also tactics games ARE boring as hell.
"But here’s the thing I don’t get – and this is the reason why even those master strategists who love a hardcore tactical challenge might want to avoid this title. It’s, like… barely even a Wii title. It doesn’t make use of any Wii functionality at all, except for the fact that you can point at menus – and that’s kind of annoying in this context, just pointing away, stabbing at menus all day. It doesn’t use the nunchuk, there are no motion controls, no voice dialogue, and the battlefields themselves seriously look about identical to the Path of Radiance screenshots I looked at. We’re talking about a GameCube title here. Normally one would expect a next-gen sequel to have some next-gen features, but Radiant Dawn has next to none."
Yep, this is my main gripe with Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn. I can put up with uninteresting stories, flat characters, and difficult strategic situations to fight my way through - but I hate it when titles do not take full advantage of the system they are on. Why even put a Fire Emblem game on the Wii if you aren't going to use all of the features that the system provides?
Also, does Radiant Dawn really have no voiced dialog? I thought Path of Radiance had VO in the CG cutscenes - which I assumed would carry over to the sequel, but I guess I was wrong. Also, you said that the player can navigate the menus by pointing the Wii Remote at the screen. So, can you not use the pointer in the heat of battle - do you have to use the D-Pad?
Also, Cocks.
Maybe Fire Emblem should be set aside, until they can be more creative with the title.
She has a point about genre bias, people who love a type of game are just as susceptible to giving a biased review than someone who doesn't enjoy that type of game. Perhaps you should give her some kudos for trying a game that is outside her comfort zone and giving it an honest chance. She correctly prefaced her article in the interest of full disclosure, but gave the game an honest review. Maybe other reviewers could take a page from this review.
To me it just doesn't make sense. Review for the crowd that may actually play the game if it's any good. If a strategy fan didn't like the game, other strategy fans probably won't either. If someone who hates strategy doesn't like the game, that just leaves me looking for a different review since obviously we don't like the same genres we probably won't like the same games.
That said, for games that do try to bring people into new genres, having someone who dislikes said genre do the review is always an interesting read.
I don't like em because in FE games its to stacked toward my enemy. I still remember the yelling and cursing my friend did when he was trying to beat Radiant stones, nothing like completing everything and finding the super secret spell book, only to be crit by the boss on your first attack.
Also, 10 out of 10! :)
@lord the night Knight- i don't think she was trying to outdo the GS review. Gamespot's review was- It's too hard for us on easy b/c we're retarded and i wish there was waggle and mii support. leigh just doesn't like SRPGs so even if she wasn't trying, she'll tend to give it a lower score.
The review is moot because I already know what the game is like without playing it. You could go play the GBA ones and it'd be the same too. If nothing else, with all the bitching about "waaa waaa Nintendo makes too much kiddy casual shit", you have to respect them for having a long running hardcore strategy franchise like this.
Also Dan, this game came out a while ago (in the US anyways).
Now unless I am mistaken this is a blog, blogs are the opinions of the writers. So if Leigh doesn't like the game, it is her opinion. Who's telling you to read it? I read it because I played the Fire Emblem games on the GBA and gamecube and I can see exactly where she is coming from. And I LIKE the genre. If you put someone who is absolutely in love with the genre you will have someone talk about how perfect the game is and how the flaws are minuscule. But the truth is most of the time the flaws are minuscule because the writer is such a fanboy or fangirl of the genre/series.
Is this review bias? Yeah. Aren't all reviews biased? No one can make a completely subjective response unless you bring someone in who has played literally no video games, and that won't help you either. If you LIKE the genre then read her review and see what the problems are. The 5.0 is what it is to HER not anyone else.
"I never said I wanted a fanboy reviewing it either, just someone that likes strategy games." Then go read IGN or GameSpy or any gaming magazine that gets sponsors to raise the scores. Destructoid likes to be honest, if it makes you go up in arms than you better get more open minded.
Oh yeah and if you don't want to see honest journalism than just read another website.
after all, this type of thing is the deciding factor in shelling out 50 for a game or not...
and yes, its her opinon, but usually when you take advice you try to get it from someone who knows their shit on the matter, right?
You're right, I was being unfairly extreme. My horribly expressed point was just that I loved the game and would have given it a much higher score. Sometimes whether you like the genre or not doesn't really make a difference; it just comes down a person's opinion. Fire Emblem is probably the least "hardcore" in the tactics genre (that honor goes to something like Disgaea), so I think having a self-proclaimed non-fan review the game is perfectly reasonable in this particular situation. :)
I am, admittedly, a turn-based strategy game whore. I love that the gameplay is purely tactical and lacking in unnecessary side quests and random encounters. Random encounters annoy me to no end.
I would rate this game a 9. It does an incredibly good job following up Path of Radiance and improves upon that game immensely. The battle scenes and cut scenes are infinitely better in this game and I'm quite enjoying the story. Having the player view the war from both sides has been rather enjoyable. A buy for SRPG fans.
For example, I would never have decided to buy Mario Galaxy based solely on the opinion of someone who has never played a Mario game before... I can't relate to that kind of person, I have no shared experiences I can draw on... UNLESS they could explain to me, in detail, what makes this game so fun or not fun.
SRPG games are meant for a small group of people who enjoy statistics and strategy, and if you don't like that sort of thing why would I care what you think about games which delve deep into statistics and strategy?
There is a vast resource of opinions for nearly every game one could hope to search on Google. There's whole magazines and sites dedicated to every genre, pro and con, imaginable. There's a site that will remain nameless (rhymes with "flamehacks") that usually has a wide enough array of fan-made reviews to wrap ones head around; Often poorly written, but usually sincere and earnest. How can we complain about Destructoid's reviews when the whole process of "review" is steeped in bias and opinion? If you simply want to know the features of a game, read the back of the box. If you want to know wether the game simply functions as intended, rent it and see.
The only, ONLY, reason to read a "review" is to get someone's opinion on a game. In this case, if FE had changed the reviewer's mind about SRPG's, would the review have been more or less valid? I contend "NO" to both options. From what I understand, I have fairly similiar game preferences to Leigh. Does that make her word gospel? Not necessarily, but it makes her review more informative to my biases. And if I want another opinion, there's one just a click away.
My point? Rather than complain about a reviewers inability to write a "valid review" (of which there is NO SUCH THING, because reviews have no empirical formula by which we can measure their "validity" against) share your opinion of the game, or seek other reviews and see if they don't have common threads that point to the big picture.
OR...argue on the internet for hours and improve your typing skills.
Fire Emblem is definitely not everyone's cup of tea. Its true its a very niche series. I like them, but even I wouldnt give it a 10, or even a 9. I really do with they would make the games a bit more pretty and with all the text voice acting would be nice. Of course if it turned out to be crap voice acting I would be crying for them to take it away.
I will probably buy this game when its a bit cheaper. For a GC game turned wii they should have priced it the same as Resident Evil 4 (29.99).
I feel bad for you. You explained the game from an outsider's perspective: something that might come in handy for about 1/5th of the people who bothered reading a Fire Emblem review. You seem to have a history of taking a hard stance (read: playing Devil's advocate) against games with which you have no experience (the big one being Halo 3). I'm not condeming you for that; it's a valid strategy when the goal is to create controversy, which leads to more hits on the site and more comments in the... err... comments section. I think most people take issue with the 5/10 you gave this game; as archaic and childish as that is, that's where the disagreements start. It's too bad you had to give this game a number.
It's not that your opinion is invalid because you don't like tactical games and I don't think that someone on the opposite end of the spectrum (LOVES Fire Emblem) would be any better. There's just a balance to these kinds of things. One should be versed in what they are trying to review. What you reviewed here is a strategy RPG, and the impression you made was that you weren't versed in strategy RPG's. That's all I'M (not sure about everyone else :D) trying to say.
"5 – Average. Half of the time the game is fun, half of the time it isn't, for whatever reason. This game is absolutely average in every single way -- neither exceptional nor face-melting awful."
Your avatar is off the f*cking chain.
oh well i'm still buying it .

surf dtoid with 

Rising (10+)
People you follow















follow


