Tendo City

From Games Are Fun:

Quote:New Kirby and Fire Emblem on GameCube
This month's issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly (EGM) claims in its Quarterman section that Nintendo is currently working on new games in two of their most popular franchises, Kirby and Fire Emblem. According to the report, both games are in development on the GameCube and Game Boy Advance, with console-to-handheld connectivity in mind. We reported a while ago that HAL Laboratories, the Research & Development group at Nintendo responsible for Kirby, indicated that they were working on at least two new games in the platforming series. Fire Emblem, a strategy/RPG series that has never made it to North America, has a strong following in Japan. A game has been released on the GBA, and was actually announced by Nintendo for a domestic release, but rumor has it that it has since been cancelled.

EGM also claims that a GC installment in the "Wars" series (of Advance Wars fame) is most likely on the way, but that hasn't been clarified yet. No details about the new Kirby game or the Fire Emblem title have been detailed, but we'll keep you updated.

Thanks EAD Ninja.
Source: Electronic Gaming Monthly

Posted by Soul4ger on 1.26.2003

Let's hope the Q Man is right for once! And perhaps the reason why NOA still hasn't released Fire Emblem for the GBA over here in the states is because they want to release the GC and GBA versions at the same time, ala Metroid Prime and Fusion. Right??!! PLEASE TELL ME THAT I'M RIGHT, NINTENDO!!!

That's great news, a GC rpg made by Nintendo themselves is cause for a celebration!! And then there's Kirby and Cube Wars which will also be extremely awesome games.

I don't know what's wrong with Nintendo. They have two incredible RPG developers (Intelligent Systems and Camelot) making GBA RPGs, but none for the Gamecube (officially) which is an RPG-starved system.

It's like they want to be in third place.

Well rumors have been going around that Camelot has been working on a GC rpg, but if Camelot doesn't want to make one Nintendo can't force them. But what about IS? I don't really know what their problem is, but they should take Mother 3, port it to the GC, and finish it.

And then work on Paper Mario 2 or something.

Isn't Fire Emblem more of a turn based strategy game?

You know, if they are making it for the 'cube, they could really make a massive 3D landscape with hills and stuff to keep track of, and thus catch up with PC TBS games. I myself have only played demos of PC TBS games, but that doesn't mean I don't actually want them. It just means other things keep distracting me and making me want other things instead.

Oh, and if they called the 3rd Mario RPG game "Paper Mario 2", that would be more than a little annoying. Why not give it yet another interesting name? I mean, it's obvious that the battle system of Paper Mario is pretty much just an expanded version of the SMRPG battle system, with all the action timed moves and such and the shared magic pool, oh and the very action oriented exploration screen.

Well they pretty much created a different series with Paper Mario. I'd like for them to keep the same graphical style as well, so PM 2 would be appropriate.

And I wouldn't want Fire Emblem cube to be anything like those PC strategy games. When I want to play a PC-style turn-based strategy game I'll play a PC-style turned-based strategy game on the PC. Leave my Fire Emblem alone!

I'm just talkin' some minor things. You see, I have yet to ever play one. The closest I've been to playing one is seeing pics online (seems 2D and such, 3D would be a lovely addition, and I don't think they are going to stop making 2D ones for the GBA), and playing SSBM. I mean, if it's going to be on the cube, it might as well use it's power. If they will keep it 2D graphics and everything, just give us portability and put it on GBA then.

How did they create a different series with Paper Mario? I already stated exactly how obviously it is a sequal to SMRPG. Of course, if they did keep the style (I'd prefer a 3rd style to be done for the 3rd game myself, it's not innovative and different if they use it every time), then Paper Mario 2 would be a warrented title.

Well of course I'd love to see the GC Fire Emblem in full 3-D. I just don't want to see any major gameplay changes.

Yeah I suppose Paper Mario is sequel to Mario RPG... but since PM had a different development team and the stories didn't connect, I like to consider it as a stand-alone game. But hey, whatever blows your skirt up. Either way it's fine.

I thought the Camelot GC version of Golden Sun was officially announced somewhat recently. Perhaps it got lost in M39at0n? I know it was rumored in early 2002, but, for some reason, I thought it was officialized recently. Am I going crazy?

I've never played Fire Emblem either, so I don't know what its gameplay is like at all... Ogre Battle? Advance Wars? Final Fantasy or Final Fantasy Tactics? Something else?

None of those games, of course, are much like any PC TBSes... though some do come close. A Heroes of Might & Magic / Disciples / Age of Wonders -style PC TBS is the closest, because of the RPG influence in those games... heroes, parties, wandering monsters, etc...

Paper Mario is very clearly a sequel to Mario RPG! It plays very similarly, for one... the game is very clearly derived from the first one. Only improved in many ways.

Fire Emblem is a lot like Advance Wars.

Ah... so it is a lot like a PC TBS game... because Advance Wars sure reminded me VERY strongly of a simplified form of PC TBS like many I've played before.

No, you are right Nintendarse. It was just reconfirmed again. I remember we even had a thread about it here.

FE is supposed to be a turn based tactical game with RPG elements, and other odd elements like marraige for story line and gameplay purposes.

They REALLY should bring out a Fire Emblem game here... I really can't understand why the previous ones didn't come out here, given how it sounds to me like they'd do OK, but Nintendo must have disagreed... wrongly of course but that doesn't matter. What does is that they bring the next one out here! It sounds like an intresting RPGish TBS game...

They really should have brought out the first one after Final Fantasy 1 became a success stateside. Sure, FF1 was only brought here like right when the SNES was released, but it still was quite popular. This should have been N's clue that some Americans like to think hard in their games. Plus, once they brought out the first one, the rest could easily follow. Why they are only now testing America with Advance Wars is a mystery. I loved Advane Wars. It had a very simplistic yet fun feel. With Fire Emblem being something in the same vein but a lot more detail and heros and such, I'd sure like playing it. They haven't even released Advance Wars in Japan yet though (and every US exclusive game made by them eventually makes it there), so it will be a while I think before we hear anything...

RANDOM THEORY TIME!: Okay, OB1, maybe they ARE doing a simultaneous release here in the US of both Fire Emblem games, due to the link up. Expansion on that theory! Maybe in Japan, they are working out a link up with Advance Wars as well, so that they will release Advance Wars and the GCN Fire Emblem game at the same time there too. How would that work exactly? Hey I dunno...

Nintendo won't release Fire Emblem here because whenever they have meeting about bringing the series to the states, Godzilla wakes up and wreaks havoc all across Japan, and the NCL guys have to run for it. And since NOA is pretty much NCL's bitch, they can't do anything about it.

That's the only logical explanation I could make up for this case of extreme insanity. RPGs sell like crack here. Advance Wars sold like crack here. Fire Emblem is an RPG meets Advance Wars. It would definitely sell like crack here. Yet Nintendo refuses to release it here. What's the matter with them? And where the fuck is Magical Vacation???

Quote:Originally posted by OB1
What's the matter with them? And where the fuck is Magical Vacation???

My thoughts exactly.

Advance War's popularity (among people I thought I knew wouldn''t like it in favor of RTS games even) shows that even console and handheld lovers love TBS games. They must release it!

Advance Wars was the best-selling GBA game for months after it came out. Nintendo didn't expect it to become such a surprise hit, and they don't expect Fire Emblem to sell well either. I really hate Nintendo sometimes.

OB1, OB1, OB1... I'd think you'd understand Nintendo better than most of us! After all, you (and N_A) are the two people here who use their tactic of choosing a position and never, ever changing it -- even when its clearly wrong and not helping them in any way...

Stupid Nintendo. I just don't see how they say "WOW! Advance Wars sold so much better than we thought! Well, Fire Emblem sure wouldn't so lets not release THAT one!" Um, first, strategy games are very popular here... including fantasy strategy ones... so I'd say Fire Emblem would definitley do very well. The very fact they didn't know if Advance Wars would do well sure says something...

No you see, I change my position on subjects when I'm wrong, which has yet to happen with any debate that I've had with you.

Very funny. You must know somewhere inside that you're wrong in pretty much all of them... :)

So I'm wrong because I don't admit that I'm wrong? That makes a lot of sense. The same could be said about you, bubba. The only difference is that I'm the one who's actually right.
:shake:

Well I don't see THIS argument going anywhere... :D

I'm still right. :p :D

Only in your mind, my very young apprentice.

What, trying to use your Jedi powers on me? Well, too bad. Plastic is resistant to silly things like mind powers... :)

No you see I'm Obi-Wan and you're Anakin, and I'm gonna whup your ass from here to Hong Kong.

But then like Darth Vader I come back and win... except without the being evil part. If you'd like I could find a Darth Lego picture... :)

The Famicom war series is kind of a light hearted game, not too complicated, and not too challenging. Its rather fast paced, and has some modern units that people can relate too.

Fire Emblem is like Ogre Battle. It will only get a niche market and won't sell very well. Even when Nintendo was publishing Ogre Battle, they had Atlus do it here because they might not even break even on the investment to localize.

Fire Emblem has tons of stats, tons of techniques and RPG elements to it that would make you dizzy. The story line is some serious branching shit with a lot of death and dying of your main characters. Remember, like real war, if your characters die, even if they're significant characters, they're dead for the entire storyline and of course impacts the passage of the story. Not something everyone is into except hard core RPGers or tactical sim enthusiasts who would be willing to brave the Japanese just to play it like me.

Yeah, and Advance Wars and Animal Crossing are also niche titles. Hey look! They told extremely well! Whaddya know!

Again with the defending... Just admit that Nintendo is making a stupid mistake not at least bringing one Fire Emblem game here. It's worth any losses to try ONE game if it has a chance of selling big. Remember this cynical comment. The most spectacular and expensive failures in business will usually make people think you are "ahead of your time" and boom, you are lined up for a promotion!

OB1 seems to have a small control problem. He thinks he's everyone's teacher or something. Well, I have to say this, if he's a teacher then I have to say he never ONCE trained me to do anything! I'd have to report him to the board of education.

What?

I swear DJ, sometimes I just don't know what you're talking about.

Famicom wars were not nich titles, they were always popular because of its easy to pick up, light hearted, fun to play.

Again, Fire Emblem is like Ogre Battle. Serious, dark, lots of death and killing, politics, involved gameplay. Its a niche title and will sell about as well as Ogre Battle... NOT VERY WELL by Nintendo's standards. Hell Metroid Prime was supposed to be a blockbusters and yet it isn't what we wanted to expect either.

That's because of their shit advertising.

But Nintendo barely even advertised Advance Wars and become a huge hit. Of course, the GBA's userbase rivals the PS2's, but still.

Since when have dark RPGs become niche titles? And Fire Emblem is more like Advance Wars than Ogre Battle.

*Stops playing Final Fantasy 6 for a moment*

What's that about dark games with death and such being only niche titles?

*plays some Secret of Mana*

Seriously, that's certainly not the case. I would expect someone who complains about how there's too much story in RPGs these days to know that there is a huge fanbase for great storyline and dark moodiness. For instance, Xenogears and Chrono Cross are massivly selling titles (though not as much as the main Final Fantasy franchise of Square's) and they rival each other for deepest story evaar in a game, or in fact any medium. They also have some moodiness, especially Xenogears, , Chrono Cross having more of a Zelda "epic" mood througout, in them, so dark moods aren't the problem.

It'll all be fine if you admit your theory is off. If indeed Nintendo does think that's the reason the game won't sell (and shame on you for thinking story would be more than the gameplay with Nintendo :D), then they are nuts.

Ogre Battle didn't sell? Wow, that's amazing, especially with the TONS of commercials for it! Sorry, that was uncalled for. However, I must admit that not once have I EVER seen an Ogre Battle commercial when those ads were supposedly running. Maybe they were on during Survivor or the Mondey Night "Brand new Lifetime movie" (which, since those movies were brand new, and one new one was shown each week, should indicate the quality and uniqueness), but regardless I never once saw any ads for them, and I am a couch potato (cut them up, mash them up, throw them in a pot). Some here may have seen them, but the fact remains that just HAVING an ad isn't enough. It has to be so widely placed on TV that people actually have the chance to see it. You see, most people don't make the media too important in their lives (just because the TV says that people think this doesn't make it so, it's just TV talking) and actually go out a lot, watching only a few shows they like. In fact, that's the case with me lately. I watch some funny shows, and some Discovery channel stuff, but TV isn't all that important to me, at least not nearly important enough for me to base my life's views on it). Anyway, as I was actually talking about originally, don't defend the position by saying "Ogre battle didn't sell well, and it had ads" because as far as the public is concerned, no that game did not. It's important that people actually SEE the ads you see. Otherwise it's about as likely to be seen as a commercial in a movie rental.

Look, Fire Emblem should have a huge following in the US for two reasons. One, people will hear that "it's like Advance Wars, but you can do all this other stuff too". Two, people have all played Super Smash Bros. Melee, with Marth and Roy in there (easy to unlock, and if you say something like "Most people don't get any secrets in fighting games because they are a bunch of stupid heads", then I'll have to tell you that's dead wrong), and thus probably would really want the Fire Emblem game via association. I know it worked on me and my friends.

Just show a few screens on the back of the box with a few quotes from some sites like ign saying "it's like Advance Wars meets Final Fantasy!" and you'll have an instant hit. Here are some screens to show some of you its Advance Wars-ness:



And here are some cool battle animations from ign, just for fun:



Damnit I want this game NOW!

For some reason I expected the graphics to be better, but oh well they get the job done. I see that someone's getting a sword equipped in one of those pics. Nice. Oh, and let's not forget that "Roy's Our Boy!".

The battle field graphics are a bit better than Advance Wars', but the actual battles do look worse than AW's. But who cares about graphics when you have such amazing gameplay?

I...was just making an innocent comment!

*runs away crying like Jay Sherman*

You better run away!!

I ran into a bar... Who put that there anyway?

Dude, I've played ALL OF THE FIRE EMBLEMS. You don't need to show me what it looks like. This game series is MUCH HARDER than Advanced Wars. It is 20 times as involved its subject matter and gameplay is targetted for more mature audience.

Whats wrong with death and dying and not selling ? Well apparently not a whole lot in other games because it doesn't really affect your gameplay, but in Fire Emblem, it does.

Its not a clone and conquer game like Advanced Wars and its not a typical Square RPG where Pheonix Down revives your fallen comrades. It might resemble Advanced Wars superficially, but when you start to realize that some of your main characters die and don't come back, or your weapons break and you're fucked in combat, or you can't complete a mission because you've screwed up so much in the past missions that you simply don't have enough men anymore, you'll see what kind of audience it carries.

The game doesn't really involve capturing much except for taking POWs, and the rest is about killing the enemy in single combat between your characters and grunts and their characters and grunts. Who survives and who doesn't affects the story line.

Advanced Wars meets FF my ass... this is Advanced Wars look but hard core Ogre Battle Tactics style. At least in OBT your main characters come back if they are defeated in the mission so you could say its even more hardcore.

And I don't know if I just got the bad ending to the game or something, but Marth is supposed to be DEAD in the story line by the time you get to Fire Emblem 4.

So.. your point is that the game shouldn't be released in the states...

Awesome.

Yeah, N_A, reading that you'd think that you support Nintendo's decision to not release the games here because they are too complex for us stupid Americans or something... Uh, yeah right?

Wow, lots of anger there. Let's face it, trace it, and erase it, okay? Because if we can trace it, we can find out how to get rid of it. You also seem to have a "I know best" disorder, which really is harmful. You hurt those around you, and you hurt yourself. You also aren't as moral as you could be, now, I'm not saying you are immoral, but when you go around internally justifying ROM theft as something that isn't wrong, it seems to me that you could use a bit more morality in your life. Now, I want you to try something. Why don't you just sit, and be angry for a moment. Just let all your anger out.

Anyway, so you can't revive fallen heros. Okay, so it's not like Final Fantasy or Warcraft (unless it's built into the story that they stay dead). It's more like other games I've played, like Lord of the Rings Volume 1 for SNES, where you want to keep them from dying. Anyway, you seem to be pointing out how screwing up in past missions can really get you messed up in current missions. Heh, you think none of us have played a game like that before? I submit to you a game like WC3, VERY popular, where you have to keep track of the items you have collected in past missions to give your hero the strength it needs in future missions. I also submit to you EVERY game where you have to keep track of continues and such you've lost in order to make it past the levels where you REALLY need to use those lives. Let's not forget that gem called Super Mario Bros. 3 where you really want to keep as many of those items in your menu as possible, without wasting or loosing them, so that in the last world or two of the game you can survive all the hard levels that present themselves.

In any case, I have no idea why you seem to think that the American people are so stupid and hateful of challenges that they wouldn't enjoy a game like this. Do you honestly have such a low opinion of the populace as a whole? Why do you hate the world so much? WHY DO YOU PUSH IT ALL AWAY?

As for heroes being permanantly gone if you lose them, that's the way it works in most fantasy TBS games I've played... now, granted, those games don't have those heroes as part of the story, but still... when your super hero dies, you'll immediately go to reload your last savegame because without good heroes you don't have a chance in a Age of Wonders or Disciples... Heroes of Might & Magic does let you resurrect heroes, though. But Disciples? Losing a strong hero would be so devastating to your chances of success (because in these games, your best hero carries over between missions, becoming really powerful... and badly needed. So you can't let that hero die...). Not a part of the story, but a major element of the game type...

As for carring over armies between levels, yeah that is a less common thing... not many games do that. I remember Homeworld did that... man, it was annoying. The result was you spent half an hour after winning every level making sure you'd collected every resource in the map so that you'd have a chance in the later missions... and if you find yourself in too bad a situation you might have to start with a much earlier level and try to keep more ships alive. (its a 3d spacebased RTS).

Complexity does mean games are more complex. It may make them less popular due to that. It should not have any effect at all on whether they come out here... complex PC strategy games are fairly popular, so I don't see
why anyone would think console ones wouldn't be...

Quote:Let's face it, trace it, and erase it, okay?

Haha, you and your motherly talk, DJ. So cute.