The Lifestream Home The Lifestream Forums The Lifestream Shop Donate to The Lifestream
The Lifestream

ARCHIVED FORUMS

Hello. You are currently viewing the old vBulletin forums, which are now in readonly archive mode.
Please go to https://thelifestream.net/forums to go to the current forums.


Go Back   The Lifestream Forums > Final Fantasy > Sub-Final Fantasy > Final Fantasy Tactics

Final Fantasy Tactics All of the Final Fantasy-based tactical role-playing games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05/13/2012   #1
Demona
Default Final Fantasy Tactics and Fire Emblem Comparison

I think the thread title sort of gives an idea of what I want to know. I've run into a lot of Fire Emblem players and a lot of Tactics players, but I don't think I've yet encountered anyone who has played both.

How do the two compare? I've played FE: Path of Radiance and FE: Sacred Stones, and I intend to play Tactics as soon as I'm done FF7, but in the meantime, I'm curious. I love the Fire Emblem game mechanics and the Tactics ones sound similar, with the exception of weapon uses and breaking in Fire Emblem and Tactics respectively.
Demona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/13/2012   #2
Flintlock
Default

Sizheng wrote: I've run into a lot of Fire Emblem players and a lot of Tactics players, but I don't think I've yet encountered anyone who has played both.
I guess you're not expecting this thread to get a lot of activity then. Unfortunately, I haven't played Fire Emblem, so I can't make a comparison.
Flintlock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/13/2012   #3
Demona
Default

I think it may be a console thing--Gamecube and Nintendo versus the Playstation and Enix franchises. Sorta hard to reconcile.

But I've noticed that games like Megami Tensei share a similar game mechanic. Turn-based strategy and all that. But Fire Emblem has permanent character deaths, weapons that have a certain number of uses before they break, and all dat fun stuff that Tactics appears to boast. I dunno.

I shall just have to play Tactics and talk to myself on this thread then.
Demona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/13/2012   #4
Madame Mayor
Default

I've played the Tactics games, and my boyfriend is currently going through Sacred Stones. I find Sacred Stones stresses me out a bit too much for the characters dying.

tbh I hated the original Tactics but I'm normally alone in that thinking. Most people loved it. I prefer the GBA/DS versions. DS though way over the GBA because they improved so much.

I would recommend giving the Tactics series a shot. You'll find it very different but the overall style is still similar.
Madame Mayor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/13/2012   #5
HylianMogget
Default

I've played some of both (FFT, FFTA, and some of Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together, which is sort of like proto-FFT in terms of gameplay; The first GBA Fire Emblem, Sacred Stones, and some of Path of Radiance) but it's been a while and I'm actually really awful at strategy games, so I dunno how much help my opinion will be.

I think if you like strategy games in general you should definitely play FFT (and probably Tactics Ogre - I've heard nothing but good things about the PSP remake). I think FE places a lot more emphasis on its weapons and magic triangles and such, whereas in FFT you get way more freedom in terms of customization and messing around with abilities and classes to get your units how you want them. Turn order + casting time and area of effect, from what I remember, also make magic in FFT pretty different from FE - since FFT's got an isometric grid and the turn order of each unit depends on stats so there's no general enemy turn/player turn.
__________________
HylianMogget is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Demona (05/13/2012)
Old 05/13/2012   #6
Cthulhu
Default

I played both (don't recall finishing either though), . Fire Emblem was, at least to me, Advance Wars with RPG elements and a much, much better story. Basically, what was listed here. FFT is... well, more FF-like, I dunno . The game mechanics are similar, yet different; FFT is 2D / flat, for example, while FFT takes height into consideration. Fire Emblem feels more mechanical, if that makes sense, more rules-bound, etc. But it's been forever since I played FFT, so I may not remember properly.
Cthulhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by 2:
Demona (05/13/2012), Kermitu Kleric Katie (05/05/2013)
Old 01/04/2013   #7
Drax
Default

(Whoa, thread is old, but I just now spotted it. You've probably already played through both series now, but I'll post anyway.)

God I love the Fire Emblem series. It's my favorite SRPG series, and has so many characters that I main.

I guess the main difference between them is that, except for a few characters like Cid and Cloud, Tactics characters are pretty much blank pawns with interchangeable classes.

You will be resetting levels all over the place in Fire Emblem because the characters have their own contributions to the main story, and if they die it's forever.

I wish they'd bring the old battle animations back. The later games seem to be getting pretty bland in that regard.
Drax is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Kermitu Kleric Katie (05/05/2013)
Old 06/15/2014   #8
TillSparks
Default

Lol not many people have played both? I sure have. Final Fantasy Tactics and Fire Emblem Awakening are pretty much the 2 best games in the genre (although I haven't tried Tactics Ogre yet).

I'd say Fire Emblem (Awakening) wins in gameplay, FFT wins in story, characters and and world design. I love all of the Matsuno worlds (even though they're all supposed to be Ivalice, which is nonsense)
TillSparks is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:52 PM.



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.