Chase Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 Having played since the beginning of a phenom franchise -AND- having jumped onto the bandwagon of another budding one, the question finally has been boring itself into my brain cells. "How does perspective change how we feel about specific games in a franchise?" --- the SERIES VETERAN. One of the series I'm sure almost all of us can lay claim to when it comes to being considered "inveterate" to would be the thing that brings us all together in the first place - Pokemon. I've been catching 'em all since 1995 myself, and while my personal favorite game in the series wouldn't come until either the Game Boy Color was replaced by either Nintendo DS or the former handheld's advanced counterpart (a.k.a White 2 or Ruby) - there's very evidently a phrase that is popular among people my age. "Genwunner." (Gen-won-er, the pronunciation should sound like something indicative of what I'm talking about.) These people swear by the original Kanto adventures being the best games in the franchise, and usually claim a decline in product quality began to occur starting with the Hoenn titles (if not earlier.) - and these people can get very hostile very quickly toward those who advocate later games in the series, particularly generations five and six, where the popular "Game Freak is running out of ideas" response becomes par for the course. This isn't a bad thing. For many people slightly older than myself, they have a very profound memory playing Red Blue.....Yellow...or even Green whereas I was just messing around as a kid for the most part. It's very natural for the first game that hooks you into a series to be your favorite. ...however, it seems to close some minds at times. Especially when a following game has very inherent flaws and when the player clearly ages to the point where they begin to understand them. Nostalgia is therefore effective when it comes to driving interest (and sales) at the risk of hurting intelligent discussion when it comes to other games. However, this isn't the only issue when it comes to game discussion... --- The NEWBIE. On the other side of the coin, we have the people that begin to play games in a series that becomes popular after a much longer period of time (either due to lack of localization, size of target audience, media coverage, etc.) A prime example of this is the Fire Emblem Franchise, long hailed as "those games where Marth/Ike/.....lolroy from Smash Bros. come from" here in the West. ...that is, until gamers around here were "Awakened". As the games finally began to make some noise across the nation (they may have been on shelves quietly before) more and more new fans put down the Smash and experienced the strategy oriented titles that packed a heavy cast while coming bundled with a dating sim-esque skin. A generation later, I would finally get into the bandwagon. After playing Fates I can unsurprisingly say it's my favorite game in the franchise, and gladly admit that I have no experience of the game prior. That being said, I believe I responded to Sheep (in my AMA) in a manner that sounded like Fates and games down the line would be the only games I would play due to lack of equipment and ability to emulate older FE titles. I also had a quip about how I enjoyed the dumbed down game-play of the newest installments. In other words, you don't have to be a series veteran to be closed minded if you aren't careful --- For me, it's very simple. Pokemon has come a very long way since it's release in 1994. There are things I will love about Pokemon Red that no other game will emulate for me, but that will never be the standard for "what makes a good Pokemon game." As for Fire Emblem, I really should try to play something older just to have that experience. It's very possible I enjoy Fates more than any other game in the franchise after the fact, but I can't talk until I have more experience under my belt. --- What about you guys? Is there something you see from your veteran -or- newbie -or- both perspectives that you can improve to have good discourse on a game series? What series are brought to your mind here? Am I truly a moron for saying Fates is my favorite game in the series? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamitako Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 I'm a newbie to everything but Kirby, which has been in my life for as long as video games have. One of my favorite games of all time is Kirby and the Amazing Mirror and it always shall be. Sure Kirby is easier than a children's educational game, but it's something I love. And perhaps I stare at it through nostalgia goggles (even though I don't because I still pick up a Kirby game every once in a while and enjoy myself owo) When it comes to any other series, I'm behind the curve. Outside Kirby there's nothing I'd ever beaten before I turned like thirteen or fourteen. I generally avoid discussions that try to compare different games in a series As for alleged "genwunners," just watch the bottom left corner of this (skip to around 1:30 or so): It nails it pretty well But honestly, everyone has a different opinion of how the series went, and it depends on what you're looking for it the games. There's really no right answer and there's elitists for every category of the games. I've beaten a game from every gen except II, and if you take into account technological limitations, they generally live up to expectations... Then again my expectations for Pokemon are pretty low When talking on Fire Emblem, I've been into the series since I played Smash. I was curious about Marth and them so I looked into them and found a series I liked. I'm no veteran, just a casual scrub, but I do enjoy the gameplay Yes, you are a moron for liking Fates, or to be more specific, liking it as the best in the series without anything to compare it to. Calling something "best" when it's also the "only" is like, not how things work. You really should go buy Awakening, it's easier than most of the franchise (and it removes endless soft-resetting for those who don't have the patience to minmax) but still retains the same general gameplay philosophy. I haven't played very much FE myself TBH, most of my time has gone into Rekka no Ken, DS Shadow Dragon, and Awakening. But the issue with Fates isn't that it makes things simpler, it's that it drops so many things that have helped make the series good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 Naw, Fates and awakening do a lot to make the FE games more fun and accessible all around. The older games and hardcore modes are like playing minesweeper- sure, there's some strategy behind it but there's a lot of random luck that goes on that'll make you start over from scratch. Not the most fun way of doing things. I mean, look at that garbage Demons Souls game. anybody that had been introduced to good anime and could recognize the art and story styles... we were the ones that caught onto the greatness of FE and Golden Sun early #hipstermoment I've been in the pokemon fandom since gen one. I don't see why anyone would call it the best. It's great for starting what it did and working with what it had. Sure, pokemon designs have gone down the crapper, notably since gen 4, but I pick and choose the ones I like and go with them. It isn't to say that there weren't great improvements in mechanics in the lamer gens. And for those of you who complain about muk and voltorbs as a bad designs, I have to wonder if you know anything at all about past pop culture and science created monsters. Hell, that's the whole damn theme of the first game- ditto, voltorb, grimer, mewtwo, porygon, bill getting crossed with a pokemon (ever seen The Fly?). I don't see any of you nerds complaining about slimes in FF games. tbf, GF probably really did give up on electrode's design. But hey, still got fingers crossed hoping for voltorbs that have the color patter of other pokeballs, like safari balls and what not. Other series brought to mind? Smash- Melee vs current Halo- Bungie vs 343 Megaman- Battlenetwork vs star force vs classic vs X Anime- classics versus casual/newer ... stuff Sonic games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lits Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 I'm a veteran of the Resident evil series, and about the game that introduces people to the franchise being their favorites, this isn't the case with me, the game that introduced me to the series was Resident evil 2, and while it was freaking amazing, my favorite has to be Resident Evil 4, despite the massive changes to the gameplay and overhaul of the series mechanics, it was a fresh change of pace, and with Resident Evil 7 coming next year, the series will revisit its old FPS gameplay from the Gun Survivor series but with a new fresh spin to it hopefully. I want the series to continue to change but remain resident evil, which sadly Resident Evil 6 didn't seem to do very well. The beginning to the Leon story was the only thing that Resident Evil 6 did right in my eyes. As for other games, like pokemon, I also like the introduction of new pokemon. The new Gameplay mechanics can go either way in my opinion but my opinion can't change how others feel about the games and the core mechanics. Mega Evolution was hype, but I don't know how I feel about Z moves. This must be the work of an enemy stand. I'll reserve my opinion on them when until the games land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 To answer your last question... are you a moron for liking Fates the best? - No! Fates is awesome, and as of now it's also my favorite (RIP 'Rekka no Ken') I played 'Rekka no Ken' (or simply "Fire Emblem" here in Germany - because it was the first FE to be released in Germany) and I loved it, and frankly, Lyn is still my all time favorite Character in any FE... a shame that she is just an assist trophy in Smash, they could have done so much with her Swordmaster Set instead of giving us 3 of the same charcter with different stats (Marth/Roy/Lucina). Then I played Sacred Stones, Awakening and now Fates (I never had the money for Path of Radiance and Shadow Dragon). And I would rank them now: Fates - Rekka no Ken - Awakening - Sacred Stones I like some of the changes they made, and some I don't like... for example: i like theat they dropped Weapon weight and Constitution-stat (used for rescuing) and that they dropped Weapon durability. but I don't like that they dropped the different Elements of Magic (Anima - Light - Dark) and with that specialized Mage classes (Mage - priest/Monk - Shaman) and in Fates I was somewhat missing the Elemental tome differences: Fire being an allrounder Lightning being High-crit Wind being weak but accurate and effective against flying to some degree it's still there... but not as much... But the reason I knew I would like Fire Emblem is because I loved the "Shining Force" series on Sega Genesis. (if you never played them - I highly recommend them! They are even on Steam! for use with the Genesis Collection!!) ----- as for Pokemon - my Brother is a total Genwunner... he only played Gen 1 and 2, and now he is constantly denying any existince beyond the 251 mark... and sometimes even talks about 152-251 being just a 'dream'. and my Roommate, after seeing the Trailers to Sun & Moon, is now considering getting himself a 2DS and Sun/Moon because he likes the changes they made... and he hasn't touched anything other then Gen1. ----- I am a total Genwunner for Command & Conquer... everything that came after Generals is garbage... well C&C 3: Tiberium Wars is just above garbage. THANKS EA for ruining my childhood! Sonic Games are pretty hard to judge... the Genesis Games are just pure gold! Adventure 1 + 2 are also pretty darn good... and then it went downhill... just to be bumped up wit Sonic Rush, and put down again with '06 and Unleashed... then came Colors and Generations... and so on... Sonic is just one giant Rollercoaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omega_Ra1der Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 Newbie to the FE series, Somewhat veteran to Pokemon series if you count FR/LG is old. Personally, I have a somewhat open mind when it comes to the new mechanics but when it removes the gameplay when it was perfect in the previous entry, that is when I get a bit ticked off. A prime example of this is Fossil Fighters: Champions to Frontier. You could even say I am a genwunner for Fossil fighters. FE: Awakening was a good experience for me as a short RPG fan as it was enjoyable. Anyways, onto the second question, Nickaboo helped me expand my tastes when my steam account got blocked off,hacked. But look at me now, I am a fighting/sports/anime/RPG game nut! Third question, you aren't a moron for liking Fates the most because everyone have their opinons on things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelazi5 Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 To be honest I'm kind of a Genwunner when it comes to the Spyro series. I was in my young formative years of 8-12 when the original PS1 games came out and I loved them, got 100% complete in them. They are some of my favorite games but when the PS2 ones came around I ended up judging them by the original trilogy and was disappointed a bit. When the Legend of Spyro reboot series came out I got through the first game and it was fun and enjoyable but didn't think it as good as the old ones. I got stuck on the second one and kinda gave up on the series. I mean I probably ought to give skylanders a try but I'm not super keen on the whole toy based dlc. It looks so freakin expensive. I consider myself still somewhat of a Newbie when it comes to Pokemon (even though I have a near full pokedex in AS). Seeing as I was first drawn into it by twitch Plays Pokemon. The lateness is partly due to my parents being a bit poor and not able to afford handheld systems, and I was hardcore Digimon. My first games were Zeta and Reborn but Alpha Sapphire just blew me away with all the graphics, moving pokemon, and so many minigames, fun stuff in it that I got kinda spoiled. I tend to shy away from pre-gen 5 a bit due to being used to unlimited TMs and some of my favorite mon were introduced there and later. I'd been planning on checking out the Gen 4 games due to the ds/3ds compatibility but when digital R/B/Y came out I kinda shied away from them partly due to the gameboy graphics and only having 151 mon. Though maybe also because I was still working on AS and I'd seen quite a few Red, red variation TPP runs but still, could be a bit more open to the pre-DS gens. Though recently a friend gave me his copies of SoulSilver, Platinum, Black 1+2, and X+Y so I'll definitely be playing those soon but probably not before Sun/Moon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hect Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 I wouldn't consider myself a veteran of any game series. Sure, I played a lot of games throughout my short life, but I never really got hooked into a series. I wouldn't consider myself some kind of "hardcore fan" of anything. Though, I got a few experiences with Fire Emblem! Where do I start? Awakening brought me to the series. I was watching videos on YouTube at the time and discovered that "new tactical game that blew everyone away", had high ratings all around and looked stunning. The first time I saw it was in a Nintendo Direct, at the time my opinion was something like: "Oh, it's just another weeb game. Good job, Nintendo. Get me outta here.." Well, some time later, after a lot of pondering I decided to finally grab 40€ and go to the GameStop in the city and pick the game up. (I played the demo before that. My hype meter was boiling.) I started the game and had so much fun, aside from that it lacked cutscenes. But alright, enough complaining. I was blown away. I played it around 500 hours, restarted the game. Did everything there was to do, bought the DLC.. and so on. Then one day, as I was about to sleep, I decided to grab my Nintendo and look at some stuff in the E-Store. (Yes, under my blanket. I didn't want my mother to catch me. Even more so because I had school the next day. I don't even remember how old I was.. 16, maybe?) Ah, anyway. I found out that there was a new Nintendo Direct and looked into it. A lot of things that I didn't care about; Super Mario, some other stuff.. well, I became bored rather quickly. But then, they mentioned Fire Emblem. That trailer played, my hype meter rising to new levels. Yeah, I was literally laying under my blanket, sweating and shaking, listening to what came out of the puny speakers of my Nintendo 3DS. Then they announced "Fire Emblem: If". No release date, no nothing. At first, I thought that it would be for the New Nintendo 3DS only. Saddened, but also hyped, I went to sleep. Then there was a time where everybody forgot about that new "Fire Emblem: If". That was until Japan got the release date and the first diehard fans started playing it on YouTube with the English translation patch. Again, I was hyped. And I also spoiled myself. But it was then that I realized that the release date for America and Europe is still so far away. I'm living in Germany, took until this summer for the localization to finish. Meanwhile, I killed my time by playing the older Fire Emblem games. Mainly the GBA games but also some fanmade games on the emulator. And guess what? Those games, even despite having no 3D graphics and such, provided me with so much fun. I don't even know what to say. I really started to think that Fire Emblem: Awakening, the game that brought me to the series, was inferior. At some point, I heard that (At that point, we already had the official English name which was "Fire Emblem: Fates, the game that people love or hate today.) the new Fire Emblem game would have split paths and that one would have to pay for each one of them. Infuriated, I sold my 3DS and fulfilled my dream of getting a decent gaming computer. It was then that I became a PC gamer, getting a few games on Steam and quickly making new friends, having fun and all that good stuff. Everything was fine and dandy, until I heard more of the news about Fire Emblem: Fates. My curiousity got the best of me and I watched playthroughs of every route, only to realize that the game doesn't have much to offer aside from fancy visuals and relatively good music. Fates' writing made me cringe on several occurences, the overly stupid protagonist didn't make that any better. And there I thought that Roy was bad. Oh, how wrong I was.. Well, enough ranting. After Fates got released in Europe, I decided that I don't have to regret my decision of not picking the game up and that I could do so later, if it's cheaper and won't kill my wallet. I have also played Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance after it, and I've come to the conclusion that it's truly my most favorite game in the entire franchise; the characters are deep, you got that intimidating Black Knight, an orchestrated soundtrack and a story that will intrigue you. But then again, I would not call you a moron for picking Fates as your favorite Fire Emblem game. I think it's fanservice, you on the other hand, you love it. Those are different opinions. And while other people may think that their opinions are right, I do not think so. Nor do I think that yours is right. In fact, it's just personal preference. Everyone who calls you a moron for a having a personal preference is a moron themselves, simple as that. About Pokémon.. I don't exactly recall having any problem with any Pokémon game ever. They are designed to be pretty easy, at least regarding the main story line. I never really got too deep into all that Battle Area stuff. My favorite canon Pokémon game has to be B/W2. The story takes a more serious approach and the characters are relatively deep, at least for the standarts of the series. To be quite frank, it felt totally refreshing and I couldn't have possibly spent those 20€ on anything better at that time. And don't even get me started on the PMD games.. I love those. No, I absolutely adore them. Except for PMD 3, which was pretty boring. PMD 1 and PMD 2 in particular stood out to me as incredibly difficult games with a mature story line that felt so incredibly unusual in a Pokémon game. And I think that PMD 2 was the first game to ever make me shed a tear. But enough about that. I discovered Pokémon Reborn and Pokémon Rejuvenation on YouTube and I don't regret the decision to download those two games. They are probably the best Pokémon games that I have ever played, even when fanmade. They are challenging, have a mature story line and that's exactly what I wanted when I first picked them up. Time for the conclusion: Older games may or may not be better. It depends on your personal preference and nothing else. It's up to you what you like and what you dislike. I, however, prefer older games over the newer one's. Though, I'm willing to make exceptions if something blows me away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreezyPonie Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 @Kelazi5 I wouldn't invest too much money in Skylanders. I played the first game, and while it was fun it's really the kind of game you'll only want to play once, despite there being so much variation in the character selection. I couldn't even make it through to the end of the second game, and I don't know much about anything about the subsequent releases. It's very much aimed at younger children (ages 5-10 ish). I had a whole paragraph here about how I absolutely despised the genwunner mentality (even though for a while I acted the same way, oops) but I realized that I was probably taking it a bit too seriously. Long story short, let people play the games that they want. If they're new to a franchise and want to give it a shot, don't bully them or belittle their experience. Instead, try and help them out ("If you enjoyed [A], I think you might want to give a try, I really enjoyed that one when I first started...") Chase, you're not a moron, but I would say that simply "Fates is my favorite" is a bit inaccurate. "Fates is my favorite so far" seems better if you're planning on playing other games in the franchise. That being said, I have never played a Fire Emblem game, so what do I know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timber Dragon Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 The original 151 will always have a special place in my heart, but that nostalgia mainly comes from the Pokemon anime, not really the games. When I was veeery young and wee I remember sometimes watching my brother playing Pokemon Red on an emulator (not that I understood half of what was happening, but the monsters were cool), but I didn't actually sit down to play a Pokemon game myself until around the middle of high school, roughly when the series was in Gen 3. But I wanted to start from the roots, so my friend lent me her Gameboy Color with Yellow and I was officially hooked on the Pokermons. Then I played some of the later games. And I was unsure if I would ever go back to those Gen 1 games. What gets to me about Genwunners is that they seem to base their criticisms of later games entirely off the Pokemon designs. While that can be valid, what with personal tastes and all, I sat down and actually played those later games, and saw how streamlined the gameplay and mechanics was compared to Gen 1. I hadn't even realized generation elitism was a thing until much later, so I had no preconceived notions of what a Pokemon game 'should' be like (in Pokemon design or otherwise). So it baffles me a bit whenever people say that Gen 1 was when the series was at its best, even though, having seen the series evolve and ironed out, RBY is so freakin' clunky. Like, I don't think I can bring myself to play it anymore. The only time when I looked back at Gen 1 was during Twitch Plays Pokemon, and that was hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted August 10, 2016 Author Share Posted August 10, 2016 I think the record should be set that even though older games will probably be "No Charlotte/10" when talking about the Fire Emblem series, that I was not into the whole "shipping" mechanic at first and actually was pretty guilty of picking on some of the Emblemiers who enjoyed Awakening for that reason. Having played the game, I kind of understand them a lot better. Older titles are probably going to fall short based on my expectation of what a Fire Emblem game is. It's simply because as you go backwards in a series, you start to lose features that may have been the cornerstone of your positive experience with the first game you played. For example, I've heard that Guard Stance doesn't exist in Awakening and that enemies don't have access to Pair-Up. I would SORELY miss those features because they were extremely helpful in beating the game I had played previously. I'm also a fan of grinding up various characters in games - and Fire Emblem is majorly (aside from Awakening, Fates, and Sacred Stones) an anti-grind franchise that prides itself on it's limitations. If I'm unable to grind all of my characters up, there may be a chance I can't use all of them, and that would become extremely annoying. That being said, I'm particularly fond of Marth and Ike as characters, and if an older game in the franchise has any prayer of beating Fates - it will come through story telling and memorable characters. I need to play Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn at some point just to get to see Ike in his own franchise. I think it's truly difficult for new players and series vets to agree when everyone has a different initial experience and set of expectations. Fire Emblem vets seemingly get disgruntled when an Awakening or Fates player praises the game and then follows up with "I don't want to play the previous games because of this feature that I like that you seemingly don't." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 Oh boy I can honestly say I've played both roles for many series so I'll just list the ones I'm a veteran and ones I'm a newbie: Veteran: Pokemon, Fire Emblem, Legend of Zelda, Mario Series minus the classic mario bros, Legend of Heroes, FInal Fantasy, Xeno series, Kingdom Hearts, Animal Crossing, and probably a crap more. Newbie: Hyperdimension, Tales of Series, Persona, Dragon Quest, Metroid, and again probably a lot more. I'll start with Pokemon since I can honestly say it's not the main games that are my problem. Gen I was not the best gen at all and I could argue 3-5 were for many reasons. Gen VI is on par with Gen I tbh since both gens were very lacking in many areas. What make the RBY games so successful was how simple and fun it was using those cute little mons to kick butt. Most of us didn't even know what we were doing which just added to the fun since there was so much freedom. It was also something you could talk about to almost everybody, just like with Pokemon Go today. Gen VI is my least favorite Gen (I'll admit I didn't like V until B/W2 which redeemed its faults...still a good gen though) because they took what we all liked about Pokemon and threw it in the trash. Sprites are gone after almost 20 years of buildup. Difficulty has been simplified and dumbed down (all leaders only having 3 weak Pokemon, really?), and the huge postgame is...nonexistant. ORAS just didn't hold the candle to what Emerald was either. That is combined with basically the removal of all those spinoffs which is what made Pokemon so good. A new gen was just an introduction to a whole big collection of stuff to come. Now...we've gone from V to VII with almost nothing but the MD series. I worry Gen VII will be just as hollow of a shell of a gen as VI due to all these changes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Now for Fire Emblem. Awakening and Fates are not terrible shitty games as people sometimes address them. Awakening had a poor storyline, but it's design was made so well to attract such a broad audience and its sandbox design was ingenious. Map design and story are lackluster but there's many diamonds in the rough with it to be worth playing once. Fates fixes all of Awakenings problems in terms of gameplay to the point it works very well. The removal of the weight system is the only glaring issue with newer FE games. Then there's fates which is all over the place. Conquest was well done other than the low budget story. Birthright isn't too bad of a game either but it runs pretty much as an average game with just a bland story, and then there's Revelations where they did not quality check this game at all. It's just an example of when a company become overambitious and it stings them in the ass since there's so many inconsistencies. I can see why somebody would see it as their favorite since there's so much to do while vets could absolutely hate the changes that come with it. Heirs of Fates is the exact difficulty a Fire Emblem game should be and with time and effort how well it can be pulled off. A lot of people such as myself expect a subpar story from FE that has it's moments and interesting characters, but it all grinds down to map design and gameplay. Quite a few fates maps actually are in my top 10 favorite FE maps. It's just the whole Hoshido vs Nohr is in reality Newbies vs Veterans in terms of what FE should really be but neither side is truly right. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm just going to bring some closing remarks that how well games age really shows how good they are. Look at Legend of Zelda Wind Waker, that game is over 10 years old and still can compete graphically with modern games. Nostalgia is also a beautiful and evil thing when talking about older games since times and expectations change. I hate FFVII which is a lot of people's favorites since I didn't play it in that era. I felt is was far immature in the writing and the whole praise sephiroth just got old fast. Nowadays, I try digging around for old gems and have really expanded my RPG gaming library to the point I can say I'm an RPG gamer. I still remember the days where I was so closed minded that I wouldn't play anything other than nintendo. Now I'm willing to pass up on the NX since I have plenty of other series to occupy my time. Just goes to show you that keeping an open mind lets you explore so many new games you'd never know you'd enjoy. Now excuse me while I go play my second run of Cold Steel before the sequel comes out in a month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timber Dragon Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 I love Final Fantasy. I didn't play all the games but I've been exposed to it for as long as I can remember, even if I was just watching my big bro play (and get his ass kicked) by FFI. But I always hated the rivalry between the pre- and post-FFVI eras. It's damn near impossible to find anyone like me who places both FFVI and FFVII on their favorites list, let alone finding anyone who ranks them anywhere close together. And it's not even always a matter of old school vs new school -- it's usually specifically VI vs VII. I've noticed the old school players (and/or the ones who specifically love VI and hate VII) tended to grow up with the older games, and the new school players who favor VII and beyond barely even realize FF games before VII are even a thing -- after all, a lot of players didn't get into Final Fantasy or RPGs in general until FFVII came out. But I still think it's weird that it's such an anomaly to run into anyone who grew up with the older FFs and still managed to love the newer games too. I'm not saying FFVII is a masterpiece, and nostalgia certainly does color some of my perception of it, but nostalgia isn't everything. I've heard of more than a few people who hadn't played VII back in the day, decided to play it and was prepared to hate it... and instead wound up falling in love (that, or they thought it was just a good game). In any case, I'm disappointed that there's such a huge divide between the two camps. Honestly I wish we could all get along and sing and hold hands about how awesome FF is and stuff. Choosing between Terra and Cloud is like choosing between two friends. (Yes, that was corny and I don't care.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godot Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 I haven't read all the posts you guys posted, but there is a Rhyme and Reason for the original Spyro trilogy drastically changing. The series was created and developed by Insomiac games. And Spyro was technically owned by universal.and they sold the rights to the character to Activision. Insomiac now makes the Ratchet and Clank games. Minus the PSP games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Support Squad Felicity Posted August 11, 2016 Support Squad Share Posted August 11, 2016 I just like games I don't care how long i've been acquainted with the series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 I just like games I don't care how long i've been acquainted with the series. So clearly if you like a game, you will show no interest in any other games in the same series or genre, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Support Squad Felicity Posted August 12, 2016 Support Squad Share Posted August 12, 2016 So clearly if you like a game, you will show no interest in any other games in the same series or genre, right? Of course I'm gonna show interest if I liked the first game. It's more of what I liked, especially if I hear as much from reviews or a friend's opinion and so on. Doesn't mean i'm indentured to following the series. I liked Spyro, I liked Crash Bandicoot, I liked FE:A but I haven't picked up anything else from the series. Even Pokemon I haven't gone out of my way to play everything just because it's pokemon. Same goes for the digimon games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5hift Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Not really a veteran of any game series TBH. I started out gaming at a fairly late age since my parents wanted me to avoid this stuff but I got into it anyways. But when I first got Pokemon Emerald on an emulator I must say I was totally blown away at how I managed to miss something this entertaining. Thus hopping on the bandwagon and finding my way to a lot of amazing games. I think we can all agree that those outspoken few who try and act all high and mighty because they played a game or did anything way back when it began can all shut the fuck up but they'll always be around. Really, we're all just here to have fun with the games and with each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheep Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 What about you guys? Is there something you see from your veteran -or- newbie -or- both perspectives that you can improve to have good discourse on a game series? Personally I have a real aversion to being a newbie in any game franchise. When I play a game I like to really understand it, and I don't feel like I can do that by jumping in half way through it. Case in point: The Witcher. I really want to play The Witcher 3, but I haven't played The Witcher 1 or 2, so instead of buying The Witcher 3 and playing it, I've bought the first two and will only buy and play the third one after having finished the first two. Pokemon I've played since gen 1 so that hasn't been an issue. Other favorite game franchises of mine that I've gotten into post release of the original game (stuff like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, and Bioshock) are also examples of game franchises that I've started at the start of and worked my way through. There are exceptions to the rule though, and they largely exist when I don't feel like I need to play all of the previous games to fully appreciate the characters and plot of the one I'm thinking of starting on. Total War is a game franchise that I played as a kid, and the most recent game I've played is Shogun 2. I don't feel the need to play Rome 2 or Attila before buying Warhammer Total War though because they won't add anything to the experience. Fire Emblem's another one, I initially decided to start playing Fire Emblem to understand the character of Ike better. Upon learning that Path of Radiance was the 10th game in the franchise I did some research to figure out whether the others would add anything to the experience, and on learning that they wouldn't because the stories are largely unconnected I started with Path of Radiance. So I'd come closest to being a newbie in the Fire Emblem franchise if any, but even then I've played numbers 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14a, 14b, am currently playing 14c, and I've tried and failed to get interested in numbers 1, 11, and 12. So I'm not exactly new to the franchise. Am I truly a moron for saying Fates is my favorite game in the series? Not really, but if you were to say it's the best game in the franchise then I'd strongly disagree with you. I'm an odd breed of FE fan that got into the franchise on the older games, and really gets the appeal of the newer games. I love the dating sim aspect of it, the children and inheritance mechanics, the increased volume of support conversations (my lord I love this one because it gives the newer characters much more character than the older ones), and the attack/guard stance mechanics. But I don't love the moronic mary sue main characters, simple and somewhat boring plots, and fanservicy designs. Stuff like this can be said for just about every era of Fire Emblem, GBA has Rekka no Ken, which has 3 really cool lords and the interplay between them is fantastic. Binding Blade (also on the GBA) follows a cast of characters that are the children of the characters from Rekka no Ken (how children characters should be done, rather than time travel or deeprealm nonsense). The GBA games also have a really visually appealing aesthetic. Personally I'm not a fan of Sacred Stones though (the third GBA game), it's mind numbingly easy and I find the characters/story boring. Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn have got the best plot and story elements of any FE games to date, and they also have the best character designs. For once you get units that actually look prepared for battle (for the most part). Ike is a well written character and is my favorite lord, Micaiah is also well written and my second favorite lord, and it's a general rule that any plot related characters will be well written and fleshed out. Radiant Dawn also has the best endgame thus far, and the entire Tellius saga has a much more mature feel to it. However, the Tellius games have the weakest characterisation outside of plot characters (and also perhaps outside of Sacred Stones) because of the lack of support conversations. I think the record should be set that even though older games will probably be "No Charlotte/10" when talking about the Fire Emblem series, that I was not into the whole "shipping" mechanic at first and actually was pretty guilty of picking on some of the Emblemiers who enjoyed Awakening for that reason. Having played the game, I kind of understand them a lot better. I get this, it's the same thing for me going into Fates. Having to pick a waifu for each route without the possibility of Cordelia (I know Caeldori exists but she is different, even if those differences are subtle. Also I can't find children characters attractive) is like having to pick the best team of a 2nd division competition. Fortunately while there is no character I feel particularly attracted to this time around, there are a few characters that I still like a lot ala Azama/Effie/Charlotte/Kagero. I think you'd find the same thing going backwards. Older titles are probably going to fall short based on my expectation of what a Fire Emblem game is. It's simply because as you go backwards in a series, you start to lose features that may have been the cornerstone of your positive experience with the first game you played. For example, I've heard that Guard Stance doesn't exist in Awakening and that enemies don't have access to Pair-Up. I would SORELY miss those features because they were extremely helpful in beating the game I had played previously. I'm also a fan of grinding up various characters in games - and Fire Emblem is majorly (aside from Awakening, Fates, and Sacred Stones) an anti-grind franchise that prides itself on it's limitations. If I'm unable to grind all of my characters up, there may be a chance I can't use all of them, and that would become extremely annoying. This I can also understand, I think a lot of the gameplay mechanic changes that Fates made were really good. You're a bit off on Awakening though, rather than not having access to guard stance they replace it and attack stance with a pair up system that combines them both. It's really broken and the reason for the more refined system in Fates. You're right in that enemies don't use it though, which means you can breeze through Awakening by pairing up everyone. The grinding stuff? Yeah that is a hundred percent true, though I never personally had an issue with it as I'm the sort of person who played pokemon games by only using the 6 pokemon I'd selected to use before starting. Until I played Reborn at least, I made it to Aya only using 4 pokemon (because I hadn't got the last two yet) and then got stuck. Only training 16 or so very specific units suits me just fine, though I can see why you would hate it. That being said, I'm particularly fond of Marth and Ike as characters, and if an older game in the franchise has any prayer of beating Fates - it will come through story telling and memorable characters. I need to play Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn at some point just to get to see Ike in his own franchise. I think it's truly difficult for new players and series vets to agree when everyone has a different initial experience and set of expectations. Fire Emblem vets seemingly get disgruntled when an Awakening or Fates player praises the game and then follows up with "I don't want to play the previous games because of this feature that I like that you seemingly don't." Fortunately I like both old and new FE styles so I'm not that put out when people only enjoy one or the other. The one that does get at me though is when people don't want to play PoR and RD because in my opinion they are the best FE games to date (at least out of the ones I've played) and there are a lot of fans that haven't played them. So yes, please please please do follow through on what you're saying and play those ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flux Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Aside from Pokemon, one of the first series that comes to mind for me is the Souls series (and Bloodborne). I started on Dark Souls 2, and I would always here from the veterans about how Dark Souls 1 is the best, and Dark Souls 2 sucks. Coming into the series on number 2, I was having a blast and just ignored it. However, after playing through Dark Souls 1, I came to agree that it was better in many aspects, though not all of them. The conversation gets started again with Dark Souls 3 having recently been released, and I'm hearing a lot of "Dark Souls 1 ftw" again. This time, as somebody who has played all the Souls games, I do have to disagree with the nostalgia train. Dark Souls 3 improved upon a lot of things from Dark Souls 1, and while there are a few steps backwards, I still consider it the best in the series. I only wish that the director hadn't been so adamant on ignoring Dark Souls 2. Almost all of the improvements made in that game have been lost, which I think is partially due to all the negative feedback DS2 got. I think it may have scared the developers away from taking anything from the game, which is a real shame. Other series brought to mind? Smash- Melee vs current As an avid fan of Melee, as well as a casual Sm4sh player, I'd have to disagree that the Melee/Current Smash comparison is really a fit for this thread. While it may simply be nostalgia for some, there are real, important differences in the mechanics of the games that make the argument for Melee quite compelling. While I understand you don't like the idea of using tech and whatnot, it makes a real difference for those who do, and want to play the game on a competitive level, myself included. Melee and Sm4sh really feel like different games to me, each with their own benefits. I suppose at a casual level, the argument stands that the newer games are pretty much better in almost all ways, but I don't think there are many casual players hanging on to Melee anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamitako Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 What about the old N64 Smash, shouldn't that be the nostalgic one? Compared to that Melee is like brand new owo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted August 12, 2016 Author Share Posted August 12, 2016 @ Sheep I think I'm tracking with you on the things I don't like about Fates quite a bit. In fact, I think Commander touched on the other half of it. Birthright for example is a fantastic introductory route that offers using many unfamiliar classes to series vets but is mainly aimed at newer players in terms of mechanics and difficulty. It's highlight though wasn't so much the mechanics but the story. It's the interpretation of the Hoshi-Nohrian conflict that is the most cohesive while still holding a few moments of shock-and-awe. The maps and objectives do get rather repetitive, and it can be jarring to try and defend with units that are mostly frail and fast instead, and the Hoshido characters seem too similar to one another to really stand out. Conquest is easily the better gameplay route and definitely has a stronger cast, but for as much praise as it gets from the Emblemier community, it's borderline cringeworthy story-wise - largely because Corrin doesn't fit the route very well and tries to shine a very strange light on the kingdom of Nohr. The story basically tries to tell you that even though you "chose the dark" you "are going to save the day" from Chapter 8 onwards - where the story would have been much more effective if Corrin had stuck to the original "I can't betray the older brother/sister I may or may not have strange feelings about-.....*sorry*......I can't betray my adoptive family" idea. It doesn't mean Corrin has to sell his soul to the devil. It's just better to have someone who abandoned their moral compass stick to the script - at LEAST until Azura makes the story even worse #Youcan'ttellyourfamily #IcouldhavetoldLeomyself #Azurawhyudodis and Revelation is just an erratic third telling of the story that focuses too much on filling in the blanks instead of telling it with any form of cohesion. Aside from storytelling, all of the characters are in play - even if horribly behind the eight-ball when recruited, meaning it's best to get this route if you like Wi-Fi battling other tactitians. ....with regards to other games, I hope there's things I would like and appreciate. And thanks for clearing the record on Awakening. --- @ Lexi I think people appreciate Melee over N64 because Melee actually was the first game to provide a fairly large cast of characters. Smash is a fighting franchise as opposed to a game typically driven by a storyline, so character selection matters a whole lot more. Finally, if there was a "competitive scene" that ever developed in Smash, it did so during Melee. As Flux said, Melee's biggest draw isn't nostalgia. It's the competitive aspects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shinki Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 (edited) Personally, I'm kind of locked in the third gen. It's by faaar my favorite gen for many reasons, and I can't stop playing them. I bought back all the cartridges, two GBA SP and a link cable. I think I might be a 3rd gen "genwunner" because of my true love for this gen, but I still like pretty much all the generations. Well, except for the first one, since Fire Red & Leaf Green made it pretty useless... Though I feel like I'm going back in time since I've bought Pokémon Crystal recently, and I enjoy it a lot. xD I don't think my mind is that closed, since I've enjoyed every Pokémon game, each one has its pros and cons, along with its own nostalgia feeling: 1st and 2nd gen because I was a kid, 3rd gen because I loved Hoenn as soon as I began to play Ruby, 4th gen because of the beginning of the battles and exchanges through the world (that, and the fact that I got my Internet connection for the first time in 2007, the same year I got Diamond)... I even like the Pokémon Colosseum and Mystery Dungeon spinoffs. But it's obvious being in love with something (or someone?) makes our point of view lose its objectivity. Many people hate the 3rd gen because 2muchH2O, and they're right, yet it's one of the reasons why I love it. --- I'm also a fan of another popular game series: Halo. Like Pokémon, there are many episodes in the main series, 5 for now, and there is gonna be a 6th one soon. I've played these games since I'm little too (oooouu, he's not respecting the PEGI 16 label!! what a thug! you only yolo once), and what made me love this game is the story, along with the very simple gameplay, quick to grasp. As long as Bungie was in charge, this was okay and the three first games were awesome, my favorite one being Halo 2 (props to 343 Industries for the beautiful remake). Bungie also made the spinoff Halo: Reach, though I didn't enjoyed it as much, not only because of the absence of John-117, but also because I feel they tried things which didn't turn out useful, making the gameplay a bit more complex for nothing. When the series began to become controversial, is when 343 Industries took control. A lot of players rejected them as soon as Halo 4 was out. Halo 4 is a game with awesome graphics and soundtracks, but that hasn't Bungie's footprint anymore, especially in the OST, and that's what made the players frustrated. While I do agree Halo 4 doesn't feel like a Halo game, that's not all. The story, what a lot of fans think it's the game's forte, started to become absurd, with for example the return of the Covenants as foes, which I can't help but think it was forced. As a whole, the game is still awesome, but it doesn't have the Halo feeling anymore, and it reduces a lot the fun capital of the game. Maybe the franchise is only evolving, like a Pokémon who reached the level 36? I don't know. Humans find hard and tiring to change, that's probably why they can't bear it. I'll have to buy Halo 5 to make my own idea on how the story is moving. --- Just to say that sticking to an objective opinion about a game is hard if we're a fan. Like I know how much a game is awesome, though I can't find many opportunities to personally enjoy it because I have my own reasons. But as long as we understand and know there are many different opinions, and we accept them, that's okay. Just don't expect to debate peacefully on YouTube and such, because you won't find many open-minded players around there. Edited August 12, 2016 by Shinki Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 As an avid fan of Melee, as well as a casual Sm4sh player, I'd have to disagree that the Melee/Current Smash comparison is really a fit for this thread. While it may simply be nostalgia for some, there are real, important differences in the mechanics of the games that make the argument for Melee quite compelling. You clearly don't get it. Games mechanics, stories, and visuals evolve and change as time goes on. This is exactly what this thread is about, Flux. There were a lot of broken mechanics in melee and it's like saying gen 1 was the best mechanics wise. One the surface the games remain the same, just like the FE's are all turn based strategy games with a support system, but the differences go far deeper than that. real important differences. that produces very different gameplay styles, approaches, and attitudes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flux Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 You clearly don't get it. Games mechanics, stories, and visuals evolve and change as time goes on. This is exactly what this thread is about, Flux. There were a lot of broken mechanics in melee and it's like saying gen 1 was the best mechanics wise. One the surface the games remain the same, just like the FE's are all turn based strategy games with a support system, but the differences go far deeper than that. real important differences. that produces very different gameplay styles, approaches, and attitudes. This is exactly the point I was trying to make. Game mechanics stories and visuals should and often do evolve over time, but the main reason soooo many people still hang on to Melee is because the game mechanics didn't evolve, at least not as a whole. Comparing Melee to Brawl or Smash 4 mechanics-wise, they removed far more than they added. Wave-dashing, L-Canceling, and directional air-dashing are far from "broken." They simply benefit the competitive crowd more than the casual crowd, which was my whole point. On a purely competitive basis, many players prefer Melee for those reasons. It's partially the same reason the newest Devil May Cry game was so poorly received by fans, despite being a hit with those newer to the series. The combat had fewer mechanics and less depth than DMC 1-4, and while it was still a great game on its own, those who had really invested time into the predecessors could easily recognize that something wasn't quite the same. Imagine if the next Pokemon game removed half the types and a bunch of moves that were considered too difficult for new players to grasp. It would hardly be considered an evolution in gameplay mechanics, and I'm sure many people would stick to earlier generations for competitive play. That's not to say Smash hasn't evolved at all since Melee, because obviously it has. Rage mechanics, more unique and niche attacks, Final Smashes for those who like to play with them... Of course there were advancements. But the point was that for players who played competitive Melee, the game simply feels like it's from a completely different series. Aside from the most basic mechanics and controls, there are very few similarities between how the games are played. It's why you see almost no players who are at the top level in both games. If you look at games like Street Fighter, Marvel vs Capcom, or Killer Instinct, many of the current top players have been top players since previous games. If you look at Smash 4, only one of the top players was also a top player in Melee, being M2K. Even then, he's not even at the top of the top as far as Smash 4 players go. The mechanics simply don't transfer from one to another One the surface the games remain the same, just like the FE's are all turn based strategy games with a support system, but the differences go far deeper than that. real important differences. that produces very different gameplay styles, approaches, and attitudes. I mean, this was exactly my point. The differences are real and important, and definitely produce different experiences, hence the split in the community and the reason Melee is still so popular despite being 15 years old. It's not people just hanging on for nostalgia, it's people hanging on for drastic differences in gameplay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.