How would you feel if the next major series Fire sign was the game exclusively a social sim?
While it almost certainly isn’t such a drastic change, the identity crisis Fire Emblem is currently facing means change is bound to come. While Engage’s 1.61 million sales as of March 2023 is respectable for the franchise, it marks a return to 3DS-era numbers after whispers of blockbuster status saw Three Houses sell nearly 3 million in its first fiscal year. The reason for this discrepancy is simple: Three Houses expanded its fan base by shifting focus away from its strategic elements, while Engage doubled down on its strategic roots.
It’s quite a bummer for any franchise to experience a surge in popularity for reasons that go against its traditional formula. However, those who already play niche genres can be quickly reshaped by this phenomenon. Turn-based strategy games—one such genre—rarely come close to reaching million-seller status. Fire Emblem took over two decades to achieve this despite being arguably the biggest player in the universe. Awakening notoriously saved the franchise from imminent demise by rallying a fan base around its marriage system, which later evolved into the Persona-coded social simulation Three Houses.
Simplifying it as an overly large bland map and removing the signature weapon triangle would have buried any item other than the Three Houses, but the average player didn’t focus on that; they wanted to drink tea with their master of choice, romance their favorite disciple (insert collar bag here), and micromanage their monastic tasks. If social media chatter around the franchise wasn’t already focused on the characters before this major Switch entry, it became an all-out port war upon release. Some fans of older Fire Emblem formulas were left behind in the process, but the newfound audience doubled the reach of the franchise. Fire Emblem became synonymous with its social elements, and if Nintendo wanted to keep up the pace of its popularity, there was no going back.
Three Houses characters look and act like people, while Engage characters look and act like cartoons.
But turning back is exactly what Nintendo tried with Engage.
Perhaps more tellingly, Engage tried to have a papaya and eat it too. For my money, the crucial moment-by-moment decision – especially when it comes to the titular “engagement” mechanic – made for Intelligent Systems’ most amazing combat system to date, but in the same vein, many new fans emerged on the immersive social network. the narratives were stolen.
That is, if they even appeared at all, because the quality of the game’s narrative and writing was being pushed widely, and there were fewer meaningful social systems through which to interact with the characters. Even the characters themselves didn’t fit the mold of modern Fire Emblem. Three Houses characters look and act like people, while Engage characters look and act like cartoons. This boldness works well for the traditional Fire Emblem formula, where most characters only have a plot during their opening mission (so they’re free to die afterwards), but this philosophy runs counter to what made its predecessor wildly popular.
Would it be too far to say then that I could enjoy a Fire Emblem game that only focuses on socializing?
It might seem obvious that Intelligent Systems should simply copy and paste the Three Houses formula for the next major Fire Emblem series, but this tactic has worked spectacularly in the past. Destinies copied Awakening’s homework, but colored between the lines with less memorable characters and bloat by the boatload. It’s also notable that Heroes, Fire Emblem’s biggest earner, has simplified combat to the point of playing second fiddle to seasonal character outfits.
So change has to come. Or more accurately, the franchise must adapt to the needs of its largest player base to risk returning to its dangerous pre-awakening state. Which I ask again: what if the next Fire Emblem game fully embraced the social sim role, even to the point of abandoning its turn-based strategy roots?
Let’s consider three possibilities for what this future might look like:
- If you remove combat entirely, you have to face the problem that warfare is still a narrative pillar of the franchise. Perhaps a social sim in this setting could act as a commentary on the impact of the external war on the citizens within the kingdom. Think of it as a story that takes place during the Fire Emblem turn-based game you would normally control. Character choices influenced by your interactions can lead to outcomes such as permadeath (you may not be able to convince them not to join the war) or romance. Importantly, many of Fire Emblem’s conceptual ideas and thematic elements can live on in a format that eschews combat. Combat items could be included in remakes of classic games from the Echoes series.
- For a less nuclear option, turn-based combat could be an optional offshoot of the social sim’s story. You can choose to send armies to fight for you automatically to give you extra time for social tasks, while players who want to take up space on the battlefield can still do so. Balancing storytelling and pacing in this format would be difficult, and creating essentially two games in one is something developers don’t often do. Still, the do-what-you-want model has worked for games like Fantasy Life, so maybe there’s a way to implement it here.
- They could change the fighting genre to one more accessible to the average player. I’ve mentioned the Persona stylizations of Three Houses before, but what if this took the concept to its logical conclusion and created a full stop for the medieval Persona? Honestly, few changes would be needed to fit the traditional JRPG dungeons into the slots where the main story beats in Three Houses take place and populate the interim content with Mementos-style dungeon traversal. We could go so far as to go the action route, something that Three Hopes has already shown to be viable.
That’s not to say I’m fighting for a future where Fire Emblem isn’t a bastion for turn-based strategy fans. However, when I think about the Switch’s two main items, I run into a conundrum. Despite having major issues with Three Houses’ combat design, while I adore Engage’s, I still think fondly of the former because of the bonds I built with its student body. Would it be too far to say then that I could enjoy a Fire Emblem game that only focuses on socializing?
I suppose the answer to that question could only come in the form of Nintendo approving such a project, but the more I thought about the possibility, the more interested I became that the game existed.
Would you play a Fire Emblem game that focused mostly on social elements instead of turn-based combat? Or do you still swear by the devoted weapon triangle?