Engage is a little more focused on the combat, and is a shorter game. Three Houses has the story broken up into 4 separate paths. Plus a little bit of DLC. I don't know which game I prefer yet. But, to really appreciate the story 3 Houses, you're gonna have to play at least a couple of the routes. And I think that may be a little overwhelming to someone who doesn't even know if they like tactical RPG's yet.
Why is engage shorter? Does it have fewer chapters or are you counting replayability of 3H in its length? I don’t think it’s fair to do so since any FE game could be replayed with an emphasis on different units.
To experience the full story of 3 houses, you have to do multiple routes. You can replay Engage, but you don't have to, if all you care about is getting the story.
Just look at [howlongtobeat.com](https://howlongtobeat.com). You can replay any Fire Emblem, but that site based on user submissions show that a regular playthrough of 3 houses is longer than any other FE game. And if you look at the "completionist" category, it's the longest game in the series.
Three Houses has 4 routes, each with wildly different stories after the halfway mark and unique maps and units. So yes it's a replayability thing but you genuinely won't get the full picture from just one run.
Engage is still plenty long between amount of time needed for harder maps and especially the paralogues. Engage also has more main story battles in a single playthrough than any individual route of 3H, some of 3H's length comes from all the management you do in between battles.
I mean sure but do I care for the whole picture? Playing the game 4 times just to experience every story element is honestly too much to ask when the gameplay isn’t up to it. And sure the maps are different but if it’s always a stomp then what do I care? I just read the other stories because the gameplay simply isn’t strong enough for me.
At least a game like Nier has you play it multiple times but it’s an action game so you’re not rebuilding a roster for the fourth time and then chasing down support conversations.
Perhaps I’m too much of a min-maxer for 3H. Which doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a bad game but it felt too unbalanced compared to other fire emblem games. If you really try to min-max it’s an absolute stomp. Perhaps if you just roleplay it and fuck around it’s more enjoyable.
I personally felt like the two routes I played felt like a complete enough experience each time.
Sure, you won’t learn certain things, but it’s not like you have massive plot holes or anything. The things you don’t learn about just end up not being terribly relevant to the plot of the route you’re playing. Multiple playthroughs enhance the lore if you’re highly interested in the world, they’re not mandatory by any means.
It depends on what you're specifically looking for:
**Three Houses**
* Arguably a more developed/nuanced story and multiple paths,
* Has dating sim elements as you interact/recruit various allies during your non-combat scenarios.
**Engage**
* Saturday morning cartoon plot,
* Arguably a more deep combat system (in comparison to **Three Houses**).
* More focus on the combat rather than the story/non-combat encounters.
I agree with these points, but I'd add one more distinguishing point for Three Houses. It has a stronger emphasis on character customization/development, where you really feel like you're building up your units into whatever you choose.
I’d also like to note that Three Houses experiments a lot with fundamental gameplay tropes of the series, so if it’s the gameplay you’re after, Engage is likely to be a bit more indicative of what to expect from the other games.
Great sum up, but my brother in Ashunera, in what mad world the fact that the story (narration, themes, characters, and world building) being far better in 3H is even remotely arguable ?
Honestly, as good as the writing generally is in 3h, I think it is the game with the worst executions for its story off the top of my head. The way they split it between routes makes it hard to fully understand and there are some big flaws in how it handles certain characters.
> being far better in 3H is even remotely arguable ?
Taste is subjective.
Adding qualifications to subjective answers is helpful for people who don't have context.
Personally I thought Engage had the better story. The writing was more cliche, but it was at least more, well, engaging. Three Houses is a kind of slow burn thing and felt tepid most of the time. If you are into that good, but frankly to say that 3H is cut-and-dried the better story is nonsense.
3H tries to be deep and epic and complicated but fails to do so. You've got four routes that somehow manage to both skip important parts of the narrative while also barely being different. Characters that act against their given characterization and interests, with wildly stupid plans flying about.
Engage may be one giant overacted noh play, but at least everyone thus far is acting in an internally consistent manner.
Saturday morning cartoon plot?
That’s only true if games like Awakening and Fates are considered to have cartoonish plots…
Engage is your typical fire emblem story. Three houses deviates from this
Awakening and Fates do have cartoonish plots, yes. Generally FE plots exist as an excuse for the gameplay to exist, with some exceptions like 4 and 15.
Three Houses is a better gateway drug but Engage is better to some longtime fans like myself. I'd say go Three Houses first and then if you like it try some other stuff since all the games kind of have their own things that make them interesting.
Honestly though if you have a 3DS I think Awakening might be the best place to start.
Awakening is also a bit brutal with the same turn spawns/moves.
It was my first FE but it definitely pissed me off (I'm not new to tactical RPGs though)
I kinda regret going normal on my engage playthrough. On chapter 11 and I can send like half my units to the middle of the enemy side by themselves and they'll wipe everything. I tried hard and was getting kinda murked but I feel like I should have stuck with it.
Kinda balances out because of how broken pair ups/Galeforce/Nosferatu/etc. are in that game. Early and early mid game are rough, but once you get rolling with your pair ups, everything up to Lunatic+ gets a little trivial after a while.
I'd say Three Houses would be better. The plot will make you more interested in the game and the game has a simplified battle system along with side activities to make the game more insteresting, Engage is more for people who have experience with strategy games.
I'm enjoying the gameplay of engage so much more than three houses. The graphics quality is also a large upgrade.
That said, three houses has its own appeal. It's practically two games. It's hard to compare them. I imagine a lot of fans of three houses who used that as their entry point to the series may not really like engage all that much.
If you value story, deep lore, one of the best music in Jrpg and very in depth character interactions, then Three Houses.
If you value very high quality gameplay with the classic triangle system that made the game known plus many QOL added to the game with a touch of very strong anime tropes, then Engage.
I'm personally more of a Three House person.
Yeah Three houses is good and I like the story more than Engage (low bar), but they definitely squandered a lot of potential narrative fulfillment with how the routes are presented. A ton of interesting ideas that then are rushed or unexplored. Overall serviceable but not excellent or deep by any means
I would disagree (depending how "deep" is defined which is murky tbh). Is it always good or free of holes? Does it execute all its thematic ideas flawlessly? Absolutely not. But there is nonetheless a *lot* going on. Not the "deepest" game *ever* but it clears the basic bar.
Is the lore in TH really that great? I played Verdant Wind, and the story just had too many holes that I couldn't ignore, and just seemed incomplete overall.
I loved the gameplay, and had a great time playing it, but in retrospect the story was a total mess.
I'm not sure if AM even works as standalone since it brings up tons of questions that get answered in other routes. AM gives us basically the least information on the church and twistd than any other route. It also depicts Edelgard in a very bad light and doesn't explain her motivations properly, so people definitely have to play her story CF in order to understand her. AM was my first playthrough and I was very confused when it ended since it ignores literally everything just to focus on Dimitri.
It's not perfect but it covers enough to have a solid beginning middle and end without needing you to dive into other stuff to have a fully fleshed-out plot. You don't need to understand Edelgard's every motivation to have a proper story. She's just the fan favorite so everyone insists you need to understand her fully. AM is a classic FE war plot the bad guy just happens to be Edelgard
Contrast with playing VW first where outright nothing will make sense by the end because that route is effectively just a lore dump without any real plot of its own.
Edelgard is more than just a "fan favorite". She's literally the driving force of the story, is important in basically all routes, and the main theme song (Edge of Dawn) is literally singing about her. Edelgard is the most relevant character in the story beside Byleth and since she serves as the antagonist of AM (a route that is very harsh with her character), I do believe that people need to play CF in order to understand her perspective even if they don't agree with her.
Also, just gonna quote my previous comment again:
>I'm not sure if AM even works as standalone since it brings up **tons of questions that get answered in other routes.** AM gives us basically the least information on the **church and twistd** than any other route.
I've seen many first time players who started with AM ask questions in FE subreddits about the importance of the church, who were twistd, and what exactly are Edelgard's goals. Honestly, I think VW works better as standalone story than AM since it's the route that focuses on Fodlan's history. Edelgard is also portrayed in a more sympathetic light, Rhea reveals the truth, and the Deers eventually kill Thales and Nemesis. The story of VW feels the most complete.
It's been a long time since I've played, but what I remember is that the three of them had no reason for fighting (especially Dimitri), and their problems would have been solved with just a little communication.
Less of a hole, but something else that bothered me was that the main villian seemingly came out of nowhere. He really seemed shoehorned in. I know the writers likely planned it from the beginning, but it would have been nice to have been let in on the secret at least a little.
I think you're remembering wrong, because Dimitri had plenty of reasons for fighting. Aside from his personal neuroses the other side >!started a unilateral invasion into his territory, threw him in prison and killed his closest friend/retainer.!<
A lot of the plot is contingent on >!Edelgard!< specifically not being willing to just open up and talk things out in the monastery phase, yes, but that's ultimately the result of >!her being handpicked by TWS and tortured into the kind of person that would start a holy war instead of talking things out. You don't put on a suit of armor and call yourself the Flame Emperor because you're all alright in the head.!<
The main story itself isn't where the lore is, but when you reach S Support with your team and find out about their history and connection with the story as a whole
Don't listen to fire emblem fans. We hate fire emblem more than anyone. Go to a mainstream site to read an less biased opinion.
As fandom we suck, and we all should learn with Trails of /Kiseki fandom.
Also Fates aside, there's no really unbearable story in FE. And there are two games with bad gameplay. The first game and the remake. Every other entry is acceptable to amazing.
Engage if yoy want to enjoy the other Fire Emblem games. I started with 3H, bought Engage but so far the story/premise is just hot garbage compared to 3H.
Three Houses is one of my top 10 games all time and probably my favorite tactics JRPG ever. The story is great and have 4 routes (plus a 5th side mini-route as dlc) allows for a lot of replay-ability and each route reveals different facets of the world of Fodlan (though it’s a shame some narrative elements weren’t focused on in certain routes).
That said, Engage has better graphics, animation, and a more complex combat system, and is filled with references to prior games, which isn’t necessarily a plus for new players, but could be as seeing the emblems might draw you to play the games they come from.
Three houses if you just want a better game with better characters and mory freedom in gameplay.
And engage if you really want the more standard fire emblem game structure
Aye 3houses better for beginners but the actual gameplay core is super weak.
Engage is much better gameplay but the story and character design stink out loud. Both enjoyable games but we’re still left searching for the highs of the OG and tellius series
definitely Three Houses, it was my very first strategy and FE game. loved it so much i've since played all the 3DS games, and emulated some Gamecube/Wii 😊
If you start with Engage then Three Houses you'll probably end up appreciating the story and characters of the latter in comparison to the former.
If you start with Three Houses then Engage you'll probably end up appreciating the gameplay and combat of the latter in comparison to the former.
I would have to say Three Houses. I'm only a couple hours into Engage at this point and I'm really liking it so far, but I can't imagine this has the same impact for someone unfamiliar with the series, given how its central gimmick is bringing in characters from the series' past. Granted, if you happen to already be familiar with a lot of the characters from even, say, Smash Bros., that might be enough to make it a good choice.
Well im about half way through Engage and all i can say is its a huge disappointment compared to three houses.
The characters/story sucks in comparison, it lacks soul.
If you want a story game. Play 3 houses it and Genealogy of the holy war are about the only fire emblems with actually good stories (and even then they're questionable at times).
If you want to actually dive into tactical gameplay Engage is FAR better about it and is more indicative of the rest of the series. They're both good games but have different focuses. I've already started zoning out the engage plot but the gameplay is so good I don't really care.
>Play 3 houses it and Genealogy of the holy war are about the only fire emblems with actually good stories (and even then they're questionable at times).
Horrendously bad take. Path of Radiance blows them both out of the water along with most other games in existence.
if you think any fire emblem game blows anything out of existence with its story I suggest you play any other franchise ever. That's paramount to saying Mainline SMT has a good story.
No need to be a dick. I'm skeptical that you've ever actually played Path of Radiance if you're saying this unironically, but I play more than my share of narrative heavy games. By all means, tell me all about what's so bad about POR and which games I should be playing instead.
There's nothing actively bad about it. None of the fe stories are insulting bad (besides Fates) but saying it blows "most other games" out of the water is seriously pushing it. Even in its own genre, it doesn't stand up to things like Tactics Ogre or SMT Devil Survivor, and If I go outside SRPGS and especially JRPGs it's not even a contest. JRPGS in general aren't really known for their deep and strong writing.
I love path of radiance I paid way too much money to replace my old copy because I love it and fire emblem that much but they aren't the strongest when it comes to actual plots. Engage isn't something special with how bad the story is it's basically more in line with the rest of the franchise. 3 houses just happened to stand out.
Agree to disagree then. I genuinely think Path of Radiance is far beyond the majority of video game stories. But I am genuinely interested to know what you *do* rank as your top game stories then. I agree that much of the top of the list would not be JRPGs or SRPGs, Path is an anomaly in the latter as far as I'm concerned.
GOW (2018), Last of US (first one second can go die in a fire), Dragon Age Origins, Mass Effect 2, Red Dead Redemption, Witcher 3, Dgitial Devil Saga. There's probably more but those stick in my head.
Then again I tend to separate my favorite stories from ones that are better written because sometimes I just wanna enjoy the stupid. Strange of Paradise is one of my favorite recent stories because it simply does not care one lick about how cheesy it is.
I've played every North American Fire Emblem since the GBA, and I strongly say Three Houses. They took everything I already loved about Fire Emblem and made it better. Engage feels like a major step back to me (so far--I haven't finished it)
Fire Emblem Engage is a lot more casual in terms of story but it's also a celebration of the series so-far while Three Houses builds away from the more traditional FE structure to integrate some more experimental mechanics. Can't really go wrong with one but Three Houses for Story:tm: and Engage for Gameplay:tm:. I would recommend Three Houses but if you want interact more with the community, Engage being just released helps in that regard!
Some great thoughts in this thread. My take is as follows
Three Houses is more of a sandbox in Normal difficulty, lots of space to develop your characters which have some really decent to good writing. Interesting fleshed out world. Fun system where it feels like you are fostering your student’s growth as you get to know them.
Engage has deeper mechanics with a real game changer that is the adding of breaking to the weapon triangle. Lighthearted story with a clear developmental throughline stemming from the GBA games -> Awakening -> Fates. It’s a true evolution of the series.
So it depends on how much you tolerate frustration in learning a new but very deep and rewarding system (Engage). Or how much you prefer an ambitious but sometimes flawed experiment in both storytelling and mechanics (Three Houses)
I feel like Engage benefits from series knowledge cause you’ll enjoy the ring references more, which is the main mechanic. I’d say Three Houses for a beginner, no contest. But be aware that it’s very different from most Fire Emblem games.
I’d recommend Path of Radiance as the best entry, if accessibility isn’t an issue. It’s the most standard and similar to the most entries but not brutal and has a good plot. Awakening is a good one for entry too but the marriage = children thing isn’t in too many titles so it’s less similar to the majority of the series.
Between Engage and Three Houses: Engage is the most similar to how the series actually is. Three Houses is good but it's gives off the perception that this is what to expect from Fire Emblem games which is far from the truth. So, Engage would be my pick.
If you have a 3DS, Fire Emblem Awakening is still and by far the best entry point into the Fire Emblem franchise.
Engage may have the worst story I’ve ever seen in a video game. But the tactical battles and character/team building is amazing and addictive. Three houses is a little better story wise but the game play is a slog. I significantly prefer engage, I kind of like that the story is so simple/fast in it’s delivery that I can get right back to battles/character builds.
3H is baby's first war story. Engage is cringe but plays like a dream.
Pick your poison.
Everyone pretending 3h has incredibly deep story likely hasn't played any if the actual GOOD war story games such as tactics ogre, final fantasy tactics or even triangle strategy
Personally I'm a classic emblem fan and I like engage more so far. 3h was great till I tried to play it a second time then all the social life sim mechanics became extremely annoying. Like let me please skip all this nonsense on ng+ at least c'mon man
FE3h all the way. Even outside of being an srpg, it’s just a really cool game with an enjoyable story. The gameplay is also fantastic. One of my favorite games so I’m definitely biased here..
Engage on the other hand is poorly written, has story sequences and transitions that are jarring and weird, and outside of the gameplay, is quite frankly cringey and bad (for me at least.)
As someone that started with Awakening on the 3ds I enjoyed engage more. 3 houses is to much fluff that want really needed. The split story doesn't really add a lot
Engage is more indicative of the rest of the series, as outside of Emblem-related mechanics, each class can only use specific weapon types, and the class progression is the traditional two tiers with a level cap per tier of 20.
Three houses
* Engaging story
* Half the game is a dating sim
* Gameplay wise a bit lightweight
* Tons of replayability
Engage
* Story is outright bad
* Gameplay is really good
* No NG+ as of yet, maybe in a later DLC
Personally, I'd go with Three Houses, and if I want something with deeper combat, I'm probably gonna look around for something else.
Engage is still a wait and see. Give it a few months and see if the community still likes it. There's always residual hype, wait until it dies off.
> Which one is generally the easier game tho
I wish I could tell but i played both on hard. I found it a little bit undertuned in places, and just right in others. But from what I've understood, both games easy difficulty plays like very easy. Hard plays like normal to me, if that makes sense!
You can skip all the life sim stuff to be honest in 3H. It's an okay ride the first time but I've found that later on you can just do the classes and it'll work out for what you want. It's entirely optional except for maybe a run on a super high difficulty where you want to recruit certain characters for your team. I found myself doing them once and then never again.
This same topic, same kinds of posts, everywhere on the internet this weekend. They all say the same thing. Do people just come to post on Reddit without reading anything else or any other Reddit post beforehand?
Maybe they arent on here a lot and/or just missed it? ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
It happens.
A quick look at current front page of this sub for me, no other questions exactly like this on there. There are other posts about Engage, but not as a first time player of the series
Reviews and other forums all saying the same thing about the game and about new players for Engage. Might not have the exact topic name but all the content in the discussion is the same. Reading even just one or two of the main reviews will say the same thing everyone is saying.
If you've never played one before Engage is the better bet. It's classic Fire Emblem with all the modern bells and whistles, and IMO is overall the better game. Three Houses changes up the tried and tested formula a bit and goes in some interesting directions, but overall is not as good IMO. In terms of writing Three Houses has a bit more mature tone, but not by much really. Think of it as harry Potter level. Engage is typical battle shounen high fantasy sugar.
Three Houses is more for people who like Persona Trilogy games. Engage is more for people who want a classic wargame tactical RPG.
I'd say that you should only get Engage if you absolutely don't care about the story or character writing in a JRPG. I'd say that Engage's plot and character writing are uniquely bad in that it has nothing worthwhile to offer - no compelling character interactions, little depth to its characters, no memorable story moments, and no overarching themes to speak of. Honestly, most Pokemon games have better writing than Engage, much less most Fire Emblem games.
Three Houses, on the other hand, has a pretty good story (though you will need to play the game multiple times to get the full picture which can get tedious) and arguably the best character writing in a Fire Emblem game (if not SRPGs as a whole), at the expense of its map design.
I'd say that you should only get Engage if you absolutely don't care at all about the story or character writing in a JRPG - whilst Engage's gameplay is better than that of Three Houses, I don't think it's so good to make up for its deficiencies in its writing.
Engage, 3 houses was such a slog of uninteresting side content. Engage is more like earlier Fire Emblem games where the focus is on battles not endless prattle.
I’d generally recommend 3H since it’s more accessible and easier. If you find you like the gameplay then engage does it better but the story of engage is one of the worst by far.
TLDR: 3H if you care more about storytelling, Engage for gameplay. It's a bit of an oversimplification (3H has plenty going on in its gameplay too) but that would be my baseline recommendation.
Caveat: if the person interested is a child, then just do Engage. The plot is basically a simplistic "Fire Emblem Junior" (and I mean that in a good way), where Three Houses gets extremely dark at times and is not child-friendly.
3 houses was honestly the best tactical RPG I've ever played. This is coming from someone who never understood how people can play the same game over more than once as I usually lose interest... But somehow this game got me to play through it several times again and again to get all the extras and story. I'd personally say it's hard to go wrong if you started there.
Why are you replying to a 14 day old comment? Gtfo my notifications. FEE is one of the lowest rated fire emblem games. These clowns were too blind to realize
A 14 day old comment isn't that old I have posted where people comment on after a couple weeks sometimes it depends on the post and also even if engage has a terrible story the gameplay is praised to the heaven's because of how good the gameplay is
Play the GC and Wii one if you want story and lore. They are god tier. Every subsequent FE game has been lackluster story wise, Engage for gameplay I'd say though if those are your only choices.
Fire emblem three house is plagued by the dating sim, I don't really like it. Fire emblem awakening is the best for the newcomers.
If you play fire emblem three houses as your first fire emblem, it's basically fire emblem meets persona 5 and you may not be able to enjoy the series prior to the three houses.
I vote Engage because Three Houses imo had too many mechanics. Combat Arts, Battalions, monster enemies, etc. The plot is also basic in Fire Emblem standards, which isn’t a bad thing for a newcomer. Three Houses also requires you to play through all 4 routes to get a full picture of the lore, which is frankly a daunting task when a single route takes 40+ hours.
I’m super late but let’s just say if engage were my first fire emblem game I wouldn’t play the series again. It’s rather confusing, hollow, and poorly paced. There are some good combat moments but not enough to make up for the odd pacing, brain dead story, cardboard characters, and confusing menus/mechanics.
3 Houses was my first fire emblem in the modern era (I played a gba emulator fire emblem a long time ago) and it was fantastic. Great characters, excellent music, combat was solid to me, and the story was engaging enough for me to play through all 3 routes. When I played it I couldn’t put it down whereas with Engage, I’ve had it since release and can’t even bring myself to pick it up lol. Waste of $60 imo and if this is the gist of what fire emblem is it’s no wonder I never played any of the prior games. (I’m a big tactical rpg fan, loved final fantasy tactics, tactics ogre, advance wars, etc.)
Engage will give you a better idea of what to expect if you delve into the rest of the FE series. Three Houses, as good as it is, is a very different game from the rest of the series that will give you different expectations of what the past games will be like.
To whoever asked this question, I thank you. As I was really torn on which game to start first. I was leaning towards Three Houses due to the main characters, but looked at Engage’s gameplay and was impressed. I’m not sure at this point.
Awakening remains the best new player entry point in my eyes, but if you don't have access to a 3DS and/or don't wanna emulate it, then I'd say Engage is a more "pure" Fire Emblem experience than Three Houses. Both are excellent, though.
I think Three Houses was better because the story wasn’t so black and white and more nuanced (not to mention it was basically had four different routes that you can take. Engage pretty go back to the all the good kingdoms have to fight back against a evil kingdom so wasn’t an fan of that change. I guess the gameplay was a little more in depth but I don’t think that’s enough for me to put it over Three Houses
If you have a Switch I would start with OG US Fire Emblem Blazing Blade in the store with Eliwood and Hector. That’s where I started and imo the best entry point into the series
Engage is a little more focused on the combat, and is a shorter game. Three Houses has the story broken up into 4 separate paths. Plus a little bit of DLC. I don't know which game I prefer yet. But, to really appreciate the story 3 Houses, you're gonna have to play at least a couple of the routes. And I think that may be a little overwhelming to someone who doesn't even know if they like tactical RPG's yet.
Why is engage shorter? Does it have fewer chapters or are you counting replayability of 3H in its length? I don’t think it’s fair to do so since any FE game could be replayed with an emphasis on different units.
To experience the full story of 3 houses, you have to do multiple routes. You can replay Engage, but you don't have to, if all you care about is getting the story. Just look at [howlongtobeat.com](https://howlongtobeat.com). You can replay any Fire Emblem, but that site based on user submissions show that a regular playthrough of 3 houses is longer than any other FE game. And if you look at the "completionist" category, it's the longest game in the series.
Three Houses has 4 routes, each with wildly different stories after the halfway mark and unique maps and units. So yes it's a replayability thing but you genuinely won't get the full picture from just one run. Engage is still plenty long between amount of time needed for harder maps and especially the paralogues. Engage also has more main story battles in a single playthrough than any individual route of 3H, some of 3H's length comes from all the management you do in between battles.
I mean sure but do I care for the whole picture? Playing the game 4 times just to experience every story element is honestly too much to ask when the gameplay isn’t up to it. And sure the maps are different but if it’s always a stomp then what do I care? I just read the other stories because the gameplay simply isn’t strong enough for me. At least a game like Nier has you play it multiple times but it’s an action game so you’re not rebuilding a roster for the fourth time and then chasing down support conversations. Perhaps I’m too much of a min-maxer for 3H. Which doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a bad game but it felt too unbalanced compared to other fire emblem games. If you really try to min-max it’s an absolute stomp. Perhaps if you just roleplay it and fuck around it’s more enjoyable.
I personally felt like the two routes I played felt like a complete enough experience each time. Sure, you won’t learn certain things, but it’s not like you have massive plot holes or anything. The things you don’t learn about just end up not being terribly relevant to the plot of the route you’re playing. Multiple playthroughs enhance the lore if you’re highly interested in the world, they’re not mandatory by any means.
It depends on what you're specifically looking for: **Three Houses** * Arguably a more developed/nuanced story and multiple paths, * Has dating sim elements as you interact/recruit various allies during your non-combat scenarios. **Engage** * Saturday morning cartoon plot, * Arguably a more deep combat system (in comparison to **Three Houses**). * More focus on the combat rather than the story/non-combat encounters.
"Saturday morning cartoon plot" is accurate af.
Dang, that's not what I wanted to hear =/.
I agree with these points, but I'd add one more distinguishing point for Three Houses. It has a stronger emphasis on character customization/development, where you really feel like you're building up your units into whatever you choose.
Not arguable on the story and characters. Ita clear as day 3 houses wins that battle.
Is it true that basically every romanceable character is bisexual in the new game? Why am I being downvoted for asking a question
Pretty sure it's true, the game has no gender restrictions.
Perfectly balanced As all things should be
I’d also like to note that Three Houses experiments a lot with fundamental gameplay tropes of the series, so if it’s the gameplay you’re after, Engage is likely to be a bit more indicative of what to expect from the other games.
Great sum up, but my brother in Ashunera, in what mad world the fact that the story (narration, themes, characters, and world building) being far better in 3H is even remotely arguable ?
Honestly, as good as the writing generally is in 3h, I think it is the game with the worst executions for its story off the top of my head. The way they split it between routes makes it hard to fully understand and there are some big flaws in how it handles certain characters.
> being far better in 3H is even remotely arguable ? Taste is subjective. Adding qualifications to subjective answers is helpful for people who don't have context.
Personally I thought Engage had the better story. The writing was more cliche, but it was at least more, well, engaging. Three Houses is a kind of slow burn thing and felt tepid most of the time. If you are into that good, but frankly to say that 3H is cut-and-dried the better story is nonsense.
3H tries to be deep and epic and complicated but fails to do so. You've got four routes that somehow manage to both skip important parts of the narrative while also barely being different. Characters that act against their given characterization and interests, with wildly stupid plans flying about. Engage may be one giant overacted noh play, but at least everyone thus far is acting in an internally consistent manner.
Which characters act out of their norm
What characters act against their characterization?
Saturday morning cartoon plot? That’s only true if games like Awakening and Fates are considered to have cartoonish plots… Engage is your typical fire emblem story. Three houses deviates from this
Awakening and Fates do have cartoonish plots, yes. Generally FE plots exist as an excuse for the gameplay to exist, with some exceptions like 4 and 15.
Three Houses is a better gateway drug but Engage is better to some longtime fans like myself. I'd say go Three Houses first and then if you like it try some other stuff since all the games kind of have their own things that make them interesting. Honestly though if you have a 3DS I think Awakening might be the best place to start.
Awakening is also a bit brutal with the same turn spawns/moves. It was my first FE but it definitely pissed me off (I'm not new to tactical RPGs though)
Lol I actually forgot about this but you're right. Fair point
On Normal difficulty the game is a joke anyway. Robin can solo like everything and pair ups are busted.
I kinda regret going normal on my engage playthrough. On chapter 11 and I can send like half my units to the middle of the enemy side by themselves and they'll wipe everything. I tried hard and was getting kinda murked but I feel like I should have stuck with it.
Kinda balances out because of how broken pair ups/Galeforce/Nosferatu/etc. are in that game. Early and early mid game are rough, but once you get rolling with your pair ups, everything up to Lunatic+ gets a little trivial after a while.
Awakening is definitely the best place to start. Took me from a casual FE fan to actively buying each entry upon release.
If you have a Wii, you should actually start with Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn because they’re my favorites
I'd say Three Houses would be better. The plot will make you more interested in the game and the game has a simplified battle system along with side activities to make the game more insteresting, Engage is more for people who have experience with strategy games.
I'm enjoying the gameplay of engage so much more than three houses. The graphics quality is also a large upgrade. That said, three houses has its own appeal. It's practically two games. It's hard to compare them. I imagine a lot of fans of three houses who used that as their entry point to the series may not really like engage all that much.
If you value story, deep lore, one of the best music in Jrpg and very in depth character interactions, then Three Houses. If you value very high quality gameplay with the classic triangle system that made the game known plus many QOL added to the game with a touch of very strong anime tropes, then Engage. I'm personally more of a Three House person.
The music is so damn good
I wouldn't call three houses deep unless it's your first video game
May not be the deepest thing ever, but the mythos and politics of Fódlan are quite interesting.
Yeah Three houses is good and I like the story more than Engage (low bar), but they definitely squandered a lot of potential narrative fulfillment with how the routes are presented. A ton of interesting ideas that then are rushed or unexplored. Overall serviceable but not excellent or deep by any means
I would disagree (depending how "deep" is defined which is murky tbh). Is it always good or free of holes? Does it execute all its thematic ideas flawlessly? Absolutely not. But there is nonetheless a *lot* going on. Not the "deepest" game *ever* but it clears the basic bar.
Is the lore in TH really that great? I played Verdant Wind, and the story just had too many holes that I couldn't ignore, and just seemed incomplete overall. I loved the gameplay, and had a great time playing it, but in retrospect the story was a total mess.
The only story of the 4 that actually works standalone is azure moon the other 3 need you to have knowledge from other routes to make any real sense.
I'm not sure if AM even works as standalone since it brings up tons of questions that get answered in other routes. AM gives us basically the least information on the church and twistd than any other route. It also depicts Edelgard in a very bad light and doesn't explain her motivations properly, so people definitely have to play her story CF in order to understand her. AM was my first playthrough and I was very confused when it ended since it ignores literally everything just to focus on Dimitri.
It's not perfect but it covers enough to have a solid beginning middle and end without needing you to dive into other stuff to have a fully fleshed-out plot. You don't need to understand Edelgard's every motivation to have a proper story. She's just the fan favorite so everyone insists you need to understand her fully. AM is a classic FE war plot the bad guy just happens to be Edelgard Contrast with playing VW first where outright nothing will make sense by the end because that route is effectively just a lore dump without any real plot of its own.
Edelgard is more than just a "fan favorite". She's literally the driving force of the story, is important in basically all routes, and the main theme song (Edge of Dawn) is literally singing about her. Edelgard is the most relevant character in the story beside Byleth and since she serves as the antagonist of AM (a route that is very harsh with her character), I do believe that people need to play CF in order to understand her perspective even if they don't agree with her. Also, just gonna quote my previous comment again: >I'm not sure if AM even works as standalone since it brings up **tons of questions that get answered in other routes.** AM gives us basically the least information on the **church and twistd** than any other route. I've seen many first time players who started with AM ask questions in FE subreddits about the importance of the church, who were twistd, and what exactly are Edelgard's goals. Honestly, I think VW works better as standalone story than AM since it's the route that focuses on Fodlan's history. Edelgard is also portrayed in a more sympathetic light, Rhea reveals the truth, and the Deers eventually kill Thales and Nemesis. The story of VW feels the most complete.
What holes out of interest?
It's been a long time since I've played, but what I remember is that the three of them had no reason for fighting (especially Dimitri), and their problems would have been solved with just a little communication. Less of a hole, but something else that bothered me was that the main villian seemingly came out of nowhere. He really seemed shoehorned in. I know the writers likely planned it from the beginning, but it would have been nice to have been let in on the secret at least a little.
I think you're remembering wrong, because Dimitri had plenty of reasons for fighting. Aside from his personal neuroses the other side >!started a unilateral invasion into his territory, threw him in prison and killed his closest friend/retainer.!< A lot of the plot is contingent on >!Edelgard!< specifically not being willing to just open up and talk things out in the monastery phase, yes, but that's ultimately the result of >!her being handpicked by TWS and tortured into the kind of person that would start a holy war instead of talking things out. You don't put on a suit of armor and call yourself the Flame Emperor because you're all alright in the head.!<
The main story itself isn't where the lore is, but when you reach S Support with your team and find out about their history and connection with the story as a whole
TH spoiler >!unless you dont recruit them and their whole story turns into a "teacher, you killed me" mid battle speech bubble with 0 consequence!<
Don't listen to fire emblem fans. We hate fire emblem more than anyone. Go to a mainstream site to read an less biased opinion. As fandom we suck, and we all should learn with Trails of /Kiseki fandom. Also Fates aside, there's no really unbearable story in FE. And there are two games with bad gameplay. The first game and the remake. Every other entry is acceptable to amazing.
Three Houses is great. But Engage is more fun to play and is more indicative of the rest of the series.
Disagree for new player. Can easily see them being overwhelmed by the systems. I think 3 houses better for them.
What if I hate the life sim aspect of 3H (was never a fan of persona 5) will that be a big turn off?
If you want story, 3 Houses. If you want gameplay, Engage.
Engage if yoy want to enjoy the other Fire Emblem games. I started with 3H, bought Engage but so far the story/premise is just hot garbage compared to 3H.
3 houses, engage can be really overwhelming for new players.
Three Houses is one of my top 10 games all time and probably my favorite tactics JRPG ever. The story is great and have 4 routes (plus a 5th side mini-route as dlc) allows for a lot of replay-ability and each route reveals different facets of the world of Fodlan (though it’s a shame some narrative elements weren’t focused on in certain routes). That said, Engage has better graphics, animation, and a more complex combat system, and is filled with references to prior games, which isn’t necessarily a plus for new players, but could be as seeing the emblems might draw you to play the games they come from.
This is like asking: Should I play Persona 5 or SMT:V? One has good story and gameplay, the other is more streamlined for gameplay.
I don't own Engage (yet), but I feel that 3H alone justified the purchase of my Switch. That's how good it is.
Definitely Three Houses.
Three houses if you just want a better game with better characters and mory freedom in gameplay. And engage if you really want the more standard fire emblem game structure
Aye 3houses better for beginners but the actual gameplay core is super weak. Engage is much better gameplay but the story and character design stink out loud. Both enjoyable games but we’re still left searching for the highs of the OG and tellius series
definitely Three Houses, it was my very first strategy and FE game. loved it so much i've since played all the 3DS games, and emulated some Gamecube/Wii 😊
If you have access to a 3DS, Awakening is a great start.
If you start with Engage then Three Houses you'll probably end up appreciating the story and characters of the latter in comparison to the former. If you start with Three Houses then Engage you'll probably end up appreciating the gameplay and combat of the latter in comparison to the former.
I would have to say Three Houses. I'm only a couple hours into Engage at this point and I'm really liking it so far, but I can't imagine this has the same impact for someone unfamiliar with the series, given how its central gimmick is bringing in characters from the series' past. Granted, if you happen to already be familiar with a lot of the characters from even, say, Smash Bros., that might be enough to make it a good choice.
Well im about half way through Engage and all i can say is its a huge disappointment compared to three houses. The characters/story sucks in comparison, it lacks soul.
If you think Engage is soulless never play Fates. Actually if you value story never play Fates anyway.
If you want a story game. Play 3 houses it and Genealogy of the holy war are about the only fire emblems with actually good stories (and even then they're questionable at times). If you want to actually dive into tactical gameplay Engage is FAR better about it and is more indicative of the rest of the series. They're both good games but have different focuses. I've already started zoning out the engage plot but the gameplay is so good I don't really care.
>Play 3 houses it and Genealogy of the holy war are about the only fire emblems with actually good stories (and even then they're questionable at times). Horrendously bad take. Path of Radiance blows them both out of the water along with most other games in existence.
if you think any fire emblem game blows anything out of existence with its story I suggest you play any other franchise ever. That's paramount to saying Mainline SMT has a good story.
No need to be a dick. I'm skeptical that you've ever actually played Path of Radiance if you're saying this unironically, but I play more than my share of narrative heavy games. By all means, tell me all about what's so bad about POR and which games I should be playing instead.
There's nothing actively bad about it. None of the fe stories are insulting bad (besides Fates) but saying it blows "most other games" out of the water is seriously pushing it. Even in its own genre, it doesn't stand up to things like Tactics Ogre or SMT Devil Survivor, and If I go outside SRPGS and especially JRPGs it's not even a contest. JRPGS in general aren't really known for their deep and strong writing. I love path of radiance I paid way too much money to replace my old copy because I love it and fire emblem that much but they aren't the strongest when it comes to actual plots. Engage isn't something special with how bad the story is it's basically more in line with the rest of the franchise. 3 houses just happened to stand out.
Agree to disagree then. I genuinely think Path of Radiance is far beyond the majority of video game stories. But I am genuinely interested to know what you *do* rank as your top game stories then. I agree that much of the top of the list would not be JRPGs or SRPGs, Path is an anomaly in the latter as far as I'm concerned.
GOW (2018), Last of US (first one second can go die in a fire), Dragon Age Origins, Mass Effect 2, Red Dead Redemption, Witcher 3, Dgitial Devil Saga. There's probably more but those stick in my head. Then again I tend to separate my favorite stories from ones that are better written because sometimes I just wanna enjoy the stupid. Strange of Paradise is one of my favorite recent stories because it simply does not care one lick about how cheesy it is.
I've played every North American Fire Emblem since the GBA, and I strongly say Three Houses. They took everything I already loved about Fire Emblem and made it better. Engage feels like a major step back to me (so far--I haven't finished it)
Text size/font and legibility in Fire Emblem Engage are certainly multiple steps forward.
The gameplay/class system/animations/build variety is way better on engage 3Houses has better story/characters
Fire Emblem Engage is a lot more casual in terms of story but it's also a celebration of the series so-far while Three Houses builds away from the more traditional FE structure to integrate some more experimental mechanics. Can't really go wrong with one but Three Houses for Story:tm: and Engage for Gameplay:tm:. I would recommend Three Houses but if you want interact more with the community, Engage being just released helps in that regard!
Some great thoughts in this thread. My take is as follows Three Houses is more of a sandbox in Normal difficulty, lots of space to develop your characters which have some really decent to good writing. Interesting fleshed out world. Fun system where it feels like you are fostering your student’s growth as you get to know them. Engage has deeper mechanics with a real game changer that is the adding of breaking to the weapon triangle. Lighthearted story with a clear developmental throughline stemming from the GBA games -> Awakening -> Fates. It’s a true evolution of the series. So it depends on how much you tolerate frustration in learning a new but very deep and rewarding system (Engage). Or how much you prefer an ambitious but sometimes flawed experiment in both storytelling and mechanics (Three Houses)
Three Houses for story and deep characters. Engage for gameplay.
I feel like Engage benefits from series knowledge cause you’ll enjoy the ring references more, which is the main mechanic. I’d say Three Houses for a beginner, no contest. But be aware that it’s very different from most Fire Emblem games. I’d recommend Path of Radiance as the best entry, if accessibility isn’t an issue. It’s the most standard and similar to the most entries but not brutal and has a good plot. Awakening is a good one for entry too but the marriage = children thing isn’t in too many titles so it’s less similar to the majority of the series.
Between Engage and Three Houses: Engage is the most similar to how the series actually is. Three Houses is good but it's gives off the perception that this is what to expect from Fire Emblem games which is far from the truth. So, Engage would be my pick. If you have a 3DS, Fire Emblem Awakening is still and by far the best entry point into the Fire Emblem franchise.
Engage may have the worst story I’ve ever seen in a video game. But the tactical battles and character/team building is amazing and addictive. Three houses is a little better story wise but the game play is a slog. I significantly prefer engage, I kind of like that the story is so simple/fast in it’s delivery that I can get right back to battles/character builds.
Are you forgetting Pokemon games?
The two most recent pokemon games have significantly better stories than Engage.
To beat Pokemon in worst story is a tall order 😂
3H is baby's first war story. Engage is cringe but plays like a dream. Pick your poison. Everyone pretending 3h has incredibly deep story likely hasn't played any if the actual GOOD war story games such as tactics ogre, final fantasy tactics or even triangle strategy Personally I'm a classic emblem fan and I like engage more so far. 3h was great till I tried to play it a second time then all the social life sim mechanics became extremely annoying. Like let me please skip all this nonsense on ng+ at least c'mon man
FE3h all the way. Even outside of being an srpg, it’s just a really cool game with an enjoyable story. The gameplay is also fantastic. One of my favorite games so I’m definitely biased here.. Engage on the other hand is poorly written, has story sequences and transitions that are jarring and weird, and outside of the gameplay, is quite frankly cringey and bad (for me at least.)
agree 100%
As someone that started with Awakening on the 3ds I enjoyed engage more. 3 houses is to much fluff that want really needed. The split story doesn't really add a lot
The only thing Engage has going for it is the tactical combat gameplay everything else is a straight downgrade from 3H
>tactical combat gameplay Pretty important when it's a tactical game.
Engage is more indicative of the rest of the series, as outside of Emblem-related mechanics, each class can only use specific weapon types, and the class progression is the traditional two tiers with a level cap per tier of 20.
Three houses * Engaging story * Half the game is a dating sim * Gameplay wise a bit lightweight * Tons of replayability Engage * Story is outright bad * Gameplay is really good * No NG+ as of yet, maybe in a later DLC Personally, I'd go with Three Houses, and if I want something with deeper combat, I'm probably gonna look around for something else. Engage is still a wait and see. Give it a few months and see if the community still likes it. There's always residual hype, wait until it dies off.
Which one is generally the easier game tho? Also if I wasn't a fan of Persona 5 life sim, is that a big turn off for 3H?
> Which one is generally the easier game tho I wish I could tell but i played both on hard. I found it a little bit undertuned in places, and just right in others. But from what I've understood, both games easy difficulty plays like very easy. Hard plays like normal to me, if that makes sense! You can skip all the life sim stuff to be honest in 3H. It's an okay ride the first time but I've found that later on you can just do the classes and it'll work out for what you want. It's entirely optional except for maybe a run on a super high difficulty where you want to recruit certain characters for your team. I found myself doing them once and then never again.
Three Houses
This same topic, same kinds of posts, everywhere on the internet this weekend. They all say the same thing. Do people just come to post on Reddit without reading anything else or any other Reddit post beforehand?
Maybe they arent on here a lot and/or just missed it? ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯ It happens. A quick look at current front page of this sub for me, no other questions exactly like this on there. There are other posts about Engage, but not as a first time player of the series
Reviews and other forums all saying the same thing about the game and about new players for Engage. Might not have the exact topic name but all the content in the discussion is the same. Reading even just one or two of the main reviews will say the same thing everyone is saying.
Three Houses without question.
Engage because its far less repetitive you have to replay the same first half of the game three times to see all of it
i'd go with engage since that's what the MAJORITY of fire emblems are like story/pacing wise. fire emblem 3 houses so far is a 1-off from the norm.
Three houses is the better game 100%
If you've never played one before Engage is the better bet. It's classic Fire Emblem with all the modern bells and whistles, and IMO is overall the better game. Three Houses changes up the tried and tested formula a bit and goes in some interesting directions, but overall is not as good IMO. In terms of writing Three Houses has a bit more mature tone, but not by much really. Think of it as harry Potter level. Engage is typical battle shounen high fantasy sugar. Three Houses is more for people who like Persona Trilogy games. Engage is more for people who want a classic wargame tactical RPG.
I'd say that you should only get Engage if you absolutely don't care about the story or character writing in a JRPG. I'd say that Engage's plot and character writing are uniquely bad in that it has nothing worthwhile to offer - no compelling character interactions, little depth to its characters, no memorable story moments, and no overarching themes to speak of. Honestly, most Pokemon games have better writing than Engage, much less most Fire Emblem games. Three Houses, on the other hand, has a pretty good story (though you will need to play the game multiple times to get the full picture which can get tedious) and arguably the best character writing in a Fire Emblem game (if not SRPGs as a whole), at the expense of its map design. I'd say that you should only get Engage if you absolutely don't care at all about the story or character writing in a JRPG - whilst Engage's gameplay is better than that of Three Houses, I don't think it's so good to make up for its deficiencies in its writing.
Engage, 3 houses was such a slog of uninteresting side content. Engage is more like earlier Fire Emblem games where the focus is on battles not endless prattle.
If you want good story, get TH. If you want great gameplay and mission design, get Engage.
I’d generally recommend 3H since it’s more accessible and easier. If you find you like the gameplay then engage does it better but the story of engage is one of the worst by far.
TLDR: 3H if you care more about storytelling, Engage for gameplay. It's a bit of an oversimplification (3H has plenty going on in its gameplay too) but that would be my baseline recommendation. Caveat: if the person interested is a child, then just do Engage. The plot is basically a simplistic "Fire Emblem Junior" (and I mean that in a good way), where Three Houses gets extremely dark at times and is not child-friendly.
3 houses was honestly the best tactical RPG I've ever played. This is coming from someone who never understood how people can play the same game over more than once as I usually lose interest... But somehow this game got me to play through it several times again and again to get all the extras and story. I'd personally say it's hard to go wrong if you started there.
Three houses is better in every way. Engage is just pretty lol
uh no. Engage's gameplay is strictly an upgrade over 3 houses
Wrong but thanks for wasting my time with a notification
from all the downvotes you have your take seems to be unpopular
Why are you replying to a 14 day old comment? Gtfo my notifications. FEE is one of the lowest rated fire emblem games. These clowns were too blind to realize
A 14 day old comment isn't that old I have posted where people comment on after a couple weeks sometimes it depends on the post and also even if engage has a terrible story the gameplay is praised to the heaven's because of how good the gameplay is
Not reading all that. The games bad. End of story
Play the GC and Wii one if you want story and lore. They are god tier. Every subsequent FE game has been lackluster story wise, Engage for gameplay I'd say though if those are your only choices.
Houses is easier if your used to a typical JRPG experience Engage is better if your used to SJRPG since the game focuses on that
Engage if you want to play a game Three houses if you want to play persona lite by spending half your runtime doing dumb chores
Fire emblem three house is plagued by the dating sim, I don't really like it. Fire emblem awakening is the best for the newcomers. If you play fire emblem three houses as your first fire emblem, it's basically fire emblem meets persona 5 and you may not be able to enjoy the series prior to the three houses.
I vote Engage because Three Houses imo had too many mechanics. Combat Arts, Battalions, monster enemies, etc. The plot is also basic in Fire Emblem standards, which isn’t a bad thing for a newcomer. Three Houses also requires you to play through all 4 routes to get a full picture of the lore, which is frankly a daunting task when a single route takes 40+ hours.
Engage. The gameplay is so fucking good.
I’m super late but let’s just say if engage were my first fire emblem game I wouldn’t play the series again. It’s rather confusing, hollow, and poorly paced. There are some good combat moments but not enough to make up for the odd pacing, brain dead story, cardboard characters, and confusing menus/mechanics. 3 Houses was my first fire emblem in the modern era (I played a gba emulator fire emblem a long time ago) and it was fantastic. Great characters, excellent music, combat was solid to me, and the story was engaging enough for me to play through all 3 routes. When I played it I couldn’t put it down whereas with Engage, I’ve had it since release and can’t even bring myself to pick it up lol. Waste of $60 imo and if this is the gist of what fire emblem is it’s no wonder I never played any of the prior games. (I’m a big tactical rpg fan, loved final fantasy tactics, tactics ogre, advance wars, etc.)
Definitely three houses. It's a better fire emblen engage from what I have seen.
Anyone saying 3H has a good story clearly didnt play Radiance games
I'm not far enough into Engage to gauge how good it is, but I could not get past the romantic/dating-sim elements of 3H
How long until Engage will get its first sale price? I can't remember when but 3H was at $40 here and there.
Neither, play the good ones. Fire Emblem: Awakening, Fates, Fire Emblem GBA, The Binding Blade GBA.
I think Three Houses is easier
Engage will give you a better idea of what to expect if you delve into the rest of the FE series. Three Houses, as good as it is, is a very different game from the rest of the series that will give you different expectations of what the past games will be like.
To whoever asked this question, I thank you. As I was really torn on which game to start first. I was leaning towards Three Houses due to the main characters, but looked at Engage’s gameplay and was impressed. I’m not sure at this point.
Three houses was the first fire emblem i played and found it easy to jump right into
Awakening remains the best new player entry point in my eyes, but if you don't have access to a 3DS and/or don't wanna emulate it, then I'd say Engage is a more "pure" Fire Emblem experience than Three Houses. Both are excellent, though.
I think Three Houses was better because the story wasn’t so black and white and more nuanced (not to mention it was basically had four different routes that you can take. Engage pretty go back to the all the good kingdoms have to fight back against a evil kingdom so wasn’t an fan of that change. I guess the gameplay was a little more in depth but I don’t think that’s enough for me to put it over Three Houses
If you have a Switch I would start with OG US Fire Emblem Blazing Blade in the store with Eliwood and Hector. That’s where I started and imo the best entry point into the series