https://old.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/1gg7jsi/leaked_dragon_age_the_veilguard_taash_companion/
Vaccines work !chuds
- 55
- 41
Top Poster of the Day:
911roofer
Current Registered Users: 28,684
the gaymen hole 😳😳😳
Post content related to video games, video game fandoms, culture, etc.
Touhou is video games not anime.
/h/vidya SETTINGS /h/vidya LOG /h/vidya MODS /h/vidya EXILEES /h/vidya FOLLOWERS /h/vidya BLOCKERS
Current software version: 468fded
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I've definitely noticed that lol. I played through Mass Effect 1-3 several times over just to see different game states and some of those ME3 replacement characters were actually cool in their own right. A lot of that is never talked about though because players need the golden ending each time.
It's common throughout game genres and another example that sticks out is Fire Emblem. FE was originally intended for Ironman runs where you'd try to get through the whole game without ever restarting. The massive character cast each game is known for is meant to help you replace losses — it's okay if your knight dies because you'll get more knights, same with your mage, fighter, etc.
But players get attached to each and every animu character so they reset the game if they take any losses. Players are so used to this they started to complain about the Ironman friendly game mechanics. They wonder why it takes so long to see certain characters when in game those units are meant to replace losses. Shadow Dragon was the most Ironman friendly since it even has named characters who only appear for recruitment if you've taken enough losses. They're meant to keep your army interesting so you're not seeing the exact same people every playthrough, but all the players who never accept losses complained these units were "locked out" to them because they only want Golden Endings and Shadow Dragon doesn't allow you to get everyone in one playthrough.
Modern Fire Emblem is now made with them in mind such that Three Houses doesn't give you any new characters past, like, the 55% mark and even comes with built in turn rewind. A purist Ironman playthrough of that game is rough because it's no long balanced for it.
!g*mers !fireemblem discuss. "Golden Ending Only" players — yay or nay?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Not sure what you mean saying 3H wasn't balanced for Ironman runs?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It wasn't
That's what I mean
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
In that it was too hard or too easy to win on ironman?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Like I said, you don't get any new units past the start of post White Clouds.
A huge part of strengthening your units isn't just getting them xp, but also training them time and time again through the teacher mechanic. Each unit is a massive time investment in 3H compared to the relatively disposable units of older games.
Levels commonly feature ambush spawns and other shit you can't see coming that the turn rewind is really handy for. Choosing not to use it exposes just how much the difficulty balance relies on the mechanic.
It's not good for an Ironman run, especially if you were going in blind.
Even the writing really conveys this design philosophy. Three Houses is about being a teacher. You take your small cast of characters and keep them by your side as Fódlan goes to shit. You see them grow and strengthen from your training. You don't take new strangers into the mix.
I could see the difference when I played Shadow Dragon. Marth constantly recruits people and many of your units are soldiers from other nation's armies or former enemy units. Marth's Altean army doesn't stay Altean for long and he soon becomes the leader of what truly feels like a unified, allied force. It really feels like all of Archanea eventually coming together against Medeus, and getting new people right up to the end enhances that theme. With Byleth it feels like you're just trying to end the shit that began at Garreg Mach and there's no room for newfriends.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Wait, by "Ironman" do you mean "nobody dies" or "never save scum?"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Never save scum
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ooh I thought it was the opposite. Yeah you'd be right then, but I'm so used to save scumming even as far back as 4 that I'm just used to it
Love Genealogy but wow what a fricking brutal game that is.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Funnily enough if you were good enough to beat FE without ever losing any units, there'd be no difference between being willing to reset or not anyway
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
OUT!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I remember reading about this way back on gamefaqs in the Aughts and thinking FE sounded too hard, to be honest I think it would be kinda cool now to try a game like that.
I'm still rewinding to save any big titted waifus I come across,mammary protectionism is non-negotiable.
!chuds !coomers !weebs
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I played differently when I was younger but I just don't have time to keep up with new releases as an adult
with a job doing various playthroughs
Sucks that it affects others who makes time for that though
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This conversation is now about Fire Emblem instead of BioWare lol but I think my ideal take on the concept is to make the campaigns shorter. If you're designing a game with many possible game states and you want people to see them all, my armchair opinion is to suggest having those campaigns be concise and replayable. Each campaign would be like "a run" and you'd want your player to think, "What's my run going to be like this time". And if different games states offered differing gameplay instead of just altered cutscenes, that would also encourage people to actually want to experience everything.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Exactly. Modern FE is not only built around resets, turn wheel, or casual mode. It's also just really fricking bloated. 3H was TERRIBLE about respecting the player's time. Engage is better in that regard, but I still can't imagine wanting to do multiple "runs" of it. But I'd love a version of the series where each game had multiple replayable ~10 hour campaigns designed around losing units.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I have a semi-pipe idea for an indie game exactly like that -- Fire Emblem but back to an ironman focus, with the campaign being shorter and the units in every playthrough being different so people would want to do "runs" of it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This is a roguelike
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's not rng based. I'm thinking there would be different decisions you could make throughout the game that would alter your army composition.
If a roguelike doesn't require rng then maybe
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
"frick off, elitist!"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
He just like me fr fr
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Sounds like FE g*mers of today are a bunch of coddled cute twinks.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Which Fire Emblem is good to start with? I wanna go in with the mentality that I'm not gonna savescum
Last game like that I played was Lisa but I was too stuck in the mindset of strategic saving in hardcore and I would seethe when the game would permakill my party members so I would reload, I kinda regret it I feel like it didn't really matter and I missed out on the proper gut punch those decisions were supposed to be
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Shadow Dragon for the DS is the best I think. It's not pretty like a modern one but it's fun for that old school Fire Emblem concept — each campaign attempt is a run and you want to see how well you do "this run"
A more modern 3DS game that also works is Shadows of Valentia. I did that one as an Ironman and enjoyed it.
Otherwise you could really pick any Fire Emblem before Awakening, Fates, Three Houses, and Engage. Those games became unfriendly to the concept in favor of assuming you'll be resetting a lot. (Actually Ironman Awakening sorta works since it gives you new units throughout the game, but it's unfriendly in other ways with shit like ambush spawns lmao)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context