what is with all of you trolls hating on casual mode

#121KeyToSuccessPosted 1/28/2013 3:50:42 PM
WestbrickIII posted...
Yes, this would marginalize a select few who want an easy-breezy experience. This is why I love my Silent Hill 2 example, since it's such a beloved, classic, and all-around great game, but *not* for everyone. To those saying "Who cares if Casual is in?", I just point to SH2 and say: Who cares if a small group of people don't like permadeath? Why should the wants of a select few newbies compel the creators to add a new mode that will undermine the experience for so many? Yes, this is "elitist" in a sense, as it buys into the crazy notion that options for options' sake isn't always a good thing. Look to that Citizen Kane example for a non-gaming illustration of what I mean.

Again, though: it's not a major blemish. Just a blemish.

Who is the so many? The long time fans? Most of us will just play classic mode.

The game is getting more advertising than I remember a Fire Emblem game getting, but there's no way I would know how many complete newbies are going to pick it up.

And if the newbies think it's too tough and don't like the idea of permanent death they'll just go to casual.

The point of this mode was to get more people to try out and purchase the game.

Same with my Devil May Cry and Mass Effect example. As long as it's an option and not permanent I honestly couldn't care less.
---
This is what RPG's are about! Killing people and taking their cool stuff!
#122Col_MobiusPosted 1/28/2013 3:51:59 PM
KeyToSuccess posted...
As long as it's an option and not permanent I honestly couldn't care less.


But then someone might be allowed to play it wrong! People on the internet would lose sleep!
#123Col_MobiusPosted 1/28/2013 3:53:47 PM
WestbrickIII posted...
Inter-subjectivity. When a Silent Hill 2 player talks with another Silent Hill 2 player about the game, their experiences will have significant overlap. They won't be identical, of course, but this is true for movies and books and other various media. By contrast, a person who plays Casual will have a very different experience from the person who plays Classic.


Because everyone's dream is to have a conversation with you. /vomits uncontrollably
#124airtamisPosted 1/28/2013 3:53:59 PM
Off topic- While I don't agree with your argument, and at this point I doubt that we will ever come to an agreement on this matter, I do love your ability to point out logical fallacies. I may get a bit frustrated and vent a bit at points, I do prefer that debates be kept mostly logical.
#125WestbrickIIIPosted 1/28/2013 3:55:53 PM
Col_Mobius posted...
WestbrickIII posted...
I'd mark you, but I feel your posts are more humiliating for you than anything I could do.


It just wouldn't be a day on a GameFAQs message board without someone being arrogant and awful.


Protip: You're the one who's been angry this whole time, what with the name-calling, the strawmanning, and the general rage. How does it feel, I wonder? To see someone who's such a huge fan of this game (to the point where he imported a 3DS and Japanese cartridge!) and is capable of reasonably criticizing it?

KeyToSuccess posted...
Who is the so many? The long time fans?


Newcomers.

The game is getting more advertising than I remember a Fire Emblem game getting, but there's no way I would know how many complete newbies are going to pick it up.


Based on what's happened in Japan, quite a few.

And if the newbies think it's too tough and don't like the idea of permanent death they'll just go to casual.


Which is my whole point: because this is such a highly-advertised Fire Emblem and because so many new-comers will be attracted to it, I'd rather them get a chance to play through the superior experience of permadeath. It's hoping people go to see the original Citizen Kane instead of the revamped one.
---
The only thing more consistent than the Pats beating the Texans is my mother's regret she survived childbirth, knowing she spawned a welcher
#126Col_MobiusPosted 1/28/2013 3:58:18 PM
WestbrickIII posted...
Protip: You're the one who's been angry this whole time, what with the name-calling, the strawmanning, and the general rage. How does it feel, I wonder? To see someone who's such a huge fan of this game (to the point where he imported a 3DS and Japanese cartridge!) and is capable of reasonably criticizing it?


Who's angry? I'm not picking at you because you dare to criticize it. I'm picking at you because you are really super arrogant and feel the need to dictate to other people how they should play the game.

Let's focus on the issue here: You're not actually upset that the game was changed at all. You're upset that another mode was created that would allow other people to play the game differently without any impact at all on your experience. Seriously, man. Get a grip.
#127WestbrickIIIPosted 1/28/2013 3:58:46 PM
airtamis posted...
Off topic- While I don't agree with your argument, and at this point I doubt that we will ever come to an agreement on this matter, I do love your ability to point out logical fallacies. I may get a bit frustrated and vent a bit at points, I do prefer that debates be kept mostly logical.


No worries. I've come to terms with the fact that I'm in the minority on this one; for the most part, people seem happy having newcomers play through the game on Casual first and then returning to Classic after-the-fact. I do worry about how this will affect the experience for such people (although it will attract more people to the series, which is a positive), but, as should be evidenced by this topic, my views aren't held by everyone.

You've been completely civil, but I do marvel at how worked up people can get. Just look at some of the posts I've responded to -- it takes a magical combination of boredom, rage, and misunderstanding for that kind of post to happen!
---
The only thing more consistent than the Pats beating the Texans is my mother's regret she survived childbirth, knowing she spawned a welcher
#128airtamisPosted 1/28/2013 3:59:22 PM
WestbrickIII posted...

Which is my whole point: because this is such a highly-advertised Fire Emblem and because so many new-comers will be attracted to it, I'd rather them get a chance to play through the superior experience of permadeath. It's hoping people go to see the original Citizen Kane instead of the revamped one.


But it's only a superior experience if you want it to be-aka, for the people like you. It won't be a superior experience to everyone, and to some it would be downright frustrating to keep resetting 8 times per battle because one enemy got lucky with the RNG. By removing casual, you just hurt the developers by sending newcomers away.
#129WestbrickIIIPosted 1/28/2013 4:02:01 PM
Col_Mobius posted...
Who's angry?


/vomits uncontrollably

I'm not picking at you because you dare to criticize it. I'm picking at you because you are really super arrogant and feel the need to dictate to other people how they should play the game.


Do I need to post that "strawman" link again?

I'm not dictating anything about how a game "should" be played; I'm suggesting that one way to play a game is better, and that giving an option for a worse mode will impact the experience for newcomers in a negative way. I've given my Citizen Kane example and I've given my Silent Hill 2 example; I'm not sure how much clearer I can get.

Let's focus on the issue here: You're not actually upset that the game was changed at all. You're upset that another mode was created that would allow other people to play the game differently without any impact at all on your experience.


This is just sort of dumb.
---
The only thing more consistent than the Pats beating the Texans is my mother's regret she survived childbirth, knowing she spawned a welcher
#130NovaWingz(Topic Creator)Posted 1/28/2013 4:02:28 PM
holy crap im gone a few hours and the topic explodes
---
it's time to end this prepare to die SAVAGE WOLF FURY,im not done with you yet take this BURNING RAGNAROK, heh heh heh you thought this was over ARS ARCANUM