• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Fire Emblem or Final Fantasy Tactics?

qJj9yNp.jpg
Click to expand...

Is my favourite. A wide variety of characters, classes, monsters and weaponry. Solid mechanics (though not without some flaws and nuances that you will get used to). Branching story based on character alignment (lawful, chaotic, neutral). Doesn't have the long animations FFT suffers from.
Chariot System allows you to "undo" an action. The game stores your last 50 actions per battle allowing you to retry different strategies if things goes terribly wrong.
World System. Essentially rather than starting a NG+ you can return to certain "anchor points" in the story. Characters, equipment and level carry over, it is sort of like time travelling. You can re-attempt recruitment quests for missed characters or choose different story paths.
Art style is great. Music is fantastic.

FE vs FFT specifically though...

I prefer the story in FFT. It also offers greater freedom in terms of unit classing. It allows you to experiment a bit more while FE's units are pretty much dependent on characters. Each character only has a few to choose from if any at all (older FEs have less choice). FE has other things going for it though. Superior sprites and animations. Supports and character endings if you like that sort of thing.

Fire Emblem has the weapon triangle which I like. Lance > sword > axe > lance. One thing I didn't really like however is that luck plays a small to medium part in the game. You can really like a character and spend some time training him/her but if the game decides that you get crap at a level up repeatedly this unit will not be great.

FE has more games to its name and a number of them are good. FFT has 2 successors that are quite different from the original style. I didn't mind FFT Advance series but it is not as good as FE nor the original FFT in my opinion.

I recommend both, but if you must start with one then I say try FE first. It is generally shorter and in some ways simpler due to less options for character classing and such. Sacred Stones is my favourite in case you want a starting point.

Honourable Mentions
- Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume
- Jeanne d'Arc
- Disgaea series
- Wild Arms series.
 
TheBryanJZX90 said:
What's the point of playing an "accessible" SRPG?

Tactics Ogre>Front Mission 3>FF Tactics>Fire Emblem
Click to expand...

Front Mission 3 isn't even the best Front Mission. :/

I'm currently making my way through Front Mission 5 + patch and ita superior to all.

But to answer the OP, Final Fantasy Tactics is what I prefer.

Although if we're bringing in the GOAT Tactics Ogre.....
 
Go for Fire Emblem via Wii U virtual console when it comes out in North America so you can be partially prepared for Shin Megami Tensei x Fire Emblem when it releases.

Once you get into Fire Emblem you'll have a lot to look forward to considering 7,8,9,10,11, and 13 are out in the US.

Fav SRPG is probably Fire Emblem: Awakening, though there are elements in it that I dislike because they were changed from previous FEs - - such as how mounted units move.
 
The stakes are higher in Fire Emblem games in general (sans Sacred Stones and Awakening) which make them a bit daunting for me. There is no chance at grinding, and the attributes you get at level up vary extremely and are completely random, and there's permadeath. I've played all the western releases and overall it can be a pretty brutal experience.

Awakening and Sacred stones allow grinding, like Tactics Ogre and FFT. I personally like grinding in these games and find it meditative and relaxing on some levels, which not everyone can get into. I suggest any of these titles, and would just roll a dice or flip a coin to choose.

I wouldn't discount Front Mission either. Really good games but the setting isn't for everybody who plays this style of game.
 
Has no one here played the amazing game that is Final Fantasy Tactics Advance?

It's my favorite tactical RPG and one of my favorite games of all time.
 
I like Fire Emblem, but I prefer Final Fantasy Tactics by a significant margin. FFT is the best strategy JRPG ever made to this day.
 
FE by a mile for me, especially Path of Radiance, the GB ones and Awakening. FFT is cool, but I never finished one, because of the much slower battles and high degree of micromanagement.
 
Muchi Muchi Pink said:
Tactics Ogre holds the crown. FFT was a simplified version by the same dev team for the Final Fantasy crowd.
Click to expand...
I don't know if I'd agree with the description "simplified" because I think that misrepresents the game-play and story. FFT has more classes, abilities, statistics, likely even much or more characters in the plot and more news, more side quests, and in general just as much or more content and detail. The combat is certainly no more simpler either, with a lot of factors to consider such as height and weather. It is, however, easier and more forgiving. Death hurts less, travel and mobility matters less, it's easier to 'break the game' with certain abilities. It's faster paced and more streamlined, but it's streamlined not in a simplistic way but in a way that reduced the tedium of some of TO's features. I don't think it's simplified in any way. It's more accessible but this is through better production values and presentation, not simplicity. Simplicity to me would suggest that things like height and weather, bravery and faith, sub-Jobs and even half the Jobs, reactionary abilities, and half the supporting cast and back drop to the plot don't exist. Making turns, mobility, targeting, etc more steamlined aren't necessarily simplifying -- part of that was just perfect tedious menus that were a side effect of TO being a low budget SNES game in a fairly un-perfected genre.

I would agree that FFT can be a more simple experience simply because it is possible to play and beat the game in a more casual and simple manner, where as Tactics Ogre forces you to understand the game mechanics more -- partly through challenge but partly through tedium. But FFT does have a lot of depth for those who are interested it. I love both games but there's a reason I've probably beat FFT over 20 years in the last 15 years and TO only 10 times, and it's certainly not because FFT is more simplified. It's the opposite -- I feel I have more options and variety to try new things and new challenges with each play-through.
 
Front Mission 3 or 4 or if you can get them and have a love for mechs. Devil Survivor: Overclocked if you can get it and have an interest in a occult apocaplypse demon SRPG with normal RPG battle elements.

However, between FE and FFT, FFT imo. For the record, the only FE I played was FE:A, so I might not be qualified.
 
So I've been looking into Tactics Ogre but it seems a little daunting. Managing 12 characters at once is kind of scary as it's not something I've done before.
 
Sajjaja said:
So I've been looking into Tactics Ogre but it seems a little daunting. Managing 12 characters at once is kind of scary as it's not something I've done before.
Click to expand...

In TO (PSP version), when you level up, everyone in that class will also level up. For example : Your Knight class is 10 and your Barbarian class is 1. You have character A which is a lv1 barbarian, if you change his class to knight, he will jump to lv 10 and vice versa.
 
Sajjaja said:
So I've been looking into Tactics Ogre but it seems a little daunting. Managing 12 characters at once is kind of scary as it's not something I've done before.
Click to expand...

Not all battles allow 12 characters. it varies depending on the map. That is the max limit and you certainly do not need to deploy that many on those maps any way. You can even just have certain units hang back so they just sit in for the exp.

The game also starts you off quite nicely, gives you some units to play with and a lot of chances to recruit more.

FE Awakening allows for 10 in some maps I think. :\
 
I'd say it's closer fight between Tactics Ogre and FFT.
Last Fire Emblem is amazing, but FFT is too much for it too beat, even after all these years.
Ogre though, that's a competitor.

I'd still bet on FFT, that game is amazing, and needs all the praise it can get so we can get a sequel and whole new sprawling FFT2, FFT3 series we need from Matsuno-san.
 
Go with Fire Emblem. It's fantastic. I managed four complete playthroughs of (North American) Fire Emblem, which is very unusual for me. There's an incredible amount of content on offer, with the different campaigns, side missions, and a huge cast of playable characters with excellent support conversations. It's probably my favorite GBA game.

Under no circumstances should you buy FFT for PSP. The sheer technical incompetence that went into that port is incredible.
 
Jagged Alliance 2 is the best squad level tactical RPG although I suppose it could be argued that JA2 isn't an RPG but that would be going down a rabbit hole I don't want to follow. As for the choice in the OP, I would go with Fire Emblem for a good strategic game. If you wanted a JRPG with some tactics go with Final Fantasy Tactics.
 
Wewtness said:
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.
Click to expand...

These two so close together..... Ouch! >_<
 
Sajjaja said:
I'm referring to the FE on GBA and FFT on PS1. Which do you recommend and why?
Click to expand...

FFT is my favourite SRPG ever, so I'm a little bit biased. Yet, if you are referring to those particular games/edition, then FFT for sure.

Don't get me wrong: FE on GBA is a very good game. Problem is: FFT is plain great.
 
Fire Emblem by a long, long way. Your strength is spread more evenly across your army, and with each unit type and weapon having clear pros and cons.

Much as I like FFT, I find even the simpler Fire Emblem games to be far more elegant, and with a battlefield that's easier to read at a glance than having very few multiclass units with over a dozen spells/abilities/item options each.

Depends what you want from your SRPG though. FFT's story is great, while Fire Emblem's 'nobles on the run' tends to repeat similar themes across the series (although it's a bit of a genre staple).

Replaying Radiant Dawn at the moment. Awesome game.
 
Fire Emblem, incredibly simple to play, very deep strategy game. The first GBA game is excellent too, and has an AWESOME hard/new game + mode.
 
FFT, one of the greatest games ever. One of the best Job Systems in the entire FF series. Fire Emblem is more accessible, which has a greater appeal to many.
 
As much as I like FFT and Tactics Ogre, I could never recommend them over Fire Emblem as they are broken, grindy games that have little to no strategic/tactical depth to them. They are better treated as RPGs, Fire Emblem is a better tactics game (though also flawed in some areas).
If you go for FFT maybe try the 1.3 patch to balance the game.

Kinhow said:
You should try Advance Wars.
It's far superior than any of these games.
Click to expand...

This. Though it's not an RPG in any way. Pure strategy. But the gameplay is sooooo much better than either FFT or Fire Emblem.
 
Jan said:
Shining_Force_III_cover.jpg
Click to expand...

Shining Force 3 S1-S3 is the king of SRPGs for me.

Scenario's 2 and 3 are now playable in english thanks to a translation patch (there's also a patch for scenario 1 because back then sega changed the english ending because they knew s2 & s3 would never go west).

Vandal Hearts & Vanguard Bandits are both pretty fun games too.

Of the OP choices both are good, FFT is better then the GBA FE game, but FFT can be a bit dry for my tastes at times and I prefer FE:A on the 3DS, which is the high point of the FE series for me. If they just got rid of RNG based level ups it'd be perfect.
 
krYlon said:
This. Though it's not an RPG in any way. Pure strategy. But the gameplay is sooooo much better than either FFT or Fire Emblem.
Click to expand...
9
Nope, Advance Wars is a puzzle game, plain and simple. I love it and think it has some of the best games of all time, and everyone should pay it, but I would never consider it a strategy game like FE.
 
manueldelalas said:
9
Nope, Advance Wars is a puzzle game, plain and simple. I love it and think it has some of the best games of all time, and everyone should pay it, but I would never consider it a strategy game like FE.
Click to expand...

FE isn't even a strategy game, it's a tactics game first and foremost. And how on earth can Advance Wars be a puzzle game when the AI is an unknown variable??
 
The problem with FE is the story is usually garbage. Some bad wizard is taking over the world, go fight a billion ruffians. Not exactly interesting stuff. And the way the A.I. works going after your weakest units can be a real pain, especially when they snipe them from seemingly out of nowhere or get reinforcements that suddenly appear right next to you.

As a result I'd say FFT and Tactics Ogre are more enjoyable. You can skirmish in non-story battles to raise your character's stats if you ever find yourself in a pinch, and the stories are better (excluding FFT Advance). The strategy doesn't come down to rock-paper-scissors. And if a character dies you have some time to revive them, unlike FE where you'll probably want to reset and try again, losing all that time and effort.

I do enjoy the FE games but when compared to FFT / Tactics Ogre it's no contest.
 
Fire Emblem easily.

The only SRPG I'd put over Fire Emblem are the Ogre Battle (March of the Black Queen and Person of Lordly Calibur) type SRPG's in the Ogre series. FFT is brilliant though.
 
Final Fantasy Tactics over Fire Emblem for me. Tactics Ogre is my favourite though.

FFT and TO have much more interesting class/ job systems which keeps the game interesting.
 
Dolobill said:
I dabbled a bit in Tactics, but not much. I just don't think it has the same style or flair as the Fire Emblem games. I feel Fire Emblem is generally better written too, with some really cool characters.
Click to expand...

FFT has one of the best video game stories ever written
 
I prefer the Fire Emblem series because of the permadeath and mostly because the game is played under "player phase vs ennemi phase".
All your players play and after that its all the ennemies. This gives me much more a chess feel than other types of SRPGs
 
heringer said:
FFT. It's the better game overall.

It would be a harder choice if we were talking about Path of Radiance or Radiant Dawn. Well, not that hard. In those cases I would go with FE.
Click to expand...

Radiant Dawn is FE garbage. It's not a bad game, but it's certainly not in the league of PoR, GBA, or Awakening.

I prefer FE.
 
I'll join the "Why not both?" camp, but I have a preference for Fire Emblem, which I think has a better gameplay overall, and is way more Tactical and Strategic than FFT (and, honestly, the gameplay of FFT didn't age well at all).

FE7 is a very good entry, and the one I would advise to play first.

As for Tactics Ogre PSP, it's a very solid game... Plaged by some stupid gameplay choices, such as the tedious crafting system, random drops for key items and characters who are terribly slow initially, since they all are restricted by a 3 or 4 move (5 for 1 or 2 classes), making a lot of battles ininteresting at the beginning, since you will waste a ton of turns just to reach the enemy (when your characters won't be stuck on a narrow path).
 
I want to like FFT as the plot in genuinely interesting but the game play makes me want to vomit. I got to a map where some swordsman was firing ranged area attacks and had a load of monks who would outspeed and kill me before shelving it. Also AI controlled dude (Deita?) would charge in and die (moron NPCs is a problem Fire Emblem also has). I did maybe 4 skirmish maps worth of grinding and didn't make more characters than any so far needed. I hope this wasn't like Chapter 4 of DQ4 where you're supposed to lose and I shelved it for no good reason...

Other gameplay problems I have with FFT, I dislike agility stat turn order as it makes it harder for weaker units.

Fire Emblem on the other hand has outstanding gameplay. The stories tend to provide sufficient backdrop...well not Shadow Dragon and Awakening.

The RNG based level ups kind of serve to make each play through unique or to make life hell in harder difficulties. Shame fixed growth from Path of Radiance never caught on (it is almost like SaGa, killing certain enemies with certain weapons is what determines stat gain).

Speaking of growth. I did like how Shining Force 1 handled stats, level 1-20 were random but rigged so you are always within one standard deviation of where you should be (not too keen the growth curves, it meant some characters gained very little at level 11-20 so could be promoted early while others only gained much at those levels so were largely useless e.g. Vincent), this did have the side effect of making stat boosters useless for the large part.

dimb said:
I think Tactics is much tighter when it comes to actual strategic elements. Fire Emblem has great character growth systems but the actual game is pretty much a joke, and the off screen spawning of enemies in stuff like Awakening is an embarrassment.
Click to expand...
Awakening goes out of its way to warn you to expect surprise reinforcements every single time they happen. I guess expecting forts, edges of maps or stairs to be
 
Nohar said:
As for Tactics Ogre PSP, it's a very solid game... Plaged by some stupid gameplay choices, such as the tedious crafting system, random drops for key items and characters who are terribly slow initially, since they all are restricted by a 3 or 4 move (5 for 1 or 2 classes), making a lot of battles ininteresting at the beginning, since you will waste a ton of turns just to reach the enemy (when your characters won't be stuck on a narrow path).
Click to expand...

Another negative for the PSP Tactics Ogre is the complete lack of mission variety. It's always take out the leader, you can literally just rush him in every stage, take him out with archers (that are way overpowered) and store up the special move or whatever it's called and unleash it on him every time. The maps aren't very interesting either.

I mean I like the game for other reasons, but boy are the actual battles really broken and repetitive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Final Fantasy X - 25th Anniversary
2 3 4
155
1K
Signalis replied
Final Fantasy Tactics - The Ivalice Chronicles | Review Thread
Opinion Review  2 3
133
5K
demigod replied
Fire Emblem Awakening released 14 years ago today (tomorrow in the west)
12
282
Sleepwalker replied
  • Poll
What Final Fantasy Game Would You Like To See A "Compilation" Or Expanded?
2
91
1K
Darkmakaimura replied
FINAL FANTASY TACTICS: The Ivalice Chronicles - Gameplay Trailer
Trailer 
16
1K
SomeNorseGuy replied
Top Bottom