LogFAQs > #905018569

Lopen posted...

I'd imagine that's the case for most people. I feel like if you're seriously arguing Conquest has bad gameplay you're letting your distaste for other elements of the game bleed into your take on the gameplay, or you don't actually have a feel for what makes gameplay appealing in FE for most people and just attack the gameplay because it makes you come off as more intelligent or something.

Conquest's gameplay should be considered fairly solid for anyone that likes Fire Emblem, full stop. Like I'm not saying it has to be your favorite for gameplay but I feel like by anything resembling an objective measure it shouldn't really be considered bad in that department, either.

You can consider it whatever you want but I don't like it and I don't have to pretend to. I wouldn't recommend it to someone, which is what this topic is about. And I wouldn't tell someone upset with Birthright, "try Conquest, it's better!", because I don't agree with that.

Incidentally I don't like Fates' general mechanics at all either so I think we're probably starting the two games in different places to begin with.

NeoElfboy posted...

Narratively the structure of Hinoka's map is also very satisfying. You're fighting a dragon-blooded pegasus knight commander on her home turf who uses dragon veins to bolster the tactical options of her own soldiers, but are given a weapon to counter this so that it isn't just "by the way here are some OP fliers for you to fight". It makes you really feel like you're breaking into the enemy's stronghold.

it feels like the enemy's stronghold is a smash bros stage
---

Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else.