Strategy RPG is my favorite game genre and I’ve been having a great time with all these games. So I decided to rank all my favorite SRPGs based on this criteria:
1.- First of all, combat system aspects including map design, difficulty design, level of unit customization, objective variety, incentives to get victory as fast as we could, risk-reward frameworks, fun side objectives, real army management, last but not least: original battle mechanics.
2.- Everything related to the story: quality of the script, character development, world building, pace, dialogues, depth, narrative style, beginning, climax and ending.
3.- Artistic features including music, world art, character art.
4.- Visual related works including UI, sprites, 3D models, combat animations.
I’ve played more than that but I need to play even more games. This tier only shows my favorites instead of every SRPG I’ve beaten. It is not meant to be a comprehensive must play strategy games or anything like that. It’s only my structured recommendation. And by the way, I already reviewed some of these games here, so feel free to read about them for more detail.
Platform: PlayStation Developer: Tirnanog Publisher: Enterbrain Year: 2001
Introduction
Shōzō Kaga, former game director and designer of Fire Emblem during its early days , parted ways with Intelling Systems and Nintendo on 1999 and continued his journey on his own. He built his own independent studio, called Tirnanog, and Tear Ring Saga Yutona Eiyu Senki was born on PlayStation.
Story First things first, this is arguably peak storytelling for a Kaga game. The depth, complexity and lore go way beyond what we have on games like Holy War. It’s not an exageration to claim we better write down like a character/kingdom log when we play, as it’s easy to get lost. I’m not spoiling anything but be prepared for top tier good character writing, likable cast, complex villains, plot twists. There are some good FE tropes here and there, so it’s also easy to please Archanea/Valentia fans, this is a game for you as well.
Gameplay
I describe like a sick mix between Thracia, Valentia and the Sacred Stones. Meaning: we control the management of two allied armies, they have their own arc yet they help and find each other now and then. But, only on this game we can switch soldiers/weapons/items/gold between armies, at specific points in the story. This feature provides a lot of fresh team customizations and a variety of play styles. Many features are very FE-derivative while others go to a wild, unheard of territory. The way some mechanics like grinding and shields work is just an example but maybe, some of the best ideas are monster summoning, dragon transformation and the peculiar implementation of item/weapon stealing. And it’s a game designed with unit skills, free unit customization with these skills. This will not only please a hardcore thracia fan but Tellius fans too. Difficulty design is better than FE4 and older, and some specific maps go to the tough boundaries of T776. Real strategy and efficient army/weapon/item management are key in order to beat many tough challenges.
Art/UI Game art is very Kaga-ish and arguably better than what was shown on Holy War or Thracia 776. Many UI aspects didn’t age well though, but this shouldn’t be a problem for you, Jugdral fan, right? However, one of the greatest, maybe the best UI idea is to have this world map to move between battles, just like Gaiden or Sacred Stones.
Music Overall, the OST was banger for me. I liked most tracks. They don’t have the FE vibe, they are something else yet they match what is shown on screen.
Conclussion A must play if you are a Jugdral or Kaga fan. An underrated SRPG gem from the past that will please players looking for an engaging story and a serious challenge. Score: 9.0
There are many reasons why Fire Emblem and Shining Force may be considered as rival franchises. However, there are even more reasons to compare Shining Force: Resurrection of the Dark Dragon and Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon. Before jumping into details, allow me to point out some common grounds between them:
-Both are remakes from their matching first game in the franchise. -Both were released on Nintendo portable consoles. -Obviously, they feature an obscure dragon, but the thing is: this enemy is a real threat for the whole world in both games. And it existed in the past and was beaten before, in both games. -Both games involve a dark sorcerer as a mastermind behind everything, and his purpose, is exactly the revival of the obscure dragon. -The main character loses his kingdom and recruits people from all the world in order to counter the enemy. -Only a specific weapon can seal/damage the obscure dragon. -If we consider Archanea Saga as a whole, there’s also the idea of a cursed ruler who is not really aware of what he is doing. -Obviously, both games are SRPGs and follow some similar gameplay trends: common weapons, classes, promotion mechanics.
After mentioning many common settings, now it’s time to dive into the real assesment of both remakes:
1.- New Content. Dark Dragon includes brand new Narsha’s arc, but they are like 3 maps and all of them are almost optional: no reset needed if we lose/no penalties if we lose. Shadow Dragon features many brand new maps but they are all unlocked upon losing our allies (?). Yes, it’s pretty obvious why this terrible joke of idea is exclusive to this game.
2.- Improvements to the battle system. Through 3 new characters, Dark Dragon delivers new means for strategy. Mawlock is a Card master whose skills on the battlefield are as wild as diverse. Narsha is a sick unit that jumps between a strong soldier and she also serves as a versatile magic unit. Zuika is basically an unbalanced fighter focused on strength. But if we bench these people or they are RNG screwed, well, we are almost playing the original game. Shadow Dragon includes weapon triangle, not present in the original material. While it’s not needed on the lower difficulties, it offers the brand new Reclassing-before-battle option for the first time in the franchise. With a few more exceptions, we are still playing SDATBOL with a big coat of paint.
3.- Map design. This property is always a good criteria for quality measurement on every SRPG. Both games fail here: they use the outdated design from their original releases instead of providing modern approaches. However, Shadow Dragon clearly aged worse on this aspect, it also features the same basic goals from before: all maps are beaten upon seizing a castle/throne and lacks an incentive to go fast. Dark Dragon’s maps didn’t age well too but at least they are consistent with providing a reward if the map was beaten below a given number of turns. And it has a bit more of objective variety: defeat boss, route all enemies or arrive to a specific tile.
4.- Game complexity. The truth is they are both very straightforward but I really think Dark Dragon goes further as it continously asks to do some activities like: carefully distributing equipment, having a promotion plan, learning how do distribute EXP, mastering how to leverage Narsha’s/Mawlock’s sick skills to buff and help our party, planning for a low turn count (which grants a reward). For people with little experience with SRPG, Shadow Dragon is ideal, it’s like an entry-level game for beginners. If we learn basic stuff like weapon triangle and bonus damage, we are pretty much with the upper hand. Within the FE world, only Sacred Stones is easier. The only aspect where Shadow Dragon may be considered a bit more difficult than Dark Dragon is it has permadeath, but the lack of challenge and big number of allies we are given is more than enough to forget about this.
5.- Difficulty design. Both get serious only at the last maps, nearby the endgame. But SD provides a useful optional tutorial for beginners, which serves as a solid implementation for learning the basics. For seasoned SRPG players, they can skip this with no problem. However, SD also offers a «save game» tile which makes things very easy. DD lacks a tutorial but challenge slighty increases as we progress, which is a good design. The difficulty of DD Narsha’s maps is overwhelming (they are always surrounded and too much outnumbered) but I said they are like optional levels, which is pointless and only works as building blocks for her story arc. SD provides several difficulty modes and DD handles it using file iteration: a concept where the next run is more difficult after beating the game for the first time.
6.- Army customization. DD offers some depth here: It uses both consumable stat boosters and equipable items to boost stats or to allow a user to cast a spell. These items are scarce and expensive and they are a good approach towards unit customization. Besides, these activities are must do if we want a solid balanced team. SD uses reclassing which is an interesting feature to allow a unit to freely change to a different class (some constraints apply). While this idea provides fullly flexible teams, it is not really needed on many difficulty modes.
7.- Unit balance. Both games fail here. There are many units from both games who are just useless or become easily benchable. On the other hand, both games prefer the idea of broken characters. I never needed offensive mages on the most part of DD. Max and Mae did most of the heavy lifting, specially on mid-late game. Bord/Cord and many more are typical examples of benchable people from SD. But Tiki, Ogma and Caeda are overpowered.
Obscure conclussions: Both remakes offer the best versions of their matching products. However, many features could be better and some ideas feel outdated, even on these remakes. Gameplay-wise, another FE entries go deeper than SD, and the same goes for SF.
Consoles Universe 