• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Reviews EDGE Magazine #381 review scores - Fire Emblem Engage, Dragon Quest Treasures, and more

mazi

picross pundit
fny3q_yx0aim2b4juf0p.jpeg

Reviews:
Fire Emblem Engage - 7
Season: A Letter to the Future - 9
Jett: Given Time - 8
High On Life - 5
Potion Craft: Alchemist Simulator - 7
Dragon Quest Treasures - 6
Hyper Gunsport - 8
The Forest Quartet - 7
Lone Ruin - 5

Cover - The Lords of the Fallen
The Making of - Citizen Sleeper
Time Extend - Grand Theft Auto V
The Long Game - Age of Empires IV


(source)
 
Last edited:
FE Fates also got a 9 from Edge -- huh! Interesting, I must say.
Not too surprising imo. Fates gets bashed in retrospect, but there was a lot of praise around it when it released (one of the main reasons I jumped in to FE with it actually). The actual gameplay of Fates was fun, the story cops a lot of shit but it was cheesy fun for the most part (Corrin in Conquest is dumb though) and the split path concept was pretty novel at the time - music and presentation were pretty incredible for a 3DS game too. Engage's writing, characters and worldbuilding are a big big step down even from Fates
 
Not too surprising imo. Fates gets bashed in retrospect, but there was a lot of praise around it when it released (one of the main reasons I jumped in to FE with it actually). The actual gameplay of Fates was fun, the story cops a lot of shit but it was cheesy fun for the most part (Corrin in Conquest is dumb though) and the split path concept was pretty novel at the time - music and presentation were pretty incredible for a 3DS game too. Engage's writing, characters and worldbuilding are a big big step down even from Fates

I don't think that's true tbh, they didn't even remember to give the continent a name in fates, the worldbuilding was so minimal. The difference is fates followed the likes of Shadow Dragon and awakening, but Engage follows three houses.

If fates was releasing instead of Engage, with appropriately upgraded visuals and etc in this alternative reality, it'd get completely savaged for it too, just like Engage has.
 
0
I think games should be evaluated on merit, i.e., if they achieve their design goals. With Fates, they wanted to tell a complex, morally-grey story and the end results were laughable. On the other hand, Engage has been clearly advertised as an anime romp and it is, well, a fun anime romp with very good gameplay.

I don't like Engage's tone and I hope the next FE will be close to Tellius games or Three Houses, but you can't hate a chair for not being a cake.
 
0
Disappointed but not surprised to see Treasures not resonate with many folks. If the gameplay loop clicks, it is superb.
 
Sounds about right based on having played DQT and currently playing Engage. I haven’t picked up a copy of Edge in a while but I might do so for the reviews to see what they have to say.

I found DQT quite disappointing in that the writing lacked the usual sparkling Dragon Quest drive to push on, and while I liked the visuals, I quickly lost the interest to continue. FE Engage is similar in that the battles and pacing are excellent, but the scenario writing and script and characterisation are barely there at all. There’s lots of it if you dig into the support convos, but the way there’s absolutely zero dissent amongst the main cast is just weird. Alear drops some cliched hero shit about being an amnesiac that has magic dragon powers and immediately forgiving even heinous acts by enemy commanders (but only as long as they look like a recruitable party member), and everyone else just nods along and spams generic support and inconsequential pleasantries. I’m ten hours in and haven’t seen a single line of dialogue or a moment of characterisation that was striking or memorable yet.

Both games have a similar element to me, in that they nail the gameplay they were going for. Engage’s battle mechanics I’d say are the best FE has ever been, they sparkle with new ideas that even have me, after playing the series for 20 years, going ‘that’s great, why didn’t anyone think of that before!’. But the writing of both lacks anything pushing me forwards. At least with Engage I’m pushing to see the next battlefield and that’s what I’m there for, but the ‘Alear says something mild and cliched and everyone else grins and agrees instead of having anything interesting to add’ just has me skipping cut scenes already.
 
Last edited:
0
7 sounds about right from what I've heard from others for Engage. Got plenty to play right now anyway, will get to it later into the year.

The Lords of the Fallen (emphasis on the s at the end of Lords) being the cover game is certainly....interesting. Since the first one was so bad. Hopefully this one is, erm, better?
 
0
Isn't 7 an alright score from Edge? It feels fair, the things it doesn't do well it does quite poorly imo and I say that as someone who is mostly enjoying it regardless. People commend the 'lean' experience but it is still packed with overlong cutscenes, weaker social activities, and a little bit of gacha and additional in-game currencies/tickets/gems too (you can feel the Heroes influence, mild as it may be). I think it'll have legs and be well-loved in the longterm by series fans who want to replay and focus on the actual gameplay, but it would be hard for me to recommend to a newcomer if I thought they wanted a more complete package or one that doesn't overwhelm.

Disappointed but not surprised to see Treasures not resonate with many folks. If the gameplay loop clicks, it is superb.

It released at such a bad time for me sadly. I'm intrigued to try it out at some point though!
 
Isn't 7 an alright score from Edge? It feels fair, the things it doesn't do well it does quite poorly imo and I say that as someone who is mostly enjoying it regardless. People commend the 'lean' experience but it is still packed with overlong cutscenes, weaker social activities, and a little bit of gacha and additional in-game currencies/tickets/gems too (you can feel the Heroes influence, mild as it may be). I think it'll have legs and be well-loved in the longterm by series fans who want to replay and focus on the actual gameplay, but it would be hard for me to recommend to a newcomer if I thought they wanted a more complete package or one that doesn't overwhelm.

That’s exactly where I am too. I think I’ll value Engage long term as my favourite battle gameplay yet, I’ll replay it a lot and skip through much of the story in future playthroughs. But it isn’t a game I’d recommend to people looking for interesting story, script and characterisation as major elements of an SRPG. I suspect it made it to a 7 with Edge on the basis of the turn-based combat being really strong, as the story, script and characters are really poor.
 
Last edited:
0
Isn't 7 an alright score from Edge? It feels fair, the things it doesn't do well it does quite poorly imo and I say that as someone who is mostly enjoying it regardless. People commend the 'lean' experience but it is still packed with overlong cutscenes, weaker social activities, and a little bit of gacha and additional in-game currencies/tickets/gems too (you can feel the Heroes influence, mild as it may be). I think it'll have legs and be well-loved in the longterm by series fans who want to replay and focus on the actual gameplay, but it would be hard for me to recommend to a newcomer if I thought they wanted a more complete package or one that doesn't overwhelm.



It released at such a bad time for me sadly. I'm intrigued to try it out at some point though!
I don't blame you at all. Square Enix put out too many games within weeks of each other on Switch and PS depending on the month. Most of 2022's SE titles are good with some duds. Hope you try it eventually (and also The Centennial Case if you like FMV experience!)
 
0
Yeah, not surprised. Reviewers value story over gameplay, so naturally it's not going to review as well as Three Houses.

Yes, story is the most important thing, which is why the edge 10/10 list includes such story powerhouses as Breath of the wild, LittleBigPlanet and rock band 3.

Engage has marginal improvements to the gameplay and great map design, but it came at the cost of being very much worse than the previous game in almost every other area, of course it's reviews are weaker.
 
Yes, story is the most important thing, which is why the edge 10/10 list includes such story powerhouses as Breath of the wild, LittleBigPlanet and rock band 3.

Engage has marginal improvements to the gameplay and great map design, but it came at the cost of being very much worse than the previous game in almost every other area, of course it's reviews are weaker.
What also doesn’t help is that the writing being terrible is front and centre long before you get to a battle of any decent size really, and bookends every single one (well, of the first ten or so hours I’ve played, at least).
 
Yeah, not surprised. Reviewers value story over gameplay, so naturally it's not going to review as well as Three Houses.
They gave FE Fates a 9 dude.

Edit: Also "reviewers" as a whole valueing story over gameplay is also a take.
 
Last edited:
0
Does Edge say who the specific reviewer was for each game? I always find it weird when people say "x site gave y this number but z this number" when X site had two different reviewers review the two different games.
 
Does Edge say who the specific reviewer was for each game? I always find it weird when people say "x site gave y this number but z this number" when X site had two different reviewers review the two different games.
Yeah this too. It’s especially funny when people compare scores from five years apart where the original reviewer might not even work there anymore. I suspect most editors require only that a score suggested by the writer roughly match up to the thrust of their text, not whatever score a staffer gave something similar years ago.
 
Yeah this too. It’s especially funny when people compare scores from five years apart where the original reviewer might not even work there anymore. I suspect most editors require only that a score suggested by the writer roughly match up to the thrust of their text, not whatever score a staffer gave something similar years ago.
Nintendo Life had a great discussion on their own review for Sonic Frontiers (which got a 4/10 iirc) with 3 other people who played the game, 2 of which would have given the game a 7 or 8, and another who agreed with the 4.
 


Back
Top Bottom