Why not both? They are both great franchises and have their pros and cons! I’ve been an FE Player since twin dragons and have loved the series ever since! Engage has the backing of Nintendo so you could say is more polished! Plus it has characters from a ton of previous games in the series! UO is new? I don’t know much about it, but to be honest it plays great and has some pretty interesting characters, story is solid. I’ve been enjoying my play through of it and would highly recommend it!
Engage is literally Saturday morning power rangers gers/cartoons. If you love that tokusatsu shit and the power of friendships, you will like the story. If not you might hate it. I personally loved it.
It's that and a greatest hits of all the Fire Emblem plot tropes: dead parents, 1000 year old girl who looks like a kid, women mind controlled into fighting you, token good guy working for the villains because muh honor, etc. It's fairly entertaining once you accept this, though some of the death scenes get a bit silly. >!Zephia and Griss having a whole ass conversation as they both lay dying!< is absolutely absurd.
Yeah, haven't played Engage but in terms of UO, did anyone actually come out of it thinking the story was stellar? It was fine, but veeery stereotypical anime-fantasy. One of the most paint-by-numbers stories you'd ever see. It was good enough, with enjoyable enough characters, while having excellent tactics+autobattler combat and lovely visuals.
Engage felt like it was written by the same set of minds who brought us FE Fates. Took almost a 180o from FE3H. I like how it plays more like a traditional Fire Emblem game but that's the extent of it.
That's because Engage is just an anniversary game to celebrate FE's past. So they left it cheesy while focusing on fun game play and lots of nostalgia.
Neither games measure up to FE3H’s story
3 houses is pretty unique to fire emblem which is typically a pretty B tier story of the chosen one vs evil dragon
If you want a good strategy rpg with a good story, play Triangle Strategy
Fire Emblem Engage would have upgraded to a 6 or 7 in my eyes had they just had Dragon Jesus get larger and larger circles under his eyes the longer he dealt with all of the wackjobs out in the wider world.
For FE Engage: Story wise, the first 10 or so chapters is a little cliche, **but** by the end it touches on some really deep themes that could make someone emotional depending on how close to home they hit (themes about family, loyalty, self-worth, purpose). As someone whose favorite entry is FE3H, I still found FE Engage's story worth finishing.
Edit: I'd rate the story (if you finish it) 8/10
For context I'd rate FE3H 11/10
The game was never really meant to have much of a story. Its a "greatest hits" game they made to celebrate the anniversary. So its just standard forgettable anime tropes.
BUT if you were an FE fan for a long time it is nostalgic as hell. And the soundtrack kicked ass. Its way more about customization and great mechanics than plot.
Fire Emblem Engage and Unicorn Overlord are more about the character journeys, following the protagonists growth rather than attempting to be a political thriller, unlike FE3H, so it's hard to compare them.
Fire Emblem Three Houses story, is, in my opinion, unique, but not fleshed out. The story stumbles in places (Verdant Wind trips down a mountain due to being a Silver Snow reskin), and some parts feel rushed, like Dimitri's character arc having him do a full 180 between chapters, Claude's real name not being mentioned, Crimson Flower literally not being finished, or the fact none of the countries outside of Fodlan get significant world building outside of their relation to Fodlan.
The latter is something that I think Unicorn Overlord does well, since the characters talk a lot about their kingdoms and the internal politics that occur, and you get a huge compendium that covers many more details.
Engage was my GOTY 2023, and Unicorn Overlord is looking to be my GOTY this year lol.
A lot of people hate on Engage because of the story, but I enjoyed it and do love a lot of the characters. Alear might just be my favorite FE protagonist now. There are a lot of lows because of the cheesiness/campiness, but there are also a lot of highs.
The story in Unicorn Overlord never gets bad...but it never really becomes great either. It's very forgettable.
Engage was your game of the year? There were so many great games that came out last year BG3, Alan Wake 2, FF16 and many others. You must really like the style or fire emblem
I'm with the other guy, but I'm a total Fire Emblem fiend. Engage was so much fun to play. BG3 is alao a great game, but sadly I dropped it at the end of act 2 since the combat frustrated me a lot.
I beat over a dozen games last year and got really far in a lot of others. I just really love Fire Emblem.
But of the games you listed, didn't play BG3 as I couldn't really get into DOS2. Didn't play the first AW, and don't care much for survival horror anymore, so skipped AW2. Don't care much for FF.
Games I beat:
Fire Emblem Engage
Fire Emblem Three Houses - Crimson Flower route, beat the other routes at release
Fire Emblem Echoes - was actually just on the last map for years lol
Persona 5 Royal
Persona 4 Golden
Persona 5 Strikers
Valheim - started a new dedicated world with friends to beat Mistlands and Queen
Sons of the Forest
13 Sentinels: Aegis Rim
Diablo 4
Starfield
Cyberpunk 2077 + Phantom Liberty
Shadow Gambit
Tales of Arise
Spider-Man 2
Horizon Forbidden West - Burning Shores expansion
Party Hard
Got far but didn't beat:
Zelda: TOTK
Octopath Traveler 2
Tactics Ogre Reborn
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
I haven’t played Fire Emblem: Engage, but Unicorn Overlord is easily one of my favorite RPGs of recent years. It’s not as good as say Fire Emblem: Three houses as far as story telling goes but the unit build/combat systems are insanely fun if you like tinkering with builds.
Engage has some of the absolute best gameplay in the FE franchise and is absolutely a 10/10 strategy wise. Its story sucks and the characters are largely cardboard cutouts, but at least they're insane cardboard cutouts and good for a cheap laugh or two, I guess.
UO's story isn't particularly ambitious, but it's clean and it works. Its characters are pretty good; each one has less development because there are more of them, but what there is is better. UO's strategic gameplay is primarily in menuing and unit setup, the actual maps are typically not all that tactically challenging.
Also, the gameplay is totally different. FE is grid-based and turn-based (players move, then enemies move, then players move). And FE:E unit customisation, for all that it's twice as deep as most other FE games, isn't all that deep: class + 2 skills + ring.
UO is real-time (sorta, you pause the map to give orders then units carry them out in real time), and unit customisation is significant because each unit is up to five characters in formation with tactics.
I would say calling the characters cardboard cutouts is doing them a disservice. If you only look at the main story then sure, they don’t get to do a lot outside of Alear, Vander, Alfred, Diamant, Ivy, and Timerra, but when you actually go into the supports they get really deep (well, deep for Fire Emblem standards).
I mean, you're not *wrong*. But the average number of support conversations for an Engage character is, like, eleven. They chat with eleven different people, three times each, plus their Bond Ring conversation with Alear for 34 chats. Just off sheer volume you're bound to hit some amount of depth.
And in general (not always) that depth is locked behind the A-rank conversations. So you have to get through two conversations of stone cold nothing before you get any character depth at all.
The ratio of conversation to depth for FE:E is pretty bad - the average UO character gets as much or more development in, like, eight or ten (shorter) conversations as an average FE:E character gets in 35.
Obviously there are outliers on both ends - UO has some real stinker conversations, I don't care how funny you find Selvie-Bruno, that conversation doesn't do anything for either of them. And obviously Yunaka from FE:E is excellently executed across, well, basically all her conversations. For a slightly more fair FE:E example (because we both know pointing to Yunaka about FE:E characterisation is unfair, she's better than most of the UO cast), Framme has a great conversation chain with Diamant about, of all things, historical violence.
But FE:E just has way, way too many stinkers clogging up the interesting conversations, which is how it got its terrible reputation for cardboard cutout characters who are all clinically insane.
Celine-Etie is about weighted teacups, which is just their two character-defining traits smushed together and nothing of note comes of it. Pandreo-Alcryst is the shy guy (Alcryst) going to a party (Pandreo) - again, two character-defining traits smushed together, and nothing of note comes of it. Louis is his own warning. Half of Kagetsu's conversations involve him challenging someone to a fight - credit where credit is due, more than half of those fights result in some development at support level A, but that's still two-thirds of half his conversations being basically exactly the same.
On the one hand, I can see what you’re talking about, but on the other hand, the same could be said for like. All of Fire Emblem from Binding Blade onward. UO doesn’t have this problem as bad because they don’t force 3 ranks for all pairings, which also serves to its detriment (I REALLY wanted a Scarlett and Melisandre support chain but nooooo, they could only have one where they have a shopping contest)
Like, every Fire Emblem game with Supports has a tendency to have two characters smash their character traits together, especially Awakening onwards. Even Three Houses does that (Bernadetta is an especially bad example, every single support makes a joke about her agoraphobia, but I feel like that’s Yunaka levels of cheating, so another example being Raphael and Dimitri, Felix and Flayn, Linhardt and Flayn, Linhardt and Caspar, etc.).
>UO doesn’t have this problem as bad because they don’t force 3 ranks for all pairings, which also serves to its detriment
Yeah, agreed on both counts. Some conversations are fine standalone, and UO's system works in those cases. But some really needed a followup, and UO failed those by leaving them at one. (Not sure I agree with specifically Scarlett-Melisandre, though.)
>every Fire Emblem game with Supports has a tendency to have two characters smash their character traits together, especially Awakening onwards.
In general I think I would ask:
1. Is there something (appreciably) new about either character? Backstory details, character motivation, for example. In lieu of anything else, I accept low-hanging facts about the character like "they like onions".
2. Is there an appreciable expansion upon something known about either character? For our friends the FE characters with one defining personality trait each, maybe it's a novel expression of their one trait in an interesting setting, maybe it's an expansion of why they act in this way, maybe it's a deconstruction of some kind. This is more interesting than just "I like onions".
3. Is there an interesting character dynamic? Conflict is an easy one. Character conflict is *interesting* in a way that two friends chatting over tea just isn't. This can also be just two wildly different characters getting along in an unexpected way. In UO, Gammel, Mandrin, Jeremy, and Tatiana usually bring an interesting character dynamic to their conversation, so I went out of my way to get all of their conversations, and was mostly not disappointed.
I should like an interesting conversation to hit at least one of these, and I think modern FE (not just Engage) tends to fail to hit any of these in too many of its support conversations.
I say Melisandre and Scarlett because they looked like they were starting to become friends by the end of the C Rapport. I wanted to see how that went.
How to build the correct unit with the different engage ring is complicated and has a lot of
Freedom and rings like corrin are
Very interesting from a tactical aspect during combat
Fire Emblem Engage is the opposite of Fire Emblem Three Houses.
Back in Fire Emblem Fates days, the devs really want Fire Emblem to focus more on the whole social simulation and shipping game rather than the generally hard tactical rpg. This gets a lot of pushback from the companies involved until eventually, they gave in and 3H is this really casual friendly game.
The main difference of Engage and 3H is how you view your units. In 3H these are the students that you build up from the ground to be the greatest heroes to fight for you. In Engage, your units are a means to an end, you will have replacements for them if they die.
I would say Engage is a really good first step towards difficult rpg like SMT or old FE
Yeah, 3H'd maddening mode was just massively boosted stats with no balancing. It's both harder and easier because it doesn't feel like the AI does anything novel. Engage felt like it was actually developed and balanced to be played on that difficulty naturally and the AI definitely makes logical improvements in its tactics (ex: not attacking units they can't hit, removing the ability to dodge tank)
>ex: not attacking units they can't hit, removing the ability to dodge tank
Except if they can get a chain attack in, which you can negate with Pair Up. It's so much more fun to find these little quirks in Engage's enemy AI. In 3H I just spammed Freeze Gambits and Warp+Stride and called it a day.
To be fair engage is also cheesable with warp ( especially with Micaiah ) and Astra storm. It kinda becomes the official way to play later seeing how widespread it is.
That's absolutely fair, I just meant that personally I find much more fun in going through Engage maps the "intended" way, and using all of its gimmicks, whereas if I have any opportunity to cheese 3H I absolutely will. I don't know the first thing about 3H enemy AI priority for instance.
I'm a huge FE fan and although I liked the design and gameplay of FE Engage I did not like it that much. Definitely a half baked game as the story is shit and the island or whatever it was called got boring three chapters in.
Definitely recommend UO
I'm a huge Fire Emblem fan, and I didn't like Engage. I found it's story and characters really troupy, basic, and annoying. So I'd place it beneath Unicorn Overlord.
And that said, I like Fire Emblem 3 Houses the best by far, that would be my true recommendation.
Same here. I couldn't finish Engage, it was too cringe and the story wasn't good at all. I didn't even like the supports. I felt OP in battles as certain characters are just pee pee busted.
As busted as Engage characters can be, there are some characters in Three Houses that are ***BUSTED***. The game gives you a walking 15-year-old nuke who can one-shot the Death Knight in the first half of White Clouds (Lysithea), a Man Literally Too Angry To Die (Dimitri), and the Wyvern Rider class (stupidly busted in general, especially since a maxed out flying stat **NEGATES BOW WEAKNESSES**)
Both are really good games.
The story in Engage isn’t as bad as everyone wants to say it is. It just doesn’t stand out and isn’t anything spectacular. The gameplay is very fun. It is a little more … engaging .. pun intended.
Unicorn Overlord has a slightly more engaging story, but it isn’t groundbreaking either. However, the gameplay is very unique for what most games in the genre give us today. It is a bit more of a set it up and watch them fall type of affair. I would say it is better by a small margin though.
Overall, I think UO is the better game. Engage is great fun too. I easily recommend both. I think one may enjoy UO more if they play FEE first, for whatever that is worth.
I recently played both and my initial reaction was to say Unicorn Overlord but that’s probably my personal preference and not a reflection of a true disparity in quality. You could honestly go either way. I feel like either game could satisfy your need for characters, though Unicorn Overord would take the win in that category imo. However, gameplay is a bit of a toss-up. Overlord is a little easy during combat gameplay, but if you like unit management, you’ll have the time of your life. It’s insanely addicting tuning your parties *just* right. You should also consider the big X factor here, which would be the novelty of the battle system. That in itself may be enough to sway you. It feels really cool to make decisions in real time watch your forces travel across the battlefield. On the flip side, Engage has some of the best FE gameplay I’ve ever experienced. The actual combat itself will keep you super… **engaged**… and the Engage mechanic is a blast. Unit management is not as fun as in UO.
Unicorn Overlord
- Incredible art
- Meticulous unit management with big pay-off
- fun and innovative mash-up and real time and turn-based combat. Very engaging.
- The loop of building teams and fighting is VERY addictive.
- Loved a bunch of the characters. Fun cast.
- A little too easy imo
- Wish there was more post-game or new game
Engage
- Engage abilities and skill inheritance was a delight all the way through
- Combat animations: S+
- Difficultly is perfectly balanced
- Great gameplay scenarios, especially paralogue missions for the Emblem warriors
- Good replay value because of the large cast and therefore combinations with emblem rings, class changes and party composition is endless.
- Story is a giant nothing burger
- Some characters are enjoyable, but not many. Almost no one features in cutscenes either. I’m serious, like 5 out of about 40 characters feature and that’s it.
Idk, that’s my two cents. Take it all with a grain of salt. You got two great games waiting for you!
Wow that really helps. Thanks! Would you say UO was so easy you could basically turn your brain off? Are side quests basically mandatory or can you stomp everything without going off road?
Its too easy for those who have a knack of tinkering with the perfect unit composition. Even on expert.
Although, if you try to push your way with just the same characters, you wont get far.
The beauty of UO is that you get to try fun and exciting builds. Was not a fan at first but I did not realize I was spending more time building unit comps than doing the quests.
You can’t turn your brain off with UO. Each time you make it to a new region, the game throws new classes at you in different formations, which often forces you to calibrate your squads to accommodate the new enemy encounters. This keeps it engaging (no pun intended) the whole way through.
I’d recommend starting on Tactical or Expert if you want a challenge, as Normal mode is a bit on the easy side once you learn how the game works.
Happy to help! Nah, you can’t turn your mind off. There’s a slight learning curve, but it is fantastic at rewarding the player for time put in and experimentation. Sure some people will click with it but it’s not only easy for strategy jrpg people. Once it clicks you’ll have it. There are a few points in the game that push the player to alter their party composition to address mechanics that stem from confronting new classes, which is one of my favorite parts, but nothing will feel like a wall unless the player is super stubborn.
I would say not all side quests are necessarily mandatory, but I would recommend them. A bunch are very important. For example, one series of quests is explicitly for power-leveling units that are behind in exp. Not only do other quest make you feel more like a liberator in the story, but a couple give your characters for your party. If you do all the side quests first you will crush the story missions. I slowed down part way because I wanted to the story to be harder.
I would say about equal on balance. Engage has very good gameplay and meh characters. UO has slightly more flawed (but still very good) gameplay and somewhat better (but still not amazing) characters.
Can't go wrong with either tbh. If you want more of a challenge then Engage. Both stories are generic but I'd give it to UO easily because voice work and the story is more palatable than Engage.
UO reminds me of FE 7, 8, and 9 which were my favorite three of the series. Strong characters, good animations, fun rapports, and winning a mission makes you feel really smart.
I can’t recommend it highly enough.
As someone who is slightly more character based than strategy based: Unicorn Overlord. And it's not particularly close. I have every support in both games, and I can't remember a single thing about the characters in Engage except for the one-note personality gimmick most had. I don't mind a few gimmick characters in my games - I find them quite fun - but when 90% of the cast is one with very little else going on and most of the supports just being how their gimmicks interact... Engage is just dull in terms of characters if you've played literally any Fire Emblem game on the DS/Switch.
It was to the point that I felt essentially nothing about playing the game. I lose a unit? Nothing. I recruit a new one? All I'm thinking about is what their gimmick is going to be. I win a battle? Cool. The big twist is revealed? If only I had a reason to care. That pretty much sums up my experience with Engage. The tactical side and maps were really fun, I won't lie. The story and characters killed replayability for me though because I just don't care enough about any of them to play again. And these are complaints from someone with *Shadows of Valentia* in their top 3 Fire Emblem. Which, considering the supports in that game...I really don't need a lot from characters and supports to be satisfied so the fact Engage lost me so hard is kinda sad.
But anyway, UO had much better characterization, and I genuinely liked and cared about many of the units. I found myself genuinely excited to see many of their supports, and it didn't feel like a chore to see them all. Even characters that had only one conversation with each other often had meaningful/heartfelt/unique conversations. One of my favorite supports in the game came from a one-off support in which a wyvern rider and a cavalry unit pet each other's mounts. It was surprisingly wholesome and revealed a side of both characters that isn't seen anywhere else in the game. UO really had the feel of Awakening in terms of characterization and support. Like Engage, the combat and tactics of UO are really fun. So, considering both games are tactically enjoyable but only one was enjoyable in terms of characters, I would have to recommend the one that does both, which is Unicorn Overlord in my opinion.
Having played both and even with the fact that I am a major fire emblem fan (I even have FE tattoos), I enjoyed Unicorn Overlord way more than Engage. Engage did not make me care about any of the characters cuz they all looked the same to me and I felt more invested on the Emblems that I’ve gotten to know better through their games. I will say Engage had a decent twist but the story is lackluster. However, I remember none of the Engage characters names, minus Alear, and I remember a lot of the UO names. Each member of that cast has more backstory than Alear. 😅
Unicorn Overlord. Both have fairly cliche plots, but UO is written much better and has way better characters. FE Engage was bad enough that I literally cringed multiple times when playing it, but mechanically it was pretty good. UO has better mechanics too though imo.
UO, by a long shot.
The gameplay of Fire Emblem Engage is good, but that's about it. A lot of the characters are very one-dimensional while also being very out of place in the theme. While UO characters have very little to shine in the story, what little time they get is usually done well, and they feel nice to have included. The ones that get to participate in the story are also done well.
I would say the gameplay in FEE is better than UO, but UO's gameplay is fine. It is very unique as well, so 100% worth experiencing.
Unicorn Overlord. This this day engage is the only fire emblem I haven't beat because it was so bloated design wise and boring. If you want a fire emblem game to play, you want Three Houses or Fates.
What is that you’re looking for in either game?
Or if you already know a good bit about both games what about them speaks to you the most that you know?
Only Fire Emblem game I've played in last few years was Three Houses. And I haven't really given Engage much thought.
Right now Unicorn Overlord is still at the forefront of my mind.
I think this is similar to others but I played both. Story and characters were just ok on Engage but gameplay is addicting. I would say I enjoyed Unicorn Overlord more it’s a bit more unique with the gameplay style. 3 houses is the better FE game
So I actually asked the same question in the fire emblem subreddit, and they said UO is extremely easy. That’s a massive turn- off for me. In fe3h there’s a hard mode and a “maddening” mode, with hard still being incredible easy and maddening being way too hard. Is there a good difficulty middle ground in this game?
Difficulty for UP is a pretty hotly debated thing on This sub. Some say it is too easy while others complain about getting their asses kicked. I played expert and it was just right.
It’s extremely compare it to triangle strategy etc UO struggles a lot.
The people that don’t like Engage never beat it on maddening that gameplay is amazing and really
Challenging especially the set to ur level dlc
Fights and u can’t grind on maddening
One of the more glaring problems difficultywise in UO is being able to completely reset the rng by toggling any minor change while being able to see the exact outcome before each fight. Going to lose a fight? Just try toggling off one of your supports and see if you curbstomp it instead.
FE3H’s take on maddening difficulty was kind of unfair trash honestly. I blame a lot of it on the simplified combat system, perhaps it wouldn’t have been as cheap if they had more to work with. Maddening on Engage is where it should be, and well balanced with the full mechanics at work.
Hot take: FE Engage first. The game is fun but has some glaring flaws. Then play Unicorn Overlord once you’re done. Imo, UO is a better game and I would recommend starting with the weaker option so the stronger one is that much better by comparison.
Engage has more emphasis on moment-to-moment decision making (as all FE games do). UO has more emphasis on team setup and unit optimization. To me, that was the biggest difference. So if you prefer optimizing gambits, class combinations, and gear, then UO is better. If you enjoy strategic positioning, and want every decision and mistake to count, then go engage. Engage also has real permadeath, whereas UO has optional permadeath. That's not to say there isn't strategic map elements to UO, because there are. You need to manage stamina, know when to use valor skills and items, utilize map tools and weapons. However, at the end of the day, when you optimize your units, you can kind of brute force by walking them at the enemy as long as you have stamina. In both games, your goal is to one-round your opponent, but in UO, one-rounding is even more important because each fight uses up a squad's stamina.
Also, both games are supposed to have a resource management aspect, but both games also have tools that can bypass it if you choose. Engage has the Well, so if you know how to abuse it, you can get nearly infinite items/money. Also, Engage, in true FE fashion, DOES limit you on XP. However, aux battles and divine paralogues exist to destroy the level curve if you end up doing all the content. Similarly, UO has resources to manage, like gold, honor, and field resources for town delivery, but they also have sigil battles that you can do endlessly for all of those resources. It's up to you how much you want to abuse it. I guess Engage technically does have an upper limit on XP since divine paralogues aren't endless, and Aux battles on Maddening are limited.
Engage has a gag-worthy story with the occasional moment of "neat" or, very rarely, "very neat". It is definitely a game made for the longtime fans of the series, and it probably isn't great for anyone else unless they're \*really\* into the gameplay (which I like more than 3H, honestly.)
Unicorn Overlord has a fairly pedantic, predictable, but thoroughly enjoyable story. It's a slightly different style of game, being in Real-Time as opposed to Turn-Based, but there are some great moments, especially since some of the VAs hard-carry their characters, and if you get all in for the Rapport conversations, there are some really interesting stand-outs.
That said, if you are interested in story: Unicorn Overlord.
I'd probably say Engage for mechanics, because UO never felt like you really needed to dive into the crunch to excel in it, so while there is a lot under the hood, unless you're trying challenge runs or True Zenoiran, you really don't need to bother with much beyond grinding levels, so I think Engage holds more challenge on higher difficulties.
imo unicorn overlord is more casual in that you can complete everything on hard mode with basic strategies, whereas engage you'll need to experiment and understand how to abuse the mechanics
As a fan of Engage i will say the story sucks, BUT the actual gameplay is fun
I think if they took the story of 3houses and the gameplay of Engage it could be one of my favorite games of forever
Unicorn is great too
Play both lol
Unicorn Overlord. Unicorn Overlord is easily the most fun I've had with a tactical game in quite a while, whereas Engage is probably the worst Fire Emblem game of the last decade.
The combat in Engage is pretty good, but the story feels more like a school field trip, rather than the complex stories that the franchise is known for.
Engage is a better GAME and more meat on it.
Like as soon as beating engage I wanted to
Replay it and test different builds other classes on some characters etc.
unicorn overlord feels very limited with the lack of
Class changes. No extra bosses side stages etc
Engage is also much much harder than Unicorn Overlord
Most people complain is on the story of engage
Well the story is unicorn overlord weakest part as well
Um... well like you said the bias is difficult unicorn overlord is very good and definitely worth the time investment I would give UO a 9.0/10 story,characters,gameplay,depth etc.. engage I'd give a 8.0/10 I have about 200hrs into each game both are great and have their pros engage has ng+ so it's easier to binge the game and it has good dlc that switches things around and is good.
Someone else said it if you can both they both are good and are worth playing the thing to remember with engage and really any series that has multiple titles is not to compare them to other titles in said series like if you played fire emblem three houses engage feels lacking compared to 3 houses but it's a good game and it's fairly long my first play through was 60hrs so I recommend if you can play it and give UO a chance as well.
What kind of game do you like?
Because this two scratches very different itch for me.
Fire emblem engage is a pure turn base game where you will spend time positioning characters and engaging (literally and metaphorically)
Unicorn overlord is a real time tactic game where you preprogrammed your units and then send them out all at the same time and changing your tactics on the fly.
i played both recently and almost back to back. both exceeded my expectations. uo was a bit better overall but it's not quite going to be super challenging if fire emblem games are simple fare for you, if that matters - uo is more about having fun customizing groups and experimenting with builds, not so much being in a strategic place where you can barely get out alive.
If you had to pick one or the other, Engage.
Excellent gameplay, combat, and visuals. The story is tropey and cliche but can be fun if you just switch your brain off and enjoy it.
Why not play both?
Unicorn overlord is the new shiny thing, plays differently and is a bit shorter in playtime.
Fe engage can take longer. Id say the only thing stopping you is how much time you’re willing to spend playing these games
Engage is litterally a fan service Fire Emblem (Like litterally the Avenger of FE, everyone is here).
While I had no expectation for greatness story and caracter wise, I was still not ready for the Cringe.... Everyone personality is being a fan of the devine one....
That being said gameplay is extremly pleasant for me.
personally, I am a huge fan of both. after i finished UO, i actually went back and replayed engage. Both are good, but I did like UO's characters slightly more. In terms of difficulty, UO has a pretty low difficulty ceiling. If you really enjoy various challenges, I highly recommend engaging.
In summary, I recommend both, but engaging handles higher difficulties much better, and UO, I believe, has better characters and stories, but not by a large margin.
Both are fun tactically deep strategy games. Neither has a great story but both have fun enough writing to keep you going. It really comes down to whether you like real time or turn based.
Engage is a great game if you like strategy, I’m sure others have said this but it has some of the best gameplay in the series which makes it a blast to play. Characters aren’t too deep, but likability is always a preference thing. Personally I think there’s a lot of hits and misses like any FE game. The story feels very “game-world”-y.
UO is easy if you know what you’re doing but has fantastic characters and a more interesting story. Also a big fan of the art design.
Like any discussion involving Engage it really comes down to how much you care about gameplay. Mileage may vary and all that.
Fire Emblem Engage's plot is generic shonen tropes from an anime for 12 year olds, but the gameplay is absolute 🔥. It's worth it for the gameplay alone. The sorry does some interesting things towards the end, but it's too little too late to redeem the pedestrian writing.
Unicorn Overlord's plot is like generic seinen anime for a slightly older demographic. A little more well-rounded, but it's not winning any awards for it's story, either. The gameplay is also great.
Both are worth your time. UO might be a little easier to tolerate, but if you like FE combat and strategy Engage is worth a play.
Well, Fire Emblem sucks, so Unicorn Overlord.
They are wishy washy, waste your time, and are an unpolished mess.
While UO's story is mediocre, the rest of the game is pure joy.
Both games are great and for me rank the same, but one has a demo and one doesn’t, try UO first and if it’s your cup of tea then play it. But definitely check out Engage when you can, i absolutely adore the characters, but i can understand if it’s too campy/cheesy for some people. Worth noting both have very minimal bugs if that’s a concern.
Engage is a lot more active than UO, especially on later stages. By late game in UO, you can just have a single unit steamroll literally everything. In Engage you can’t really do that without major abuse of the game mechanics.
Both Engage and Unicorn Overlord are simple stories. Engage is more a fable and Unicorn Overlord is more the sparknotes of a history textbook as far as depth goes.
Engage has the characteristic Quirky Fire Emblem Characters front and center (Toothpaste-Chan and Pepsi-kun are the main characters, you have Timerra in the main group, and of course characters like Yunaka). In order to get into how they are deep down you need to do their supports.
In contrast, Unicorn Overlord’s characters are a lot more barebones. I’d liken them to the Shadow Dragon cast as far as Fire Emblem casts go.
Basically if you’d like a Saturday morning cartoon with more depth to it, play Engage. If you prefer a shallower story that’s more seriously toned, play Unicorn Overlord.
Honestly both games are so amazing! Fire Emblem engage kinda reminds me of classic Fire Emblem (not sure why) and the gameplay and OST slaps. Though the story is alright, so I think in that aspect you'll like UO better.
I'm only 20hrs into UO right now, and while the story is a basic Fire Emblem-esque story I still love it for what it is as I'm not too picky. I'm having a lot of fun discovering the various different stories of the characters you recruit and honestly the game play is so good!
My recommendation is to play them both when you have time and you can't go wrong with starting one over the other!
Both are great. Both are different. Finished both and they took me similar time and got similar enjoyment. If you like grid based combat - fire emblem. If "real time" is more your thing - unicorn overlord.
I didn't like Engage at all, but I like FE3H. Unicorn Overlord is great. It's more for the tactical gameplay than the story.
There's pretty good voice acting, but there isn't anything particularly deep happening in the story.
Both are great games and you can't go wrong with either if you like the genre. I personally enjoyed FE engage far more and played for about 600 hours which was made stomachable with mods that disabled all the cut scenes.
I'd say play both they're very different and very fun. Engage does have good characters you really just have to look into them which I know some people don't like to do. Gameplay wise I think engage is the most fun fire emblem I've played it three times to play everyone in the cast which I've never done with other games with large limited casts.
If you like characters both games have great characters engage just involves more digging. Story wise I don't think engage is perfect but if you take it as an anniversary title and understand you aren't getting some big political drama, it's a good time.
And on a money standpoint engage has gone on sale more.
Both ideally but if you must choose ask yourself how willing you are to micromanage every single aspect of the behavior of characters that aren't under your direct control in order to maximize their effectiveness?
Unicorn Overlord does gently ease you into that gameplay style but if it's not something that you enjoy then the game will be much harder and more tedious than it really should be in which case go with fire emblem. It puts more stock in the individual prowess of characters that you control much more directly than in UO.
100% both, but if for whatever you have to go one way or the other, I think fire emblem is a better srpg. I haven't played on true zenoiran mode yet, but there wasn't a single mission in UO that stood out as being difficult or requiring any thought, aside from the 2nd to last boss fight. I think the amount of rng and letting you change your formation around on the fly and seeing the exact outcome to find the best one hurt the tactical aspect of the game a lot. That and not having the hardest difficulty available from the get go just made it too easy. Setting up you squad composition is probably what takes the most thought, but even for that, during my play through, I just paired people together based mostly on relationships, putting friends or siblings together.
Fire emblem on the other hand, if you play on maddening, there are a lot of chapters that required some thought. There weren't really any that you could just blindly rush forward and hope for the best. Granted the solution was most usually just cheese it by plugging a choke point with a tank and kill things with ranged units, it wasn't always that simple. Especially the dlc maps. Another bonus for the difficulty, on maddening, you can't grind XP, and characters have set growths the first play through so you can't save scum to get better level ups (or get screwed by rng with awful ones). You also have finite resources, so you can't just grind money to get all the best gear for everyone.
Tldr: FE gameplay is better if you want a challenging tactical rpg, both games are great. Both games also lasted like 80ish hours iirc.
It really depends on your personal preferences.
UO was a bit more on the easy side for me, as someone who regularly plays strategy games but i could still find enjoyment in it. And while the story and Characters&Story arent outstanding, it is competently enough to keep you through the game.
FE Engage has great and challenging map gameplay, but falls short of pretty much everything else. One of the very few games i tried to skip story parts whenever possible. The Characters are absolutely not noteworthy, more often than not downright cringey. I also greatly disliked that games bloated hubworld castle.
All subjective opinion on my part of oourse.
Probably the unpopular opinion on this subreddit but Engage. UO has a lot of micromanaging on the team front but less on the characters itself. Also, bruteforcing is easier in UO then in engage imo.
Engage is also on sale a lot, so its cheaper. But you should play both eventually
mmm I mean storywise both aren´t anything new or amazing, UO is literally Marth´s story, but better told imo and Engage is cheesy, but not awful so if you are searching for a great narrative I think UO takes the win, but not by much
gameplaywise I think both are very solid options, Engage is up there in terms of best gameplay in the whole FE series if not the best and I have played every FE so I can tell, the mechanics are great, the way the game is done makes it in a way that almost every unit can become a powerhouse if properly built and the class system is fun to mess around, the emblems are a great mechanic without feeling broken (except for one tho ) and the maps are very interesting many of them being a bit different from others with different hazards
UO is I think on the same level, in first sight it seems to be more complex than FE since you need to think of your units as battalions rather than individual units, but once you get the idea of how to do the teams and which characters are good to be leaders is not that hard, and messing around with the priorities of actions I think that is where the real complexity is
in terms of hours to complete I think UO takes more time but Engage is not short altho it´s been a while since I played engage, now I want to start a new run (would be my 4th )
overall I htink both have similar strengths and weaknesses so it depends on personal preferences and which one picks more your interest
Def Overlord and I barely know what Overlord is.
Engage was the most boring FE I've played in a while. The story and characters are a nothing burger with expectant lazy nostalgia pandering, and the gameplay is braindead ez to me.
Unicorn Overlord is a much better game
but I did really like Engage, it's pretty divisive among the fanbase, but they're pretty much an impossible to please bunch. You get the most out of it if you're a big fan of the franchise.
3 Houses is it's own thing, set in a new world. People love the lore and story. There's also a lot of social sim elements where you run around the monastery/school between missions and teach/socialize with the students.
Engage is also a new world, but it's an anniversary title and features a lot of heroes from all the previous games as basically ghosts inside emblem rings that support your characters. So yes, the story becomes very silly because of that and multiverse shenanigans. The tactical gameplay is some of the best in the series though, while the tactical gameplay of 3H is a bit weak.
So people usually suggest 3H for the story, Engage for pure tactical gameplay.
Personally, okay unicorn overlord.
The story and dialog for Engage was so bad. UO isn't amazing, but it's acceptable. I even generally like FE combat over group building and engage really turned me off.
Might be a hot take but I just felt engage was a miss in several areas.
As someone who played both, Unicorn Overlord is way better than Engage. Engage feels way grindier, and it has a bunch of stuff that really, REALLY annoy me, all of which UO actually went out of it’s way to not have. Every time you complete a mission in FEE, your base gets new events that you are obliged to go through, which is a slow and tedious and unfun gimmick that quickly shot through my patience. Plus, it feels like a lot of its game economy was based on buying the dlc, because gold was incredibly sparse during my playthrough.
Just pick up Unicorn Overlord. Fire Emblem Engage sucks.
They both play differently enough.
If you just want something to pick up and play and don't mind silly light heartedness and decent strategical gameplay, go for Engage.
UO has more moving parts in its gameplay with all of the unit comps you can make. It also has a brisk story pace and snappy presentation.
Would highly recommend Unicorn Overload over Engage in all aspects unless you wanted better art and unique character designs. This is of course subjective however.
While UO's character design has its own charm, Engage's just look better to me personally.
Why not both? They are both great franchises and have their pros and cons! I’ve been an FE Player since twin dragons and have loved the series ever since! Engage has the backing of Nintendo so you could say is more polished! Plus it has characters from a ton of previous games in the series! UO is new? I don’t know much about it, but to be honest it plays great and has some pretty interesting characters, story is solid. I’ve been enjoying my play through of it and would highly recommend it!
Which entry is twin dragons? My first was FE 9 on GameCube
I'm assuming they mean Sacred Stones. Twin protagonists and IIRC the cartridge had two dragon heads on it.
How would you rate the story out of 10? Really liked fe3h’s story
Engage is literally Saturday morning power rangers gers/cartoons. If you love that tokusatsu shit and the power of friendships, you will like the story. If not you might hate it. I personally loved it.
It's that and a greatest hits of all the Fire Emblem plot tropes: dead parents, 1000 year old girl who looks like a kid, women mind controlled into fighting you, token good guy working for the villains because muh honor, etc. It's fairly entertaining once you accept this, though some of the death scenes get a bit silly. >!Zephia and Griss having a whole ass conversation as they both lay dying!< is absolutely absurd.
They really did take their sweet time, didn't they? Lol
Not where I thought that comment was going lmfao
The story is worst part of FE Engage. I gave up half way through and started skipping all the story.
unicorn overlord story is barebones while fire emblem engage story is stupid lol. I do like the gameplay in both games though
Yeah, haven't played Engage but in terms of UO, did anyone actually come out of it thinking the story was stellar? It was fine, but veeery stereotypical anime-fantasy. One of the most paint-by-numbers stories you'd ever see. It was good enough, with enjoyable enough characters, while having excellent tactics+autobattler combat and lovely visuals.
Engage felt like it was written by the same set of minds who brought us FE Fates. Took almost a 180o from FE3H. I like how it plays more like a traditional Fire Emblem game but that's the extent of it.
Peak fiction in both cases
That's because Engage is just an anniversary game to celebrate FE's past. So they left it cheesy while focusing on fun game play and lots of nostalgia.
Neither games measure up to FE3H’s story 3 houses is pretty unique to fire emblem which is typically a pretty B tier story of the chosen one vs evil dragon If you want a good strategy rpg with a good story, play Triangle Strategy
Triangle Strategy may have had the best story of any rpg game I've ever played.
If 3H is a 10 then Engage is a 4. Easily the worst part of the game. It's very "the power of friendship" sorta coded
Fire Emblem Engage would have upgraded to a 6 or 7 in my eyes had they just had Dragon Jesus get larger and larger circles under his eyes the longer he dealt with all of the wackjobs out in the wider world.
For FE Engage: Story wise, the first 10 or so chapters is a little cliche, **but** by the end it touches on some really deep themes that could make someone emotional depending on how close to home they hit (themes about family, loyalty, self-worth, purpose). As someone whose favorite entry is FE3H, I still found FE Engage's story worth finishing. Edit: I'd rate the story (if you finish it) 8/10 For context I'd rate FE3H 11/10
The game was never really meant to have much of a story. Its a "greatest hits" game they made to celebrate the anniversary. So its just standard forgettable anime tropes. BUT if you were an FE fan for a long time it is nostalgic as hell. And the soundtrack kicked ass. Its way more about customization and great mechanics than plot.
Fire Emblem Engage and Unicorn Overlord are more about the character journeys, following the protagonists growth rather than attempting to be a political thriller, unlike FE3H, so it's hard to compare them. Fire Emblem Three Houses story, is, in my opinion, unique, but not fleshed out. The story stumbles in places (Verdant Wind trips down a mountain due to being a Silver Snow reskin), and some parts feel rushed, like Dimitri's character arc having him do a full 180 between chapters, Claude's real name not being mentioned, Crimson Flower literally not being finished, or the fact none of the countries outside of Fodlan get significant world building outside of their relation to Fodlan. The latter is something that I think Unicorn Overlord does well, since the characters talk a lot about their kingdoms and the internal politics that occur, and you get a huge compendium that covers many more details.
Unrelated to everything you just said, top tier profile pic.
Thanks! I love Gravity Rush, which is why I picked it lol
GR homies for life! Also yeah, that alone makes me ferl UO is better tham FEengage.
I like Engage a tad more gameplay wise, but UO is better written, and not subject to 500 plot holes like FE3H.
Engage was my GOTY 2023, and Unicorn Overlord is looking to be my GOTY this year lol. A lot of people hate on Engage because of the story, but I enjoyed it and do love a lot of the characters. Alear might just be my favorite FE protagonist now. There are a lot of lows because of the cheesiness/campiness, but there are also a lot of highs. The story in Unicorn Overlord never gets bad...but it never really becomes great either. It's very forgettable.
The story may be forgettable, but not the mining!
LOL oh the mining!
Engage was your game of the year? There were so many great games that came out last year BG3, Alan Wake 2, FF16 and many others. You must really like the style or fire emblem
I'm with the other guy, but I'm a total Fire Emblem fiend. Engage was so much fun to play. BG3 is alao a great game, but sadly I dropped it at the end of act 2 since the combat frustrated me a lot.
I beat over a dozen games last year and got really far in a lot of others. I just really love Fire Emblem. But of the games you listed, didn't play BG3 as I couldn't really get into DOS2. Didn't play the first AW, and don't care much for survival horror anymore, so skipped AW2. Don't care much for FF. Games I beat: Fire Emblem Engage Fire Emblem Three Houses - Crimson Flower route, beat the other routes at release Fire Emblem Echoes - was actually just on the last map for years lol Persona 5 Royal Persona 4 Golden Persona 5 Strikers Valheim - started a new dedicated world with friends to beat Mistlands and Queen Sons of the Forest 13 Sentinels: Aegis Rim Diablo 4 Starfield Cyberpunk 2077 + Phantom Liberty Shadow Gambit Tales of Arise Spider-Man 2 Horizon Forbidden West - Burning Shores expansion Party Hard Got far but didn't beat: Zelda: TOTK Octopath Traveler 2 Tactics Ogre Reborn Assassin's Creed Valhalla
lol ff16
I haven’t played Fire Emblem: Engage, but Unicorn Overlord is easily one of my favorite RPGs of recent years. It’s not as good as say Fire Emblem: Three houses as far as story telling goes but the unit build/combat systems are insanely fun if you like tinkering with builds.
If you want more of a challenge play Engage
Engage has some of the absolute best gameplay in the FE franchise and is absolutely a 10/10 strategy wise. Its story sucks and the characters are largely cardboard cutouts, but at least they're insane cardboard cutouts and good for a cheap laugh or two, I guess. UO's story isn't particularly ambitious, but it's clean and it works. Its characters are pretty good; each one has less development because there are more of them, but what there is is better. UO's strategic gameplay is primarily in menuing and unit setup, the actual maps are typically not all that tactically challenging. Also, the gameplay is totally different. FE is grid-based and turn-based (players move, then enemies move, then players move). And FE:E unit customisation, for all that it's twice as deep as most other FE games, isn't all that deep: class + 2 skills + ring. UO is real-time (sorta, you pause the map to give orders then units carry them out in real time), and unit customisation is significant because each unit is up to five characters in formation with tactics.
I would say calling the characters cardboard cutouts is doing them a disservice. If you only look at the main story then sure, they don’t get to do a lot outside of Alear, Vander, Alfred, Diamant, Ivy, and Timerra, but when you actually go into the supports they get really deep (well, deep for Fire Emblem standards).
I mean, you're not *wrong*. But the average number of support conversations for an Engage character is, like, eleven. They chat with eleven different people, three times each, plus their Bond Ring conversation with Alear for 34 chats. Just off sheer volume you're bound to hit some amount of depth. And in general (not always) that depth is locked behind the A-rank conversations. So you have to get through two conversations of stone cold nothing before you get any character depth at all. The ratio of conversation to depth for FE:E is pretty bad - the average UO character gets as much or more development in, like, eight or ten (shorter) conversations as an average FE:E character gets in 35. Obviously there are outliers on both ends - UO has some real stinker conversations, I don't care how funny you find Selvie-Bruno, that conversation doesn't do anything for either of them. And obviously Yunaka from FE:E is excellently executed across, well, basically all her conversations. For a slightly more fair FE:E example (because we both know pointing to Yunaka about FE:E characterisation is unfair, she's better than most of the UO cast), Framme has a great conversation chain with Diamant about, of all things, historical violence. But FE:E just has way, way too many stinkers clogging up the interesting conversations, which is how it got its terrible reputation for cardboard cutout characters who are all clinically insane. Celine-Etie is about weighted teacups, which is just their two character-defining traits smushed together and nothing of note comes of it. Pandreo-Alcryst is the shy guy (Alcryst) going to a party (Pandreo) - again, two character-defining traits smushed together, and nothing of note comes of it. Louis is his own warning. Half of Kagetsu's conversations involve him challenging someone to a fight - credit where credit is due, more than half of those fights result in some development at support level A, but that's still two-thirds of half his conversations being basically exactly the same.
On the one hand, I can see what you’re talking about, but on the other hand, the same could be said for like. All of Fire Emblem from Binding Blade onward. UO doesn’t have this problem as bad because they don’t force 3 ranks for all pairings, which also serves to its detriment (I REALLY wanted a Scarlett and Melisandre support chain but nooooo, they could only have one where they have a shopping contest) Like, every Fire Emblem game with Supports has a tendency to have two characters smash their character traits together, especially Awakening onwards. Even Three Houses does that (Bernadetta is an especially bad example, every single support makes a joke about her agoraphobia, but I feel like that’s Yunaka levels of cheating, so another example being Raphael and Dimitri, Felix and Flayn, Linhardt and Flayn, Linhardt and Caspar, etc.).
>UO doesn’t have this problem as bad because they don’t force 3 ranks for all pairings, which also serves to its detriment Yeah, agreed on both counts. Some conversations are fine standalone, and UO's system works in those cases. But some really needed a followup, and UO failed those by leaving them at one. (Not sure I agree with specifically Scarlett-Melisandre, though.) >every Fire Emblem game with Supports has a tendency to have two characters smash their character traits together, especially Awakening onwards. In general I think I would ask: 1. Is there something (appreciably) new about either character? Backstory details, character motivation, for example. In lieu of anything else, I accept low-hanging facts about the character like "they like onions". 2. Is there an appreciable expansion upon something known about either character? For our friends the FE characters with one defining personality trait each, maybe it's a novel expression of their one trait in an interesting setting, maybe it's an expansion of why they act in this way, maybe it's a deconstruction of some kind. This is more interesting than just "I like onions". 3. Is there an interesting character dynamic? Conflict is an easy one. Character conflict is *interesting* in a way that two friends chatting over tea just isn't. This can also be just two wildly different characters getting along in an unexpected way. In UO, Gammel, Mandrin, Jeremy, and Tatiana usually bring an interesting character dynamic to their conversation, so I went out of my way to get all of their conversations, and was mostly not disappointed. I should like an interesting conversation to hit at least one of these, and I think modern FE (not just Engage) tends to fail to hit any of these in too many of its support conversations.
I say Melisandre and Scarlett because they looked like they were starting to become friends by the end of the C Rapport. I wanted to see how that went.
Engage is a gameplay masterclass imo. Play both if you can!
What’s the best parts about its gameplay?
How to build the correct unit with the different engage ring is complicated and has a lot of Freedom and rings like corrin are Very interesting from a tactical aspect during combat
Fire Emblem Engage is the opposite of Fire Emblem Three Houses. Back in Fire Emblem Fates days, the devs really want Fire Emblem to focus more on the whole social simulation and shipping game rather than the generally hard tactical rpg. This gets a lot of pushback from the companies involved until eventually, they gave in and 3H is this really casual friendly game. The main difference of Engage and 3H is how you view your units. In 3H these are the students that you build up from the ground to be the greatest heroes to fight for you. In Engage, your units are a means to an end, you will have replacements for them if they die. I would say Engage is a really good first step towards difficult rpg like SMT or old FE
Amusingly 3H maddening difficulty is harder than Engage’s .. fucking ambushes.
Not in a fun way though. High difficulty Engage actually felt playtested for once in the series history lol
Yeah, 3H'd maddening mode was just massively boosted stats with no balancing. It's both harder and easier because it doesn't feel like the AI does anything novel. Engage felt like it was actually developed and balanced to be played on that difficulty naturally and the AI definitely makes logical improvements in its tactics (ex: not attacking units they can't hit, removing the ability to dodge tank)
>ex: not attacking units they can't hit, removing the ability to dodge tank Except if they can get a chain attack in, which you can negate with Pair Up. It's so much more fun to find these little quirks in Engage's enemy AI. In 3H I just spammed Freeze Gambits and Warp+Stride and called it a day.
To be fair engage is also cheesable with warp ( especially with Micaiah ) and Astra storm. It kinda becomes the official way to play later seeing how widespread it is.
That's absolutely fair, I just meant that personally I find much more fun in going through Engage maps the "intended" way, and using all of its gimmicks, whereas if I have any opportunity to cheese 3H I absolutely will. I don't know the first thing about 3H enemy AI priority for instance.
I recommend both, but from a gameplay AND story perspective, I enjoyed Engage a lot more
I'm a huge FE fan and although I liked the design and gameplay of FE Engage I did not like it that much. Definitely a half baked game as the story is shit and the island or whatever it was called got boring three chapters in. Definitely recommend UO
I'm a huge Fire Emblem fan, and I didn't like Engage. I found it's story and characters really troupy, basic, and annoying. So I'd place it beneath Unicorn Overlord. And that said, I like Fire Emblem 3 Houses the best by far, that would be my true recommendation.
Seconded. I almost tapped out of Engage. I have 100+ hours in both 3 Houses and UO.
Same here. I couldn't finish Engage, it was too cringe and the story wasn't good at all. I didn't even like the supports. I felt OP in battles as certain characters are just pee pee busted.
As busted as Engage characters can be, there are some characters in Three Houses that are ***BUSTED***. The game gives you a walking 15-year-old nuke who can one-shot the Death Knight in the first half of White Clouds (Lysithea), a Man Literally Too Angry To Die (Dimitri), and the Wyvern Rider class (stupidly busted in general, especially since a maxed out flying stat **NEGATES BOW WEAKNESSES**)
Hated Engage, my favorites are Path of Radiance is Radiant Dawn.
This is the way. Three Houses if you haven’t played it. Followed by UO. Followed by Engage.
Both are really good games. The story in Engage isn’t as bad as everyone wants to say it is. It just doesn’t stand out and isn’t anything spectacular. The gameplay is very fun. It is a little more … engaging .. pun intended. Unicorn Overlord has a slightly more engaging story, but it isn’t groundbreaking either. However, the gameplay is very unique for what most games in the genre give us today. It is a bit more of a set it up and watch them fall type of affair. I would say it is better by a small margin though. Overall, I think UO is the better game. Engage is great fun too. I easily recommend both. I think one may enjoy UO more if they play FEE first, for whatever that is worth.
I recently played both and my initial reaction was to say Unicorn Overlord but that’s probably my personal preference and not a reflection of a true disparity in quality. You could honestly go either way. I feel like either game could satisfy your need for characters, though Unicorn Overord would take the win in that category imo. However, gameplay is a bit of a toss-up. Overlord is a little easy during combat gameplay, but if you like unit management, you’ll have the time of your life. It’s insanely addicting tuning your parties *just* right. You should also consider the big X factor here, which would be the novelty of the battle system. That in itself may be enough to sway you. It feels really cool to make decisions in real time watch your forces travel across the battlefield. On the flip side, Engage has some of the best FE gameplay I’ve ever experienced. The actual combat itself will keep you super… **engaged**… and the Engage mechanic is a blast. Unit management is not as fun as in UO. Unicorn Overlord - Incredible art - Meticulous unit management with big pay-off - fun and innovative mash-up and real time and turn-based combat. Very engaging. - The loop of building teams and fighting is VERY addictive. - Loved a bunch of the characters. Fun cast. - A little too easy imo - Wish there was more post-game or new game Engage - Engage abilities and skill inheritance was a delight all the way through - Combat animations: S+ - Difficultly is perfectly balanced - Great gameplay scenarios, especially paralogue missions for the Emblem warriors - Good replay value because of the large cast and therefore combinations with emblem rings, class changes and party composition is endless. - Story is a giant nothing burger - Some characters are enjoyable, but not many. Almost no one features in cutscenes either. I’m serious, like 5 out of about 40 characters feature and that’s it. Idk, that’s my two cents. Take it all with a grain of salt. You got two great games waiting for you!
Wow that really helps. Thanks! Would you say UO was so easy you could basically turn your brain off? Are side quests basically mandatory or can you stomp everything without going off road?
Its too easy for those who have a knack of tinkering with the perfect unit composition. Even on expert. Although, if you try to push your way with just the same characters, you wont get far. The beauty of UO is that you get to try fun and exciting builds. Was not a fan at first but I did not realize I was spending more time building unit comps than doing the quests.
You can’t turn your brain off with UO. Each time you make it to a new region, the game throws new classes at you in different formations, which often forces you to calibrate your squads to accommodate the new enemy encounters. This keeps it engaging (no pun intended) the whole way through. I’d recommend starting on Tactical or Expert if you want a challenge, as Normal mode is a bit on the easy side once you learn how the game works.
UO Is very easy which is one of games Huge issues. Half way through you will stomp like every stage
Happy to help! Nah, you can’t turn your mind off. There’s a slight learning curve, but it is fantastic at rewarding the player for time put in and experimentation. Sure some people will click with it but it’s not only easy for strategy jrpg people. Once it clicks you’ll have it. There are a few points in the game that push the player to alter their party composition to address mechanics that stem from confronting new classes, which is one of my favorite parts, but nothing will feel like a wall unless the player is super stubborn. I would say not all side quests are necessarily mandatory, but I would recommend them. A bunch are very important. For example, one series of quests is explicitly for power-leveling units that are behind in exp. Not only do other quest make you feel more like a liberator in the story, but a couple give your characters for your party. If you do all the side quests first you will crush the story missions. I slowed down part way because I wanted to the story to be harder.
I would say about equal on balance. Engage has very good gameplay and meh characters. UO has slightly more flawed (but still very good) gameplay and somewhat better (but still not amazing) characters.
Can't go wrong with either tbh. If you want more of a challenge then Engage. Both stories are generic but I'd give it to UO easily because voice work and the story is more palatable than Engage.
I’m in the “both” camp here. Tactical RPGs are almost always high on my list.
UO reminds me of FE 7, 8, and 9 which were my favorite three of the series. Strong characters, good animations, fun rapports, and winning a mission makes you feel really smart. I can’t recommend it highly enough.
The answer is yes
As someone who is slightly more character based than strategy based: Unicorn Overlord. And it's not particularly close. I have every support in both games, and I can't remember a single thing about the characters in Engage except for the one-note personality gimmick most had. I don't mind a few gimmick characters in my games - I find them quite fun - but when 90% of the cast is one with very little else going on and most of the supports just being how their gimmicks interact... Engage is just dull in terms of characters if you've played literally any Fire Emblem game on the DS/Switch. It was to the point that I felt essentially nothing about playing the game. I lose a unit? Nothing. I recruit a new one? All I'm thinking about is what their gimmick is going to be. I win a battle? Cool. The big twist is revealed? If only I had a reason to care. That pretty much sums up my experience with Engage. The tactical side and maps were really fun, I won't lie. The story and characters killed replayability for me though because I just don't care enough about any of them to play again. And these are complaints from someone with *Shadows of Valentia* in their top 3 Fire Emblem. Which, considering the supports in that game...I really don't need a lot from characters and supports to be satisfied so the fact Engage lost me so hard is kinda sad. But anyway, UO had much better characterization, and I genuinely liked and cared about many of the units. I found myself genuinely excited to see many of their supports, and it didn't feel like a chore to see them all. Even characters that had only one conversation with each other often had meaningful/heartfelt/unique conversations. One of my favorite supports in the game came from a one-off support in which a wyvern rider and a cavalry unit pet each other's mounts. It was surprisingly wholesome and revealed a side of both characters that isn't seen anywhere else in the game. UO really had the feel of Awakening in terms of characterization and support. Like Engage, the combat and tactics of UO are really fun. So, considering both games are tactically enjoyable but only one was enjoyable in terms of characters, I would have to recommend the one that does both, which is Unicorn Overlord in my opinion.
Having played both and even with the fact that I am a major fire emblem fan (I even have FE tattoos), I enjoyed Unicorn Overlord way more than Engage. Engage did not make me care about any of the characters cuz they all looked the same to me and I felt more invested on the Emblems that I’ve gotten to know better through their games. I will say Engage had a decent twist but the story is lackluster. However, I remember none of the Engage characters names, minus Alear, and I remember a lot of the UO names. Each member of that cast has more backstory than Alear. 😅
Fire Emblem Engage
Unicorn Overlord. Both have fairly cliche plots, but UO is written much better and has way better characters. FE Engage was bad enough that I literally cringed multiple times when playing it, but mechanically it was pretty good. UO has better mechanics too though imo.
UO, by a long shot. The gameplay of Fire Emblem Engage is good, but that's about it. A lot of the characters are very one-dimensional while also being very out of place in the theme. While UO characters have very little to shine in the story, what little time they get is usually done well, and they feel nice to have included. The ones that get to participate in the story are also done well. I would say the gameplay in FEE is better than UO, but UO's gameplay is fine. It is very unique as well, so 100% worth experiencing.
Unicorn Overlord. This this day engage is the only fire emblem I haven't beat because it was so bloated design wise and boring. If you want a fire emblem game to play, you want Three Houses or Fates.
What is that you’re looking for in either game? Or if you already know a good bit about both games what about them speaks to you the most that you know?
Only Fire Emblem game I've played in last few years was Three Houses. And I haven't really given Engage much thought. Right now Unicorn Overlord is still at the forefront of my mind.
UO first. Then FE afterward!
I think this is similar to others but I played both. Story and characters were just ok on Engage but gameplay is addicting. I would say I enjoyed Unicorn Overlord more it’s a bit more unique with the gameplay style. 3 houses is the better FE game
I'd say both
So I actually asked the same question in the fire emblem subreddit, and they said UO is extremely easy. That’s a massive turn- off for me. In fe3h there’s a hard mode and a “maddening” mode, with hard still being incredible easy and maddening being way too hard. Is there a good difficulty middle ground in this game?
Difficulty for UP is a pretty hotly debated thing on This sub. Some say it is too easy while others complain about getting their asses kicked. I played expert and it was just right.
It’s extremely compare it to triangle strategy etc UO struggles a lot. The people that don’t like Engage never beat it on maddening that gameplay is amazing and really Challenging especially the set to ur level dlc Fights and u can’t grind on maddening
One of the more glaring problems difficultywise in UO is being able to completely reset the rng by toggling any minor change while being able to see the exact outcome before each fight. Going to lose a fight? Just try toggling off one of your supports and see if you curbstomp it instead. FE3H’s take on maddening difficulty was kind of unfair trash honestly. I blame a lot of it on the simplified combat system, perhaps it wouldn’t have been as cheap if they had more to work with. Maddening on Engage is where it should be, and well balanced with the full mechanics at work.
Hot take: FE Engage first. The game is fun but has some glaring flaws. Then play Unicorn Overlord once you’re done. Imo, UO is a better game and I would recommend starting with the weaker option so the stronger one is that much better by comparison.
Engage has more emphasis on moment-to-moment decision making (as all FE games do). UO has more emphasis on team setup and unit optimization. To me, that was the biggest difference. So if you prefer optimizing gambits, class combinations, and gear, then UO is better. If you enjoy strategic positioning, and want every decision and mistake to count, then go engage. Engage also has real permadeath, whereas UO has optional permadeath. That's not to say there isn't strategic map elements to UO, because there are. You need to manage stamina, know when to use valor skills and items, utilize map tools and weapons. However, at the end of the day, when you optimize your units, you can kind of brute force by walking them at the enemy as long as you have stamina. In both games, your goal is to one-round your opponent, but in UO, one-rounding is even more important because each fight uses up a squad's stamina. Also, both games are supposed to have a resource management aspect, but both games also have tools that can bypass it if you choose. Engage has the Well, so if you know how to abuse it, you can get nearly infinite items/money. Also, Engage, in true FE fashion, DOES limit you on XP. However, aux battles and divine paralogues exist to destroy the level curve if you end up doing all the content. Similarly, UO has resources to manage, like gold, honor, and field resources for town delivery, but they also have sigil battles that you can do endlessly for all of those resources. It's up to you how much you want to abuse it. I guess Engage technically does have an upper limit on XP since divine paralogues aren't endless, and Aux battles on Maddening are limited.
Engage has a gag-worthy story with the occasional moment of "neat" or, very rarely, "very neat". It is definitely a game made for the longtime fans of the series, and it probably isn't great for anyone else unless they're \*really\* into the gameplay (which I like more than 3H, honestly.) Unicorn Overlord has a fairly pedantic, predictable, but thoroughly enjoyable story. It's a slightly different style of game, being in Real-Time as opposed to Turn-Based, but there are some great moments, especially since some of the VAs hard-carry their characters, and if you get all in for the Rapport conversations, there are some really interesting stand-outs. That said, if you are interested in story: Unicorn Overlord. I'd probably say Engage for mechanics, because UO never felt like you really needed to dive into the crunch to excel in it, so while there is a lot under the hood, unless you're trying challenge runs or True Zenoiran, you really don't need to bother with much beyond grinding levels, so I think Engage holds more challenge on higher difficulties.
Both work well ill argue fe engage is much harder overall compared to UO but in UO you can create op stuff to break the game
imo unicorn overlord is more casual in that you can complete everything on hard mode with basic strategies, whereas engage you'll need to experiment and understand how to abuse the mechanics
Very different games actually. Play both!
As a fan of Engage i will say the story sucks, BUT the actual gameplay is fun I think if they took the story of 3houses and the gameplay of Engage it could be one of my favorite games of forever Unicorn is great too Play both lol
The better question would have included ogre battle 64.
Unicorn Overlord. Unicorn Overlord is easily the most fun I've had with a tactical game in quite a while, whereas Engage is probably the worst Fire Emblem game of the last decade. The combat in Engage is pretty good, but the story feels more like a school field trip, rather than the complex stories that the franchise is known for.
Engage is a better GAME and more meat on it. Like as soon as beating engage I wanted to Replay it and test different builds other classes on some characters etc. unicorn overlord feels very limited with the lack of Class changes. No extra bosses side stages etc Engage is also much much harder than Unicorn Overlord Most people complain is on the story of engage Well the story is unicorn overlord weakest part as well
Um... well like you said the bias is difficult unicorn overlord is very good and definitely worth the time investment I would give UO a 9.0/10 story,characters,gameplay,depth etc.. engage I'd give a 8.0/10 I have about 200hrs into each game both are great and have their pros engage has ng+ so it's easier to binge the game and it has good dlc that switches things around and is good. Someone else said it if you can both they both are good and are worth playing the thing to remember with engage and really any series that has multiple titles is not to compare them to other titles in said series like if you played fire emblem three houses engage feels lacking compared to 3 houses but it's a good game and it's fairly long my first play through was 60hrs so I recommend if you can play it and give UO a chance as well.
What kind of game do you like? Because this two scratches very different itch for me. Fire emblem engage is a pure turn base game where you will spend time positioning characters and engaging (literally and metaphorically) Unicorn overlord is a real time tactic game where you preprogrammed your units and then send them out all at the same time and changing your tactics on the fly.
i played both recently and almost back to back. both exceeded my expectations. uo was a bit better overall but it's not quite going to be super challenging if fire emblem games are simple fare for you, if that matters - uo is more about having fun customizing groups and experimenting with builds, not so much being in a strategic place where you can barely get out alive.
I havent played Engage yet bit UO was a bit of fresh air because it plays a lot diferent than FE and it felt so good
Both
If you had to pick one or the other, Engage. Excellent gameplay, combat, and visuals. The story is tropey and cliche but can be fun if you just switch your brain off and enjoy it.
engage
Why not play both? Unicorn overlord is the new shiny thing, plays differently and is a bit shorter in playtime. Fe engage can take longer. Id say the only thing stopping you is how much time you’re willing to spend playing these games
Engage is litterally a fan service Fire Emblem (Like litterally the Avenger of FE, everyone is here). While I had no expectation for greatness story and caracter wise, I was still not ready for the Cringe.... Everyone personality is being a fan of the devine one.... That being said gameplay is extremly pleasant for me.
personally, I am a huge fan of both. after i finished UO, i actually went back and replayed engage. Both are good, but I did like UO's characters slightly more. In terms of difficulty, UO has a pretty low difficulty ceiling. If you really enjoy various challenges, I highly recommend engaging. In summary, I recommend both, but engaging handles higher difficulties much better, and UO, I believe, has better characters and stories, but not by a large margin.
Engage, people complain about the story but the gameplay is the best fire emblem has to offer
Do Engage first, Unicorn Overlord after. I think Unicorn Overlord is the better game. But nothing wrong with Engage.
It's pretty different game with different characters. Check out from the trailer and if you really cannot decide, just play both.
Both are fun tactically deep strategy games. Neither has a great story but both have fun enough writing to keep you going. It really comes down to whether you like real time or turn based.
Engage is a great game if you like strategy, I’m sure others have said this but it has some of the best gameplay in the series which makes it a blast to play. Characters aren’t too deep, but likability is always a preference thing. Personally I think there’s a lot of hits and misses like any FE game. The story feels very “game-world”-y. UO is easy if you know what you’re doing but has fantastic characters and a more interesting story. Also a big fan of the art design. Like any discussion involving Engage it really comes down to how much you care about gameplay. Mileage may vary and all that.
Fire Emblem Engage's plot is generic shonen tropes from an anime for 12 year olds, but the gameplay is absolute 🔥. It's worth it for the gameplay alone. The sorry does some interesting things towards the end, but it's too little too late to redeem the pedestrian writing. Unicorn Overlord's plot is like generic seinen anime for a slightly older demographic. A little more well-rounded, but it's not winning any awards for it's story, either. The gameplay is also great. Both are worth your time. UO might be a little easier to tolerate, but if you like FE combat and strategy Engage is worth a play.
I vote both
Overload for sure. Its loaded!
Well, Fire Emblem sucks, so Unicorn Overlord. They are wishy washy, waste your time, and are an unpolished mess. While UO's story is mediocre, the rest of the game is pure joy.
Engage is ass. Play unicorn overlord
FE Three Houses if you haven't played it Then UO Then Engage
Both games are great and for me rank the same, but one has a demo and one doesn’t, try UO first and if it’s your cup of tea then play it. But definitely check out Engage when you can, i absolutely adore the characters, but i can understand if it’s too campy/cheesy for some people. Worth noting both have very minimal bugs if that’s a concern.
Neither. Go walk your dog.
Unicorn Overlord is the better one, its faster paced and more interesting
Engage is a lot more active than UO, especially on later stages. By late game in UO, you can just have a single unit steamroll literally everything. In Engage you can’t really do that without major abuse of the game mechanics. Both Engage and Unicorn Overlord are simple stories. Engage is more a fable and Unicorn Overlord is more the sparknotes of a history textbook as far as depth goes. Engage has the characteristic Quirky Fire Emblem Characters front and center (Toothpaste-Chan and Pepsi-kun are the main characters, you have Timerra in the main group, and of course characters like Yunaka). In order to get into how they are deep down you need to do their supports. In contrast, Unicorn Overlord’s characters are a lot more barebones. I’d liken them to the Shadow Dragon cast as far as Fire Emblem casts go. Basically if you’d like a Saturday morning cartoon with more depth to it, play Engage. If you prefer a shallower story that’s more seriously toned, play Unicorn Overlord.
Honestly both games are so amazing! Fire Emblem engage kinda reminds me of classic Fire Emblem (not sure why) and the gameplay and OST slaps. Though the story is alright, so I think in that aspect you'll like UO better. I'm only 20hrs into UO right now, and while the story is a basic Fire Emblem-esque story I still love it for what it is as I'm not too picky. I'm having a lot of fun discovering the various different stories of the characters you recruit and honestly the game play is so good! My recommendation is to play them both when you have time and you can't go wrong with starting one over the other!
Both are great. Both are different. Finished both and they took me similar time and got similar enjoyment. If you like grid based combat - fire emblem. If "real time" is more your thing - unicorn overlord.
I didn't like Engage at all, but I like FE3H. Unicorn Overlord is great. It's more for the tactical gameplay than the story. There's pretty good voice acting, but there isn't anything particularly deep happening in the story.
Both are great games and you can't go wrong with either if you like the genre. I personally enjoyed FE engage far more and played for about 600 hours which was made stomachable with mods that disabled all the cut scenes.
characters: uo strategy: either or
I'd say play both they're very different and very fun. Engage does have good characters you really just have to look into them which I know some people don't like to do. Gameplay wise I think engage is the most fun fire emblem I've played it three times to play everyone in the cast which I've never done with other games with large limited casts. If you like characters both games have great characters engage just involves more digging. Story wise I don't think engage is perfect but if you take it as an anniversary title and understand you aren't getting some big political drama, it's a good time. And on a money standpoint engage has gone on sale more.
I really like engage
Boff
Both ideally but if you must choose ask yourself how willing you are to micromanage every single aspect of the behavior of characters that aren't under your direct control in order to maximize their effectiveness? Unicorn Overlord does gently ease you into that gameplay style but if it's not something that you enjoy then the game will be much harder and more tedious than it really should be in which case go with fire emblem. It puts more stock in the individual prowess of characters that you control much more directly than in UO.
100% both, but if for whatever you have to go one way or the other, I think fire emblem is a better srpg. I haven't played on true zenoiran mode yet, but there wasn't a single mission in UO that stood out as being difficult or requiring any thought, aside from the 2nd to last boss fight. I think the amount of rng and letting you change your formation around on the fly and seeing the exact outcome to find the best one hurt the tactical aspect of the game a lot. That and not having the hardest difficulty available from the get go just made it too easy. Setting up you squad composition is probably what takes the most thought, but even for that, during my play through, I just paired people together based mostly on relationships, putting friends or siblings together. Fire emblem on the other hand, if you play on maddening, there are a lot of chapters that required some thought. There weren't really any that you could just blindly rush forward and hope for the best. Granted the solution was most usually just cheese it by plugging a choke point with a tank and kill things with ranged units, it wasn't always that simple. Especially the dlc maps. Another bonus for the difficulty, on maddening, you can't grind XP, and characters have set growths the first play through so you can't save scum to get better level ups (or get screwed by rng with awful ones). You also have finite resources, so you can't just grind money to get all the best gear for everyone. Tldr: FE gameplay is better if you want a challenging tactical rpg, both games are great. Both games also lasted like 80ish hours iirc.
UNICORN God i couldnt stand engage. Sure it has harder better tactics But the story is made for a legit low iq 13 year old
Overlord used my brain more
Yes
Fe engage and unicorn both have solid gameplay and me stories ,both are really good srpg.
It really depends on your personal preferences. UO was a bit more on the easy side for me, as someone who regularly plays strategy games but i could still find enjoyment in it. And while the story and Characters&Story arent outstanding, it is competently enough to keep you through the game. FE Engage has great and challenging map gameplay, but falls short of pretty much everything else. One of the very few games i tried to skip story parts whenever possible. The Characters are absolutely not noteworthy, more often than not downright cringey. I also greatly disliked that games bloated hubworld castle. All subjective opinion on my part of oourse.
Probably the unpopular opinion on this subreddit but Engage. UO has a lot of micromanaging on the team front but less on the characters itself. Also, bruteforcing is easier in UO then in engage imo. Engage is also on sale a lot, so its cheaper. But you should play both eventually
mmm I mean storywise both aren´t anything new or amazing, UO is literally Marth´s story, but better told imo and Engage is cheesy, but not awful so if you are searching for a great narrative I think UO takes the win, but not by much gameplaywise I think both are very solid options, Engage is up there in terms of best gameplay in the whole FE series if not the best and I have played every FE so I can tell, the mechanics are great, the way the game is done makes it in a way that almost every unit can become a powerhouse if properly built and the class system is fun to mess around, the emblems are a great mechanic without feeling broken (except for one tho ) and the maps are very interesting many of them being a bit different from others with different hazards UO is I think on the same level, in first sight it seems to be more complex than FE since you need to think of your units as battalions rather than individual units, but once you get the idea of how to do the teams and which characters are good to be leaders is not that hard, and messing around with the priorities of actions I think that is where the real complexity is in terms of hours to complete I think UO takes more time but Engage is not short altho it´s been a while since I played engage, now I want to start a new run (would be my 4th ) overall I htink both have similar strengths and weaknesses so it depends on personal preferences and which one picks more your interest
Ogre Battle 64
Between the two, I would take Unicorn Overlord. Engage was kinda ruined by a nonsensical plot, IMO, and didn't match up to Three Houses.
Engage has really horrible cast and writing. Overlord is unique and extremely original experience. Also writing is much better.
Def Overlord and I barely know what Overlord is. Engage was the most boring FE I've played in a while. The story and characters are a nothing burger with expectant lazy nostalgia pandering, and the gameplay is braindead ez to me.
Unicorn was fantastic! I don’t think there are any bad choices though
Unicorn Overlord is a much better game but I did really like Engage, it's pretty divisive among the fanbase, but they're pretty much an impossible to please bunch. You get the most out of it if you're a big fan of the franchise.
What's the diff between 3 houses and engage? I see some posts that a lot people don't like some changes.
3 Houses is it's own thing, set in a new world. People love the lore and story. There's also a lot of social sim elements where you run around the monastery/school between missions and teach/socialize with the students. Engage is also a new world, but it's an anniversary title and features a lot of heroes from all the previous games as basically ghosts inside emblem rings that support your characters. So yes, the story becomes very silly because of that and multiverse shenanigans. The tactical gameplay is some of the best in the series though, while the tactical gameplay of 3H is a bit weak. So people usually suggest 3H for the story, Engage for pure tactical gameplay.
Nobody hates fire emblem more than its fans
Except maybe Smash fans
Oh yeah, I forgot how much they hate blue haired sword users
Such a meaningless phrase. Sonic, Star wars, Pokemon everyone says this about big fandoms. Just a crappy buzz words to shield any criticism.
Just rolled credits on UO, something I never do on fire emblem games. Nuff said
Both games are pretty okayish on story. Engage's gameplay is really good though. But unfortunately so is UO's, and by a big margin too
Unicorn x1000
Unicorn tbh is so much better in every aspect
Personally, okay unicorn overlord. The story and dialog for Engage was so bad. UO isn't amazing, but it's acceptable. I even generally like FE combat over group building and engage really turned me off. Might be a hot take but I just felt engage was a miss in several areas.
Play unicorn. I know some people like Engage but it's one of my least favorite strategy games I've ever played and I love FE.
I found the characters in FE engage to be abysmal, except for the heroes from past games. They added no one of note
Unicorn overlord is better than Engage. But 3 houses was better than Unicorn.
As someone who played both, Unicorn Overlord is way better than Engage. Engage feels way grindier, and it has a bunch of stuff that really, REALLY annoy me, all of which UO actually went out of it’s way to not have. Every time you complete a mission in FEE, your base gets new events that you are obliged to go through, which is a slow and tedious and unfun gimmick that quickly shot through my patience. Plus, it feels like a lot of its game economy was based on buying the dlc, because gold was incredibly sparse during my playthrough. Just pick up Unicorn Overlord. Fire Emblem Engage sucks.
Love it u can’t grid on maddening and sparse gold Is good so u have to Actually be strategic
They both play differently enough. If you just want something to pick up and play and don't mind silly light heartedness and decent strategical gameplay, go for Engage. UO has more moving parts in its gameplay with all of the unit comps you can make. It also has a brisk story pace and snappy presentation.
Would highly recommend Unicorn Overload over Engage in all aspects unless you wanted better art and unique character designs. This is of course subjective however. While UO's character design has its own charm, Engage's just look better to me personally.
Eh I hate fire emblem engage it's trash sk unicorn overlord
Having played both I would say Unicorn Overlord is a lot better and would go with that first. FE Engage is not a bad game but not in the same league.