What I wish I'd known before buying

[👁]

Here are some things I wish I'd known before getting it on Switch
1: The Skills system is far more limited than it was in the PSP version
2: They removed random battles entirely, until you unlock dungeons there's no way to grind for Goth and Recruitables
3: There's a level cap now, this is how they solved the "soft lock" problem that occurs from enemy levels scaling to your own, but gear being limited to story progression

That Said once you clear the game apparently The World from PSP is still active so it lets you time travel and explore different paths.

Overall, I think the PSP version of the game was the best version of the game, I can understand that people may have found Random Battles annoying but there still should have been a way to manually initiate wilderness battles like in Fell Seal Arbiter’s Mark.

Also if you've played Tactics Ogre before but haven't played Fell Seal I highly recommend it over this game. It's improved on many of the core mechanics of the Genre instead of just taking them away.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/699170/

[REhorror]

I never play Fell Seal, but aside from japanese stuff like Wild Arms XF, if anyone want a mature and even more tactical Tactics Ogre, Battle Brothers is where you should put the money in.

[sorethroat]

引用自 REhorror：

I never play Fell Seal, but aside from japanese stuff like Wild Arms XF, if anyone want a mature and even more tactical Tactics Ogre, Battle Brothers is where you should put the money in.

Agreed, Battle Brothers is the closest thing to an open world Tactical RPG.
There is Horizon's gate as well, but Battle Brothers' procedurally generated maps can be more immersive and realistic, unlike Horizon's gate where it's all static.

[REhorror]

引用自 sorethroat：

引用自 REhorror：

I never play Fell Seal, but aside from japanese stuff like Wild Arms XF, if anyone want a mature and even more tactical Tactics Ogre, Battle Brothers is where you should put the money in.

Agreed, Battle Brothers is the closest thing to an open world Tactical RPG.
There is Horizon's gate as well, but Battle Brothers' procedurally generated maps can be more immersive and realistic, unlike Horizon's gate where it's all static.

There is also Wartale, but that game is putting me off at the moment.
Something about the 3D graphics.

Ironically, the other thing is go full 3D like Mount and Blade, but it's not turn-based.

[👁]

What's sad is that the people running Square Enix are so dumb they'll probably assume we hate Tactics games if this doesn't do well.

Let them, better companies will make tactics games.

[👁]

引用自 Kael：

引用自 👁：

Here are some things I wish I'd known before getting it on Switch
1: The Skills system is far more limited than it was in the PSP version
2: They removed random battles entirely, until you unlock dungeons there's no way to grind for Goth and Recruitables
3: There's a level cap now, this is how they solved the "soft lock" problem that occurs from enemy levels scaling to your own, but gear being limited to story progression

That Said once you clear the game apparently The World from PSP is still active so it lets you time travel and explore different paths.

Overall, I think the PSP version of the game was the best version of the game, I can understand that people may have found Random Battles annoying but there still should have been a way to manually initiate wilderness battles like in Fell Seal Arbiter’s Mark.

Also if you've played Tactics Ogre before but haven't played Fell Seal I highly recommend it over this game. It's improved on many of the core mechanics of the Genre instead of just taking them away.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/699170/

I could not stomach the main story of Fell Seal. Way too much wokeness up in your face. The dialogues are juvenile and painful to read. I'd prefer a much more mature story, where real life ideology and politics are non-existent. Story and wokeness aside, the gameplay is solid.

What would you say is particularly woke about it?
That it has a female protagonist? Is that it? Is that all it takes?

[REhorror]

引用自 👁：

What's sad is that the people running Square Enix are so dumb they'll probably assume we hate Tactics games if this doesn't do well.

Let them, better companies will make tactics games.

They are already remaking Front Mission, they made Triangle Strategy (one of the best SRPG in recent years) and will likely remaster FFT next.

The tactics genre isn't stopping.

[👁]

引用自 REhorror：

引用自 👁：

What's sad is that the people running Square Enix are so dumb they'll probably assume we hate Tactics games if this doesn't do well.

Let them, better companies will make tactics games.

They are already remaking Front Mission, they made Triangle Strategy (one of the best SRPG in recent years) and will likely remaster FFT next.

The tactics genre isn't stopping.

True, fair enough, SE has just made some ridiculous irrational non sequitur assumptions and completely missed the point in the past so it wouldn't surprise me. Like, for a long time they assumed no one wanted to play traditional RPG games anymore. Their reasoning? They stopped making them then noticed they weren't selling as many.

[REhorror]

引用自 👁：

引用自 REhorror：

They are already remaking Front Mission, they made Triangle Strategy (one of the best SRPG in recent years) and will likely remaster FFT next.

The tactics genre isn't stopping.

True, fair enough, SE has just made some ridiculous irrational non sequitur assumptions and completely missed the point in the past so it wouldn't surprise me. Like, for a long time they assumed no one wanted to play traditional RPG games anymore. Their reasoning? They stopped making them then noticed they weren't selling as many.

Tactics genre is different than traditional RPG, since they focus more on terrain, a large cast of characters rather than just 3-4 dudes in a row. Much more replayability.

Then again, they never stop making them either, see their 2D-HD brands like DQ3 remake, Live a Live and Octopath 1+2 (waiting for PC ports).

[Euclase]

Should I stick to playing Gungnir or FFTA? I feel like this game only wants you to play by using random buff instead of actually engaging the core gameplay of a tactical rpg

[REhorror]

引用自 Euclase：

Should I stick to playing Gungnir or FFTA? I feel like this game only wants you to play by using random buff instead of actually engaging the core gameplay of a tactical rpg

The core gameplay of SRPG is movement, equipment and terrain, the card encourages you to move and deny enemy's advantages, that's all.
It doesn't impact the core of the gameplay.

[Kael]

引用自 👁：

引用自 Kael：

I could not stomach the main story of Fell Seal. Way too much wokeness up in your face. The dialogues are juvenile and painful to read. I'd prefer a much more mature story, where real life ideology and politics are non-existent. Story and wokeness aside, the gameplay is solid.

What would you say is particularly woke about it?
That it has a female protagonist? Is that it? Is that all it takes?

Plenty of decent games have a female protagonist, if a character is good then there are no issues regardless of gender.

The dialogues are pretty woke, with the strong wahman in power, with lines such as ''See you got beat by two women' etc. The main character is also very unidimensional, no depth of character or grey areas. Very predictable and bland, but she always knows best and can't do no wrong. Most males are portrayed as either yes-men or totally incompetent.
When females use corruption is considered not that bad (see main character), when males use it it;s evil. Just to name a few examples.

The whole story I find it pretty insufferable and immature. But that's just my opinion. A pity though, the gameplay is solid and I don't mind the simple art style.

Would love to see a more traditional story such as tactics ogre with updated graphics and maybe some gameplay concepts from Fell Seal.

[Euclase]

引用自 REhorror：

引用自 Euclase：

Should I stick to playing Gungnir or FFTA? I feel like this game only wants you to play by using random buff instead of actually engaging the core gameplay of a tactical rpg

The core gameplay of SRPG is movement, equipment and terrain, the card encourages you to move and deny enemy's advantages, that's all.
It doesn't impact the core of the gameplay.

does prioritizing the enemy gives more advantage more taking control of the buffs? I am also afraid that the gameplay would end up more on chasing random buffs and being more repetitive. I really hope I am wrong.

[👁]

引用自 REhorror：

引用自 👁：

True, fair enough, SE has just made some ridiculous irrational non sequitur assumptions and completely missed the point in the past so it wouldn't surprise me. Like, for a long time they assumed no one wanted to play traditional RPG games anymore. Their reasoning? They stopped making them then noticed they weren't selling as many.

Tactics genre is different than traditional RPG, since they focus more on terrain, a large cast of characters rather than just 3-4 dudes in a row. Much more replayability.

Yes I know I'm commenting on the type of absurd conclusions Square Enix has drawn on faulty reasoning in the past,

So if this game did poorly because of bad decisions the developers made re-designing it, it wouldn't surprise me if SE failed to understand the reasons for it and drew some absurd conclusion instead.

引用自 REhorror：

Then again, they never stop making them either, see their 2D-HD brands like DQ3 remake, Live a Live and Octopath 1+2 (waiting for PC ports).

Yeah they actually did stop making them for a long time, Final Fantasy went way off the rails and DQ got shafted for a long time, SE actually expressed surprise when Bravely Default did well because at the time they assumed no one wanted to play that kind of game, the kind of game they built their company on, the kind of game that made them a household name.

That's why it wouldn't surprise me,

[REhorror]

引用自 Euclase：

引用自 REhorror：

The core gameplay of SRPG is movement, equipment and terrain, the card encourages you to move and deny enemy's advantages, that's all.
It doesn't impact the core of the gameplay.

does prioritizing the enemy gives more advantage more taking control of the buffs? I am also afraid that the gameplay would end up more on chasing random buffs and being more repetitive. I really hope I am wrong.

It's always better to prioritize the enemy and gang on them, the buff either helps or hurts you in case the enemy gets it.
In fact, it makes it less repetitive since you can't turtle every single times.

[Pickleton]

It's not that, no matter how many times people keep making that claim.
People just want to find something to whinge about, and then use that as either justification for not buying the game (if they haven't bought it) or to make everyone else think that it's RNG and bad mechanics making them lose, instead of admitting their own skill being low.
"I grinded up to the same level as the enemy, have better equipment and they're thrashing me even though we're all running on the same mechanics. Game's unbalanced."

The card system basically amounts to small bonuses if you pick them up.
From reports, a physical card increases your damage dealt (after all the calculations) by 25%.
If you can somehow stack 3 of them on a character, they'll be doing almost double damage. Stack those on a character that already does damage, and you'll see very large numbers.
The issue is that cards spawn in and around where characters already are in the battlefield, with more cards appearing where there's a higher concentration of units.
This means that while your archer might get a decent bump from picking up these cards, they probably shouldn't be running around in the thick of the combat. As such, people have been complaining that archers are weak when really they're really in-line with other classes (they were gods in PSX/PSP versions).

Honestly, the only time I really care about cards is when one pops up really close to a character that can effectively use it or if one pops up close to an enemy and I want to deny it. Other than that it's more "if it's in range and I don't have anything more important to do".
Often times it's more important for the field if I finish off an enemy before he gets a heal or move to a certain spot so that an enemy can't run between 2 of my characters and get to my backline.