The Triple-Dipping of Fire Emblem: Fates (Pay Three Times to Get the Full Game)

[Nz17]

Apparently Nintendo wants to Pokemon-up (or should that be Mega Man Star Force-up?) the Fire Emblem series, as the next game, Fates, will require 3 (Yes, three!) purchases to get the whole game. To get the "lightness" campaign, you will need to buy the retail/digital version called Birthright. To get the "darkness" campaign, you will need to buy the retail/digital version called Conquest. And to get the third campaign (which either takes place after the other two stories or as an alternative version of events, I'm not sure which), you need to pay to get the digital-only DLC campaign.

Now I'm all for making this a big game, but is it really fair to split it into three pieces? Sure some people will never finish any of them after starting one, but most people who finish one will want to see what happens in the others. I really wish they would have either made it into a series of three, releasing one per year, or that they would have combined all three into one $60 game if they really wanted all the content in a single release.

[SparTonberry]

I thought how they were doing it in Japan was buy one of the two digital/retail campaigns, get the other half-price as DLC or something.

[Nz17]

I thought how they were doing it in Japan was buy one of the two digital/retail campaigns, get the other half-price as DLC or something.

Though I don't know all the details, I believe it cost the equivalent of $15 for the "other half," but this didn't include the third campaign, just the second.

[Tanooki]

Sounds like they're going down the road of what they fairly said they wouldn't do when roasting other companies on their DLC tactics. They've been hypocritically going back on that stuff right down the list with mario golf on 3DS, and then the next step with on disc locked 'dlc' content on splatoon. This would be the trifecta of sticking it to the fans. I think you're right, the best way would have been to sell a game a year at full price to string it out longer to the gamers enjoyment, and then leave that smaller back end campaign as an optional download since it's likely smaller since it won't retail at all.

I like the series but rarely have time to sink into something like it which is weird I guess. I could see buying birthright and just stopping there both on protest but also I'd get my fix anyway since I loathe TRPG/SRPGs but somehow don't get disgusted alone with Fire Emblem. I like Awakenings enough and the fact they have it where you can tone it down putting the damage wheel hint on screen or even the non-perma death(I'm fine with a reset, but it's handy) I think this birthright one will be much like that where it's easier, but not a pushover as they were saying at E3 press events.

[Nz17]

Tanooki, to be fair to Nintendo, the people working at Nintendo never wanted to go the DLC route, or the free-to-play route, or the mobile apps route, or a lot of what you've been seeing out of Nintendo of Japan lately. But it is a publicly traded company and shareholders have been pressuring Nintendo for years to do these sorts of things from enabling online play and other online activities with their games to further online communications to DLC to mobile and tablet games etc. So while it is sad to see Nintendo making a lot of DLC available for purchase, at least we know that the core of each of these games is not being compromised like a lot of what you see on the Xbox and PlayStation platforms or from third parties, plus Nintendo didn't even want to do DLC in the first place, it just had to make little concessions to answer to shareholders each year until eventually things ended up this way, not because Nintendo's people themselves chose this but because the people who buy and sell its stock pressured Nintendo to go this way and they finally got their way on these matters. So if anyone should be blamed for the current state of things with this company, it should be those influential major owners of its stock rather than those who work at the company. At least Nintendo held out the longest on these things compared to all the other major players.

[kai123]

Tanooki, to be fair to Nintendo, the people working at Nintendo never wanted to go the DLC route, or the free-to-play route, or the mobile apps route, or a lot of what you've been seeing out of Nintendo of Japan lately. But it is a publicly traded company and shareholders have been pressuring Nintendo for years to do these sorts of things from enabling online play and other online activities with their games to further online communications to DLC to mobile and tablet games etc. So while it is sad to see Nintendo making a lot of DLC available for purchase, at least we know that the core of each of these games is not being compromised like a lot of what you see on the Xbox and PlayStation platforms or from third parties, plus Nintendo didn't even want to do DLC in the first place, it just had to make little concessions to answer to shareholders each year until eventually things ended up this way, not because Nintendo's people themselves chose this but because the people who buy and sell its stock pressured Nintendo to go this way and they finally got their way on these matters. So if anyone should be blamed for the current state of things with this company, it should be those influential major owners of its stock rather than those who work at the company. At least Nintendo held out the longest on these things compared to all the other major players.



I agree with this. They completely shifted gears after the shareholders felt they should completely whore out all of their properties and developers. I would hate to see Nintendo to fail as one of the original big guys but I just can't support stuff like this from them anymore. I have no shame buying a game used so I know they don't get my money.

[RP2A03]

So, this means we get three full games worth of unique content, right?

[The 1 2 P]

Apparently Nintendo wants to Pokemon-up (or should that be Mega Man Star Force-up?) the Fire Emblem series, as the next game, Fates, will require 3 (Yes, three!) purchases to get the whole game.

We should be lucky that this isn't the norm for the entire industry, at least not yet. It's already started taking over Hollywood, so when ever there's a trilogy or series the last movie gets split into two parts(or sometimes the last two movies). Harry Potter, Twilight, Divergent and even the next Avengers movie will be doing this. Just like season passes slowly started we may see more and more game companies utilize this technique but hopefully not.


I would hate to see Nintendo to fail as one of the original big guys but I just can't support stuff like this from them anymore.

Nintendo isn't doing so great now but they still have options. I've been calling for them to leave the console business for years now and instead focus on their handheld systems. If the NX turns out to be more Wii U than it is 3DS then they might finally take me up on my offer. Otherwise one day they will have to go the route of Sega.

[Tanooki]

Tanooki, to be fair to Nintendo, the people working at Nintendo never wanted to go the DLC route, or the free-to-play route, or the mobile apps route, or a lot of what you've been seeing out of Nintendo of Japan lately. But it is a publicly traded company and shareholders have been pressuring Nintendo for years to do these sorts of things from enabling online play and other online activities with their games to further online communications to DLC to mobile and tablet games etc. So while it is sad to see Nintendo making a lot of DLC available for purchase, at least we know that the core of each of these games is not being compromised like a lot of what you see on the Xbox and PlayStation platforms or from third parties, plus Nintendo didn't even want to do DLC in the first place, it just had to make little concessions to answer to shareholders each year until eventually things ended up this way, not because Nintendo's people themselves chose this but because the people who buy and sell its stock pressured Nintendo to go this way and they finally got their way on these matters. So if anyone should be blamed for the current state of things with this company, it should be those influential major owners of its stock rather than those who work at the company. At least Nintendo held out the longest on these things compared to all the other major players.

I know and totally understand that when I wrote it, but to me it still happened, and it cheapened the experience greatly. Sure it's still hit and miss which games they grease people on at this rate, but it'll go full circle in the near future at the rate it's trending.

So....

I agree with this. They completely shifted gears after the shareholders felt they should completely whore out all of their properties and developers. I would hate to see Nintendo to fail as one of the original big guys but I just can't support stuff like this from them anymore. I have no shame buying a game used so I know they don't get my money.

Yeah this is about it. If I find a game does this stuff and I want it, Nintendo now included, I just don't buy it from the company, or if I do, it's after a game of the year edition arrives where all the stuff that should have been there, is, and for usually 2/3 the original game alone price as they end to hit around $40 (vs $60 a year earlier.) I'm patient so I dont' care, but I won't reward shang-hai tactics. With Nintendo though, they're a little different, they don't do that, so it's more about waiting for a goofy sale, a clearance, or buying it used to make up for the garbage or I just don't need it that badly. I know some gamer will whine I don't know what I'm missing, I'm losing the experience, or some other bunk but if I don't care enough to ever own it then the experience to me was never worth it in the first place, and if I am willing to buy a 3, 6, 12 months later to pay what I want, I'll just enjoy it later on my terms, not theirs.

[Flashback2012]

Tanooki, to be fair to Nintendo, the people working at Nintendo never wanted to go the DLC route, or the free-to-play route, or the mobile apps route, or a lot of what you've been seeing out of Nintendo of Japan lately. But it is a publicly traded company and shareholders have been pressuring Nintendo for years to do these sorts of things from enabling online play and other online activities with their games to further online communications to DLC to mobile and tablet games etc. So while it is sad to see Nintendo making a lot of DLC available for purchase, at least we know that the core of each of these games is not being compromised like a lot of what you see on the Xbox and PlayStation platforms or from third parties, plus Nintendo didn't even want to do DLC in the first place, it just had to make little concessions to answer to shareholders each year until eventually things ended up this way, not because Nintendo's people themselves chose this but because the people who buy and sell its stock pressured Nintendo to go this way and they finally got their way on these matters. So if anyone should be blamed for the current state of things with this company, it should be those influential major owners of its stock rather than those who work at the company. At least Nintendo held out the longest on these things compared to all the other major players.

I'd say the move by Nintendo is more deliberate than just caving to the pressure of their shareholders. If they truly were beholden to the desires of those shareholders, there would ample supply of ALL Amiibos on store shelves and we wouldn't be seeing scumbags trying to get $100+ for certain ones on eBay and Amazon (well we would but they'd be "graded" or some other such nonsense). I understand that Nintendo is a "conservative" company but the initial line came out in November of last year and it's almost July, that's PLENTY of time to issue a replenishment order on Waves 1 and 2 and get them to market, port strikes or whatever other excuses be damned. :ass:

[Tanooki]

Amen to that. Those jerks still haven't restocked most of the Smash Bros amiibo that are not Super Mario based and it's a disgrace. If I were a stock holder I'd be furious and if it were a fairly well controlling stake I'd be out for someones head over the amiibo situation. The fact people scalp enough of them for like 4-6x the value shows there's plenty of consumer demand because some dumb dumbs are paying that much to inspire the continuance of it now for nearly a year now. There's zero excuse to not meet demand along the large lack of quantity of a good many of them. I'm not saying flood the market and lose cash, but there are enough that are overly scarce beyond any reason to be.

[The Adventurer]

The impression I have gotten is that this is going to be a really big game. So they're staggering the costs so you don't have to pay $100 up front for the whole experience if you don't want too.

[Tanooki]

I get what you're thinking, and you may be right, but it doesn't make it right. That's like if you had a video game that rated in a 50/hr to finish that it should cost someone $50, but if you have a game that rolls in at or over 100/hr to win, it's time to up the price. It comes off as a terrible looking excuse if that's the case.

[The Adventurer]

Also possible that they're making so much game it won't fit on a single 3DS cart.

It's really not even as bad as needing to buy two versions of Pokemon to get all the Pokemon, because at least with this division you're getting two completely different single player campaigns.

[kupomogli]

The impression I have gotten is that this is going to be a really big game. So they're staggering the costs so you don't have to pay $100 up front for the whole experience if you don't want too.

This is bs right here. Both versions of the game are running on the same graphics engine and using all of the same resources. Outside of storyline, there will be no difference from one game to the next. It's nothing more than different enemy placement and maybe some different battlefields. Fire Emblem Sacred Stones had two completely different storylines and they didn't break that game into pieces. With Nintendo finally getting into the DLC game, Nintendo realized like other devs that people will pay for content regardless how it's cut up.

During last gen it's not that Nintendo wasn't pushing DLC to appeal to their fans, it's because they couldn't, so they took their pot shots while they could. Now that Nintendo can push DLC, as Tanooki stated, they're hypocrites, especially with the way they're doing it. This game is like a far worse version of EA's Dragon Age Origins DLC bs, but the good thing about Dragon Age is you know the game and all the DLC will go on sale and even one day get a GotY edition. Good luck waiting for a Nintendo GotY edition.


Also possible that they're making so much game it won't fit on a single 3DS cart.

It's really not even as bad as needing to buy two versions of Pokemon to get all the Pokemon, because at least with this division you're getting two completely different single player campaigns.

Read the first paragraph. This is bs and you know it.

[RP2A03]

Also possible that they're making so much game it won't fit on a single 3DS cart.

We know that the first two campaigns can, as Japan has a special edition with both of them on one card. The Fire Emblem if download weighs in at a little over 3 GB with apparently half of that reserved for the path you didn't choose should you decide to play it later. However, I would expect the third path to push the game over 4 GB; which is presently the largest capacity game card. 8 GB game cards are possible. For reference, Fire Emblem: Awakening is a little over 1 GB.

Additionally, it would appear that each game has 22 unique chapters.

[Tanooki]

Adventurer I see your argument with Pokemon, it's kind of a fair statement, but unless you're a crack addict pokemon fiend it's not really needed as the story is the same, just a few rodents aren't shared between the two so you buy or trade, but it's a choice, so I can see why kupo there is calling bs on your argument.

Like it or not we're seeing a 180 hypocritical shift by Nintendo gradually moving in style but rapidly in deployment towards bullying gamers into the shit that Capcom and EA individually do that piss people off the most in one fell swoop, basically a double header of douchebaggery at its finest. You're getting on disc locked content called DLC (out of Capcom's playbook) while piecing every little bit out even though you really don't have to just to milk a lot of added cash out of people just because you can to make a bundle having gamers feeling like they're left out on content (classic EA playbook stunt.) They're taking the two rudest ways to f someone who likes a game and those respective companies have taken lots of flack over too, and doing it anyway after preaching the from the pulpit how rotten it is to take advantage and that they'd never do it. Now they are. And kupo is right, you won't see a Game of the Year edition of Splatoon in 2016 for the holiday season at $40 with all the addon map, weapon and character packages either. It'll still be $60 for the game and full price barring some weekly sale they do on the DLC through the eshop.

All I know is I'm charting new territory with my relationship with trust and buying Nintendo for the first time ever. I mean there have been moments where a system disappointed me but I kept it, or a franchise started to bug me and I laid off it, but this is different. You have how badly mishandled the Wii and WiiU were, they lied both times about support and capabilities along with non-existent support from others. Then the turn the page on the online stuff doing the most (good for them) profitable yet disreputable things you can do with DLC too. As my mind is made currently I no longer will buy another of their consoles out of the gate anymore if it's a stand alone TV bound system until I can see a proven track record of existing and future support. Furthermore I'll watch the news like a hawk for a game I may like or know I should due to a franchise to see if they'll be trying to screw me for extra money for content that should already be included in the game because I know they'll never do Game of the Year versions as it's not their style. Like I said, I love Mario Golf and sold off the 3DS one because of that kind of abuse as they left off both courses and characters while deceitfully lowering the retail price just $5 while then charging I think around $20 for the missing content day one to weeks later.

[The Adventurer]

This is bs right here. Both versions of the game are running on the same graphics engine and using all of the same resources. Outside of storyline, there will be no difference from one game to the next. It's nothing more than different enemy placement and maybe some different battlefields.


I don't...

I can't...

Do you know what it takes to make a video game?

I guess there was no difference between Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask then, since they use the same resources. Just the story is different!

[Zthun]

This actually sounds like what was done with the .hack games. It's basically one game split into 4.

[Tanooki]

Yeah in a way it is, but at least with .hack you got an hour long Japanese anime movie DVD to watch too, and back in those years your usual anime movie was like $30 at retail. :) That definitely would have taken a bite out of the cost. I had the first .hack for PS2, never got the others.

[kupomogli]

I don't...

I can't...

Do you know what it takes to make a video game?

I guess there was no difference between Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask then, since they use the same resources. Just the story is different!

No I don't, but I've played plenty of games that allow you to use the games resources to create different battles with different objectives. I only need to use a single example though. Advance Wars. See. I don't have to have created a game, as I clearly have a thing called common sense.

I created this in less than an hour. It's a copy of Sharom from Ogre Battle with a few additions of my own that aren't actually on the stage in Ogre Battle in order to make both sides more balanced with Advanced Wars. Do you think they did more work in Advance Wars than they had to? No, the level creator we received was more than likely the same developers tool. I'm sure Fire Emblem has its own level creator as well, so as soon as they code the creator, every level in the game is build off of that.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b334/kupomogli/9a68744a.jpg

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b334/kupomogli/sharomogrebattle.gif

[Tanooki]

Ok now that's cool. I still own Ogre Battle along with this huge guide book for it. I played that stage not all that long ago too so I think it would be safe to say you probably did well in balancing it for the AW type characters to use.