant, not consonant-vowel-consonant-vowel.

Why can't I make him understand?

 

[VanillaCakeIsBurning]

Looks cool, although I'm not sure how I feel about the art style. Rizu's outfit looks out of place to be honest.

I will miss Senri Kita's work.

Regardless of that, I hope it does well.

 

[bon]

I think Rizu's problem is her haircut. Her outfit wouldn't look too bad if her hair wasn't so silly.

 

[JasonUresti]

This is also an excellent example of patronization.



I must confess to not seeing the self-evident absurdity in using words to make a judgement on language. Please explain it to me.

I'm hoping for a 50/50 split of Sapir-Whorf and solipsism, but feel free to surprise me.



Everybody always assumes that I don't like Vivi just because I have an avatar called ihatevivi.gif. Nothing could be further from the truth. I simply wish that that soulless, dimwitted, spell-slinging automaton could get it through his dense mechanical skull that when you have a name consisting of a single two-letter syllable repeated twice that the correct order is vowel-consonant-vowel-consonant, not consonant-vowel-consonant-vowel.

Why can't I make him understand?

The name Cici made you wrong several centuries ago.

 

[Zee-Row]

One of the things I hate about Fire Emblem are the chances that my character doesn't get a stat boost from leveling up at all. i hate having to reload saves just for the computer to get it right.