quote The Deathwind

When a 2003/2004 GBA game is beating at 2008/2009 DS game, something is wrong.

Advance Wars 2 > Advance Wars DoR
Doesn't mean DoR is a bad game.

Any Gba Super Mario Bro (numbered) game except 2 > New super mario bros
Doesn't mean NSMB is a bad game.

I could probably find more if I looked them up.

Also, none of you might agree to this, but in my opinion,

Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any pokemon game ever made except maybe Red/Blue.

quote The Deathwind

When a 2003/2004 GBA game is beating at 2008/2009 DS game, something is wrong.

By this you mean DS games have to be better than GBA games. If they're not, according to you, something is wrong.

There are GBA games that are better than DS games of the same name. Doesn't mean something is wrong, it means the older games were simply better. That does not mean the DS games are bad.

Back to the point.

The main reason why Nintendo made Shadow Dragon was to introduce Marth to fans. They don't expect people who have emulators and hundreds to thousands of roms play the game then judge it to every other Fire Emblem game. Shadow Dragon was to introduce Marth's story, without forcing people to buy a japanese NES and a japanese copy of Fire Emblem.

From what I can tell, you're judging Fire Emblem Shadow Dragon from a hardcore Fire Emblem-crazy fan. Oh, and you're setting your expectations too high. Their point wasn't to invent the next Fire Emblem 7, it was to show (probably Melee/Brawl fans) a game about who Marth was, what his story was, and to polish that game. That's the point of remakes. They can't go around adding lots of cool story twists and super awesome DMC combo style gameplay to remakes, or it wouldn't be a remake anymore.

D/P just added to the crap S/R made. Lots of more random stereotypical pokemon, only one region (Why they didn't follow G/S's 2 regions I'll never know), and extremely stupid people (your rival for one).

G/S was great because it added stuff to the pokemon game which, for some reason, isn't in any other game. The second showings of pretty much everyone from the first, the ability to go back to Kanto and take on those gym leaders, sticking to only main legendary pokemon (wtf D/P why do you have over 9,000 legendary pogeymanz) and other stuff.

1. Of which there are. I just stated a couple of better Gba over DS games.
There are better sequels. There are also better previous title games.

2. Lots of newer games are better then their older games. But there are older games that are better (DMC1 is better then DMC2), and nothing can stop that. Just because the older game is better, doesn't mean the new games are bad. You think because a certain older game is better, that's a bad thing.

3. Why remake a remake?

4. What? The original Marth Story is the first game. How would they rebuild the game? Changing it up would not make it a remake, it would make a whole different story. Why do that? The whole point of Shadow dragon is to tell fans (That have NOT played the originals) about Marth. Adding more than what's needed isn't required.

5. It's still better than 1 region. Making G/S/C one region would have been fine, but instead, there are two.

D/P is a mess in my opinion. Why are there so many useless legendary pokemon? Why is your rival some idiotic dumbass? Why was another useless shitty team whatever added? Why add even more stupid pokemon, more stupid then even R/S?

I'd still like to point out the fact you ignored that this game was meant to people who don't know Marth's story. You obviously played Fe1 and/or 3, and are judging it from a Fire-emblem crazy fire emblem fan.

Try to stop looking at Shadow Dragon from the view of a hardcore fan. It's not meant for hardcore fans. If you want a hardcore game, stick to Radiant Dawn.

Edit: I obviously can't stop you from hating Shadow Dragon for all the wrong reasons, so I'm just gonna stop talking about Shadow Dragon all together.

quote The Deathwind

The thing is, games companies aren't about exceeding anymore. They're about "hey, if we slap X label on Y game, people will buy it whether or not it's worth buying. They'll think 'it's X, it has to be good!'". Thus we continually get half-assed attempts that sell on the name alone. Sure, you get a few exceptions here and there, but other than that it's a pretty accurate summary of the industry today.

I think that pretty much sums up all games for Nintendo consoles. Though, the PS3 and X360 are still in the habit of being host to good, original games - Infamous and Prototype, for example.

I do believe FRWL's post is stupid and nonsensical. Bad debating skills that question the opposing persons viewpoint are fail. You debate the game, not the person.

wtf@this argument. FEDS is bad solely because it's a remake of a bad game. A minus times a plus will never give you a plus. And if you say -i*i, you're a fag.

Storywise, FE didn't really start putting depth into each individual character until FE4 onwards, so I can hardly blame IS for any lack of characterization in FEDS, but I can't praise it either since it became a norm for FE since FE4. And I can see where IS is coming from in not trying to add backgrounds to all their characters, I wouldn't waste any character subplot ideas on a remake when I could save them for an original new game.

But one thing that you can say that was good about FEDS was that IS had the balls to try out different gameplay concepts outside the FE-norm like reclass and replacement units, regardless of whether it "worked" or not.

I think it's fairly obvious old games are for the most part better than new games. But that all depends on the genre, FPS' are clearly better this gen then they've ever been, but most other genre's were better last gen.

But in general, I'd say 2D is way better than 3D.

quote Ste Guitar

But in general, I'd say 2D is way better than 3D.

QFT. Sprites >>> 3D models.

Anyway, just wanted to pop in to give my reason Shadow Dragon pretty much sucked: they didn't improve it. Take a look at the FR/LG Pokemon games. They went in, took the Pokemon list, the world, and the story, and ported that over, then rehashed everything else, from graphics to gameplay mechanics. They brought the first-generation Pokemon games up to the level of the third-generation, THEN added a couple new areas to explore.

With Shadow Dragon, all we got were "improved" graphics (which actually sucked in comparison to FE7 or FE8), and touch screen support (which was a completely new feature altogether). The horrific character list, with its 10,000 cavaliers and uninteresting characters, was left entirely intact. The bland storyline wasn't spruced up in the least. The old broken units were barely brought up to current standards. IS should've done what Game Freak did, and simply brought FE1 up to the level of FE7 and FE8. Instead, they tried to make it a brand new game in itself, and it pretty much failed.

FF2(4): SNES
Final Fantasy Chronicles(FF4 / CT): PS1
FF4: Wonderswan Color
FF4: GBA
FF4: DS.

5 versions of one game? Really?