Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance GameCube Nintendo Review

I was really looking forward to this game and I did enjoy it but purely on the basis that I enjoyed the previous two games. Considering what was achieved by Final fantasy Tactics on the GBA which had enough extra content to provide over 100 hours of gameplay the fact that all the changes made to this game are cosmetic are extremley disapoitning.

Really wish Square Enix would have done an FFT for the GC as well...

Features I would've liked to have seen:

Rotatable camera with a zoom in and out.
Alternative missions where you have the option of chossing from multiple paths which give different maps, difficulties and rewards.
Conditionable missions which affect others, complete it in under twenty turns and you get a bonus mission.
Greater variation in troops, do I really need six paladins and only two halberdiers?
At the half-way mark you supposedly control an army yet only play with your small band. Why can't I use the rest of the army in bonus maps.
Where are the sidequests and seperate dungeons?

Apart from the camera all of these features have appeared in previous Fire Emblem games or FF:T

Good review Matt.

I must say this is the first FE game I've played and I'm very much in love with it, fantastic title and despite being weak in the graphics department I'd say it's a classic example of not needing graphics to be a great game!

If you've never played a FE game before this is a good as start as any but thats the problem, when I put a disc into my GC I'm expecting an experience I can't achieve on a SNES emulator.

A bit harsh maybe, I'd put this beyond what a PS1/N64 could do, it just isn't up to GC levels - though I can see what you're saying.

Catch 22, great game that could have been better, but in my honest opinion it's worth every single one of its thirty pounds despite being below technological standards :

To be honest, the small part I've played so far (about ten minutes in total since I got it last November... was just as enjoyable as ever and that FMV stunned me!

I thought the sound score was a bit harsh, I found it to be very good even by Nintendo standards. It had a superb midi engine, the first mido Nintendo music that I've heard sounding so realistic. There was also some very subtle use of dissinance in places that provided plenty of "soul".
As for the graphics, to me they range from N64 to Dreamcast/PS2.

Great review Matt.

I've tried to be interested in Fire Emblem, but I've yet to get into any of them. I think it'll be like Advance Wars, I'll just gradually fall into liking them at some point...

It's the story that made me love this game so much, I didn't bother with the rest. Good review.

I imported this game and have played it all the way through.

I don't agree with the score - maybe you shouldn't have reviewed fire emblem when you already hate fire emblem games in the first place? But considering that handicap the review is written pretty fairly.

I felt disapointment with the in game graphics too, but they're not entirely without charm, they just could of, and should of, been so much better.

My emotions are really mixed, but in the end, I'd say it's a great experience if you are fond of the type of gameplay present in the gba games, just as you more or less conceded. Ultimately this is because the story, characters and dialogue are a honestly a cut above most rpgs, and that's a very important factor when you are going to play a game in long a established genre that, while nice and refined, is never going to blow you away with something you've just never seen before...and there are a few (four or five) GREAT fmv scenes, but they are very short.

I guess the real problem is that this is a great little game when it could have had a few years development time where the characters that fight in game were made to look amazing (like soul calibur 2 or something maybe) and each character had like 20 or so different combat animations that were all carefully conceived and animated, more of that great CG, much more, etc.

But the most crucial parts of a great game, the gameplay mechanics and story, are not weak, so if anyone wants an rpgesque experience to tide them over till Twilight Princess is unleashed, you could do a hell of a lot worse than this.

It really does have a spark about it in the end.

JoSheeMitzu, I do like the Fire Emblem series but throughout playing the three games I've picked up on flaws which detract from the overall game. This game was in development for quite a few years but the end result is a GBA game with better graphics but not all the good features of the previous games. Where's the bonus missions from the first Western game? Where is the alternative storyline and side dungeons from Sacred Stones. When paying full price for a GC game I'm expecting something that's better than a GBA game and not on par with it.

You sound like you are saying you expect any home console game to be better than a gba game, intrinsically, just by virtue of not being on a handheld, which I can't get my head around. Many of the best games on all systems last year were on the DS.

Well I enjoyed the first gba fire emblem and Sacred stones too. To be on par with them is be higher than 6 out of 10!

But then there is your new rating system Where the same numbers have new meanings now. Part of the problem is that I would never tell anyone to play a game that I personally would consider to be worth 6/10, what a waste of time when there are so many other games out there...whereas I know that for some people, this game will be something they really treasure. I wouldn't want them to miss that, and I feel people won't see that score. Obviously the games not so great for other people, of course, like yourself...

But you need to understand, there are things - like the side dungeon which you considered a strong point of SS, apparently, but others thought it was a negative thing because it allowed people to keep replaying it, grinding over and over and twink out their characters, instead of beating the game fair and square. They'd be delighted by it's omission.

I guess this just proves the foolishness of the current numeric rating system that is seemingly inseperable from gaming reviews.

I admit that I wanted more from the game too. I want more from every game. And I can definately imagine how, with you know, four years development time and lot of money it could have been something astounding, and yes, I say that should have happened. But I still feel intelligent did a lot with a little, it had beautiful 2D art and music that suited its fantasy backdrop perfectly, and it
got right some of the most important things that many bigger budget, heavily marketed, successful games get horribly wrong.

I'm sorry Gastrian, I'm arguing with you so much for someone who agrees with you for the most part. I can't tell you how underwhelming I found the game sometimes, I really know how you feel, but there were other moments of delight that I more than made up for it in my case.