Taking turn base action out of RPGs...

[J.E. Sawyer]

You forgot the top-down view. Visc is a stickler for that kind of thing.

When I play D&D, I put my head in a brace so I can only look at the miniatures from one angle for the entire game.

[Child of Flame]

That's because you sir, are hardcore.

[Musopticon?]

[Kaftan Barlast]

You forgot the top-down view. Visc is a stickler for that kind of thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When I play D&D, I put my head in a brace so I can only look at the miniatures from one angle for the entire game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Im ashamed but I actually broke down in a fit of maniacal laughter when I read that. It could have something to do with the fact that Ive been fiddling with Isometric level design the whole day.

 

:">

[Gabrielle]

Miniatures ? We never used those before.

[Grone]

I like both.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly. Sometimes one is the best solution, sometimes the other. A turnbased Bloodlines would've sucked, while a realtime Final Fantasy wouldn't have been fun.

 

In the case of KotOR, I think both would work excellent, provided they were handled right. And it was.

Edited December 8, 2005 by Grunker

[kumquatq3]

Fallout's SPECIAL system was wholly original, was it not?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wholly original? I guess that depends on how you define that. It was based on GURPS.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is that code for, "We couldn't get permission to use GURPS"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yep, but JE didn't work on FO, so no "we" (unless he was a tester or something that I wasn't aware of, but I'm pretty sure no)

[Walsingham]

I'd have to say turn based for games with a party of players, and non-turn for solo games. Dialog, obviously needs to slow down so everyone has time to read what's happening.

[kumquatq3]

As for TB, the arguement usually comes down to the: "It shouldn't be about reflexes in a RPG", etc

[taks]

How about an RPG that has action/attack sequences that are not turn based, but maintain all the other customizations that make the core elements fun?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you mean like, real-time with pause? which, not coincidentally, nearly 90% of all rpgs are actually implemented with... ahem.

 

taks

[Grone]

How about an RPG that has action/attack sequences that are not turn based, but maintain all the other customizations that make the core elements fun?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you mean like, real-time with pause? which, not coincidentally, nearly 90% of all rpgs are actually implemented with... ahem.

 

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Think he means like real-time while, in the case of AD&D, still maintaining things like initiative rolls. Baldur's Gate and other games have that so...

[Commissar]

Fallout's SPECIAL system was wholly original, was it not?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wholly original? I guess that depends on how you define that. It was based on GURPS.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is that code for, "We couldn't get permission to use GURPS"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yep, but JE didn't work on FO, so no "we" (unless he was a tester or something that I wasn't aware of, but I'm pretty sure no)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Informative.

[Arkan]

You forgot the top-down view. Visc is a stickler for that kind of thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When I play D&D, I put my head in a brace so I can only look at the miniatures from one angle for the entire game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

What you do in your free time is not my concern. I was merely putting forth Viscy's probable stance on the subject. "

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I like both.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly. Sometimes one is the best solution, sometimes the other. A turnbased Bloodlines would've sucked, while a realtime Final Fantasy wouldn't have been fun.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Someones not played FFXII

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

For me it's about two things.

 

1. Workload - how much do I have to accomplish in a given time.

2. Waiting - how long do I have to wait while the other side does the same thing.

 

Obviously if I have one character with few options lets use SW:BG as an example. Then thats not giving me a great deal I can easily handle that in real time.

 

Now lets say I have a squad of troopers (6) now I could not handle those six in the same time period. Which is why SW:BG gives AI control to your squads.

 

Waiting-Again SW:BG. There are a lot of units active in that game and most of the time your outnumbered by a significant ammount. Therefore you would spend more time waiting around than actually doing anything.

 

For example I read an entire novel in the time it took for enemies to take turns in Wiz 8 both due to a general slowness and an overall poor design which inflicted lots of "allies" on you. Allies in TB games just mean more waiting around. Much like a henchmen would in a game like Fallout.

 

I was playing Battalion Wars earlier today. Despite what people will claim it's quite simliar to Advance Wars in basic principle. Big difference is the learning curve. Took me about half an hour to get comfortable with the controls in real time and another half hour to be able to handle them under the pressure of combat.

 

However having done that the game offers things that AW (it's a good game) could never offer.

[Gfted1]

I prefer the turn based style of the BG/IWD series for CRPG's. There is just too much going in with targeting enemies with various party members, selecting spells, healing, etc... for me to be effective in RT.

[Slowtrain]

For example I read an entire novel in the time it took for enemies to take turns in Wiz 8 both due to a general slowness and an overall poor design which inflicted lots of "allies" on you. Allies in TB games just mean more waiting around. Much like a henchmen would in a game like Fallout.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I watch movies!

 

But also while I understand your point re: Wiz8, since it is by far the most commonly heard complaint about the game, it doesn't bother me since I don't really have any desire to rush through a game to get to the end. I mean, if you're not enjoying the experience of actually playing the game, then you are probably wasting your free time in the first place.

[Haitoku]

I like both.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly. Sometimes one is the best solution, sometimes the other. A turnbased Bloodlines would've sucked, while a realtime Final Fantasy wouldn't have been fun.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Someones not played FFXII

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

It's still turn-based is it not? Just a bit different.

 

I would have loved Bloodlines if it was turn-based also... I'm playing it right now, and the combat is just so lame. Feels like i'm playing GTA or some other generic hack and slash title.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I watch movies!

 

But also while I understand your point re: Wiz8, since it is by far the most commonly heard complaint about the game, it doesn't bother me since I don't really have any desire to rush through a game to get to the end.  I mean, if you're not enjoying the experience of actually playing the game, then you are probably wasting your free time in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's not really a desire to rush. It's a desire to actually be playing and not watching. When it's story thats a different matter , but when its gameplay I want to play the game and not be watching it.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

It's still turn-based is it not?  Just a bit different.

 

I would have loved Bloodlines if it was turn-based also... I'm playing it right now, and the combat is just so lame.  Feels like i'm playing GTA or some other generic hack and slash title.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

With the exception of the early ones and X FF was never turn based. The clock ticks along whether or not you act so if you dont act you die. What does happen if if you open a menu the clock will stop so you dont have to rush your menu selections. Although thats otional too you can have the clock carry on while your in the menus. Makes the game a lot harder especialy when your trying to time something intricate.

[Haitoku]

Personally, I've always considered them turn-based.

 

Even the ones that did use the ATB (IV,V,VI,VII,VIII,IX,XI,X-2... wow, almost all of them).

 

I guess thats because my idea of "real" real-time is also having the ability to move about.

[Slowtrain]

It's not really a desire to rush. It's a desire to actually be playing and not watching. When it's story thats a different matter , but when its gameplay I want to play the game and not be watching it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

hmmm....but if you follow that train of thought to its logical conclusion that removes anything that is not player-controlled from the game, and really even unneccessary things like movement and animations since those take time and are not really actually neccessary to playing a game.

 

That seems a rather static and uninteresting canvas in which to interact with a game world.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

hmmm....but if you follow that train of thought to its logical conclusion that removes anything that is not player-controlled from the game, and really even unneccessary things like movement and animations since those take time and are not really actually neccessary to playing a game.

 

That seems a rather static and uninteresting canvas in which to interact with a game world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Some waiting is inevitable, but in Wiz it was way over the top. My phase would take 30 seconds and theirs would take several minutes. But your more than likely at the crux of why games went real time. Or at least RWP (real time with pause).

Edited December 8, 2005 by ShadowPaladin V1.0

[Slowtrain]

Some waiting is inevitable, but in Wiz it was way over the top. My phase would take 30 seconds and theirs would take several minutes. But your more than likely at the crux of why games went real time. Or at least RWP (real time with pause).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

WIz8 is probably a worst-case example since I do think Linda Currie and her teams made a bad decision in trying to bring classic Wizardry gameplay into a full 3d environment without considering the ramifications of how fighting multiple large groups of monsters would play out when everything was now being moved and animated in full 3d. A style that worked OK in Wiz2 was suddenly problematic in the new world of 3d realtime movement and animations.

 

But back to the concept of waiting, I think the bigger question is are you waiting on inconsequential trivial stuff or stuff that matters. Suspense is built on waiting for something unknown that makes a difference. Mostly that's pretty interesting stuff.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

WIz8 is probably a worst-case example since I do think Linda Currie and her teams made a bad decision in trying to bring classic Wizardry gameplay into a full 3d environment  without  considering the ramifications of how fighting multiple large groups of monsters would play out when everything was now being moved and animated in full 3d.  A style that worked OK in Wiz2 was suddenly problematic in the new world of 3d realtime movement and animations.

 

But back to the concept of waiting, I think the bigger question is are you waiting on inconsequential trivial stuff or stuff that matters.  Suspense is built on waiting for something unknown that makes a difference.  Mostly that's pretty interesting stuff.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes thats a very good point.

 

Nine times out of ten it's trivial stuff which you already know the outcome of and have already planned a counter for. The only things that will generally throw a spanner in the works is a time limit (which sort of goes against the whole TB thing) or something some extreme chance event.

 

I was playing the Hammer & Sickle demo recently (think I mentioned it earlier) but the tactics havnt really changed since Xcom.