Muchi Muchi Pink
Member
Tactics Ogre holds the crown. FFT was a simplified version by the same dev team for the Final Fantasy crowd.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Fire Emblem or Final Fantasy Tactics?
- Thread starter Sajjaja
- Start date
Tactics Ogre holds the crown. FFT was a simplified version by the same dev team for the Final Fantasy crowd.
equippedwithtowel
Member
FE7 if you're gonna play it no death. Go big or go home.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
If we were talking "series" versus "series", then Fire Emblem takes it no contest--as FFT is the only thing worth talking about. But if you're talking FE7 vs. FFT, as you said, then Tactics blows that away. I love Lyn as much as the next Fire Emblem fan, but Tactics is a longer, more fun, more rewarding game than Fire Emblem 7.
I'M FINISHED!
Um exCUSE me Sakurai but CLEARLY the best choice for Smash Bros would be my fav niche character HOWEVER you are clearly INCOMPETENT and
The series with Marth and girl versions of him.
The styles and structure are pretty different. While they are both 'SRPGs' it really is like comparing apples to oranges.
I recently replayed through Fire Emblem (Rekka no Ken). Honestly I think it's better than Awakening in almost every facet. I wasn't too big on Awakening in the first place though.
I recently replayed through Fire Emblem (Rekka no Ken). Honestly I think it's better than Awakening in almost every facet. I wasn't too big on Awakening in the first place though.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Shining Force 
Nah seriously, FFTactics, the original (the GBA ones can die in a fire). I like Fire Emblem but it's often more frustrating than fun and the story is nowhere near as compelling. Also the FFT score is one of the best ever made.
Nah seriously, FFTactics, the original (the GBA ones can die in a fire). I like Fire Emblem but it's often more frustrating than fun and the story is nowhere near as compelling. Also the FFT score is one of the best ever made.
Taaacticssssss.
Also, I'm probably the last person to know, but just found out the other day that Matsuno directed Tactics Ogre, as well as the Ogre Battle games. Had always known him from FFT, FFXII, and Vagrant Story, and could "feel" the similarities with the Ogre games, but I never really connected the dots. So, for anyone saying that FFT is a poor mans TO, it's really just the prequel. And yeah, LUCT originally came out before FFT, but if you're referring to FFT as comparatively worse, I'm gonna assume you're going off the PSP version.
Also, I'm probably the last person to know, but just found out the other day that Matsuno directed Tactics Ogre, as well as the Ogre Battle games. Had always known him from FFT, FFXII, and Vagrant Story, and could "feel" the similarities with the Ogre games, but I never really connected the dots. So, for anyone saying that FFT is a poor mans TO, it's really just the prequel. And yeah, LUCT originally came out before FFT, but if you're referring to FFT as comparatively worse, I'm gonna assume you're going off the PSP version.
I have played both games many times and like FFT a lot more. The main thing is that it has a significantly more interesting job system. I also find the strategy element more interesting, because FFT has more diversity in what strategies are effective. Despite the fact that TO gives you more units to play with, you will find that more often than not you want to use the basic strategy of trying to lure the enemy in while hitting them with arrows and spells. This is exacerbated by the fact that archers are ridiculously overpowered in the PSP version. From an A/V perspective, FFT also has better music and graphical effects.
There are two areas where I would say that TO is better. First, it is a more consistently balanced game. FFT has a few very rough difficulty spikes in its first half and can get too easy near the end-game when you figure out how to really exploit some of the higher-level job skills. Second, with the PSP version I would say that TO has a more interesting narrative structure, letting you play around with alternate timelines. However, keep in mind that the story in TO can be pretty dry, even with the spruced up translation.
Ryouji Gunblade
Member
I love Fire Emblem, but I can't help being a grind-a-holic.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
FFT, for sure. While I love FFT and Advance Wars, FE occupies a space between the two games that I just can't get into.
Muchi Muchi Pink
Member
No, FFT is just super simplified in comparison. It's not even a secret, he said it himself. And while we're at check out Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume.
I think Fire Emblem is overall the better series. Normally this would be a no-brainer, because Path of Radiance is so good, but since you're playing the GBA games, it's a toss up.
I'd probably go for Matsuno's game for story and Intelligent Systems for gameplay. Depends on what you value more.
Great writing, story, characters, and music. Mediocre strategy game. Still worth playing, but there wasn't much strategy to the main game.
I'd probably go for Matsuno's game for story and Intelligent Systems for gameplay. Depends on what you value more.
Great writing, story, characters, and music. Mediocre strategy game. Still worth playing, but there wasn't much strategy to the main game.
tactics ogre and FE aint got one thing that makes FFT the real shining king of all games
all hail ramza buttpants
hahaha I always thought Ramza looked funny with his defined butt like that in Chapter 4. There's a reason the girl in the equipment shops was checking him out for real in that Chapter.
Prequel? What?
thereisnoif
Member
Definitely FFT because the story and job system rock.
MissDeviling
Member
TO had a great narrative and localization, but it wasn't very balanced or slick, gameplay-wise. A large portion of maps have kill-the-leader objectives, but for those you can just rush in with one winged character, Canopus, and let the mooks hack away at you without a care in the world, since it takes so many hits to go down. The rout-all maps, on the other hand, take far too long because of those animations you can't skip/speed up. The maps just take too long in general and main game isn't challenging. Many classes are useless, and levelling them is a chore.
I've found the FE series really enjoyable because you do end up using a lot of the classes and try to use them to their strengths. Animations can be sped up or skipped, maps have careful enemy placement and chokepoints, walls, fortresses, etc. Challenge is definitely there. Story is ass compared to TO, though. I'd recommend FE12, 7, 8, or 9. 13's map design can be awful so I don't recommend it.
Not sure about FFT since I haven't played it. But if its gameplay is like TO, I would recommend FE then. The SMT Devil Survivor games are OK too.
I've found the FE series really enjoyable because you do end up using a lot of the classes and try to use them to their strengths. Animations can be sped up or skipped, maps have careful enemy placement and chokepoints, walls, fortresses, etc. Challenge is definitely there. Story is ass compared to TO, though. I'd recommend FE12, 7, 8, or 9. 13's map design can be awful so I don't recommend it.
Not sure about FFT since I haven't played it. But if its gameplay is like TO, I would recommend FE then. The SMT Devil Survivor games are OK too.
And with worse mechanic, it's been a while so I don't know if they change anything in the PSP version, but I used to have 2 people sitting in the corner hitting each other like a fucking idiot. And after you get Orlandu, everything became a fucking joke because he's just too OP.
"Super" is a strong word to use. It isn't like TO is EVE. If anything, I'd say it was streamlined, and for the better. There were a lot of bulky, roundabout elements in TO that I'm glad got pared down for FFT.
OverdriveOtaku
Member
Haven't owned many of the recent Nintendo consoles, so haven't played Fire Emblem.
Have played FF Tactics and I personally really like it, as well as Disgaea.
Have played FF Tactics and I personally really like it, as well as Disgaea.
thatdenalidude
Neo Member
I prefer Fire Emblem for the characters and the battle system. But, there is a ton of fun in making the most broken team you can in Tactics. Way back I remember making a Paladin dual wielding Excaliburs that would cover people and counter.
I think he means it came out before FFT, TO on PSP is the remake version of original TO:LUCT on SNES.
As a franchise? Fire Emblem, easily. It's been a pretty consistently-great series since the SNES days, bar one or two stinkers.
Final Fantasy Tactics is a supremely good game in its own right. It's arguable that it's better than any Fire Emblem game, though I wouldn't agree. The two are just so different.
I like the relative simplicity of Fire Emblem while still managing to be balls-hard. Everything's so tight and crunchy.
Final Fantasy Tactics is a supremely good game in its own right. It's arguable that it's better than any Fire Emblem game, though I wouldn't agree. The two are just so different.
I like the relative simplicity of Fire Emblem while still managing to be balls-hard. Everything's so tight and crunchy.
See this is one of the times where think the simplification helped FFT more than hurt it.
Tactics Ogre is quite good, but FFT trumps it as far as character development goes. Thanks to TO PSP's class leveling system, you really don't level up a character you are leveling up a class.
Additionally, I feel like Tactics Ogre's size works against it at time... namely the Palace of the Dead. I just plain burnt out on the game because of it. It's very rare that I burn on a game so bad I just can't play it anymore. But Palace of the Dead adventuring did it.
The former isn't really a knock on Tactics Ogre, just a personal qualm with it. But having a (now) 100+ level dungeon in a TRPG really overstays its welcome after a while.
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
Fire Emblem aside from nostalgia I really like the direction IntelligentSystems is taking the series.
MHWilliams
Member
FFT splits the difference between Fire Emblem and Tactics Ogre.
I'd go FFT, Fire Emblem Awakening, and then Tactics Ogre. If you can complete the first two, you get to step up to the adult table.
I'd go FFT, Fire Emblem Awakening, and then Tactics Ogre. If you can complete the first two, you get to step up to the adult table.
TheRedSnifit
Member
Get Advance Wars.
If it absolutely must be either a GBA FE or FFT, go with FFT. As a series Fire Emblem is more consistent, but the original FFT is tough to top.
If it absolutely must be either a GBA FE or FFT, go with FFT. As a series Fire Emblem is more consistent, but the original FFT is tough to top.
TheBryanJZX90
Member
What's the point of playing an "accessible" SRPG?
Tactics Ogre>Front Mission 3>FF Tactics>Fire Emblem
Tactics Ogre>Front Mission 3>FF Tactics>Fire Emblem
I'd love playing it (or is it somehow on PS3?).
KyanMehwulfe
Member
Final Fantasy Tactics is the single video game that I've played the most. Tactics Ogre is overall the better quality game relative to its release date and more significant for what it developed, and I prefer the subjective elements more, but I do find myself playing FF Tactics more simply for the greater aesthetic variety of customization.
They're very well aged games and they're both games that are great to revisit regularly. I''ve probably beat both games over 50 times. I always go back to when I feel inspired to start a new army 'theme'. I'd choose between FFT and TO based on which game better suited the theme. When I was younger, I had themes inspired by everything from Tenchu to Dragon Lance to Suikoden, and when I become a bit older and more of a PC gamer, I had themes inspired by characters (or players) from everything from Diablo II to World of Warcraft or Warhammer to Final Fantasy XI. Most of my 'master' files were all unique themes though where I created a full army of generic characters all with their own stories that I though up. God-hating knights. Far Eastern bandits. War wizards. Zealous Clerics and Paladins. Kyan Mehwulfe, the Red-axe Grim, and the Huntusk mercenaries of the Nes'Gwenth Mountains. I consider it most akin to a dungeon master design new campaigns.
I just always found that Matsuno's two gems perfectly lended themselves to sandboxing in a creative sense. They are not sandbox games, but they gave enough customization you could have very creatively unique and customized armies yet retained the fun and well-paced gameplay of a console game often lossed in more complicated PC sandbox games. This combination has made FFT/TO not the best sandbox game for starting new 'army themes', but the most enjoyable. Often deeper simulation or sandbox games are a lot more enduring but also invested, and can require a lot of focus or dedication to really engross yourself in. It can be draining to try play them every year. Three Kingdoms and XCOM would contend with FFT/TO (perhaps though they like the creative theme variety of FFT's vast variety of visual and thematic Jobs) but sometimes it is just too taxing and costly (no pun intended) to get engrossed in those games annually. That tireless gameplay is the strength of Matsuno's two games, I think. He gets the pacing perfect enough that it's highly engrossing but not tiring.
FFT/TO have the perfect combination of customization and pacing that made it desirable to play every year but also fun and paced well enough that it wasn't too draining or tiring to play every other year.
They're very well aged games and they're both games that are great to revisit regularly. I''ve probably beat both games over 50 times. I always go back to when I feel inspired to start a new army 'theme'. I'd choose between FFT and TO based on which game better suited the theme. When I was younger, I had themes inspired by everything from Tenchu to Dragon Lance to Suikoden, and when I become a bit older and more of a PC gamer, I had themes inspired by characters (or players) from everything from Diablo II to World of Warcraft or Warhammer to Final Fantasy XI. Most of my 'master' files were all unique themes though where I created a full army of generic characters all with their own stories that I though up. God-hating knights. Far Eastern bandits. War wizards. Zealous Clerics and Paladins. Kyan Mehwulfe, the Red-axe Grim, and the Huntusk mercenaries of the Nes'Gwenth Mountains. I consider it most akin to a dungeon master design new campaigns.
I just always found that Matsuno's two gems perfectly lended themselves to sandboxing in a creative sense. They are not sandbox games, but they gave enough customization you could have very creatively unique and customized armies yet retained the fun and well-paced gameplay of a console game often lossed in more complicated PC sandbox games. This combination has made FFT/TO not the best sandbox game for starting new 'army themes', but the most enjoyable. Often deeper simulation or sandbox games are a lot more enduring but also invested, and can require a lot of focus or dedication to really engross yourself in. It can be draining to try play them every year. Three Kingdoms and XCOM would contend with FFT/TO (perhaps though they like the creative theme variety of FFT's vast variety of visual and thematic Jobs) but sometimes it is just too taxing and costly (no pun intended) to get engrossed in those games annually. That tireless gameplay is the strength of Matsuno's two games, I think. He gets the pacing perfect enough that it's highly engrossing but not tiring.
FFT/TO have the perfect combination of customization and pacing that made it desirable to play every year but also fun and paced well enough that it wasn't too draining or tiring to play every other year.
They are very different takes on the genre, and arguably are representatives of two very different genres of game. So it is hard to directly compare the two games.
Overall, Fire Emblem is a much more tactically complicated game. FF Tactics is much more about creating powerful individual characters who work well as a team. You can easily put together a team that con completely overwhelm any opponent using various character development mechanics. On the other hand, Fire Emblem focuses much more on very precise troop movement and use of formation, while individual soldiers have much less capability.
It is very hard to not recommend Final Fantasy Tactics. It is a true classic. It's story is solid and unconventional, it has some great character customization, and it is a true videogaming classic.
However, if what you want is a serious tactical challenge that makes you sweat over every move you make, go with Fire Emblem.
Overall, Fire Emblem is a much more tactically complicated game. FF Tactics is much more about creating powerful individual characters who work well as a team. You can easily put together a team that con completely overwhelm any opponent using various character development mechanics. On the other hand, Fire Emblem focuses much more on very precise troop movement and use of formation, while individual soldiers have much less capability.
It is very hard to not recommend Final Fantasy Tactics. It is a true classic. It's story is solid and unconventional, it has some great character customization, and it is a true videogaming classic.
However, if what you want is a serious tactical challenge that makes you sweat over every move you make, go with Fire Emblem.
He's calling FFT a prequel.
FFT came out after TO, and was worse in pretty much every way.
texhnolyze
Banned
I prefer Fire Emblem for the gameplay/mechanic/difficulty, I've played almost every single FE series since the GBA version. However, I prefer Final Fantasy Tactics for the story (the original/war of the lion, not the Advance/A2). As mentioned from previous posters, Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together is also a good tactics game, excel in both gameplay and story.
My suggestion is, play them all. They're worth it.
My suggestion is, play them all. They're worth it.
I love both series to death but FFT wins mainly by virtue of using per-unit turns and not entire team turns. I hate binary win/lose situations, having disproportionate punishment for single mistakes, I've always thought FE's permadeath was just bullshit and doesn't need to stick around for the sake of tradition, "Casual" (aka. sensible) settings in recent entires are a godsend, but the team phases still compounds the problem. It just feels like a big puzzle, an inching up to a safe/unsafe line of enemy range and then grabbing at oppertunities. FFT feels more like a real battle is happening, a fuzzy back and forth tug-of-war struggle where you can make a few sacrifices to get ahead and scrape out a victory when things aren't looking ideal.
Also it's not like it has a recent entry with which to judge and compare, but at least we can say FFT never abandoned really nice sprite work for relatively sloppy 3d models.
Also it's not like it has a recent entry with which to judge and compare, but at least we can say FFT never abandoned really nice sprite work for relatively sloppy 3d models.
Muchi Muchi Pink
Member
Agreed.
Diomedeskun
Member
Fire Emblem is all about precise positioning and balancing risk and reward as you choose which characters to level. You have to manage the flow of a much larger force by picking them apart in small groups or placing strong characters strategically to slow them without hogging all the exp. Awakening and Sacred Stones allow repeat visits to maps which removes the challenge of selected leveling.
Final Fantasy Tactics is about how you customize your team and deploy those abilities in battle.You have far less characters in a given fight, but they have far, far more they can do. Great, if rather grim story. The PSP version's new translation is worth the spell slowdown which you will soon forget about anyway if you aren't obsessive.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance takes FFT's character growth, but usually has you outnumber the enemy and takes away pretty much any challenge. The first Advance has a very light tone with some darker elements, but both Advance games are pretty weak when it comes to story.
Tactics Ogre is a much slower, denser game that requires a TON of patience to get through with the slow character leveling and the utter inability of low level characters to hit anything.
The story is one of the best in any game ever.
Tactics Ogre for PSP is much, much more playable and has solid character characterization included (although I prefer the FFT version), has an expanded story and cast, tons of new features and a fantastic new translation, but the new per class instead of per unit leveling system is...divisive, to say the least.
I adore them all, but Final Fantasy Tactics: War of the Lions on PSP is my favorite overall.
Final Fantasy Tactics is about how you customize your team and deploy those abilities in battle.You have far less characters in a given fight, but they have far, far more they can do. Great, if rather grim story. The PSP version's new translation is worth the spell slowdown which you will soon forget about anyway if you aren't obsessive.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance takes FFT's character growth, but usually has you outnumber the enemy and takes away pretty much any challenge. The first Advance has a very light tone with some darker elements, but both Advance games are pretty weak when it comes to story.
Tactics Ogre is a much slower, denser game that requires a TON of patience to get through with the slow character leveling and the utter inability of low level characters to hit anything.
The story is one of the best in any game ever.
Tactics Ogre for PSP is much, much more playable and has solid character characterization included (although I prefer the FFT version), has an expanded story and cast, tons of new features and a fantastic new translation, but the new per class instead of per unit leveling system is...divisive, to say the least.
I adore them all, but Final Fantasy Tactics: War of the Lions on PSP is my favorite overall.
Tactics Ogre gameplay is shit compared to Final Fantasy Tactics. FFT has a better variety of movesets and spells to play around, whereas the vast majority of TO boils down to ninjas 2-shotting things from close range or archers 2-shotting things from far away. Leveling new classes and obtaining ability points is also a fucking nightmare in TO.
FE is the casual version of FFT. I highly recommend playing FFT using a difficulty mod though to get a full experience.
FE is the casual version of FFT. I highly recommend playing FFT using a difficulty mod though to get a full experience.
MikeXXIeaf
Banned
Not a fair comparison at all.
If we judge the latest game in each series then Tactics for sure. Awakening has the absolute bare minimum in terms of strategy.
If we judge the latest game in each series then Tactics for sure. Awakening has the absolute bare minimum in terms of strategy.
terrisus
Member
Japanmanx3
Member
FFTA>>>
I'm biased with that one to the grave.
I'm biased with that one to the grave.
TheRedSnifit
Member
Similar threads
- Poll