Wow, I did not expect to see a full video being made from a comment i made a couple of months back O.o I am very glad that you found my comment insightful! I 100% agree with trying to rethink how we recommend games, move away from having catch all recommendations and instead look at people and what they value in a game. Not everyone values the same things, and what other things you played before has a huge part in what you like and what expectations you have. This is somewhat what i was getting at when i wrote that FE7 was a good starting point back in the day, but not anymore. Because most people who got into Fire Emblem at that time were younger players who got it for their GBA, their experience with other games, and especially story focused RPGs were probably very minimal, so having a detailed, extended and safe tutorial was important to them, and replay value was also very good, because most kids only had a handful of games, so there was more of a chance they would replay the few games they owned. My original comment was made with the assumption that most new players today are coming from other JRPGs (like myself), and that these players will most likely not replay a game unless they really enjoy their first playtrough. This most likely wasn't an accurate assumption, but it is probably describing quite a good chunk of new players to the series, and for these people i don't think FE7 will be viewed as very impressive when its compared to other juggernauts of the JRPG genre. But there are definitly other groups as well. People who found out about the series through Smash being a huge one. For these people it is probably quite important that the game has characters that they already know from smash. So somthing like FE4 or Echoes, which i did recommend to someone coming from other JRPGs are probably not a very good starting point for someone coming from Smash. A video going over all the games and what type of people you would recommend them to would be very cool. Alternatively you could try to find more "groups" like the ones i listed, and what games you would recommend to them. Reframing it as User Stories like is used in Software Development could be very interresting here.
I think there's a huge blind spot when picking "the game to start with" in terms of considering accessibility. Before a player can fail to connect with the game you recommend for them, they can first fail to pick it up at all. A new player won't go out and emulate an old game from a series they don't know. If I think a person would enjoy FE4, I'd recommend they start with 3H because it's the one on the Switch.
Im proof thats not true, i emulated and started with FE6 simply because the little bit of gameplay i watched from fates looked interesting. And FE6 was the earliest in the series i could start with emulating. So thats where it began. It was a trial by fire and i didnt know you could reset chapters so i played it ironman by accident.
@@bluntlyhonest6803 That experience is not universal, and indeed flies in the face of the thesis "the modern player values their time". While a certain kind of enthusiast player may indeed jump right in the deep end by emulating a title that never even released outside Japan on a whim, that is not a common experience. Moreover, the very move from "saw some Fates" to "emulated FE6" completely invalidates any consideration of "which one to start with" by answering "any one".
@@illusive-mike "Modern player". Modern players have the attention span of a goldfish and require constant validation and praise at every turn. Thats how we end up with engage.
@@illusive-mike "a new player wont go out and emulate an old game from a series they font know". Is what i was reffering to. I did just that. So it does not invalidate anything, you were just talking about something else entire from what i did.
@@bluntlyhonest6803 Not really. Any generalization will have exceptions, so I highlighted how your exceptional experience is not representative of the way a person would be recommending FE to somebody else. You being the kind of person who would emulate a Japan-only game based on nothing but a glimpse of a vastly different game doesn't make this example a useful reference. Moreover, Engage is a really funny example to bring up in this context considering how much it failed to attract a new audience.
I would say they should play Advance Wars as their first fire emblem game. That way they can stop yelping about how fire emblem “is a strategy game before everything else” and “three houses is not a fire emblem game”
Three Houses is such an interesting game to talk about. I personally know 3 people who tried it as their first Fire Emblem game. And the reasons you've highlighted are major factors as to what drew them in. Getting to know the students in a Persona copying system, run around the monastery. And a story that tonally goes to a darker place then most other recent games have been. But then also none of my friends went on to play Engage. A game which tonally feels closer to what the rest of the series is. Especially the newer games. With a lot of anime trope elements, somewhat whimsical art style, while also featuring gameplay that is a step up from Three Houses. Even if it does basically everything else worse. But as the commenter originally said, none of my friends even care that much about the more thought out map design in Engage. Or the amount of fun and unique objectives are in the missions. In that way Three Houses wasn't representative of the larger series. So my pick would actually be Path of Radiance. Just that the story is still one of the best ones, has pretty easy gameplay, and isn't a unique departure for the series the monastery was. But that said, maybe Path of Radiance was a better representative of the series in 2009 than it is in 2024. Who knows?
yo numb nut... they didn't get the next game that came out because they played three houses and hated it, so now they are soured on fire emblem even though three houses is not a fire emblem game. Fire Emblem Engage really is the best introductory fire emblem because you are going to desire more after playing it to the end, tons of map variety, fantastic character designs, and most importantly you feel like you went on a journey by the end which is what makes a good story. Three Houses NEVER goes on a journey! It is an absolute trash story, bland and forgettable characters in every way, and bad writing. Path of Radiance / Radiant Dawn duo is good because you feel like you went on a grand adventure by the very end (Radiant Dawn) starting from the beginning (Path of Radiance), saw a lot to the world on your journey, and really saw ike grow as a character from start to finish. It is like how Clannad and Clannad After Story works together, and they need each other to be that masterpiece, but as a singular game they suck which is why they are a terrible introductory game because it requires 2 games to fully experience everything and create those memories of going on a long journey alongside Ike.
The m problem with recommending path of radiance and radiant Dawn is how inaccessible to the average person they are, either you have to buy a pre owned one on eBay for like $500 or you have to learn how to emulate, both of which are not going to be as appealing to a first time player then just buying the latest game on the latest console. They are good games but I would not recommend them as an entry point thou.
Oh for sure on a practical level I would still most likely just tell someone to play three houses. Because normal people are more likely to have a switch, and it looks a lot better. I was kind of thinking of the hypothetical on each game’s merits. But in real life I agree
Engage is nothing like the older games, it's a cruel thing to insult the older games that way just because the game adverts repeated the line "appeal to older players" which it never did and was not designed to do.
Unpopular opinion but fe8 has a better tuto than fe7, it's more fluid (you learn the mechanic because the map design asks you to use them instead of a long written tutorial) and you can consults the index if you want and the explanations are more expanded than in fe7. You even get a tuto for the support system with Colm and Neimi. It's also in the in between the old games and the most recent ones. It's also an easier game.
I started out with Three Houses and I think, that there could not have been a better entry point for me. The overall story was intriguing and the shift in viewpoints in the different paths was excellent. Besides Lorenz, I enjoyed talking and getting to know everybody. Combat was easy enough to understand and most of the more nuanced systems that play into that, could be discovered by myself. It got stale on consequent playthroughs, but I had the story to carry me on. So in short, Story and Characters was the main thing that hooked me and kept me going. Moving on to Engage afterwards and everything switched. The Story was anime tropes 101, most characters were rather bland with only glimpses of interesting quirks, but the Combat was amazing. While story and characters are most of the time the most important thing for me, by the time I started with Engage, I was able to appreciate the combat side a lot more, which kept me going this time. Otherwise I might have dropped this halfway through. Where does that leave me for future FE games? I think, that I'm at a point where 1 strong aspect of the Game can carry me to the End, even if the Rest is only mediocre. But I need Story and Characters to do another playthrough. For the older Titles, I fear that I'm missing a nostalgia factor to actually complete them, when the general UX/UI is outdated. So I'm reluctant to give them a try. I had the same issue with e.g. Final Fantasy 6 & 8. Regarding comparing to other Games, I can't really follow the thought process of comparing it to, for example, the mainline Final Fantasy series, when the combat is so different. Personally, I could have only really compared it to Symphony of War: Nephilim Saga and on a strech, maybe XCOM. But in essence, the combat side of things was effectively new to me.
The commenter raises a very valid point in that the best first FE can vary depending on the person that is going to play it. 10:52 If the newcomer is interested in heavy tactical gameplay (and ideally already has a background in S/TRPGs), I'd actually recommend New Mystery. It's a much more vanilla experience (likely more similar to what the person already has experience in) while still being very much an FE game. Fe12's prologue, I believe, does a great job of teaching you the basics as well some more slightly advanced things, and it does so without any handholding. The problem is that it can get frustrating, but that's why I recommend it to newcomers who already are hardened strategy game players who likely are already used to this.
You know, i think it’s better to recommend three houses because everyone loves it, and it’s easy to play and buy. It doesn’t matter if they play the other games now, they likes that one game and if another one that comes out that strikes that same itch, they’ll play it, and maybe they’ll go back and play other games like path of radiance or echoes which have a similar vibe. Or maybe they won’t who cares, they had fun with a game you love.
i agree when it comes to recommending the series there are so many games on the series and there differences will appeal to different people so categorizing the recommendations would be best
I recently got into Fire Emblem. I bounced off of Awakening when I first tried it years ago for whatever reason. But the game that hooked me, of all things.... Was Engage! The gameplay was just instantly addicting for me and I think it does a really good job of introducing mechanics at a good clip to keep things super interesting. I can easily tolerate a mid story for stellar gameplay, so that hasnt been any obstacle for me. I recently started playing FE7 and have been enjoying that so far too!
Getting into my personal history with RPGs as a genre and how I didn't really appreciate them til a certain point could take an entire comment. I could also talk about why I don't like Xenoblade 2 (I respect your opinion for the record and I see why people like it; I just think the "distractions" you mention pile up for me to the point where I just can't stand it.), but I'll just keep it at Fire Emblem. Like many a new fan in the early 2010s, my familiarity with the series stems from Smash Bros. and Marth/Roy/Ike were all pretty popular characters within Smash. I'd just got a 3DS for Christmas and saw a trailer for Fire Emblem Awakening. I played the demo and instantly fell in love. Of course being a teenager at the time this was an introduction into a more "complex" RPG-type game, that being the SRPG. Granted I'm aware of how easy it is to break Awakening but I also played Normal/Casual since I'm a coward. However after Awakening I basically didn't go back to it. I never played Fates nor Echoes when they came out, and while I did dabble into FE7 a bit, I never got far. The next FE for me would happen to be Three Houses. It was pretty damn great even if extremely flawed. I played every route like a damn maniac and idk if I ruined the game for myself because of that LOL. I still love it and have a ton of respect for it still. I also got a chance to play OG FE1 and FE2 because I'm a damn masochist for antiquated RPGs like these. I played only Book 1 of FE3 and a little bit of Book 2 but never finished it. My next FE was Engage. I enjoy it a lot despite the story not really being good. I think the art style doesn't really get enough credit since the artist's work is honestly pretty stellar when separating it from the game models. I never finished Engage just cuz it was getting tough for me at a point and FE can really be draining if you aren't mentally prepared for it, so I backed off. Another reason I stopped was a bit of a smaller reason, but I essentially wanna play most of the FEs that interest me in order for me to appreciate things like the remixes and the gimmicks of each Emblem map. So some time in the month of July I would end up playing a certain game that's been rumored to get a remake for a good few years now: Genealogy of the Holy War. I also happened to be learning Japanese at the time, meaning instead of using Project Naga, I played the entire game in its original language of Japanese (S/O to Naga for making a fantastic fan translation even if I never used it btw). I beat the game at around August and damn it was an experience. The story and presentation were so good for this kind of game at the time, and the music to me is iconic and will be iconic when this game is given to more hands in the future. Since then I've started Path of Radiance but I stopped at either chapter 5 or 6 (when a certain something happens to a certain someone without spoiling), but I DID play Binding Blade. I thought it was OK but definitely flawed from front to back. I also played Echoes recently and LOVED it even if Gaiden's DNA is all over it. Presentation for these games really upped to ante with Echoes, and Engage continued the tradition. Before getting back to Engage I at least wanna play both Tellius games, Blazing Blade, Sacred Stones, and MAYBE Thracia, but I'll save that for a good long while. Now what the hell does this have to do with the topic of the video in question? Uhh well I do like FE a ton lol. In terms of the best game to start with, that's really hard to boil down since different gamers want different things. I do think that one commentor was right about the common JRPG fan: they want a game with the best worldbuilding, cast of characters, and overall narrative. FE4, FE9+10, and Echoes make sense. Awakening is a weird one since it was obviously a first FE for a ton of people, but after Three Houses trounced it in sales it does sorta lampshade Awakening's position a bit. It will forever be the most important game in the series as it was the savior, and a lot of ideas being a hodgepodge of different ideas from previous games really makes it obvious. In that sense it was the original Engage but with a more "logical" story. The historical context of this game will definitely stand the test of time, but because of this it's hard to recommend since when you remove that aspect of being "the savior", what else does it offer? Well there's obviously things like pair-ups, and for those interested in the lore of Archanea then hey there's something there I guess. Compare that to Three Houses where the entire world is original, three different sets of cast members to choose from, and the professor/student angle being present in the game. Hell even Engage, for as insane and whacky as it is, at least has the Emblem mechanic for use in extremely unique and unorthodox play. Echoes also has the unique factor of being a two-path story where progression is very unique and seeing how the stories intertwine is part of the appeal, along with the added characters in both character's paths (mostly Alm's side though lol). Despite all that I said I still look forward to replaying it someday. I got a lot of my own friends into it and I'll always cherish that about it even if its lost its shine over the years. Regarding recommendations I actually HIGHLY recommend checking out the video "Why You Should Play Fire Emblem (And Where To Begin)" by Vivi's Variety Show. It's a great video that goes over every game, discusses its strengths and weaknesses, and even categorizes which types of FE you'd be interested it in whether its for narrative or gameplay. Plus his channel is severely underrated (also please watch his Gintama video I beg of you)
I personally started with Fates Conquest. Not the best game to starr but it made me want to play the other games. I like most of the the games starting 7 to Echoes. And yeah Fates doesn't have the best story but I like it. Then I went out got Awakening and Echoes. I liked Awakening but Echoes..... made me mad. It just didn't work out for me mainly in act 4. I was going to drop it but in the end I beat it. That left bad taste in mouth. Everyone has things they like and dislike but it's not really fair to try and tell people they shouldn't like what they like. I get alot of 'hate' when it comes to me like Fates.
I entered FE with Awakening, picked Conquest over Birthright since it matched my personality, but skipped Echoes after hearing reviews like yours about it. I thought Conquest was just fine and has characters I will remember -- though I did rework the plot line in my head a bit, and found male Corrin a bit weak. Maybe I should move through Conquest on the crossplay.
I know you mentioned the social aspect that some fans might be attracted to, but I’m surprised that I don’t often see mention of the pairings aspect of FE being a major draw for some fans. As a resident hardcore shipper myself, it’s what drew me to the series and kept me because I had never seen another series like it that allowed me to not only have the MC/self insert be given romance options, but also the rest of the cast. I’m always a fan of story and characters, but FE unfortunately never stands out compared to so many other games out there that do those things so much better in my opinion. For cases like mine, I think the pairing mechanics are what make the series unique enough to keep coming back. Otherwise to me FE would just be another SRPG in the sea of others that might have an edge in areas it doesn’t.
I always recommend people 1 of 2 games for their first fire emblem. Path of radiance, because it is the second best in the series in my opinion, and it isnt a hard game. But even better, if they DO end up enjoying the series and want more, they can immedietly jump into radiant dawn, which is imo the best in the series. The only issue is the games are expensive and difficult to find, but emulation is a thing a nintendo can suck it. XD The second game i recommend to people is sacred stones. Its an easy fire emblem, with a good story, and thanks to the tower, they dont need to worry about getting stuck very often, so it's a great starting point for anyone.
you know i tried getting a family member into the fe series with path of radiance but it didnt work so well. idk there was just a vibe about it that seemed sort of inaccessible i think it was the units coming and going from your army early game. fe7 (and sacred stones probably too) seemed a lot more accessible and enjoyable to them tho.
I still think Blazing Blade is what I would consider the best introduction. I just don't agree with the idea that the story is bad or the units don't stand out. It's not some super grand story, but it has good characterization. Far better than the other two GBA games, but probably enough I'd consider it one of the better entries in the series for it. It has so many iconic characters like Lyn, Hector, Sain, and Pent. They're cool and flashy and interesting and have time for you to get to know them even without supports. Lyn mode is a bonus, but not the primary reason I think it's good for new players gameplay-wise. Blazing blade is just a game that doesn't think you should be severely punished. Lyn mode is easy, and anyone who dies there comes back after. Eliwood/hector mode starts you off with Marcus who is going to be a powerhouse all game. If he dies it's honestly not a big deal, any of the other cavaliers can step up. And if you leveled Sain in lyn mode he'll be even stronger than Marcus anyways. Oswin is a solid unit that keeps you in check if you accidentally overextend Marcus, and by being a slow armor knight he struggles to get overextended and put in as dangerous situations. But then towards the latter half of the game you're always being given standout units that work in case you've gotten everyone good killed. Isadora is a free paladin who only looks bad if you compare her to Marcus or leveled up Sain. Pent is amazing, and Louise is perfectly good. Hawkeye is super good. Athos can practically solo the last map if you lost everyone else. These are all characters that you are guaranteed to get, you can't miss them. The game is letting you play and fuck up and experience the consequences and get the fire emblem experience so you can decide if you like the fire emblem experience. But it's still holding your hand so you can be eased into that experience, as opposed to something like Three Houses where everyone is an investment and every loss is devastatingly felt. The thing is... if you get into the series on three houses and make it as little of a fire emblem game as possible, you'll then find you have no interest in other fire emblem games. You'll look at them and see "oh but there's no turn wheel or casual mode so what if I lose someone? i have to restart the whole chapter?" They won't understand that the games are explicitly designed so that permadeath doesn't hurt you because they played the game where it DID hurt you. Different games have different scales on how much death actually matters. I think Blazing blade is one of the lowest because of all the units you get handed for free that also just happen to be the best in the game and require little to no investment to get them there. Sacred Stones has a very small cast and is more about growth so people dying there sucks, even if Seth is so good he can practically solo the game (except he's not so good that a bit of bad luck can't take him out so if you rely entirely on him without being super familiar with the game you'd probably have to reset to cancel out his death). I think Sacred Stones is easy, but it's not as friendly as that easiness would have you believe. Back on the uniqueness of units... I feel like modern customization systems really took that away. They all just feel the same if you don't mind taking them out of their original class. 3DS customization wasn't as bad, but it still lessens their uniqueness a little bit I think. I don't think not having skills was that big of a deal. I feel like the skill-less class-restricted units in blazing blade feel more unique than the units of engage. and ESPECIALLY three houses. without even pre-existing classes for the students and the way the class system works, the Three Houses cast just feel so generic gameplay wise. Now branching promotions? I don't think that took away from it, but I still feel blazing blade is just a better game to get hooked onto fire emblem even without it.
That is a really good point about the different strengths each game provides for new players. The way that my journey into the franchise went, I started with Fates, then Awakening, then I think Echoes was third, and finally cracked into the older entries by playing FE7. thohillesland has a good point that a lot of JRPG fans will compare it to other series first, and you also have a good point that different people will want different things. I feel like a good middle ground for all five points you all discussed in the tier list itself (story, characters, gameplay, presentation, maps) would be either Sacred Stones or Path of Radiance. Both have some of the higher-tier stories in the franchise and a bunch of great maps, along with fun gameplay mechanics like branching promotions and BEXP. I'd argue that SS excels in its presentation as the last GBAFE, while PoR has a more fun cast of characters.
Id say any of the games where casual mode is available (Awakening and onwards) so they don't have to worry about permanently losing characters until they are personally ready to take off that handicap. This should help avoid unfair situations and they will also have time to connect to the characters as they continue to ease into the gameplay. Also its not just one game so players can still enjoy quite a lot before deciding they might want to go back to enjoy the older games. I wanted to be fair to all the enteries in the series.
Yeah, this really makes sense. As for me, my introduction was Fe7 when it released on NSO. Personally, I thought the story and characters were great (Lyn, Elliwood [who I first thought was Roy], and Sain) and I felt like it taught me the mechanics (simple as they were) perfectly. I'm glad I started with this one, but I'll admit, I didn't compare it to other RPGs I'd played (Mostly FF7 and Miitopia :D). The whole experience just felt completely different. I would recommend that game to everyone, RPG fan or not, even through my knowledge of the game's many flaws.
For me, I think Path of Radiance is the best game to start for new players. It’s a good mix of a good story and simple enough gameplay to understand core Fire Emblem mechanic. It’s always fun bringing up this age old question especially for the Fire Emblem series with how varied each game experience is going to be for everyone.
FE Awakening was my entry point and is likely the best for those moving in from other game series. I am the kind of guy the commenter is referring to. I was looking for a turn-based strategy game, got a recommendation from a random Best Buy worker and bought Awakening @ GameStop with no instructions and no knowledge of the other games in the series. I was surprised by the character development, nebulous plot line, breeding children and the sophisticated intimate relationship between Owain & Lucina. My chess pieces suddenly had big personalities, weird back stories and could make new pieces! Roughly, my game progression from childhood, which may be fairly typical for my age group: Chess --> Stratego, Risk, Cards etc... --> Secret of Mana (1993) --> Panzer & Allied General (1994-5) --> Heroes of Might & Magic 2 & 3 (1996+) --> Age of Empires (1997+) --> Zeldas, Mario Karts with the kids --> Awakening (2012+) --> Fates Conquest (2015+) --> Three Houses --> Engage (half-way through) --> Bravely Default 2 (gift from IRL waifu) is probably next. For me, Awakening is the dividing line between game pieces having & not having personalities and complex dialogue, and that was the hook.
There's a lot of games that do a bad job at teaching you how to play the game, so I don't usually look at a franchise and pick out one that provides that. Anyone else that's in the Project Moon sphere will know that like second nature. Generalizing people to be looking for one thing or another in their games is a bit... crude? I always ask people what they value in their games before I start throwing suggestions at them. If they value gameplay the most, I'll go for that. If they want a narrative, I'll pick something that I think delivers. FE7 is still on my list for FE starters when someone says they want a game that provides good gameplay that isn't so different from the majority of other games, that's something that FE7 delivers on incredibly well. If you wanted a game with more narrative but doesn't sacrifice the game itself, I would definitely lean more towards FE4 or FE9 though. This isn't FE related, but recently I had someone ask me if they should try one of my personal favorite games of all time, Ender Lilies, and as much as I think "Everyone should give it a shot" I also understand that it won't be for everyone and I honestly didn't know that person for enjoying games that emphasize environmental storytelling the way that game does. This kind of mentality around catering suggestions to the other player and not your own preferences has been on my mind lately, and when it comes to hooking the player, different things will be effective for different people.
I mainly just want to know how the attributes on the units work. I understand weapon triangles giving a "bonus", but without knowing the basic math behind everything, weapon advantage only helps me so much.
Are you talking about the stats? Most fire emblem games strength=physical damage, magic =magic damage, skill=affect hit rate and crit chance, speed=affect avoid and attack speed(ability to double), luck=mainly crit avoid but other stuff too depending on game, defence=negate physical damage and resistance=negate magic damage. Specific calculations differ from game to game though.
@@nekonomicon2983 It's almost certainly varied across games, I know for a fact that it was +1 Atk +15 Hit for WTA and the inverse for WTD in some titles, but overall it's also ironically not as impactful in the long run as you would think.
Excelblem has done a whole video ruclips.net/video/dP74QyybGqE/видео.html on the weapon triangle in each game. In many, it leverages weapon rank, e.g. for an E rank lancer "lance beats sword" is inconsequential but for an A rank lancer it does make for a better chance to hit and a better chance to dodge. Further complicating the outcome are the different ways different games rig the actual hit chance compared to nominal. (Combat forecasts show nominal.) Special effectiveness (such as anti-flyer damage from bows, or anti-mounted from ridersbane) may be more significant. Concentrate on learning the damage calculations first, especially the downside. Remember that over the many combats throughout a game, our units are bound to sometimes miss a 90% hit (miss a 90% double both times, even) and enemies sometimes twice land a 30% hit double with 2% crit. Echoes being the example I know, one bit of maths there that isn't explained is that crit is attacker skill + luck, minus victim's luck, all divided by 2 for % chance, then add any weapon or spell bonus. Which with most enemies having zero luck, and no bonus to their weapon or spell, a unit of ours with luck greater than enemy skill is guaranteed safe from being on the wrong end of a crit.
So many times when this “best first game?” question comes up we make the HUGE assumption that this fictional new person is going to play every game in the series. That is just not realistic unless we know they already like this kind of game (in which case they’ve probably already played FE). If you are trying to get someone to try Fire Emblem (or anything new), the best place to start is the very best of the series so they also fall in love, then they can explore more. Good thing the community is so united on what the best game in the series is, right guys? Guys?
I agree with some of the stuff that youre saying but not all of it. Most of them are nitpicks but the biggest thing is i would never, ever recommend a Fates game as someone first game.
Agreed, there ia no single game that is a must first play. There needs to be a clarification for what part of the gameplay that is being demonstrated at its peak.
I stick with Fire Emblem 7 because Lynmode was a very fun way to introduce you to the mechanics and it'd be annoying to play on forced normal mode once you've moved on to other games. It's also cool since it offers multiple diffivulties to face when you return after playing other titles.
Best game to start with would be hero's. Very beginner friendly, very simplified and no permadeath. Once you get bored of that try a mainline or warriors game.
fe9 with the instruction manual was always better than fe7 anyways and is the average fav fe game of fe fans. i usually just tell people to play the best in the series if i’m recommending a series. and if they can’t like they it’s just doomed for them then… but if i know what they like maybe i’ll look for one that appeals to them. but eh, usually they just like good things and think they like certain aspects because they happen to be in other games they’ve played. and they like those games because they’re good. but not necessarily because of those details and enough for those similarities to carry the entire experience of another game. so what i’m saying is often our preference for types of mechanics/strengths, mostly for a novice/inexperienced players, are kinda exaggerated and preconceived by bias. really the main advantage for this is getting them motivated cause i find when you compare a game to a game they know they’re way more likely to actually play it. anyways i think people like the total package but will sum it down to its basics and might miss the rest without realising.
I'll still say FE11 might be good because I think Fire Emblem is a game full of failure and FE11 is all about failure either story or game play "oh you fail saving Tiki? Don't worry Goto have a back up plan, oh you didn't get the stone? Don't worry Goto got your back. Oh you didn't get the true Falchon? Don't worry we still have a back up plan " The game award you while playing bad and I think it's the core of Fire Emblem "suffering" and for the replay value is to get good like maybe next time you don't have to use the back up plan and see a different dialog (i guess) But I guess a prince slaying a dragon is too Cliché for someone , I just like Cliché storries and i think moddern jrpg is taking plot twist too seriously.
I actually started with fire emblem heroes (the gacha one) when it first came out 7 years ago because I saw a friend of mine playing. It's obviously not representive of the series but in a way I don't think it was a bad starting point either and I still play it to this day. I then played various fe games in various order such as fe7 and fe8 via rom hack, as well as awakening, fates and echoes (that same friend lend them to me). I definitely liked them in a way or another but honestly it still wasn't enough to let me fall in love with the series, until three houses came out and easly became my absolute favorite game on the switch. I spent over 300 hours playing each route (some of them even twice) experimenting with different units and difficulty settings. That for me was the breaking point, I finally got all the good of fire emblem gameplay sistem and map design, with a great story and an almost infinite lore to explore. I understand those who didn't really get into 3H because it can be a little different from other fe games at times, but for me that was probably the whole point of liking it more. I'm also currently going through fire emblem engage (I'm late I know) and I've been having a great time (I'm at chapter 12 or so) like I always do with fire emblem gameplay but we are far from the three houses story and general appeal of the characters. That might get me some haters but I honestly think that the almost all the fire emblem games I played had an average story with some average characters and almost always a great gameplay, which is fun but at that point every fe game could be a good starting point imo
I definitely think there are games that are best to start with (*cough* FE7 *cough*), but I've always believed that you should play whatever game you want to play. You won't have fun if you feel like you HAVE to play a game. It's important to have fun in a video game, y'know
As someone who has almost always suggested FE7 as an entry point I also found that comment and this video very interesting. I agree that it would be a good idea to move away from the idea of a singular entry point and instead tailor it to what the person likes in a game. But that might be difficult, because old habits die hard, as they say.
I think their point is valid but personally I do _not_ think 3 Houses is a good beginner game. It DOES do an excellent job at luring in new players, and it has all sorts of things that will appeal to different kinds of people. The problem is that _so many_ of its features are unique to itself. A lot of people will inevitably be disappointed when they try other Fire Emblem games and they don't have a big hub area, or easy support-building, or the lesson system, or the branching storyline (unless they play Fates), or the ability to make anyone any class and give them any weapons, etc... The consequence is that there are a lot of people who liked 3 Houses but don't really like or play any other Fire Emblem games. With this in mind I think Echoes (which, disclaimer, I haven't finished yet) is one of the best introductory games. It has a lot of different things going for it that people may find interesting, like the dungeon exploration or town segments. But I also think that these things play a small enough role in the game that if someone goes to another game after this, like Fates or FE7, they won't be too disappointed. It keeps its bells and whistles pretty limited while still being an engaging game. Also, it teaches certain mechanics in easier ways. The radius for raising support seems to be bigger(?) so players will probably still see supports without having to rely on things outside of battle like a meal system. And while the system for doubling is unusual (Spd difference of 1 instead of 5), it does mean that new players are more likely to start paying attention to speed when making decisions. In general, really, it's easier to notice what the stats do since there are much fewer of them (Avo isn't listed, and Str+Mag are combined, for example) It's unfortunate that it doesn't have a Switch port. That's probably the only point 3 Houses has over it.
Echoes was my first and so far only. (I've the other 3DS FEs in my backlog pile, but deliberately chose Echoes first.) I loved it, and a year after finishing it (to end of Act 5, i.e. no postgame) am still full of it. I started blind, but after a point improved my experience by going to a website (Serenes Forest) for info on which classes are 2-stage career paths (one promotion), which are 3-stage (two promotions) and what the respective promotion levels are. I enjoyed the constant feeling of progress, always somebody with a promotion coming up (plus spells and weapon arts unlocking too) and it helped to know which strategic milestone for whom I was working towards next. I also enjoyed it for the variety of pacing, with small battles, middling battles and big set pieces, plus a town or a dungeon interspersed every two or three battle locations. The dungeons adding extra gameplay and the towns being fun breaks contributing to progress without overstaying their welcome. Another advantage is the good-sized cast but split into two squads, with room most of the way through to field the whole of the relevant squad for each battle, so getting to use and enjoy everybody. My one quality-of-life criticism is not getting a prep menu before being attacked by a mobile reinforcement army. Especially defending the map where our healer will be killed before we start, unless in position #2 or #5 in our unit order. Yes we can laugh that off in casual mode, but fixing it takes a reload, which if we are unlucky will mean repeating a fight (as attacker) we'd already won once. In short it is a game about fighting to win (defeat boss being just about the only "pacifist" objective, and that seldom) while making the most of what people and what weapons we are given.
8:35 Three houses definitely got the hook down, the issue is replay ability or at least the beginning part. It was a slog to go through for sure. Engage did it slightly better though it came up short in story telling, horribly predictable and dull story. I myself like Dark Cloud for the PS2 and it's sequel, it is a georama builder (kind of like Sim City) and dungeon crawler with RPG elements. Was made out to be the "Zelda Killer" back in the day but now it's more fun to be it's own thing. Both games stories are pretty good, the gameplay CAN be a bit outdated or janky to say the least but since I grew up with it, I find it endearing, plus that music though is wonderful to listen to. Here's Matataki Village theme, something that's calming and what you could listen to on a calm day- ruclips.net/video/UMvAA3jEwsg/видео.html
Many "newcomer" recommendations hide a certain exclusivity, a sort of elitism (it seems to me). FE4 being a case in point. Recommending FE4 says to me that FE is only for "real" gamers, those "in the know" for whom the automatic go-to place for their next game is a certain website from which to download "illicit" (shall we say) copies of abandonware, and fan translation hacks of forbidden fruit (games never released outside Japan). ( Some content creators, responding recently to an announcement that the rom hack site is being frozen, have given away its identity as a central focus for their online community. Before, many FE tier list compilers, for example, have vaguely mentioned "emulation" with no hint as to how to get started doing it. ) Even that comment you quoted as your starting point, looks to be assuming that the "newcomer", if not one of that select group, will be a longstanding Playstation user with the funds now to branch out to Nintendo. To all commenters who got into Fire Emblem as kids, what about today's kids wanting to progress, those who've had a Switch for a couple of years and will compare FE to SuperMario, Zelda, Pokemon or Dragon Quest XI. Their options are 3 Houses, Engage and (the try-it-for-free one, am I right? - having once bought a Nintendo Switch Online Expansion subscription) FE7. While here in the UK, that Playstation gamer, or an old PC gamer like me, ready to splash out on a different platform, has double the choice with the other option of a second-hand 3DS and its games, all readily available from our CeX high street chain. (Where getting a GBA would be easy and cheap, but copies of its FE games are rarities, with the Radiant pair being rarer still. Are the latter so outstanding as to justify hunting out a working Wii just for them? So Switch games and 3DS games the only realistic contenders.) And do those coming from mobile phone gaming already outnumber all the rest of us combined? Of course it is still fun to compare all FEs as if they were on a level playing field. Imagining that in the afterlife we'll have access to a library of every game ever made, with devices to run them on, for free, no queues, and with all eternity ahead of us in which to play them.
I'm currently playing Fire Emblem 7, just beat chapter 23 and couldn't be more bored with the game. Actually, I'm forcing myself not to drop it. After finishing Dragon Quest 11, I really wanted to play other JRPGs with more than just turn-based combat, which led me to tactical RPGs. At that time, I got a 3DS and decided to play Stella Glow instead of Fire Emblem Awakening, mostly because I think the permadeath system is an important part of the game, and I didn't have the experience to play this way without frustrating myself. Anyway, sometime after beating Stella Glow, I wanted to play Fire Emblem and decided to pick Fire Emblem 7 since it's the starting point everyone recommends. It was a bad choice. The gameplay is basic; no one has skills, but the weapon triangle is interesting. I have 29 units, and it seems like too many of the same, with most of them being useless to the story. The story is really simple-not bad, but not interesting either, failing to keep me curious about what would happen next. Furthermore, I was researching something about the game when I discovered the "support" mechanic that apparently hides much of the story, and I just questioned myself, "WHY???" I don't even remember the game telling me about that. I don't think the game is bad, it's just too simple for someone who has already played JRPGs and tactical JRPGs.
I am not a hardcore Fire Emblem fan, I saw the first trailer for Three Houses, and I was interested. The 2nd trailer I saw a year later and I was hooked so much it made me want to get into my car. Take a chance on this game with a franchise I haven't cared much about. I played Awakening before and that was it. What hooked and kept me on Three Houses was the first that each house offers their own story and outcome. Everything changes on the decision Byleth makes or what house he/she chooses to join. It's not just the story, it's how the characters react to Byleth after events take place. With each house there is a desire I got to want to know them and see if I like em. So what happened? I spent 530 hours on it, trying different things with different people. I played every every house/route then I recently finished another playthrough of the Black Eagles before I do another one of the Blue Lions, then Golden Deer to follow. A newcomer wanted to know who the students were in each house and what made them tick. Not just the students but also people like Manuela, Hanneman, Seteth, Flayn, even Rhea to an extent. I think the desire for Three Houses was to draw people in, the game did that very well offering three houses you can choose from so if you don't pick one, you can pick another on another playthrough. What I loved about Three Houses? what new game plus added with future playthroughs. Let's see what happens when I pick a different dancer next time. The hours I spent on Three Houses, says a lot, considering I do not consider myself to a hardcore Fire Emblem fan. The game did a great job of hooking me and keeping me in. No matter what house I choose there's always something new I can discover through Supports that may have like a certain house/character more. It's that aspect that makes me enjoy Three Houses more with each playthrough, there's something new to discover, even when I didn't realize it. having said all this, some may be completely turned away from Three Houses and it's multiple routes. So many students to know and some cannot be bothered to remember their names. Everything I said I loved about it, can be seen as a huge knock against the game. Even though I'm glad I still play it. For me? Mission accomplished.
Tbh, it can also go the other way around. One could claim that Three Houses did not introduce more people to FE unlike Awakening and Fates, it introduced more people to itself. I have seen a lot of people bounce off of other games in the series hard(an example possibly being Engage, since a lot of the talk against it that I heard would be valid for most games in the series) because they are not like TH and do not contain certain mechanics and elements that TH did. There really is no real right answer in a lot of these newcomer-related questions and a lot of FE7-sayers don't even recommend the game for introductory qualities but moreso because of the major designflaw that the tutorial is sleep inducing and unskippable(That being, unless you play in japanese on the original GBA and do the FE6-link, then you can skip. But just casually on NSO, there's just no way, even in that version).
When it comes down to it, it’s different strokes for different folks. There isn’t one game that’s THE definitive best for new people to start with. I would still argue the 7 is a solid pick BECAUSE of all the hand holding. It was fire emblem at its most basic and taught it to you thoroughly. And if we’re going to argue story and characters, it’s still one of the best in my opinion. It’s hard to pick out one bad character in there. The dynamic of the three lords was fantastic because they felt like real people more than tropes like most of Engage’s cast, the Black Fang was an intriguing antagonistic force feeling like pure evil at first, but then discovering the manipulation and the heartache of the group, and it’s a simple yet engaging story of a group of heroes working to take down a big bad that ends with *SPOILER* fighting a mother effing dragon. 🐉 The only criticism I would give is that it doesn’t have the rollback mechanic like the more recent games have, which is super punishing for new and/or casual players. In that way, I see Three houses is to Blazing Blade like Elden Ring is to Dark Souls 1. You don’t need to play Dark Souls to play and enjoy Elden Ring, but playing Dark Souls 1 first gives you the basics of Elden Ring since it and all the proceeding Dark Souls games jumped off from Dark Souls 1 same as all the FE games after 7 jumped off and expanded from it.
Unrelated to the main point but, I don't necessarily think that fans for life kinda analogy works in this day and age. We can see clear examples of what happens to die hard fanbase after years and years of disappointments in franchises where the fanbase becomes apathetic or don't care as much as they used to. Blizzard in D4, WoW, Star Wars, and Pokemon (to me) a lot of how AAA companies abuse their fan base. But maybe we are aware of the brand for life. I'd imagine if fire emblem brand kept being more disappointments 5x in a row after engage then we can reacess where we stand as a consumer
I've become disabled in th last 5+years had to relearn to talk nd play games. Fire emblems games have helped mi alot. I got epilepsy nd brain damage from a fall. I'm going 2 try nd play those games 2 sea if helps mi better. Thank u kindly for the video
three houses is a terrible game and terrible introduction game, the marketing was really good for it and it launched at the perfect time with no competition around it in the middle of the peak hype cycle of the Switch. It was successful with sales, but a failure of a game, its sales success has nothing to do with the game because if that was the case then Paper Mario Sticker Star is the the greatest paper mario ever made by the logic of sales success. Three Houses actually hurt the Fire Emblem series.
I am genuinely curious to why you believe Three Houses is a terrible game and hurt the series. It has been almost five years and people still talk about it, still play it, still upload videos discussing it and showing off playthroughs. Retention over that amount of time in this era of gaming when the next new big thing is only ever a year away at most is impressive.
Wow, I did not expect to see a full video being made from a comment i made a couple of months back O.o I am very glad that you found my comment insightful!
I 100% agree with trying to rethink how we recommend games, move away from having catch all recommendations and instead look at people and what they value in a game. Not everyone values the same things, and what other things you played before has a huge part in what you like and what expectations you have.
This is somewhat what i was getting at when i wrote that FE7 was a good starting point back in the day, but not anymore. Because most people who got into Fire Emblem at that time were younger players who got it for their GBA, their experience with other games, and especially story focused RPGs were probably very minimal, so having a detailed, extended and safe tutorial was important to them, and replay value was also very good, because most kids only had a handful of games, so there was more of a chance they would replay the few games they owned.
My original comment was made with the assumption that most new players today are coming from other JRPGs (like myself), and that these players will most likely not replay a game unless they really enjoy their first playtrough. This most likely wasn't an accurate assumption, but it is probably describing quite a good chunk of new players to the series, and for these people i don't think FE7 will be viewed as very impressive when its compared to other juggernauts of the JRPG genre.
But there are definitly other groups as well. People who found out about the series through Smash being a huge one. For these people it is probably quite important that the game has characters that they already know from smash. So somthing like FE4 or Echoes, which i did recommend to someone coming from other JRPGs are probably not a very good starting point for someone coming from Smash.
A video going over all the games and what type of people you would recommend them to would be very cool. Alternatively you could try to find more "groups" like the ones i listed, and what games you would recommend to them. Reframing it as User Stories like is used in Software Development could be very interresting here.
Did he pronounce your name right?
@@quickpawmaud it was close enough at least
I think there's a huge blind spot when picking "the game to start with" in terms of considering accessibility. Before a player can fail to connect with the game you recommend for them, they can first fail to pick it up at all. A new player won't go out and emulate an old game from a series they don't know. If I think a person would enjoy FE4, I'd recommend they start with 3H because it's the one on the Switch.
Im proof thats not true, i emulated and started with FE6 simply because the little bit of gameplay i watched from fates looked interesting. And FE6 was the earliest in the series i could start with emulating. So thats where it began. It was a trial by fire and i didnt know you could reset chapters so i played it ironman by accident.
@@bluntlyhonest6803 That experience is not universal, and indeed flies in the face of the thesis "the modern player values their time". While a certain kind of enthusiast player may indeed jump right in the deep end by emulating a title that never even released outside Japan on a whim, that is not a common experience. Moreover, the very move from "saw some Fates" to "emulated FE6" completely invalidates any consideration of "which one to start with" by answering "any one".
@@illusive-mike "Modern player".
Modern players have the attention span of a goldfish and require constant validation and praise at every turn. Thats how we end up with engage.
@@illusive-mike "a new player wont go out and emulate an old game from a series they font know". Is what i was reffering to. I did just that. So it does not invalidate anything, you were just talking about something else entire from what i did.
@@bluntlyhonest6803 Not really. Any generalization will have exceptions, so I highlighted how your exceptional experience is not representative of the way a person would be recommending FE to somebody else. You being the kind of person who would emulate a Japan-only game based on nothing but a glimpse of a vastly different game doesn't make this example a useful reference.
Moreover, Engage is a really funny example to bring up in this context considering how much it failed to attract a new audience.
I would say they should play Advance Wars as their first fire emblem game. That way they can stop yelping about how fire emblem “is a strategy game before everything else” and “three houses is not a fire emblem game”
Advance Wars was my first and is still is my favorite Fire Emblem.
Based take and correct opinion
Three Houses is such an interesting game to talk about. I personally know 3 people who tried it as their first Fire Emblem game. And the reasons you've highlighted are major factors as to what drew them in. Getting to know the students in a Persona copying system, run around the monastery. And a story that tonally goes to a darker place then most other recent games have been.
But then also none of my friends went on to play Engage. A game which tonally feels closer to what the rest of the series is. Especially the newer games. With a lot of anime trope elements, somewhat whimsical art style, while also featuring gameplay that is a step up from Three Houses. Even if it does basically everything else worse. But as the commenter originally said, none of my friends even care that much about the more thought out map design in Engage. Or the amount of fun and unique objectives are in the missions.
In that way Three Houses wasn't representative of the larger series. So my pick would actually be Path of Radiance. Just that the story is still one of the best ones, has pretty easy gameplay, and isn't a unique departure for the series the monastery was. But that said, maybe Path of Radiance was a better representative of the series in 2009 than it is in 2024. Who knows?
yo numb nut... they didn't get the next game that came out because they played three houses and hated it, so now they are soured on fire emblem even though three houses is not a fire emblem game.
Fire Emblem Engage really is the best introductory fire emblem because you are going to desire more after playing it to the end, tons of map variety, fantastic character designs, and most importantly you feel like you went on a journey by the end which is what makes a good story.
Three Houses NEVER goes on a journey! It is an absolute trash story, bland and forgettable characters in every way, and bad writing.
Path of Radiance / Radiant Dawn duo is good because you feel like you went on a grand adventure by the very end (Radiant Dawn) starting from the beginning (Path of Radiance), saw a lot to the world on your journey, and really saw ike grow as a character from start to finish. It is like how Clannad and Clannad After Story works together, and they need each other to be that masterpiece, but as a singular game they suck which is why they are a terrible introductory game because it requires 2 games to fully experience everything and create those memories of going on a long journey alongside Ike.
The m problem with recommending path of radiance and radiant Dawn is how inaccessible to the average person they are, either you have to buy a pre owned one on eBay for like $500 or you have to learn how to emulate, both of which are not going to be as appealing to a first time player then just buying the latest game on the latest console. They are good games but I would not recommend them as an entry point thou.
Oh for sure on a practical level I would still most likely just tell someone to play three houses. Because normal people are more likely to have a switch, and it looks a lot better.
I was kind of thinking of the hypothetical on each game’s merits. But in real life I agree
@@MasterStacona Yes you are totally correct. Also the sun rises in the west and the world is flat
Engage is nothing like the older games, it's a cruel thing to insult the older games that way just because the game adverts repeated the line "appeal to older players" which it never did and was not designed to do.
Unpopular opinion but fe8 has a better tuto than fe7, it's more fluid (you learn the mechanic because the map design asks you to use them instead of a long written tutorial) and you can consults the index if you want and the explanations are more expanded than in fe7. You even get a tuto for the support system with Colm and Neimi. It's also in the in between the old games and the most recent ones. It's also an easier game.
I started out with Three Houses and I think, that there could not have been a better entry point for me. The overall story was intriguing and the shift in viewpoints in the different paths was excellent. Besides Lorenz, I enjoyed talking and getting to know everybody. Combat was easy enough to understand and most of the more nuanced systems that play into that, could be discovered by myself. It got stale on consequent playthroughs, but I had the story to carry me on. So in short, Story and Characters was the main thing that hooked me and kept me going.
Moving on to Engage afterwards and everything switched. The Story was anime tropes 101, most characters were rather bland with only glimpses of interesting quirks, but the Combat was amazing. While story and characters are most of the time the most important thing for me, by the time I started with Engage, I was able to appreciate the combat side a lot more, which kept me going this time. Otherwise I might have dropped this halfway through.
Where does that leave me for future FE games? I think, that I'm at a point where 1 strong aspect of the Game can carry me to the End, even if the Rest is only mediocre. But I need Story and Characters to do another playthrough. For the older Titles, I fear that I'm missing a nostalgia factor to actually complete them, when the general UX/UI is outdated. So I'm reluctant to give them a try. I had the same issue with e.g. Final Fantasy 6 & 8.
Regarding comparing to other Games, I can't really follow the thought process of comparing it to, for example, the mainline Final Fantasy series, when the combat is so different.
Personally, I could have only really compared it to Symphony of War: Nephilim Saga and on a strech, maybe XCOM. But in essence, the combat side of things was effectively new to me.
The commenter raises a very valid point in that the best first FE can vary depending on the person that is going to play it.
10:52 If the newcomer is interested in heavy tactical gameplay (and ideally already has a background in S/TRPGs), I'd actually recommend New Mystery. It's a much more vanilla experience (likely more similar to what the person already has experience in) while still being very much an FE game. Fe12's prologue, I believe, does a great job of teaching you the basics as well some more slightly advanced things, and it does so without any handholding. The problem is that it can get frustrating, but that's why I recommend it to newcomers who already are hardened strategy game players who likely are already used to this.
You know, i think it’s better to recommend three houses because everyone loves it, and it’s easy to play and buy. It doesn’t matter if they play the other games now, they likes that one game and if another one that comes out that strikes that same itch, they’ll play it, and maybe they’ll go back and play other games like path of radiance or echoes which have a similar vibe. Or maybe they won’t who cares, they had fun with a game you love.
i agree when it comes to recommending the series there are so many games on the series and there differences will appeal to different people so categorizing the recommendations would be best
I recently got into Fire Emblem. I bounced off of Awakening when I first tried it years ago for whatever reason. But the game that hooked me, of all things.... Was Engage!
The gameplay was just instantly addicting for me and I think it does a really good job of introducing mechanics at a good clip to keep things super interesting. I can easily tolerate a mid story for stellar gameplay, so that hasnt been any obstacle for me. I recently started playing FE7 and have been enjoying that so far too!
Getting into my personal history with RPGs as a genre and how I didn't really appreciate them til a certain point could take an entire comment. I could also talk about why I don't like Xenoblade 2 (I respect your opinion for the record and I see why people like it; I just think the "distractions" you mention pile up for me to the point where I just can't stand it.), but I'll just keep it at Fire Emblem.
Like many a new fan in the early 2010s, my familiarity with the series stems from Smash Bros. and Marth/Roy/Ike were all pretty popular characters within Smash. I'd just got a 3DS for Christmas and saw a trailer for Fire Emblem Awakening. I played the demo and instantly fell in love. Of course being a teenager at the time this was an introduction into a more "complex" RPG-type game, that being the SRPG. Granted I'm aware of how easy it is to break Awakening but I also played Normal/Casual since I'm a coward. However after Awakening I basically didn't go back to it. I never played Fates nor Echoes when they came out, and while I did dabble into FE7 a bit, I never got far. The next FE for me would happen to be Three Houses. It was pretty damn great even if extremely flawed. I played every route like a damn maniac and idk if I ruined the game for myself because of that LOL. I still love it and have a ton of respect for it still. I also got a chance to play OG FE1 and FE2 because I'm a damn masochist for antiquated RPGs like these. I played only Book 1 of FE3 and a little bit of Book 2 but never finished it. My next FE was Engage. I enjoy it a lot despite the story not really being good. I think the art style doesn't really get enough credit since the artist's work is honestly pretty stellar when separating it from the game models. I never finished Engage just cuz it was getting tough for me at a point and FE can really be draining if you aren't mentally prepared for it, so I backed off.
Another reason I stopped was a bit of a smaller reason, but I essentially wanna play most of the FEs that interest me in order for me to appreciate things like the remixes and the gimmicks of each Emblem map. So some time in the month of July I would end up playing a certain game that's been rumored to get a remake for a good few years now: Genealogy of the Holy War. I also happened to be learning Japanese at the time, meaning instead of using Project Naga, I played the entire game in its original language of Japanese (S/O to Naga for making a fantastic fan translation even if I never used it btw). I beat the game at around August and damn it was an experience. The story and presentation were so good for this kind of game at the time, and the music to me is iconic and will be iconic when this game is given to more hands in the future. Since then I've started Path of Radiance but I stopped at either chapter 5 or 6 (when a certain something happens to a certain someone without spoiling), but I DID play Binding Blade. I thought it was OK but definitely flawed from front to back. I also played Echoes recently and LOVED it even if Gaiden's DNA is all over it. Presentation for these games really upped to ante with Echoes, and Engage continued the tradition. Before getting back to Engage I at least wanna play both Tellius games, Blazing Blade, Sacred Stones, and MAYBE Thracia, but I'll save that for a good long while.
Now what the hell does this have to do with the topic of the video in question? Uhh well I do like FE a ton lol. In terms of the best game to start with, that's really hard to boil down since different gamers want different things. I do think that one commentor was right about the common JRPG fan: they want a game with the best worldbuilding, cast of characters, and overall narrative. FE4, FE9+10, and Echoes make sense. Awakening is a weird one since it was obviously a first FE for a ton of people, but after Three Houses trounced it in sales it does sorta lampshade Awakening's position a bit. It will forever be the most important game in the series as it was the savior, and a lot of ideas being a hodgepodge of different ideas from previous games really makes it obvious. In that sense it was the original Engage but with a more "logical" story. The historical context of this game will definitely stand the test of time, but because of this it's hard to recommend since when you remove that aspect of being "the savior", what else does it offer? Well there's obviously things like pair-ups, and for those interested in the lore of Archanea then hey there's something there I guess. Compare that to Three Houses where the entire world is original, three different sets of cast members to choose from, and the professor/student angle being present in the game. Hell even Engage, for as insane and whacky as it is, at least has the Emblem mechanic for use in extremely unique and unorthodox play. Echoes also has the unique factor of being a two-path story where progression is very unique and seeing how the stories intertwine is part of the appeal, along with the added characters in both character's paths (mostly Alm's side though lol). Despite all that I said I still look forward to replaying it someday. I got a lot of my own friends into it and I'll always cherish that about it even if its lost its shine over the years.
Regarding recommendations I actually HIGHLY recommend checking out the video "Why You Should Play Fire Emblem (And Where To Begin)" by Vivi's Variety Show. It's a great video that goes over every game, discusses its strengths and weaknesses, and even categorizes which types of FE you'd be interested it in whether its for narrative or gameplay. Plus his channel is severely underrated (also please watch his Gintama video I beg of you)
I personally started with Fates Conquest. Not the best game to starr but it made me want to play the other games. I like most of the the games starting 7 to Echoes. And yeah Fates doesn't have the best story but I like it. Then I went out got Awakening and Echoes. I liked Awakening but Echoes..... made me mad. It just didn't work out for me mainly in act 4. I was going to drop it but in the end I beat it. That left bad taste in mouth. Everyone has things they like and dislike but it's not really fair to try and tell people they shouldn't like what they like. I get alot of 'hate' when it comes to me like Fates.
I entered FE with Awakening, picked Conquest over Birthright since it matched my personality, but skipped Echoes after hearing reviews like yours about it.
I thought Conquest was just fine and has characters I will remember -- though I did rework the plot line in my head a bit, and found male Corrin a bit weak.
Maybe I should move through Conquest on the crossplay.
I know you mentioned the social aspect that some fans might be attracted to, but I’m surprised that I don’t often see mention of the pairings aspect of FE being a major draw for some fans. As a resident hardcore shipper myself, it’s what drew me to the series and kept me because I had never seen another series like it that allowed me to not only have the MC/self insert be given romance options, but also the rest of the cast.
I’m always a fan of story and characters, but FE unfortunately never stands out compared to so many other games out there that do those things so much better in my opinion. For cases like mine, I think the pairing mechanics are what make the series unique enough to keep coming back. Otherwise to me FE would just be another SRPG in the sea of others that might have an edge in areas it doesn’t.
I always recommend people 1 of 2 games for their first fire emblem.
Path of radiance, because it is the second best in the series in my opinion, and it isnt a hard game. But even better, if they DO end up enjoying the series and want more, they can immedietly jump into radiant dawn, which is imo the best in the series. The only issue is the games are expensive and difficult to find, but emulation is a thing a nintendo can suck it. XD
The second game i recommend to people is sacred stones. Its an easy fire emblem, with a good story, and thanks to the tower, they dont need to worry about getting stuck very often, so it's a great starting point for anyone.
you know i tried getting a family member into the fe series with path of radiance but it didnt work so well. idk there was just a vibe about it that seemed sort of inaccessible i think it was the units coming and going from your army early game. fe7 (and sacred stones probably too) seemed a lot more accessible and enjoyable to them tho.
@@waffleman9000 most people I've introduced with por only really had an issue with the map movement animations taking so long.
I still think Blazing Blade is what I would consider the best introduction. I just don't agree with the idea that the story is bad or the units don't stand out. It's not some super grand story, but it has good characterization. Far better than the other two GBA games, but probably enough I'd consider it one of the better entries in the series for it. It has so many iconic characters like Lyn, Hector, Sain, and Pent. They're cool and flashy and interesting and have time for you to get to know them even without supports. Lyn mode is a bonus, but not the primary reason I think it's good for new players gameplay-wise.
Blazing blade is just a game that doesn't think you should be severely punished. Lyn mode is easy, and anyone who dies there comes back after. Eliwood/hector mode starts you off with Marcus who is going to be a powerhouse all game. If he dies it's honestly not a big deal, any of the other cavaliers can step up. And if you leveled Sain in lyn mode he'll be even stronger than Marcus anyways. Oswin is a solid unit that keeps you in check if you accidentally overextend Marcus, and by being a slow armor knight he struggles to get overextended and put in as dangerous situations. But then towards the latter half of the game you're always being given standout units that work in case you've gotten everyone good killed. Isadora is a free paladin who only looks bad if you compare her to Marcus or leveled up Sain. Pent is amazing, and Louise is perfectly good. Hawkeye is super good. Athos can practically solo the last map if you lost everyone else. These are all characters that you are guaranteed to get, you can't miss them.
The game is letting you play and fuck up and experience the consequences and get the fire emblem experience so you can decide if you like the fire emblem experience. But it's still holding your hand so you can be eased into that experience, as opposed to something like Three Houses where everyone is an investment and every loss is devastatingly felt. The thing is... if you get into the series on three houses and make it as little of a fire emblem game as possible, you'll then find you have no interest in other fire emblem games. You'll look at them and see "oh but there's no turn wheel or casual mode so what if I lose someone? i have to restart the whole chapter?" They won't understand that the games are explicitly designed so that permadeath doesn't hurt you because they played the game where it DID hurt you.
Different games have different scales on how much death actually matters. I think Blazing blade is one of the lowest because of all the units you get handed for free that also just happen to be the best in the game and require little to no investment to get them there. Sacred Stones has a very small cast and is more about growth so people dying there sucks, even if Seth is so good he can practically solo the game (except he's not so good that a bit of bad luck can't take him out so if you rely entirely on him without being super familiar with the game you'd probably have to reset to cancel out his death). I think Sacred Stones is easy, but it's not as friendly as that easiness would have you believe.
Back on the uniqueness of units... I feel like modern customization systems really took that away. They all just feel the same if you don't mind taking them out of their original class. 3DS customization wasn't as bad, but it still lessens their uniqueness a little bit I think. I don't think not having skills was that big of a deal. I feel like the skill-less class-restricted units in blazing blade feel more unique than the units of engage. and ESPECIALLY three houses. without even pre-existing classes for the students and the way the class system works, the Three Houses cast just feel so generic gameplay wise.
Now branching promotions? I don't think that took away from it, but I still feel blazing blade is just a better game to get hooked onto fire emblem even without it.
That is a really good point about the different strengths each game provides for new players. The way that my journey into the franchise went, I started with Fates, then Awakening, then I think Echoes was third, and finally cracked into the older entries by playing FE7. thohillesland has a good point that a lot of JRPG fans will compare it to other series first, and you also have a good point that different people will want different things. I feel like a good middle ground for all five points you all discussed in the tier list itself (story, characters, gameplay, presentation, maps) would be either Sacred Stones or Path of Radiance. Both have some of the higher-tier stories in the franchise and a bunch of great maps, along with fun gameplay mechanics like branching promotions and BEXP. I'd argue that SS excels in its presentation as the last GBAFE, while PoR has a more fun cast of characters.
Id say any of the games where casual mode is available (Awakening and onwards) so they don't have to worry about permanently losing characters until they are personally ready to take off that handicap.
This should help avoid unfair situations and they will also have time to connect to the characters as they continue to ease into the gameplay.
Also its not just one game so players can still enjoy quite a lot before deciding they might want to go back to enjoy the older games. I wanted to be fair to all the enteries in the series.
Yeah, this really makes sense. As for me, my introduction was Fe7 when it released on NSO. Personally, I thought the story and characters were great (Lyn, Elliwood [who I first thought was Roy], and Sain) and I felt like it taught me the mechanics (simple as they were) perfectly. I'm glad I started with this one, but I'll admit, I didn't compare it to other RPGs I'd played (Mostly FF7 and Miitopia :D). The whole experience just felt completely different. I would recommend that game to everyone, RPG fan or not, even through my knowledge of the game's many flaws.
For me, I think Path of Radiance is the best game to start for new players. It’s a good mix of a good story and simple enough gameplay to understand core Fire Emblem mechanic.
It’s always fun bringing up this age old question especially for the Fire Emblem series with how varied each game experience is going to be for everyone.
FE Awakening was my entry point and is likely the best for those moving in from other game series. I am the kind of guy the commenter is referring to.
I was looking for a turn-based strategy game, got a recommendation from a random Best Buy worker and bought Awakening @ GameStop with no instructions and no knowledge of the other games in the series.
I was surprised by the character development, nebulous plot line, breeding children and the sophisticated intimate relationship between Owain & Lucina.
My chess pieces suddenly had big personalities, weird back stories and could make new pieces!
Roughly, my game progression from childhood, which may be fairly typical for my age group:
Chess --> Stratego, Risk, Cards etc... --> Secret of Mana (1993) --> Panzer & Allied General (1994-5) --> Heroes of Might & Magic 2 & 3 (1996+) --> Age of Empires (1997+) --> Zeldas, Mario Karts with the kids --> Awakening (2012+) --> Fates Conquest (2015+) --> Three Houses --> Engage (half-way through) --> Bravely Default 2 (gift from IRL waifu) is probably next.
For me, Awakening is the dividing line between game pieces having & not having personalities and complex dialogue, and that was the hook.
There's a lot of games that do a bad job at teaching you how to play the game, so I don't usually look at a franchise and pick out one that provides that. Anyone else that's in the Project Moon sphere will know that like second nature. Generalizing people to be looking for one thing or another in their games is a bit... crude? I always ask people what they value in their games before I start throwing suggestions at them. If they value gameplay the most, I'll go for that. If they want a narrative, I'll pick something that I think delivers. FE7 is still on my list for FE starters when someone says they want a game that provides good gameplay that isn't so different from the majority of other games, that's something that FE7 delivers on incredibly well. If you wanted a game with more narrative but doesn't sacrifice the game itself, I would definitely lean more towards FE4 or FE9 though.
This isn't FE related, but recently I had someone ask me if they should try one of my personal favorite games of all time, Ender Lilies, and as much as I think "Everyone should give it a shot" I also understand that it won't be for everyone and I honestly didn't know that person for enjoying games that emphasize environmental storytelling the way that game does. This kind of mentality around catering suggestions to the other player and not your own preferences has been on my mind lately, and when it comes to hooking the player, different things will be effective for different people.
I mainly just want to know how the attributes on the units work. I understand weapon triangles giving a "bonus", but without knowing the basic math behind everything, weapon advantage only helps me so much.
I think triangle advantage is plus 2 damage and +20% hit.
Might be wrong on that but I think it's something like that.
@@nekonomicon2983 well you cant answer the question before knowing what game in particular he is talking about.
Are you talking about the stats? Most fire emblem games strength=physical damage, magic =magic damage, skill=affect hit rate and crit chance, speed=affect avoid and attack speed(ability to double), luck=mainly crit avoid but other stuff too depending on game, defence=negate physical damage and resistance=negate magic damage.
Specific calculations differ from game to game though.
@@nekonomicon2983 It's almost certainly varied across games, I know for a fact that it was +1 Atk +15 Hit for WTA and the inverse for WTD in some titles, but overall it's also ironically not as impactful in the long run as you would think.
Excelblem has done a whole video ruclips.net/video/dP74QyybGqE/видео.html on the weapon triangle in each game. In many, it leverages weapon rank, e.g. for an E rank lancer "lance beats sword" is inconsequential but for an A rank lancer it does make for a better chance to hit and a better chance to dodge.
Further complicating the outcome are the different ways different games rig the actual hit chance compared to nominal. (Combat forecasts show nominal.)
Special effectiveness (such as anti-flyer damage from bows, or anti-mounted from ridersbane) may be more significant. Concentrate on learning the damage calculations first, especially the downside. Remember that over the many combats throughout a game, our units are bound to sometimes miss a 90% hit (miss a 90% double both times, even) and enemies sometimes twice land a 30% hit double with 2% crit.
Echoes being the example I know, one bit of maths there that isn't explained is that crit is attacker skill + luck, minus victim's luck, all divided by 2 for % chance, then add any weapon or spell bonus. Which with most enemies having zero luck, and no bonus to their weapon or spell, a unit of ours with luck greater than enemy skill is guaranteed safe from being on the wrong end of a crit.
So many times when this “best first game?” question comes up we make the HUGE assumption that this fictional new person is going to play every game in the series. That is just not realistic unless we know they already like this kind of game (in which case they’ve probably already played FE).
If you are trying to get someone to try Fire Emblem (or anything new), the best place to start is the very best of the series so they also fall in love, then they can explore more. Good thing the community is so united on what the best game in the series is, right guys? Guys?
I agree with some of the stuff that youre saying but not all of it.
Most of them are nitpicks but the biggest thing is i would never, ever recommend a Fates game as someone first game.
Tear Ring Saga
Agreed, there ia no single game that is a must first play. There needs to be a clarification for what part of the gameplay that is being demonstrated at its peak.
I stick with Fire Emblem 7 because Lynmode was a very fun way to introduce you to the mechanics and it'd be annoying to play on forced normal mode once you've moved on to other games. It's also cool since it offers multiple diffivulties to face when you return after playing other titles.
Best game to start with would be hero's. Very beginner friendly, very simplified and no permadeath. Once you get bored of that try a mainline or warriors game.
Start on conquest & hard? Ya crazy mate? XD that game’s harsh for newbies.
fe9 with the instruction manual was always better than fe7 anyways and is the average fav fe game of fe fans.
i usually just tell people to play the best in the series if i’m recommending a series. and if they can’t like they it’s just doomed for them then…
but if i know what they like maybe i’ll look for one that appeals to them. but eh, usually they just like good things and think they like certain aspects because they happen to be in other games they’ve played. and they like those games because they’re good. but not necessarily because of those details and enough for those similarities to carry the entire experience of another game.
so what i’m saying is often our preference for types of mechanics/strengths, mostly for a novice/inexperienced players, are kinda exaggerated and preconceived by bias.
really the main advantage for this is getting them motivated cause i find when you compare a game to a game they know they’re way more likely to actually play it.
anyways i think people like the total package but will sum it down to its basics and might miss the rest without realising.
I'm gonna sabotage this video by Rescuing it, then claiming all the views/EXP for myself 😈
I'll still say FE11 might be good because I think Fire Emblem is a game full of failure and FE11 is all about failure either story or game play "oh you fail saving Tiki? Don't worry Goto have a back up plan, oh you didn't get the stone? Don't worry Goto got your back. Oh you didn't get the true Falchon? Don't worry we still have a back up plan "
The game award you while playing bad and I think it's the core of Fire Emblem "suffering" and for the replay value is to get good like maybe next time you don't have to use the back up plan and see a different dialog (i guess)
But I guess a prince slaying a dragon is too Cliché for someone , I just like Cliché storries and i think moddern jrpg is taking plot twist too seriously.
I left this comment just so you read it and waste 1.8 seconds of your life. Cool vid.
Read it I shall, and waste more time of my life replying to it while I'm at work, I will.
I actually started with fire emblem heroes (the gacha one) when it first came out 7 years ago because I saw a friend of mine playing. It's obviously not representive of the series but in a way I don't think it was a bad starting point either and I still play it to this day. I then played various fe games in various order such as fe7 and fe8 via rom hack, as well as awakening, fates and echoes (that same friend lend them to me). I definitely liked them in a way or another but honestly it still wasn't enough to let me fall in love with the series, until three houses came out and easly became my absolute favorite game on the switch. I spent over 300 hours playing each route (some of them even twice) experimenting with different units and difficulty settings. That for me was the breaking point, I finally got all the good of fire emblem gameplay sistem and map design, with a great story and an almost infinite lore to explore. I understand those who didn't really get into 3H because it can be a little different from other fe games at times, but for me that was probably the whole point of liking it more. I'm also currently going through fire emblem engage (I'm late I know) and I've been having a great time (I'm at chapter 12 or so) like I always do with fire emblem gameplay but we are far from the three houses story and general appeal of the characters. That might get me some haters but I honestly think that the almost all the fire emblem games I played had an average story with some average characters and almost always a great gameplay, which is fun but at that point every fe game could be a good starting point imo
I definitely think there are games that are best to start with (*cough* FE7 *cough*), but I've always believed that you should play whatever game you want to play. You won't have fun if you feel like you HAVE to play a game. It's important to have fun in a video game, y'know
As someone who has almost always suggested FE7 as an entry point I also found that comment and this video very interesting. I agree that it would be a good idea to move away from the idea of a singular entry point and instead tailor it to what the person likes in a game. But that might be difficult, because old habits die hard, as they say.
I think their point is valid but personally I do _not_ think 3 Houses is a good beginner game.
It DOES do an excellent job at luring in new players, and it has all sorts of things that will appeal to different kinds of people. The problem is that _so many_ of its features are unique to itself.
A lot of people will inevitably be disappointed when they try other Fire Emblem games and they don't have a big hub area, or easy support-building, or the lesson system, or the branching storyline (unless they play Fates), or the ability to make anyone any class and give them any weapons, etc...
The consequence is that there are a lot of people who liked 3 Houses but don't really like or play any other Fire Emblem games.
With this in mind I think Echoes (which, disclaimer, I haven't finished yet) is one of the best introductory games. It has a lot of different things going for it that people may find interesting, like the dungeon exploration or town segments. But I also think that these things play a small enough role in the game that if someone goes to another game after this, like Fates or FE7, they won't be too disappointed. It keeps its bells and whistles pretty limited while still being an engaging game.
Also, it teaches certain mechanics in easier ways. The radius for raising support seems to be bigger(?) so players will probably still see supports without having to rely on things outside of battle like a meal system. And while the system for doubling is unusual (Spd difference of 1 instead of 5), it does mean that new players are more likely to start paying attention to speed when making decisions. In general, really, it's easier to notice what the stats do since there are much fewer of them (Avo isn't listed, and Str+Mag are combined, for example)
It's unfortunate that it doesn't have a Switch port. That's probably the only point 3 Houses has over it.
Echoes was my first and so far only. (I've the other 3DS FEs in my backlog pile, but deliberately chose Echoes first.) I loved it, and a year after finishing it (to end of Act 5, i.e. no postgame) am still full of it.
I started blind, but after a point improved my experience by going to a website (Serenes Forest) for info on which classes are 2-stage career paths (one promotion), which are 3-stage (two promotions) and what the respective promotion levels are. I enjoyed the constant feeling of progress, always somebody with a promotion coming up (plus spells and weapon arts unlocking too) and it helped to know which strategic milestone for whom I was working towards next.
I also enjoyed it for the variety of pacing, with small battles, middling battles and big set pieces, plus a town or a dungeon interspersed every two or three battle locations. The dungeons adding extra gameplay and the towns being fun breaks contributing to progress without overstaying their welcome.
Another advantage is the good-sized cast but split into two squads, with room most of the way through to field the whole of the relevant squad for each battle, so getting to use and enjoy everybody.
My one quality-of-life criticism is not getting a prep menu before being attacked by a mobile reinforcement army. Especially defending the map where our healer will be killed before we start, unless in position #2 or #5 in our unit order. Yes we can laugh that off in casual mode, but fixing it takes a reload, which if we are unlucky will mean repeating a fight (as attacker) we'd already won once.
In short it is a game about fighting to win (defeat boss being just about the only "pacifist" objective, and that seldom) while making the most of what people and what weapons we are given.
8:35 Three houses definitely got the hook down, the issue is replay ability or at least the beginning part. It was a slog to go through for sure. Engage did it slightly better though it came up short in story telling, horribly predictable and dull story.
I myself like Dark Cloud for the PS2 and it's sequel, it is a georama builder (kind of like Sim City) and dungeon crawler with RPG elements. Was made out to be the "Zelda Killer" back in the day but now it's more fun to be it's own thing.
Both games stories are pretty good, the gameplay CAN be a bit outdated or janky to say the least but since I grew up with it, I find it endearing, plus that music though is wonderful to listen to.
Here's Matataki Village theme, something that's calming and what you could listen to on a calm day- ruclips.net/video/UMvAA3jEwsg/видео.html
For me, the best game to start with is Fire Emblem 7 on the GBA.
Many "newcomer" recommendations hide a certain exclusivity, a sort of elitism (it seems to me). FE4 being a case in point. Recommending FE4 says to me that FE is only for "real" gamers, those "in the know" for whom the automatic go-to place for their next game is a certain website from which to download "illicit" (shall we say) copies of abandonware, and fan translation hacks of forbidden fruit (games never released outside Japan).
( Some content creators, responding recently to an announcement that the rom hack site is being frozen, have given away its identity as a central focus for their online community. Before, many FE tier list compilers, for example, have vaguely mentioned "emulation" with no hint as to how to get started doing it. )
Even that comment you quoted as your starting point, looks to be assuming that the "newcomer", if not one of that select group, will be a longstanding Playstation user with the funds now to branch out to Nintendo. To all commenters who got into Fire Emblem as kids, what about today's kids wanting to progress, those who've had a Switch for a couple of years and will compare FE to SuperMario, Zelda, Pokemon or Dragon Quest XI. Their options are 3 Houses, Engage and (the try-it-for-free one, am I right? - having once bought a Nintendo Switch Online Expansion subscription) FE7.
While here in the UK, that Playstation gamer, or an old PC gamer like me, ready to splash out on a different platform, has double the choice with the other option of a second-hand 3DS and its games, all readily available from our CeX high street chain. (Where getting a GBA would be easy and cheap, but copies of its FE games are rarities, with the Radiant pair being rarer still. Are the latter so outstanding as to justify hunting out a working Wii just for them? So Switch games and 3DS games the only realistic contenders.)
And do those coming from mobile phone gaming already outnumber all the rest of us combined?
Of course it is still fun to compare all FEs as if they were on a level playing field. Imagining that in the afterlife we'll have access to a library of every game ever made, with devices to run them on, for free, no queues, and with all eternity ahead of us in which to play them.
I'm currently playing Fire Emblem 7, just beat chapter 23 and couldn't be more bored with the game. Actually, I'm forcing myself not to drop it. After finishing Dragon Quest 11, I really wanted to play other JRPGs with more than just turn-based combat, which led me to tactical RPGs. At that time, I got a 3DS and decided to play Stella Glow instead of Fire Emblem Awakening, mostly because I think the permadeath system is an important part of the game, and I didn't have the experience to play this way without frustrating myself.
Anyway, sometime after beating Stella Glow, I wanted to play Fire Emblem and decided to pick Fire Emblem 7 since it's the starting point everyone recommends. It was a bad choice. The gameplay is basic; no one has skills, but the weapon triangle is interesting. I have 29 units, and it seems like too many of the same, with most of them being useless to the story. The story is really simple-not bad, but not interesting either, failing to keep me curious about what would happen next. Furthermore, I was researching something about the game when I discovered the "support" mechanic that apparently hides much of the story, and I just questioned myself, "WHY???" I don't even remember the game telling me about that.
I don't think the game is bad, it's just too simple for someone who has already played JRPGs and tactical JRPGs.
I am not a hardcore Fire Emblem fan, I saw the first trailer for Three Houses, and I was interested. The 2nd trailer I saw a year later and I was hooked so much it made me want to get into my car. Take a chance on this game with a franchise I haven't cared much about. I played Awakening before and that was it.
What hooked and kept me on Three Houses was the first that each house offers their own story and outcome. Everything changes on the decision Byleth makes or what house he/she chooses to join.
It's not just the story, it's how the characters react to Byleth after events take place. With each house there is a desire I got to want to know them and see if I like em. So what happened? I spent 530 hours on it, trying different things with different people. I played every every house/route then I recently finished another playthrough of the Black Eagles before I do another one of the Blue Lions, then Golden Deer to follow.
A newcomer wanted to know who the students were in each house and what made them tick. Not just the students but also people like Manuela, Hanneman, Seteth, Flayn, even Rhea to an extent.
I think the desire for Three Houses was to draw people in, the game did that very well offering three houses you can choose from so if you don't pick one, you can pick another on another playthrough. What I loved about Three Houses? what new game plus added with future playthroughs. Let's see what happens when I pick a different dancer next time.
The hours I spent on Three Houses, says a lot, considering I do not consider myself to a hardcore Fire Emblem fan. The game did a great job of hooking me and keeping me in. No matter what house I choose there's always something new I can discover through Supports that may have like a certain house/character more. It's that aspect that makes me enjoy Three Houses more with each playthrough, there's something new to discover, even when I didn't realize it.
having said all this, some may be completely turned away from Three Houses and it's multiple routes. So many students to know and some cannot be bothered to remember their names. Everything I said I loved about it, can be seen as a huge knock against the game. Even though I'm glad I still play it.
For me? Mission accomplished.
Tbh, it can also go the other way around. One could claim that Three Houses did not introduce more people to FE unlike Awakening and Fates, it introduced more people to itself. I have seen a lot of people bounce off of other games in the series hard(an example possibly being Engage, since a lot of the talk against it that I heard would be valid for most games in the series) because they are not like TH and do not contain certain mechanics and elements that TH did.
There really is no real right answer in a lot of these newcomer-related questions and a lot of FE7-sayers don't even recommend the game for introductory qualities but moreso because of the major designflaw that the tutorial is sleep inducing and unskippable(That being, unless you play in japanese on the original GBA and do the FE6-link, then you can skip. But just casually on NSO, there's just no way, even in that version).
Sacred Stones
❤
When it comes down to it, it’s different strokes for different folks. There isn’t one game that’s THE definitive best for new people to start with. I would still argue the 7 is a solid pick BECAUSE of all the hand holding. It was fire emblem at its most basic and taught it to you thoroughly. And if we’re going to argue story and characters, it’s still one of the best in my opinion. It’s hard to pick out one bad character in there. The dynamic of the three lords was fantastic because they felt like real people more than tropes like most of Engage’s cast, the Black Fang was an intriguing antagonistic force feeling like pure evil at first, but then discovering the manipulation and the heartache of the group, and it’s a simple yet engaging story of a group of heroes working to take down a big bad that ends with *SPOILER* fighting a mother effing dragon. 🐉 The only criticism I would give is that it doesn’t have the rollback mechanic like the more recent games have, which is super punishing for new and/or casual players. In that way, I see Three houses is to Blazing Blade like Elden Ring is to Dark Souls 1. You don’t need to play Dark Souls to play and enjoy Elden Ring, but playing Dark Souls 1 first gives you the basics of Elden Ring since it and all the proceeding Dark Souls games jumped off from Dark Souls 1 same as all the FE games after 7 jumped off and expanded from it.
I love ALL LinkKing7 videos!!!! ❤
Unrelated to the main point but, I don't necessarily think that fans for life kinda analogy works in this day and age. We can see clear examples of what happens to die hard fanbase after years and years of disappointments in franchises where the fanbase becomes apathetic or don't care as much as they used to. Blizzard in D4, WoW, Star Wars, and Pokemon (to me) a lot of how AAA companies abuse their fan base. But maybe we are aware of the brand for life. I'd imagine if fire emblem brand kept being more disappointments 5x in a row after engage then we can reacess where we stand as a consumer
I've become disabled in th last 5+years had to relearn to talk nd play games. Fire emblems games have helped mi alot. I got epilepsy nd brain damage from a fall. I'm going 2 try nd play those games 2 sea if helps mi better. Thank u kindly for the video
three houses is a terrible game and terrible introduction game, the marketing was really good for it and it launched at the perfect time with no competition around it in the middle of the peak hype cycle of the Switch.
It was successful with sales, but a failure of a game, its sales success has nothing to do with the game because if that was the case then Paper Mario Sticker Star is the the greatest paper mario ever made by the logic of sales success. Three Houses actually hurt the Fire Emblem series.
Three houses (and smash) got me into fire emblem and I have now played over half of them, and made me a fan for life how can it be a failure
I am genuinely curious to why you believe Three Houses is a terrible game and hurt the series. It has been almost five years and people still talk about it, still play it, still upload videos discussing it and showing off playthroughs. Retention over that amount of time in this era of gaming when the next new big thing is only ever a year away at most is impressive.
Three houses based and immersive