Fire Emblem Engage - Easy Allies Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- Fire Emblem Engage is a return to form when it comes to strategy and battles, but it’s definitely a step backwards for the character development and social simulation elements.
Written by Michael Damiani
Video Edited by Don Casanova
Reviewed on Switch
Available on Switch
Support us through Patreon: / easyallies
Merch: store.roostert...
One-time donations: streamlabs.com...
Schedule: easyallies.com/
Live streams - / easyallies
Stream archives - / easyalliesplays
/ easyallies
/ easyallies
/ easyallies
Easy Allies is an independent media outlet regularly provided with access to preview and review materials. To learn more, check out easyallies.com...
#EasyAllies #Gaming #FireEmblemEngage #Review
I'm 170+ hours in and I still haven't finished the Story. I am obsessed with building my units' build
Must have the strongest units. At least 24 units.
Im at the 80 hour mark and I’m stressed that it’s almost over! I agree the story/ characters take a hit but the combat is so addictive and the journey each battle becomes ends up making me connect and care about the characters so much more. Definitely going to be high on my goaty list but understandable why it’s swimming in 7s for some
Can't wait for a Brandon Jones narrated Metroid Prime review once again, like in the old days.
I'm about 30 hours in and absolutely glued to the game. As someone who liked the story and characters of 3H, I was kind of over the sim parts by my 2nd playthrough and just wanted to get to the battles, but since that aspect took a nosedive in that game I haven't felt much want to go back to the game.
The story and some of the characters in this game are ehh, but I like most of the cast and the gameplay here is probably my favorite since PoR/RD. It's just so satisfying!
If I had any real complaints it's the supports with the emblems, most of them are just like why even write this one line of dialogue? Also the game does need a new game plus option. I wanna be able to start over and carry over my bonds and abilities like you could in 3H, so that I can try out new characters and different combinations with the emblems. Overall I'm probably at a 8.5/10
First EZA review I've watched in a while that feels like a disservice to the game. I agree there's better narratives even in the same format but narrative isn't what Fire Emblem is for. Sure, Awakening has good writing (and still only good) but it has the flattest map design of any entry I've played and I replayed it right before Engage came out. Engage has the best and most varied maps of anything I've played in the series so far, even the maps without a lot of hazards vary in size or have an Emblem fighting against you.
Pair Up is a far more broken mechanic than even rewinding is, and the lack of rewind made Awakening's bad RNG moments really stand out when you have to reset a half hour+ long map because an enemy landed a 3% crit on an important unit. Since this was played on Normal, where I didn't even know crystal was unlimited, of course you're going to feel that way. The game pushes back much more on Hard and limited uses mean it becomes an invaluable resource only used at the right time. Use it to fix too many mistakes and you won't have it when you need it later. It really helped me re-learn proper positioning after Awakening built a bad habit of just placing broken units in the middle of 5+ enemies.
I'd also argue this game has much more replayability than something like Three Houses. The Somniel isn't nearly as tedious to deal with as the monastery, even with stuff like the arena you spend far less time in battle prep, and the engage rings and generous class swap system make it really fun and easy to try a bunch of different units in different classes, using different rings to see what can really make them shine. After my replay of Awakening I never want to play it again, but I already see myself playing Engage again in a year's time when all of its DLC is released.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess, but as someone who's played (and not finished) every entry since Awakening, and has gone back (and finished) some classic entries, Engage is a solid 9. The only true knock I can give it is the poor writing, but I'm also the type of player who grows attached to a character based on how they perform in fights. So even if I can't stand Yunaka's character, she tore it up so hard on every map I used her that I love her just the same.
Not sure why so much focus was spent talking about the extra stuff, but for anyone thinking about getting it the game part of the game is one of the best in the series, and feels like one of the most fine-tuned entries in the series if you're playing on hard or maddening (which is impressive since most games really struggle when making proper harder difficulties). Especially if you learn the game on hard and replay on maddening once you have a full understanding of all the emblems, proper use of gold, etc. You can also ignore most of the Somniel, just really needing the dog ores and possibly the arena if you're that in need of exp but the games designed to not need any grinding.
I playing on hard mode which is the middle dificulty in the game, still find the game challenge.
@@mattiasolsson1523 The game is actually balanced on Hard first, which is why Hard feels so finely tuned and intense. Normal is the devs taking away from that, and Maddening is just making Hard mode harder. But the game is definitely balanced around Hard. It's fair and honest for a first playthrough, and demands the player makes good decisions. Normal is in the last 2 entries has been really easy. I'd even say Hard mode in Three Houses was pretty easy too while Maddening was just tedious and frustrating. I'm glad Engage is more of a return to form. Even Maddening is a lot more enjoyable compared to Awakening or Three Houses by quite a bit - it just demands even better decision making and planning.
@@Katie-hb8iqit’s a return to form for gameplay at the cost of the writing. It’s Conquest 2.0
The last Fire Emblem game I loved was Radiant Dawn. Hated Awakening, hates Fates, liked Echos and 3 House. Engage is best one since Radiant Dawn.
Engage feels a lot like GBA/GameCube era games, just with more modern character designs.
If you play for the story, 7 is fair. But honestly, I don't think I've had this much fun playing through a fire emblem game since Awakening. Also it's unfortunate that you didn't mention the music, by far the best in series so far.
Fire Emblem Engage has some of the best gameplay of any of the Fire Emblem games. It's fun, with new mechanics and challenging maps.
The story is serviceable and reminds me heavily of Awakening. Also like Awakening it has several callbacks to former games with tons of little things to make the experienced player smile. The Sommiel is actually more akin to My Castle feature than the Monastery though it takes features from both.
Comparing this game to only Fire Emblem Three Houses does it a bit of disservice, as the other 16 games in the series would show that each game brings something different to the table. Fire Emblem Echoes: Shadows of Valentina sacrifices any semblance of new or innovative gameplay for a gripping retelling of the story. It is a wonderful story, with gameplay secondary.
Yet when it comes to replayability and the games that keep the fans coming back, it's not the marriage simulators, stories that are hyper compelling, or even relatable bad guys. It's all about fun and dare I say engaging gameplay.
With many entries that all have their own combinations of the same elements, there is possibly a Fire Emblem out there that could be any one person's favorite. Until this game released, mine was Sacred Stones for its charming GBA sprites, simple black and white story, and post story army building.
Fire Emblem Engage is my new favorite and compared to the others in the series and the value it presents, I personally give it a 9 out of 10.
To me it's the opposite it's probably my 2nd least favorite with Fates being the only one I liked less. (For reference I am playing since the Tellius Games)
@@Burdiso93 Which game is your favorite if you don't mind me asking?
@@alexdrake90 I think overall I would say Path of Radience.
@@Burdiso93Great game!
Engage really is a great measuring stick for what you value in FE. The fact that most outlets (including Easy A) reviewed it worse than 3H is understandable; on the whole the story is weak and the cast is quite a bit worse than Three Houses. Doesn't help that Damiani probably played on Normal, where the good Map design and Emblems don't get to shine. I'd probably rank it a bit higher, since the gameplay is top shelf for FE, but I definitely get where this review is coming from.
Man I put about 60 hours into this game. Best gameplay yet and probably the worst story :/
The story in Engage isn't great but it definitely isn't as much of a trainwreck as Fates. It's just toothless and kinda campy.
@@aster5191 Yeah I felt similarly about Fates - honestly can't remember anything about it besides my sister had some big yiddies
@@danielmullin5134 The way I see it, Engage is a game that doesn't tell a particularly exciting or evocative story, but it also doesn't really try all that hard to. It's very straightforward and easy to digest at the cost of being pretty bland and uninspired.
Fates on the other hand leaps into the air for a slam dunk of a narrative but misses entirely and lands on its head. It's ambitious, but almost none of it comes together and the whole thing is just a convoluted mess.
Also yes, your older sister has some honkin' hooters and you can blow on her face disturbingly with the 3DS microphone. It was a dark chapter in the legacy of Fire Emblem, lmao.
So many folks in the comments worried about scores in a review. If someone wants to play a game that nails the tactical combat, and they don't care if it sacrifices quality in story writing, they can listen to this review and get a very clear idea of what the game's main strength is. That's the main point of a review. An established franchise adding a bunch of features in a game that ends up being a big hit, and then taking them away or phoning them in in the next game, is always going to split the fanbase and make some people unhappy.
I'm so frustrated that not a single review I have seen of this game _anywhere_ likes this game's story.
It's not a good Fire Emblem story. It's not trying to be. It's a JRPG story, focused on character drama and exploring a specific theme. It's full of anime tropes, and several moments that seem like just checking an item off the anime tropes checklist actually serve a very distinct purpose in relation to the game's theme. *Spoilers ahead, you've been warned!*
Engage is a game about healing from trauma and breaking the cycle of abuse. It's a game about the importance of supportive friends and good role models in breaking that cycle. The difference between the game's heroes and villains isn't really about whether they're good people. It's about who they found when they tried to recover from their trauma or escape their abusers. The game doesn't really care whether you pity Zephia, or Griss, or Sombron. It doesn't care whether you view them as "redeemed". In Zephia's case, the game deliberately waits until after her death to directly show you how she got to be the way she was. This is so her backstory, the trauma she went through and the abuser she found in lieu of a support network, don't muddle your hatred of her while she's alive. The game wants you to hate her for everything she's done to Veyle, for trying to do the same things to Hortensia, for indirectly forcing Ivy and Hortensia to fight the image of their own father, for the mass murder of innocent civilians. You are _supposed_ to hate Zephia with every fibre of your being. That is why you aren't shown how she got to be who she is until after her death. If the sympathetic aspects were presented too early, you might feel conflicted. But you need to hate her. You _should_ hate her, for everything she's done, and you are right to put her down, despite the circumstances that created her. She was a monster, and she needed to die so others could live. But that doesn't mean there aren't lessons to learn from seeing what led her down that path.
Sombron represents something different, compared to the other villains. He's not someone who merely perpetuates the cycle of abuse. As a young child, he had the love and care that all children need and deserve ripped away from him, an act of dispassionate, impersonal cruelty that his attackers viewed as a mercy. Maybe they felt they had a reason for the genocide they committed, but that doesn't matter. What does matter is what Sombron found after everyone was taken from him: a companion, an Emblem, someone with whom he developed a toxic, almost parasocial relationship. Because an Emblem summoned with a Fell Dragon's power cannot speak, the two could not effectively communicate, yet the Emblem and its legend still served as a role model for him. He learned things from this accidental mentor figure that the mentor in question never intended to teach… and as soon as someone else reached out to try to provide support, his idol, his Emblem, vanished from his life. Believing he had failed to follow his role model's example and ideals, and that was why he was abandoned, he lashed out at those who had reached out to him in the hopes of once again earning his idol's favour. But it was all for naught. His idol - his closest companion, whom he looked up to - did not return, and he remained alone.
Sombron, then, is the origin of the cycle. A monster created by a single act of impersonal cruelty and simple happenstance, yet who visits incredibly personal cruelties on others. All of the other villains reveal that abusers are made, not born. But facing Sombron means confronting the harsh reality that sometimes, an abuser is made not by another abuser, but merely by bad luck and unavoidable miscommunication.
Hey, speaking of Emblems, even their presence as a story element and as characters is in service to this theme. The game beats you over the head with the idea of the Emblems as mentor figures and role models to Alear and the rest of the cast, and, as mentioned, even to Sombron. And because the Emblems include characters you, the player, already care about and know about, whose stories and lessons and triumphs you've already seen play out in full, you have an instant attachment to them. You like these characters and think they're cool. This saves the game from having to attempt to build up a mentor figure over the course of its story, in a way that could not _possibly_ hit as hard as the parasocial relationship between player and player character that you developed over the course of the Emblems' games.
Even the skill inheritance system, clunky though it may be, is a part of this theme. You earn SP only while you have a bond ring or Emblem Ring equipped. That is, only by living with friends and mentors (as opposed to going through life friendless and alone) can you gain the experience needed to learn from your mentors, to take from them the skills you'll need to face life's challenges. SP is usable to learn skills from _any_ Emblem, also, not just the Emblem you earned it with. Because it doesn't really matter who that friend is; spending time with one friend can help you be ready to learn from another. It's all a silly, indie game-esque metaphor. And that's kinda what Engage is. An indie JRPG with a AAA budget that, by necessity, uses the trappings of Fire Emblem to make its point.
It's quite annoying to watch so many reviews of this game from people whose only point of reference for the series seems to be Three Houses.
The people who enjoy the game literally do the same in an attempt to drag the previous game down. They are no better
@J. Emet I enjoyed Engage and I still love Three Houses. The point is that most professional reviews by non-FE fans have been about how it's not like 3H and not what Engage is trying to do and how it does in that.
@@funsohng it's not uncommon to compare a recent entry into a franchise to a previous entry. If the previous game did something better compared to a recent one. Ot should be brought up.
@@Megajmaster1000 Three Houses was a good game, but it has its problems reviewers at large seem to be completely oblivious to. They like to talk about "replayability" without actually replaying the game and experiencing that replayability.
Three Houses was a chore to replay. The monastery and monthly activities took up 30-60 minutes of time where it used to take 3-5 minutes, and it grew old very quickly. The monastery itself is extremely repetitive - go plant stuff, spam the cafeteria to max out motivation, spam the tournaments for professor ranks and gold, and then fish until you run out of bait on high fish days. It was like this for 250 hours on all 4 playthroughs, especially if you did maddening without new game+. Why is this being praised??? Reviewers want to pretend this was awesome, but they are completely obvious to these problems in Three Houses.
The Somniel is optional because they were responding to CUSTOMER FEEDBACK - I.e. the people that actually pay money for the games. They were not responding to the casual critics in California who play the games for 30 hours and play on Normal/Casual rather than Hard/Classic. And somehow that's a bad thing???
I still like Three Houses. The characters were really good, and the world building was pretty great. The story though had problems - the villains were not fleshed out very well either, there were plot holes at various points, the church route was basically identical to the golden deer route, and the edelgard route was unfinished. Of course, we'll just pretend none of that was an actual problem so we can pile onto Engage, right?
And all of the talk about Three Houses and its characters, nobody mentions that the supports were too numerous and took too long. Between the monastery and the supports, I don't even think I am exaggerating that 125 hours out of my 250 hours of time in Three Houses was spent just doing those tedious social activities and not actually playing the game. This is not good. This is a flaw that Engage does not have.
He referenced other games here. Specifically Awakening. Its fair to say its a step down from Three Houses, though. Definitely in terms of story and characters.
It would be like if the next Pokemon game went back to just being linear.
I finished my first run on hard/classic and will do a maddening run sometimes in the future. The gameplay is some of the best tactic/turn based gameplay in years, while the story is absolutely abyssmal, definitely one of the worst in FE history - if you are looking for story: stay away! If you are looking for the gameplay, hard recommend!
35-40 hours to beat the game?
I'm not even grinding and I'm only on chapter 18, and my playtime has just eclipsed the 40 hour mark (hard classic, completing all paralouges)
I am a long time fan of the franchise since first playing through FE7 about 15 years ago. While the story is weaker compared to the games released during the GBA era, I feel that the gameplay is the most rewarding of the series. Very strong map design and stronger tactical options make this easily one of the best playing games of the series.
I thought three houses' narrative and world building were fantastic but the gameplay left a lot to be desired, to the point where I stopped playing during the silver snow route (completed Azure moon and crimson flower). If the next game of the series can combine the strong world building of 3H and the gameplay quality of Engage, we will have probably the strongest entry in the series.
I prefer a game with good gameplay and maybe weaker characters then a slog fest that has good story or better characters. I played awakening more times then three Houses despite three Houses having better characters or story and multiple story paths which only open up after the time skip and share a lot of the same maps. To get to that point you have to play the same 1 half for every house and barely have any difference outside of some dialogue changes. Can't wait for every new entry to hear the word three Houses. Will 3 Houses stay the reference point for every game going forward or will the next game get complaints that is has not the same gameplay changes as in Engage. Will people dock points of the FE4 remake because it's not like Engage or 3 Houses?
I think games that focus on one aspect, just need a servicable story to be great. Nobody judges COD on story or characters. Games focused on characters and stories, like jrpgs, can take a harder hit. The characters in this game are distinct , i know who they all are, despite a large roster. I can easily follow the story. My main complaint is the switch system, i have way too many heroes through bracelets, and gwtting them leveled to customize characters the way i want them takes way too much grinding and switching heroes. Also, there is one easy support ability to grab, its used pretty much on all characters and takes up half of everyones 2 support slots (move after attack). Id still go with 9 out of 10, it does exactly what i wanted it to do amazingly, and makes the time spent getting there mostly optional.
let’s be real most cod games have a surprisingly good campaign
@@vintageoriginallegit a few do, but not because of their characters or story.
Which emblem has that ability? I've been running Tikis stat gains and byleths XP boost on everyone but I'd much rather have the ability to move after attacking on most of my units
@@mnbrileyman4605 Canter, by Sigurd.. its a level 3 or 4 ability, so easy to get for anyone.
@@scottjelinek1916 thanks for the heads-up ! Honestly haven't looked at his abilities much but I briefly remember Alfred being able to move again after attacking when they were paired. Time to go spend some bond fragments!
FYI you can change the difficulty at any time by resting in your bed at the Somniel. Game never tells you this unless you go into your room though
It can only be moved down, though. Not increased.
i just can't with this series with leaning so heavily into the lighthearted anime vibe. it doesn't have to be Berserk, but that Path of Radiance tone was perfect and I hope they go back to it sometime.
7?! the gameplay is the best in the entire series and perhaps genre!
But they don’t like the minigames and writing, go gotta dock those points
They acknowledge that in the review--they also prefer a good narrative.
What's so depressing about Engage is that it is what "I" personally love as a long time FE fan. It hits the major important aspects of what I've always loved about this series. The problem is that Nintendo will see these reviews and sales and think that everyone just wants more 3H (which IMO is just too far off of what a traditional FE game should be) and that is what we will get going forward. They will try to duplicate that success. So many new people came in at 3H (which is a good thing for the longevity of the franchise) and think that's what FE has always been (hence a lot the criticisms of Engage) and were upset at what the new entry had to offer. If they go back to the 3H approach, I'm honestly out - it was easily my least favorite game in the series and I don't understand why it gets such high praise. I found the sim aspect to be horrible and dragged on way too long between battles, the story was boring, the art direction/style of the game was so bland and generic - I know many people loved it, but I just did not enjoy it at all.
I love the game, tho I prefer 3 houses. I totally started a 2nd playtrough when I finished because I wanted to replay the game with an entire new group of chracter and mix them with the emblems. I also dissagree with the characters being bad after seeing a lot of the supports. They are not as good as the 3 houses character, but I would say kinda like awakening which means a hand full of good ones and some are likeable and I really only dislike about 4 character
reviews complaining about the story is a meh. I play strategy games for the gameplay. I couldn’t care less for story. just like when playing chess, the story is on the match.
Story aside, Engage is wayyyy better than 3H. Suprising takes but thanks for the review
From what I've seen theirs is a very common stance. Engage is special in the sense that it really reveals what one cares about most in FE... or whether you've only played on normal or not.
The story is simple in engage.
The story wasn’t so much focus in Three houses
better in combat yes but overall for package 3h still better how they execute thing it not only story it narrative that make you want to do something
engage only combat and balance difficulty that make me addict other than that a lot of miss opportunity
I definitely prefer this one over Three Houses. It's true that that one had a better story, characters and artificial replay value, but it also forced you to play the same 40 hour game multiple times in order to truly understand the narrative, going through mostly the same content and featuring mostly the same bland maps each time, with every single playthrough feeling incomplete in its own right thanks to all the unanswered questions. Engage's story is simpler, but you get all of it in one playthrough. It also steps up the game massively with regards to map design and combat mechanics. I've always thought that the best form of replay value is being a fun game, and on that front, Engage has Three Houses beat.
I strongly disagree with this; map vs map 3 houses had much more distinct maps than engage does. I agree with you in that there is more combat to be had in engage, which is the one thing in which it has 3 houses beat, but you could easily play 3 houses with 1 story and understand it in its entirety, and playing with the other houses simply gave you a deeper understanding of other perspectives of that story. And the characters from 3 houses have NO EQUAL in engage's. I am enjoying engage more than I thought though, so it earns points for that, but I agree with him; sacrificing story in exchange for better combat in a tactical rpg just doesnt do it for me.
@@blkwng I'm also enjoying Engage more than I thought after seeing the relative lukewarm reception it got compared to Three Houses. But it simply blows Three Houses out of the water now that I'm playing it for myself. I disagree with most things you said, but you know my position, so there's no point in rehashing it. I think Engage takes a spot in my personal Top 5 in the series, probably only behind FE7-10.
@@blkwng The map design in Three Houses was bland. It was very similar to Birthright or even Awakening to some extent - some of the worst modern games. Engage does map design, enemy placement, unit balance, etc. a lot better, especially at harder difficulties.
@@Katie-hb8iq that's merely your opinion. Compare the battle pf lion vs eagle map to the same length map in chapter 7 and it has less unit types, less strategic points to take advantage of, and its even smaller. So no, this is an esoteric response and excuse for people that want to pretend that engage somehow makes maps better because of elitism. Go on, compare both chapters and tell me precisely why "engage map is better" in maddening vs lunatic chapter 7 in 3 houses. Let's see if you can even describe what's better other than saying it's better, because I'm betting no one even bothered to actually compare them fairly at all....
@@blkwng What does elitism have to do with anything? The quality of map shines through on harder difficulties. One big problem with Three Houses is that even Hard is too easy while Maddening is too tedious and frustrating. Engage's maps gets this difficulty balance just right where every decision matters and it's fair. Three Houses ambush spawns were not fair, just as they weren't fair in Awakening and other games.
But difficulty aside, the breath of maps in Engage are far more interesting and the strategies to beat them are far more varied. I didn't think that Three Houses map you were referring to was even that strong, but this goes beyond just one map. To beat the vast majority of Three Houses maps, you do the same thing over and over. There isn't really that much strategy to them and they don't pressure you very well. Even the bosses are very samey and require similar strategies to beat. Bosses in Engage are tricky and require vastly different approaches to avoid losses and to defeat them. Engage also pushes you to explore and utilize your toolkit more than Three Houses did - you can basically ignore Combat Arts entirely on Hard difficulty which is really weird. Engage maps also are a lot more unique mechanically.
After having completed the game myself, I think this review nailed all the good and the bad of this game! Overall enjoyable game, and great review!
Most important thing about this game is that the game is not Three houses level content.
I really liked the combat in engage and actually prefer it to three houses, the rings mechanic was pretty good, I like the weapon triangle, and you could tell they put in a ton of effort in designing levels. But damn our main character was so generic and boring in a generally mid story.
What’s the best fire emblem game to buy for switch? I haven’t played any fire emblem series.
You will not be disappointed with Three Houses. It's a masterpiece. Been playing FE since Gameboy Advance and it's my favorite by a decent margin.
Three Houses for sure
Engage for gameplay or if you're a fan of previous FE games, 3H if you like story based JRPGs more. Engage's story/characters suffers, while 3H really drops the ball on map design and finetuning to get that strategic feel.
How many gameplay hours Three Houses has?
@@CatzzMoney There are three routes for each house and they each take around 35-45 hours each. Probably can shave off a bit off that for subsequent playthroughs, but there's a ton of replayability in Three Houses and it's definitely something it has an advantage over Engage on in that regard. That said, Three Houses goes all in on the social aspect with the Monastery and that takes a lot of the playtime as well. Engage significantly toned that aspect down so if you're someone who prefers combat rather than running around talking to characters and doing other social elements, Engage is the better option. I think overall Three Houses is the best of the two though.
This is a great fire emblem game and so much better than three houses
This series is starting to get too much into the mobile/anime cliche territory. Miss the more serious tone of the earlier games.
in short, engage is a better Strategie game then 3 houses, but a worse RPG
Are the new Pokémon games ever going to be reviewed by you guys? It’s been at least three months since they released late last year.
No, we're not planning a review for them. -Bloodworth
@@EasyAllies You guys actually responded to me? That was unexpected. Every other mainline Pokémon game has been reviewed here. Is there a particular reason Scarlet and Violet will be an exception? I’d like to know. Thanks!
There's multiple factors, but two of our reviewers left the company last year, and they were also our biggest Pokemon fans. Pair that with the fact that we don't get Nintendo codes early and that it came out in a busy season, and there really wasn't space to do a full review. We did cover it extensively on Frame Trap though.
th-cam.com/video/_l0oBOEKHcc/w-d-xo.html
-Bloodworth
@@EasyAllies Thanks for answering!
So many reviewers schlob Three Houses knob so hard...
Spot on as far as I can tell (I'm on Chapter 18). I actually took a break for 4-5 days because I was getting bored with the Somniel between battles and was finding most of the characters uninteresting even after unlocking plenty of B and even some A support convos. I think I'm just going to do the bare minimum there going forward so I can spend more time in combat. Strangely, I enjoyed the monastery in Three Houses throughout every route.
One and done? The fact that this game has many units, classes and emblems that can mix and match so effortlessly appears to be lost here.
Also animations and models are so lovingly crafted in Engage. I hope they can step up the writing next time too; it is indeed quite cringe here. I watched a video where they talked about the creators intending Alear to be pathetic at the start and growing to be more of a hero later, but boy, they don't need to make it this bad.
Obviously this reviewer is not the best pick to review this game. Playing on Normal by itself I think really influenced how poor the review was. It's like only playing Dark Souls on a hypothetical easy mode where you don't need to learn most of the mechanics and strategies to beat the game and then not really praising the gameplay very much in a review because of that difficulty decision. I feel like Engage is very similar. Hard feels really good on a blind playthrough. Very tense and your decisions really matter.
@@Katie-hb8iq Yeah, times like this i miss Ben. Someone more experienced with these types of games like him are sorely needed
Yikes. So much time and attention in this review is spent on the narrative which is a such a small part of the game compared to the tactical gameplay. I’m two chapters from finishing it and it has some of the best gameplay in the series. It definitely has much better combat than Three Houses’ simplified and often lazy map design. Even with the points made here, I feel like it is objectively an 8 even if I personally lean higher.
it only thing engage does better is combat but other system is drag it down, home base that make you feel need to comeback every fight ruin pacing to me also narrative not small part game itself try to show story a lot and it failed that why people feel lacking, 3H do a lot of thing outside combat better for rpg element
their opinion is valid the score is subjective it fair for them to give that score
tbh if engage cut everything down and not try to tell story too much bc if they cant make good narrative and writing it will not be problem, make it more simple people will not complain that much
@@warm-heartedreaction6191 because people complain at almost everything, simple as that. they are entitle to their opinion about the score they gave, as you are entitled to say that 3H graphics is better than Engage because you said gameplay is the only thing that is better than the older.
@@warm-heartedreaction6191 You don't need to go back to the Somniel after every battle, especially if you're not on Maddening. What are you doing in the somniel exactly? The arena doesn't give so much experience that it's required. You probably want to get the ingots from the dogs and occasionally go to the bulletin board to collect achievements, but that's honestly it for most of the game. Just what are you doing there exactly? I promise you, most of the shit there is very optional and not worth it. It's nothing like the monastery which actually was mandatory.
I feel like if you didn't play this game on Hard, you didn't experience the refined balance and tension that was intended. I can tell you played on Normal, which is frankly Easy and it's been that way with this franchise for awhile now. The devs balance this game around Hard.
I personally dont want to go back to a monastery with 30 to 60 minutes of social sim busy work where you grind out motivation, professor ranks and resources. That is so tedious. You can fault the Somniel for not being as essential as the monastery, but I think that's kind of the point because these social sim features in Three Houses killed replayability. They were super tedious, repetitive and time consuming.
Three Houses had some great world building but it had poor map design and bloated social sim features and supports that could add 20 or 30 hours to your playthrough. I really don't want a mix of old and new when so many of the new social sim features were not very good beyond the first 30 hours of gameplay. They got too repetitive when playing all 4 routes takes 200-250 hours.
I'm all for more serious world building and writing, but fire emblem is still at it's best when it focuses on the map design and restriction of resources like engage does and Conquest did. I think in order for Fire Emblem to unique, it has to keep going down that path. I am all in favour of a more mature, serious story with rich world building - I agree with that. But I definitely feel like you missed out on a genuine Fire Emblem experience by not playing on Hard difficulty.
Nice review would for the most part agree that 7 sounds fair. Really wish to finally get a FE game that nails both Story and Gameplay in a satisfying way again.
Play genealogy of the holy war if you haven't yet
@@deiruru waiting for the rumored remake for that one. ^^
Playing on Hard/Classic, I think the gameplay is an easy 10/10. I don't care that much about story. I admit, the world building is nowhere near as good as Three Houses or the Tellius games, but to me that's not worth 3 entire points off the score. That is a bit harsh when the game is doing so many other things really well. I don't think this game should get lower than 8. The gameplay and map design and class balance is really good all the way through. Even most of the characters are likable enough and story is fine.
I wonder if three houses got some backlash for having that sim feature
It did. A good portion of the typical Fire Emblem fans thought it was too much. The problem here is that 3 houses brought in a new audience who liked the social sim aspects more and because of that Engage made the more typical fans happy as more of a return to form and the newer fans who have only played 3 houses disappointed due to the lack of the social stuff they liked.
to me 3h do it better for their game engage try it but it not work, the whole base is not need at all i not feel want to go there even it better for leveling that why it ruin pacing
old FE fan criticize 3h bc it ruin pacing that they want fight after fight dont want to go school but they not care how narrative work in there
to me i want to go school bc i want to see my children my comrade and optional text world building so it work for those people who enjoy that in 3h
@@Eviltwin1 I dont think that was it; Ive playyed all FE since FE awakening, and up till this point FE Engage easily has the worst story out of all of them. Its not the lack of sim that got me downgrading it points for myself, its just the uninspired story and worst, the characters. It just felt like the characters were childish....kinda like they were there to make a checkmark on some generic trope of a character, give them a name and just release them into your hands to play them. Just comparing the impact of the death of the parents in both 3 houses and this one you already notice how HUGE the difference in character development is.
@@blkwng better read books for the best narratives. FE is more of tactical and strategic problem solving, not for the player to cry on every little thing.
@@allendelarosa0525 Thata an ignorant statement; its genre is called rpg. Even if you want to bottleneck it even further, it would still be a tactical rpg. YOU dont decide what a game should be. It's plain and simple, the story and characters suck on this game compared to the others, and from people who came in from 3 houses, which had excellent character development and great storytelling, its a step down. If you want to puff up your chest and pretend that you're an elite gamer that played the previous ones, youre not, because a lot of people that have played since before 3h also disliked the story. The game is good, but being blind to its weaknesses is just being a fanboy.
completely forgot this came out a month ago
3H this and 3H that. This is why I started to hate 3H. Engage combat kicks 3H ass by miles but I guess most people just want a Dating simulator it seems.
Dude you literally had kids with party members and could rub their faces in previous games 😂
@@obchamp only in Japan in the Global version it was removed or toned down.
The dating sim stuff is probably my least favorite thing FE has ever done, but while the combat in this game is amazing - the story is just awful here.
It’s pretty reductive to say that Three Houses is just a dating simulator.
@94BigMac well in 3H that's like the most you do in that game. Monastery time is kinda double of what combat time is since your units are super soldiers that can deal with anything without risk.
I lvoe how serious Nintendo fans take any review that isn't a 9 or better.
They get visibly angry knowing that there are people out there who think a Nintendo game could possibly be "only" a 7 or act like they can suddenly no longer enjoy the game.
7 is not a bad score and the game definitely does have flaws compared to previous games and the improved gameplay still isn't great enough to make up for some of them.
And especially with a FE game a lot of people definitely want more story and character focus which you can still do even while being a "best of" or "theme park" game.
FFXIV does it just fine.
I love Easy Allies, but this review really missed the boat. Like others have said, Engage is a throwback FE game that’s all about the combat and maps, but this review focused on everything else.
I mean, if its a throwback game then why is it mainly throwing back to Awakening and Fates (I guess cause it's the same writer). But like I think back to stuff like Geneology of the Holy War or the Tellius games and it wasn't like this. Maybe with the 4 Hounds being a callback to the 4 Fangs, but still I feel like Engage takes these elements and throws them in without understanding why they worked in their respective games.
@@Burdiso93 Story and characters-wise, yes, you’re right. It’s reminiscent of Awakening and Fates, which were equally bad in those departments. But I meant that it’s throwing back to older Fire Emblems when it comes to battle mechanics and map design. Compared to a newer entry like Three Houses, where every map is either a wide open field or a big empty room, Engage’s maps actually had thought put into them. Overall I think Genealogy and the Tellius games were the peak of the franchise. They had interesting stories, great characters, challenging gameplay, and all the non-combat stuff was navigated through nice snappy menus between battles. I don’t think we’ll ever go back to that, but at least the Somniel was more streamlined than the Monastery.
@@TIDbitRETRO I mean we might see a remake of Geneology in the future, if the rumors are to be believed, but yeah I think while Engage isn't a bad game it has to be the point where I am the most frustrated I have ever been with the series, cause this game had the potential to be the best in the entire franchise. But nah it had to have piss poor writing and while some where decent for the most Part hollow characters, especially the villains were really boring, more annoying then intimidating and all kinda felt stupid.
@@Burdiso93 100% 👍
Looking for every detailed to give the game lower as possible, i do not do this often when i review my games, i have some good time playing despite the story is normal like previous games.
Damiani thinks Forspoken is better then Fire Emblem Engage...
It’s a KH3 and FF7 Remake situation all over again
And reviewers, like everyone, have their own opinions and takes on things. Even if it doesn't align with your own.
@@MiseryBrick No one said otherwise bud
FEE isn’t 3H But i enjoy the game for what it is. Thanks for the review by the way.
Don't like this review. FE Engage is at least an 8/10 for it's gameplay and graphics, if not a 9/10.
I feel like how a game reviewer reviews Fire Emblem Engage will represent whether they are more gravitated towards gameplay or story.
I am personally more for story and characters, so I feel that this review connects with me than others that gave the game a 9, even if they acknowledged the poor writing and characters.
Excellent review. I just subscribed. ❤❤❤
As someone who has beaten this game twice on higher difficulties, it's a terrible review. If I had to talk about the gameplay and map design and unit balance by itself, I could have spent 10 minutes just on that. Instead, he just complained about characters and narrative, which imo does not tank a game by 3 entire points when the gameplay is an easy 10/10 and you spend 95% of your time doing gameplay.
Since they revisited classic FE here, hopefully the next game returns to the fun social aspects and narrative focus of Three Houses.
What when were height advantages and slope mechanics ever a part of the series? Idk if this reviewer has played anything before 3H but those have never been in fire emblem?
the tellius games had height
Here I am finding out that there's no new game + 😭
We get it, you like Three Houses, too bad it's so bogged down with Persona shit that it barely feels like a Fire Emblem game.
Damiani holding that L like a champion when you can tell he didn't pay attention well enough to the supports (and maybe got like, 10 C conversations lol).
Jiminy Christmas 3 Houses really is the Persona 5 of the FE franchise; people just can't freakin' accept the franchise moving on or being even slightly different. It's an absolute refusal to view any change from their "golden goose" as anything but bad.
This was one of the poorest reviews Damiani's done in a while.
i mean even interesting support writing it not good
Sort of an odd comparison when there hasnt been a persona game out since 5 LOL.
I mean..lets be real. Regardless of what you think of engage, fire emblem will almost definitely be following more in 3 houses foot steps for the next(non remake) mainline game.
People who are upset engage wasnt more like 3 houses will certainly be getting their wishes granted in the coming years
7? Are you kidding me???
But Forespoken was an 8?
People are allowed to like things on a case by case basis. Come on now
Not saying I particularly disagree with this review, but for the most part I've come to terms with the fact that I do not agree with a lot of Damiani's taste.
So what if it got an 8?
What the hell?
@@KevinJennissen he seems to be more critical with Nintendo games or will have higher opinions, less harsh of a game if it is a new IP or idea.
Guys gotta get more reviewers. Let Ben work remote
I think they've said before that Ben didn't want to. They just need to manage their undertakings better.
Ben seemed content with getting out of the industry to accommodate his wife's career, but I do agree they need another reviewer. Ben handled the vast majority of their reviews when he was still at EZA and without him it feels like they're struggling to keep up since it's primarily Damiani/Huber/Brad that do reviews with Blood doing a few here and there. They need to hire someone else IMO.
@@blakeandcamp With what money? lol
@@georgaras666 This. I'm sorry to say but there's a lot of things they need to get smarter about.
@@blakeandcamp Since Ben and Jone's departure it definitely feels like the crew are being forced into properties they aren't really interested in. The allies need to prioritize their funds into hiring another reviewer. I can only take so much Damiani
Reviews like this really make me miss Ben.
I know right? He was def my fav. Every time one of them leaves it always seems to be my more favorite members. :(
am i the only one that skips the dialog? i just like to fight my units. been like that with every single fire emblem.
How are y’all this late?
Time for you guys to get more reviewers.
Well its a very long game
They sadly don't get these types of games in advance, so they have to start the review process right when the game launches. That, combined w/ the length of the game, makes for a pretty long delay after the release
They don't want to do like other reviewers who have to to rush their reviews before the release date.
@@JasonDennic what makes you think they don't get these games early? they def do
It just rubs me the wrong way that you’re having a war and killing people, yet everyone in your party seems to have the time of their life in the vacation resort that is your home base.
Personally, 3H’s school setting fit its narrative and made more sense. This vacation home approach is just too weird…
Quick question : is Hogwart’s Legacy review coming?
Damiani may think Three Houses' social stuff was heavy handed, but to me that's what got me hooked. I agree with most of the criticisms of Engage here, though. I'd give it an 8 but it's hard to overstate how much the huge character roster hurts this game. Characters I genuinely liked just became useless as they got replaced with more powerful versions
I agree with the review, this game was a really big step down from 3H for me, and I think 3H is the best Switch game I've played, so after playing Engage I felt that the game was really meh, I'd might even rank it lower when I think about it.
This game is the definition of mediocre. A 7 is pretty accurate and the general consensus. The story characters are writing are genuinely awful. It bogs and ruins the pacing. That’s how bad the story is. It’s absolute garbage. I had to struggle to finish it and dropped it for days at time. The gameplay is good but it’s ruined by everything else because it’s offensively bad and intrusive to the whole experience.
Don’t start shit with “You started with 3H” Ya’ll are embarrassing. Most people have played all the games. I’ve been playing since the GBA ones. When FE was first ever localized and i’ve played every unlocalized games as well since, mind you. So cut the elitist nonsense. You’re no better than anyone else. In fact, it makes you look insecure if anything.
The story is genuinely one of the worst things i’ve experienced in a game in a very very long time. And that’s an achievement. There’s also other issues besides the narrative. The second half of the game is frontloaded with bullshit and bad map design. There’s a reason why every reviewer agrees the game is significantly worse than Three Houses. Because it is. Deal with it. It has nothing to do with the “Sim” excuse people keep dropping. The game is badly designed with many fundamental issues, including maps, unit versatility etc. The story is the worst of its issues but it’s not the only thing. Probably the most disappointing game of the year so far for me, what a massive step down from Three Houses.
Metroid Prime Remastered Review please!
good review. The story is trash
The story is basic yes but it does enough to keep you going and the tactical gameplay is absolutely top tier and is probably the most fun game to play in the series
The story is normal as Fire emblem games, 3H was so much focus But the best story is Echoes in my opinion.
Great game wack story. All logic goes out the window in the last few chapters and my suspension of disbelief was gone in a game about magic rings and dragons.
The bad story and lack of the social stuff makes this a game I'll either skip, or wait until it's at a heavy discount
no way dude this game is a 9
A 7 you guys are tripping and where is the Hogwarts legacy review? You boycotting?
No plans for a Hogwarts review, but we talked about it on Frame Trap yesterday.
th-cam.com/video/MbMrcAn97_A/w-d-xo.html
-Bloodworth
A 7 is still a good score.
The story and art design is awful. The gameplay is good but that’s about it. I don’t think it’s worth it when Octopath Traveler 2 and Tactics Ogre are right there.
This is my first 'Fire Emblem' game, and I agree with so much of this review. The story is awful and the writing is even worse. The voice actors try their best, but I just can't care about anything or anyone because there's not much to hold on to. I'm two-thirds the way through, and started skipping conversations a long time ago. The post-battle time in the battle area is nigh-on useless, and everything outside the larger cutscenes looks pretty bland. The menus are also not great, and I don't bother with anything back at the home base. I've started forcing my way through the story missions, and kind of regret getting the game. Though the Divine Edition extras are really nice.
I’ve always ALWAYS wanted a Game of Thrones themed Fire Emblem. Think about it. We don’t have to put up with this anime crap anymore!
Fire emblem without anime is just an entirely different game Lol. There are plenty of other strategy games out there :P
You can emulate FE4 right now.
Its pretty much what people would describe as FE x Game of Thrones, except it came out a year before that first book, in 1995 iirc.
The gameplay will probably filter you since it doesn't hold your hand or explain anything to you (games had manuals back then)
Also you'd have to patch it from Japanese with one of the available translations
Happy playing.
This is the first Fire Emblem release I'm skipping (though in retrospect, I could have just as well skipped on the DS version of Shadow Dragon, and two of the versions of Fates). The Monastery was the source of my biggest most key issues with Three Houses and it seems to once again be the culprit here. Sure that mid-chapter grind is technically optional, but your opportunities are limited, like deadlines for a homework assignment. Once the opportunity passes, it's gone. You can't grind on your own time for your own reasons, and you're missing out on resources by choosing to skip it. Previous Fire Emblem games had an open structure without running up against issues like that.
I don't understand your complaints at all. You can grind if you want, all you want (more open than Three Houses). You don't have to grind either, and you are not missing out anything. Much of Somniel activities can be ignored and should be ignored honestly. There are more FE games without the open structure than the ones with one.
Play maddening? And the between-chapter somniel visit is like 3 minutes (and optional), whereas in three houses it was like 15 minutes even if you did the bare minimum
I'd reccomend taking a bit more of a second look. Somniel is actually quite minimal compared to the Monastary.
And this is coming from somebody who hates the Monastery.
You can grind as much as you want whenever you want lol and I'm not aware of any deadlines for anything in this one
Unlike the Garreg Mach, the Somniel can effectively be skipped entirely, and the game can be played like a traditional FE. The "homework deadline" aspect that you mention simply doesn't exist in engage.
A 7 feels a bit too generous in my opinion. This has been the most disappointing FE game for me since the Shadow Dragon remake on DS.
Are you sure you played the right game?! Engage has some of the best strategy rpg gameplay I’ve ever seen
@@Blaze1101 I'm sorry to hear that.
Probably disapointed compared to Three houses, But Yeah its one of the lower games not including the mobile games.
I realy hope the Writer of this game works never again on this franchise.
The gameplay was great but uff the Story was at best a 3/10.
Guess people do love the Dating Sim that is 3H with shallow and unbalanced combat. 3H story wasn't even that great and has alot of plotholes.
There's 9 writers in the game, games aren't written by just one person
@@ausgod538 oh that why it bad
@@SyLuX636 we talk about narrative and writing here. story can be simple but good engage story ok but narrative and writing drag it more down
Great gameplay, 3/10 story. Balance that out and it sounds like you've got a 7 on your hands.
Yeah 6 - 7 is about right. The map design is god awful with every map featuring random, nigh infinite spawns, super bland story and characters and the Somniel a big waste and a huge step down from 3 Houses. Emblems are fun, but they take them away and make it super weird and clunky to use at times.
Yes, the wonderful replayability of three houses, in which you get to play about two-thirds of basically the same content and then a final third that uses a lot of the same maps and assets that you probably experienced in your last route. This review spent so much time talking about minigames, writing, and characters, but so little about map design, mechanics, and basically what you’re likely spending 90% of your time doing.
The characters and writing don't make up 10% of the game. Don't kid yourself
@@Megajmaster1000 you’re right it’s probably about 5%
he have same criticize as me his opinion is valid to me i will give it 8.5 and i think it fair for him to give it 7 bc i fully understand how not good thing he mention that they not put it well in engage
@@Blaze1101 sure... if you happen to be both blind and deaf
@@Megajmaster1000 or I happen to spend 95% of the game in battles funnily enough
Damiani clearly rushed his review for this game (especially going off his 40 hours of playtime), he very clearly only watched a handful of C supports for characters going off the very typical knee jerk reaction to Framme's support with Alear shown in the video which is one of the very first ones you unlock. Not only do Framme's supports with characters outside of of Alear and her brother expand greatly on her character but there's even ones like her support with Diamant which has a lot of world building involving the history between Brodia and Elusia.
World building in general is done through supports in Engage rather than dragging out the main story, a lot of reviewers don't end up seeing them as they only see a couple of the C supports of the Lythos and Firene characters and don't bother watching more (imagine thinking Awakening had good characters).
And in what world is 36 characters too many for an FE game? That's one of the smallest rosters only beating Gaiden/Echoes, Sacred Stones, and only looking at single routes for Three Houses.
Some FE games have over 70 characters. with most others being in the 45-55 range.
He rushed the review so much that it took him a month after launch to get it done...
@@Badalight Yeah because he spent every waking hour of that month playing it right? His 35-40 hours of playtimes is only half of the average playtime most people end with.
I have play the game almost 80 hours to learn about every character and emblem ring, its soon over chapter 21.
all writing in support is not that good and few support convo not make overall narrative better i play almost 100 hr stil agreed about writing and narrative
also if they want good world building they need to make good narrative around the game not just support
@@warm-heartedreaction6191 Yeah you definitely didn't read any supports or play the game for 100 hours with how basic and nondescript your post is.
ah yes 3 houses replayability where you have to play the same 12 chapters at least 3 times(4 if you didn't know there were 2 routes in black eagles) with different casts
Surprised you guys didn’t do a Kof 15 review, but you guys are still the best in the business!
Seems surprising they differed so heavily in approach after three houses was such a hit. The art style and weak narrative are quite offputting for me.
It was in development at the same or shortly after and was meant to be a celebration of the series. Why do every game has to be the same? People ask for changes in their games yet complain when it hasn't the exact same systems.
@Hansiger Obba does it count as a change if it's a back to basics fire emblem game? Maybe the next one will bring back the systems from three houses that people enjoyed. A better art style too.
@@reed1645 the arstyle is amazing in engage. Both are good. Why you can't enjoy different things. Also the next game will most likely be a remake. Back to a basic fire emblem game? Yes thats what the series is known for. If you have only one reference point being 3 Houses. That people enjoyed not everyone enjoyed them to the degree that you may think except people which only played that game and will most likely never touch the series again if it has similar features or progression and systems as 3 Houses.
@@obba40 Agree to disagree on the art style I guess but I personally find it a massive step down from three houses.
To be fair three houses did win 2019's player voice award at the game awards so that does suggest a good number of people were quite impressed with it. It's pretty rare a series can keep going without evolving. You need the brand recognition of something like pokemon to pull that off.
Personally i'm hoping the next one is better as engage seems to have come and gone really fast without making any kind of an impression at all. Just a solid 7 or an 8 type game that won't get much discussion at the end of the year when people are trying to figure out the best games of 2023.
@@reed1645 who cares if it will be up for discussion for the end of year.
Let’s go.