Jump to content

Taking turn base action out of RPGs...


Do you think RPGs should have turn base action?  

46 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think RPGs should have turn base action?

    • Yes, RPGs should be turn based.
      28
    • No, RPGs should have a flow in action.
      12
    • Some other resolution needs to be done.
      6


Recommended Posts

Posted
Thanks for the playing tips, ShadowPaladin and Haitoku, but this wasn't my kind of interactive story at all. I'm beginning to wonder if I'll ever find a jRPG that will suit me and not be so horrible that it actually makes me angry while I play it. I hate when that happens.

 

Sorry to hear that.

 

I guess jRPGs aren't for you.

 

Like I said before, jRPGs are about watching a story unfold, not about creating it.

 

Very few RPGs have multiple endings that can be influenced by your decisions. Though some things might change based on the choices you make, for the most part... you are simply traveling from point A to point B.

 

I suggest playing Chrono Cross if you are looking for a jRPG with more interraction. Old PSone masterpiece.

Posted

I have to confess, I have something of an odd hobby. Never played Star Wars: Galaxies in my life, don't intend to, but on the off chance I'm bored for a couple of minutes I'll skate on over to its forums and read, with great glee, about the continual implosion of that game.

 

From what little I know of how the developers have butchered it, they had similar thoughts to the sort you were expressing earlier in this thread; they felt the game was too complex, too slow, and needed to be dumbed down and quickened up. I don't know, maybe they had Ninja Gaiden fresh on their minds as well. It's an interesting study, though, in what sort of havoc you can wreak if you try to alter a genre too much.

Posted
  1. PST's ccombat was more challenging, more fun, and better combat than BL. Easily.
     
     
  2. OMG! I can't beleive I find myself DEFENDING PST's combat.
     
     
  3. R00fles!

  1. PS:T's combat is a complete flush out, as all the semi-automatic isometric click and kill games are, but it has one redeeming quality: the spell animations are just plain AWESOME. In BL you actually have to use skill and be within range (melee/brawling).
     
  2. Neither can I.
     
  3. Ditto.

 

Just what I was about to say :thumbsup:

 

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is, that if combat is at all important in an RPG, it comes in af the least important priority. Which is why Bloodlines is so goddamn great even though the combat might suck.

 

Plus, the combat was more fun for the typical 1st-person shooterplayer, and that has made many of my friends, who has never played RPG before, play RPG. I think that Troja wanted the game to sell to more than just the typical RPG-guy.

Posted
Unfortunately it didn't sell to anyone.

:geek:

I blame bad marketing for that. They spent alot of money to make a fantastic game and website, but didn't advertise it very well :(

I think that the two previous games might have put a lid and few nails in the coffin as well. Not to mention all the "clunky"-ness that is sprayed all over quite a lot of reviews.

(Signatures: disabled) 

Posted

A lot of people complain about PS:T's combat but all the Infinity Engine games had the same style of combat. I don't see much difference between PS:T's combat to Icewind Dale 2's or to BG 1, and so forth.

Posted
From what little I know of how the developers have butchered it, they had similar thoughts to the sort you were expressing earlier in this thread; they felt the game was too complex, too slow, and needed to be dumbed down and quickened up.  I don't know, maybe they had Ninja Gaiden fresh on their minds as well.  It's an interesting study, though, in what sort of havoc you can wreak if you try to alter a genre too much.

I think it's an interesting study in how you can destroy a subscriber base that has already paid for something they think will fundamentally stay a certain way. The same does not apply for "stand alone" games. But really, which do you think does more damage: changing some mechanics or deleting everyone's character?

 

Also, if the "new" SWG is supposed to be anything like Ninja Gaiden, it might be history's worst form of imitation.

Posted

I think that SWG and MMORPGs are generally a bad idea. I think that games like NWN 1 and 2 would be better, I just would like a more vareity of them.

 

Imagine a hard science fiction game with an original rules set or even d20 modern that has the same capabilties in every aspect of NWN 1 or 2. Man, I would by that in a second it is released if not sooner. Or even a similar fanatsy styled game with a different rules set. It gives the player base control while freeing up the developers to make different games and patches without alienating the player base.

 

Hmmm...

Posted

I think that just about every graphical CRPG, online or not, has a really poor implementation of groups. Doesn't make much sense to have a tank, if the big nasty dude keeps chasing the lowly mage and can do so more or less unhindered. Only text-based MMO's really make groups work well with rows (tanks and warriors in first row; thieves and some clerics in mid rows; clerics, mages and rangers in last row).

 

SWG is an abbreviation of what? :)

(Signatures: disabled) 

Posted
Too bads its a MMORPG or at least requires online game play that needs other people.

On the other hand, this ensures each battle is unique, each opponent is individually customized, and that you aren't fighting potentially-predictable AI. Add to this no monthly fees. Yay.

Hadescopy.jpg

(Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)

Posted

Yeah, pretty much. I love GW, but its real-time elements are really starting to kill it. When twitch and reflexes get in the way of tactics, not good. This is why TacO would be a boon for me.

Hadescopy.jpg

(Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)

Posted
All of your TB lovers need to keep updated on this game http://www.tacticaonline.com

 

I've been keeping an eye on it, although I really still have no idea how the game will turn out. It seems like it has a tremendous chance to be a stinker, but it also has that slight probability of being the best game in a long time.

 

I've been playing D&D Online for the stress test, and the real-time combat is an absolute game killer...I'm way to slow to enjoy it.

Guest MacLeodCorp
Posted

At the moment, I am in the middle of playing Jade Empire. I am very impressed with how they handled the action sequences. When you fight a set of opponents, the action happens in real-time. I think their system works well for an RPG. Instead of pausing the game, I can call up weapons and powers with my directional pad, and hit my X, Y, B, etc...

 

Unfortunatly, the dialogue and main engine is a mirror to KotOR I. If a developer created the same type of system for KotOR III, the real-time action sequence system, I would buy it in a heart beat. However, that would be for another story...

Posted

Jade Empire played like an action adventure game and not a CRPG. If they did a similar set up in KotOR 3 then the rules set would have to be completely rewritten therefore not really a proper sequel.

 

It would be going from Baldur's Gate 2 to Baldur's gate Dark Alliance. Sorry, but that is a terrible idea.

Posted

Indeed it is. I want turn base back in CRPGs, may it be inthe form of NWN or in Fallout, but turn base combat is one of the defining aspects of a traditional CRPG.

Posted

BGDA was a fun game. It honours the BG name. Period.

 

However, to comapre JE to an action game liek that does everyone a miservice as the games are NOTHING alike. JE is a RPG with real time combat. BGDA is 100% action game.

 

Next place.

DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...