Final Fantasy Tactics Vs. Fire Emblem

hx214

hx214

CAGiversary!
Feedback
38 (100%)
Final Fantasy Tactics Vs. Fire Emblem (1 or 2)

I've been reading about both of these games, Im looking to grab one, but I was wondering in your guys opinion which one was the better game? I really liked the orginal tactics and I think thats why I am getting tripped up, because alot of signs point to fire emblem, but what do you guys think?
 
Well, i havnt played Fire Emblem, But i thought Tactics Ogre The Knight of Lodis was much better than FFTA. (good luck finding a legit copy though)
Just my 2 cents.
 
I like tactics myself. But if you want depth or a more complex game Fire Emblem or Tactics Ogre the Knights of Lodis are both good.
 
You should make a poll.... those are always fun.

And my vote goes for Fire Emblem. IMHO, it's more challenging and has a better story. I think it's got more replay value than FFTA, too.
 
Honestly, FFTA and both Fire Emblem games are excellent. I just scored Tactics Ogre, myself, but I'm really enjoying it, too. I'd advise you to pick up any of the four. You really can't go wrong! :D
 
the problem with FFTA is that the classes aren't balanced well enough.

Some jobs are just too good (Gunner, Assassin, Sage) and with a handful of clan members you can basically slaughter everyone.
 
FFTA is slower paced (you can't skip cutscenes and the characters pause before and after moving) and you can almost always win if you have a White Mage healer in your clan. The art style is more effeminate too, with bunny-head girls and cute moogles. It's kind of girly, and even the toughest members of your clan are little kids and bunnies. The battles themselves are kind of underwhelming. The magic spells never look that cool, and only the occasional summoned monsters put on an impressive show of strength.

In Fire Emblem you fight with grown men and women with only a few little kids and one wimpy girl. It's got wyvern riders, pegasus knights, pirates, and mounted swordsmen, all of whom have good-looking combat moves. The game moves fast too. You can skip cutscenes if you want, and get right into the game. The balance is excellent. You really have to keep your archers and healers in the back or they will killed by the warriors. It requires more foresight and planning than FFTA. Any mistakes made in Fire Emblem will cost you dearly.
 
I'm totally amazed at how people care that a game is more cutsie and feminine. I mean, are all gamers really that homophobic? Who plays FFTA and goes, oh yea, it's definetly a girly game.

I think both games are goin after a different audience. FFTA was more of a Tactics game intro and Fire Emblem continues a series that assumes you've played other Fire Emblems.

Personally I find Fire Emblem to be a bit on the easy side... I recommend both tho!
 
[quote name='Lister']I'm totally amazed at how people care that a game is more cutsie and feminine. I mean, are all gamers really that homophobic? Who plays FFTA and goes, oh yea, it's definetly a girly game.[/quote]

It's not homophobia. I just prefer doing battle as powerful characters. If you don't share that preference then that's fine. I just wanted to share that with the OP in case that mattered to him. Thanks. :)
 
[quote name='boyward']It's not homophobia. I just prefer doing battle as powerful characters. If you don't share that preference then that's fine. I just wanted to share that with the OP in case that mattered to him. Thanks. :)[/QUOTE]Cutsie = not powerful?
 
id say fire emblem... i mastered ffta in a week... use ezal's big sleep attack, move up on target from behind with thief gloves , steal ability, repeat... all jobs mastered... ;)
 
while FFT is my favorite SRPG ever, FFTA wallows in the shadow of the original. Fire Emblem's the only SRPG i've played other than FFTA on GBA, and it was a helluva lot more fun, although FFTA is a MUCH longer game, what with all the side missions and everything.
 
[quote name='judyjudyjudy']Cutsie = not powerful?[/QUOTE]

Well, let's just say I get a lot more satisfaction from seeing a Wyvern Lord swoop down with a critical hit than I do from watching stationary FFTA characters bop enemies on the head.

I also think FFTA's combat would have a heavier impact if it went to the side view used in Fire Emblem. The animations in Fire Emblem look as powerful as they really are, whereas FFTA's combat relies more on numbers and statistics to convey the damage done.
 
FFT for PS was fantastic. FFTA-GBA, not as much so.

Fire Emblem to me is more Pure Strategy (closer to Advance Wars), than an FFT style S-RPG, with just the addition that your guys can actually gain levels. But I enjoyed both the Fire Emblem GBA games immensely.

Isnt Fire Emblem Gamecube coming out late October though? Thats gonna kick all sorts of ass.
 
FFTA is part of the TRU green tag im waiting for the 70% or even 90% since i saw a ton of these last time i was there
 
FFTA is part of the TRU green tag im waiting for the 70% or even 90% since i saw a ton of these last time i was there
Click to expand...

Ya I saw that the other day. I may end up getting both of them if I can score that game at 70% off. Anybody know when TRU is going to kick that in? maybe i'll go hide a copy in one of the powerwheels trunks...
 
[quote name='Lister']I'm totally amazed at how people care that a game is more cutsie and feminine. I mean, are all gamers really that homophobic?


Only the straight ones.
 
I would give FFTA the slight edge because I like the fact that you can't loose units permanently like you can in FE:SS.
 
final fantasy tactics advance. The is the 3rd best gba game of all time behind Castlevania:aria of sorrow and castlevania: harmony of dissonance. The gameplay is fun, the story makes sense, and overly it is extremely depth.
 
[quote name='Ebraum'][quote name='Lister']I'm totally amazed at how people care that a game is more cutsie and feminine. I mean, are all gamers really that homophobic?

[/QUOTE]

Only the straight ones.[/QUOTE]
... who are really gay but can't admit it to themselves.


As for whether I'd prefer to watch Simon Belmont wave around a whip, or Hello Kitty...:whistle2:?
 
[quote name='mellowsmoothe']I feel like the only person in the world who likes Vandal Hearts.[/QUOTE]

I don't think a lot of people have played VandalHearts...it did come out fairy early on in the PS1's cycle. Also, the post is about FFTA versus Fire Emblem. VH isn't available for GBA, although either a port or a sequel (I can't remember which) has been announced for the DS.
 
I've been playing Fire Emblem recently and I have to say that its about 100 times better than FFTA. The interface was so awful in FFTA that you really had no idea what the hell was going half the time and just trying to buy items was a chore.

The only real complaints I have about Fire Emblem is the fact that your items can get broken after to many uses, but thats more of an annoyance than a flaw.
 
They are very different animals.

Fire Emblem is more a strategy game with light rpg elements, and FF:TA is essentially the opposite.

I'd say screw them both and get Advance Wars.
 
Hey just wanted to let you know that FFTA is 9.99 at TRU/Amazon.
I picked up Tactics Ogre at a local store the other day for 12 bucks, also shining force for Gameboy at 10 bucks. Pretty good finds. I'm gonna have some serious RPGing to do after I pick up Tactics for 10 bucks. Or should I wait for the 90% off...
Now I just gotta finish Advance Wars 2 so I can start on one of these game.
Oh, PS someone keep us posted on that Vandal Hearts release for DS, man I loved those games, I would love to play it or some kind of re-encarnation of it. Thanks for all the help guys
 
I'm a strategy gamer and can never really get into RPGs too much, so I played FFTA for a while but found it to be pretty shallow as far as strategy goes; it's more of an RPG gamer's strategy game.


Tactics Ogre is incredibly deep with lots of strategy, but to be honest, I'm just too impatient to enjoy it. There's no way to skip past the battle animations, and even so, the battle animations for each side are REALLY slow...I just can't stand there staring at my screen for a couple of minutes while I watch the enemies make their moves.


Does anybody know if the two Fire Emblem games are different enough to warrant buying them if i don't care about the story too much? I have the second one but have been wondering if I shouldn't buy the original as well...same with Advance Wars.
 
Personally, I love FE. It may be one of my favorite SRPG if not my favorite SRPG, simply because it's takes some strategic knowledge, unlike FFT, FFTA, and the NIS Games (THough I still like these games), If you don't place your units perfectly, you could be in deep trouble in Fire Emblem, with serious consequences if a unit dies. The game also saves after like every move, so it's not like you can go back and reset when you die, and try to get that 8% chance of survival. It's determined once the oppnonent's turn starts whether or not you're going to be hit.

Vandal Hearts and Hoshigami take a lot of skill as well.
 
FFTA is my favorite GBA game, there are a ton of missions, more classes than you could shake a stick at, and the gameplay rocks.

It is an awesome strategy game, and if you like the genre than this is the game you want.
 
[quote name='Tromack']They are very different animals.

Fire Emblem is more a strategy game with light rpg elements, and FF:TA is essentially the opposite.

I'd say screw them both and get Advance Wars.[/QUOTE]

I feel about the same, I don't see them as the same kind of game really and liked both immensely. I guess I played Fire Emblem a little more, but that's probably because it wasn't summer then. I guess, if you want more in-depth strategy Fire Emblem may be the choice over FF Tactics if you had to choose, but other than that I'd say everyone play both (and Advance Wars too of course).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top