Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 4063008" data-attributes="member: 32536">Well, I think the TV Tropes entry regarding Fire Emblem is more a result of modern players unfamiliar with true Nintendo Hard rather than a proper statement of that series' difficulty. The very fact that Radiant Dawn has a proper mid-battle save feature so you don't need to replay a chapter from the beginning every time you lose a character removes it from being Nintendo Hard in of itself. The game took me over 100 hours of play time, but I completed most of the missions on my first try.Compare that to Super Ghost and Goblins, where it takes me hours of dying and retrying in order to pull off the perfect execution needed to reach the end of the first level, and dying that much in the second level means I need to play through the first level all over again (in a game where you need to complete the whole game twice in one sitting).I have not played either, but I am perfectly willing to agree with the concept.Navigating a labyrinth in which every chest either trapped, a mimic, or both, all the enemies have instant death attacks, you need to cross chasms full of lava in anti-magic zones (and no one in the party has any relevant skills), and the DM is counting every last turn so that he can insta-kill you when the dungeon collapses after two in-game hours is Nintendo Hard.Fighting a running battle through an ancient ruin, fending off waves of attackers and getting caught in traps and ambushes as you go, giving you little time to rest, is just hard.I think the second sounds more like fun to me.Anyways, I don't understand why people are condemning 4E so much over this article. Before, the writer always wanted to play a reckless character who gets himself and the party into trouble, but had to limit that tendency because simple recklessness or a single mistake can be fatal in older editions. Now, it is possible to survive recklessness through luck and skill, and a single mistake may hurt, but it won't be fatal. This route may not be easy, but it is possible. This is not a case of a player charging in recklessly because he knows he won't die, it is a case of a player roleplaying a brave fool of a character, and not having to hold back because of guaranteed death.This article is not trying to say that heroes are guaranteed to live, he is saying that there are no longer situations that are a guaranteed death. There is a huge difference between the two ideas. I would hate the first, but the second is a vast improvement over previous editions.</blockquote>

Verification