Board 8 > Is there any real reason to play the original Fire Emblem vs the DS remake?

(+) Yeah! (+)

The original was just released on the Switch with an official translation for the first time ever, but does the DS port essentially make it obsolete? Asking for a friend who just bought the 30th anniversary set.

probably not, other than historical curiosity.

---

not really

---

i attempted to play FE1 but literally gave up within 20 minutes because of how slow it was.

oh yea and there was a speed-up option but there was some issue with that too and overall it's just really dated and not fun

Cool, so it seems more like a novelty piece then. Is Shadow Dragon (the remake) good at least?

shadow dragon is not good

---

shadow dragon is good

shadow dragon is

---

SSBM_Guy posted...

shadow dragon is not good

---

shadow dragon good, it isnt

---

okay if you're looking to play a fire emblem more for story/characters it is not good but the gameplay has some really cool stuff to offer like unlimited class changes, weapon forging, unique maps and also BALLISTICIANS

honestly the absolute best thing about the game is that you can combine weapons so if i have one iron lance with 3 uses and another one with 7, i can combine them to make 1 10 use iron lance. and i love inventory shit like that

SSBM_Guy posted...

shadow dragon is not good

---

kateee posted...

okay if you're looking to play a fire emblem more for story/characters it is not good but the gameplay has some really cool stuff to offer like unlimited class changes, weapon forging, unique maps and also BALLISTICIANS

honestly the absolute best thing about the game is that you can combine weapons so if i have one iron lance with 3 uses and another one with 7, i can combine them to make 1 10 use iron lance. and i love inventory shit like that

Are you referring to the Famicom original or the DS remake?

i'm talking about Shadow Dragon because i already said i gave up playing FE1 within 20 minutes

I'm not into FE and never finished it so I'm not really a good one to judge, but it's essentially still an NES game (so little story and no character supports) just one with a lot more modern QoL improvements from the later games.

The main controversial point is that the requirement for the sidestory maps is killing off characters, as kind of a crutch to help out bad players I guess but people don't like it.

---

the "killing off characters" part does get a lot of attention and iirc it's from people who think of them in the same manner as later Fire Emblem games where they have even the most minor development. the characters you get from the gaiden chapters have like two lines in the entire game. so it really doesn't matter because there's only five of those chapters and the characters all fucking suck. the last one is just there to serve as a replacement if you fuck up too hard so it's impossible to get every character anyway.

so it's not a big deal either way: you can intentionally kill off the rest of your army to access the gaiden chapters because pretty much all the characters are bland (not recommended) or you can just not worry about the gaiden chapters and their requirements because the characters suck anyway

Shadow Dragon is as generic and bland as Fire Emblem can get
Like, you have the basic Fire Emblem gameplay, but with boring maps, story, character and graphics

---

Shadow Dragon is super underrated. It has great map design (with some notable exceptions) and the writing is actually really good. The big weak point is no character supports, so side characters don't get developed at all. It's also pretty ugly looking. If you can overlook that it's a great game otherwise.

---

The first Fire Emblem is good. It's on the slow side, but I enjoyed it a lot.

---