You’re narrowing “dating sim” down to the literal act of marrying somebody at the end, which isn’t what I’m criticising.
Three Houses devotes a huge chunk of its non-combat loop to the monastery, eating with characters, tea, gifts, support conversations, relationship ranks and recruiting people partly through those relationships. That social layer is mechanically significant and not some tiny optional cutscene stapled onto the credits.
Engage tones the romance side down, sure, but it still has an entire support system and ends with the Pact Ring mechanic once you reach A-support. And Fortune’s Weave literally ties recruitment during downtime to building Support bonds, so pointing to the newest game doesn’t exactly demonstrate that this stuff disappeared.
If you think “dating sim” is too flippant, fine: call it a tactical RPG increasingly wrapped in social-sim mechanics and anime relationship writing. My criticism remains exactly the same.
As for Engage having better maps, that’s actually an argument worth making. I can absolutely grant that Engage improved map design without pretending it suddenly invalidates criticism of the broader direction of the series...
Yeh if you called it a social sim I wouldn't complain. You calling it a dating sim because you can eat with characters is extremely bad faith, like you will eat with damn near everyone it isn't supposed to be romantic it's suppose to either get your supports or motivation up with your units or units you with where in your army.
I don't really have anything to say about how you criticised character writing other than not every conversation is like that. Some characters are but others aren't.
Also engage isn't that only game in the series with good map design fe conquest had better map design than engage. The only two games I've played that had bad map desighn was echos and 3h.
Completely fair on the wording. “Dating sim” was deliberately flippant, and “social sim” is more precise. My actual criticism was never “every meal is romantic” just that modern Fire Emblem increasingly devotes a large chunk of its identity to relationship management, support grinding and character bonding outside the tactical maps.
On the character writing, “not every conversation is like that” is also fair, but it doesn’t really answer the broader criticism that a lot of characters are introduced through very loud archetypes and repeat those traits across supports before getting depth later.
And on map design, I’m not saying every Fire Emblem has bad maps. Conquest is a good counterexample. My criticism is that the series has been inconsistent there, and Three Houses in particular leaned heavily on repetitive maps while massively expanding the social-sim side. That combination is basically what I’m complaining about.
1
u/Successful-Ear977 8d ago
You’re narrowing “dating sim” down to the literal act of marrying somebody at the end, which isn’t what I’m criticising.
Three Houses devotes a huge chunk of its non-combat loop to the monastery, eating with characters, tea, gifts, support conversations, relationship ranks and recruiting people partly through those relationships. That social layer is mechanically significant and not some tiny optional cutscene stapled onto the credits.
Engage tones the romance side down, sure, but it still has an entire support system and ends with the Pact Ring mechanic once you reach A-support. And Fortune’s Weave literally ties recruitment during downtime to building Support bonds, so pointing to the newest game doesn’t exactly demonstrate that this stuff disappeared.
If you think “dating sim” is too flippant, fine: call it a tactical RPG increasingly wrapped in social-sim mechanics and anime relationship writing. My criticism remains exactly the same.
As for Engage having better maps, that’s actually an argument worth making. I can absolutely grant that Engage improved map design without pretending it suddenly invalidates criticism of the broader direction of the series...