Trun Based vs Real Time RPG combat...?

[robotnist]

so, was just recently watching the Planescape video and yeah, it looks awesome. 

 

i'm so happy that we are FINALLY getting to play these classic D&D like RPGs again!!!

 

it was a golden age from 1998 to 2004, and then, nothing.

 

atari dropped the ball SO MANY times... think of all the games they bailed on that needed more work...?

 

i feel like Pillars of Eternity is like a cross between Temple of Elemental Evil and Pools of Radiance from 2001... 

 

i was SO excited for those games. i think atari/wizards of the coast even decided to change the games rules system from D&D 2.0 to 3.0 MID DEVELOPMENT!!!

 

while i prefer 3.0 to 2.0, they just never gave Stormfront enough time to maek this game what it SHOULD have been!!!

 

anyways, lets wash that horrible taste out of our mouths.

Obsidian is here to deliver the type of games I would like to design if i had the abilities to do so.

 

and while i LOVE PoE completely, i wonder if i would enjoy it even more if it were turn based. only because the rules system is so well designed that there's so much flying over my head in combat, the kind of stuff that i really enjoy about games like D&D... the numbers side of the game!!!

 

lately i have been playing with combat set to slow again, and i try to follow who's doing what kind of damage etc.

 

what do you guys think about your personal tastes and games like these.

 

anyways, its my first post here since PoE launched, i would like to say CHEERS to OBSIDIAN, one of my fave developers, and thanks for creating games that NEVER go out of style!!!

[Darkpriest]

Personally i like TB combat in isometric/top down RPGs. TB combat.can be fun and games like new.XCom proved that it can work even on consoles.

 

only action rpgs like diablo should be real time. Party base benefits way more from being turn based.

[Exoduss]

Compare D:OS and PoE ,

 

1 of those games has ****ty story and amazing combat 

another of those games has story about baby souls and pathetic combat .

[Evange]

Nope never liked traditional turn based games. I prefer real time turn based games as positioning is fun to me.

[Portrait]

Turn based is great, although with pillars of eternity, it's a success with the real-time combat they implemented, the way I see it, it fits. 

[abaris]

Both systems have their merits. I have no problem going eiher way. Real time isn't really real time if you think about it, since there's always the space bar to pause at your leisure to issue new commands.

[Nakia]

I prefer real time with pause.

[Ink Blot]

I like both, and used to far and away prefer RTwP. But having played a number of TB games over the past year (D:OS, Wasteland 2, Expeditions:Conquistador, etc.) I think I'm actually at the point where I prefer TB. But, like I said, I still enjoy both.

[dukefx]

Either BG/IWD/NWN style turn based to real time implementation or true real time. I just can't stand true turn based games. The only turn based games I enjoyed - regardless of genre - were the HoMM series.

[roller12]

implementation is key. D:OS/ToEE for example imho has great combat dynamic even though its turn based. PoE on the other hand feels kinda uneven. I also feel like too many games try to mimic HoMM which imho is not exactly suitable for a party combat due to chess-like field, reducing tactical choices (there is basically just charge and hold back)

[eLPuSHeR]

I prefer TB myself; I feel it's more tactical that RTwP (I love both Fallouts combat, ToEE...). And yes, I have just bought D:OS. I had skipped it until now. I also have got Wasteland 2. So far, so good. Both are great games (PoE and D:OS) but rather different. As for PoE, I think the combat is okay as is (I have already finished it on hard difficulty). And I doubt developers would include a TB option.

Edited May 25, 2015 by eLPuSHeR

[bussinrounds]

Come on Obsidian.  Convert the system to be turn based for Pillars 2.

 

 Tim Cain said it would be easy to do. 

[Althernai]

I prefer real time with pause. Turn based is a lot more popular among developers, but it lacks the element of chaos present in RTwP which makes the latter feel a lot more like a real battle.

[Nakia]

Come on Obsidian.  Convert the system to be turn based for Pillars 2.

 

 Tim Cain said it would be easy to do. 

No, please don't.

[Shorkan]

For Pillars RTwP, because TB need always hard battles. Trash mobs on TB are only a waste of time for me.

 

Out of Pillars, i prefer TB, when right (for me) made. This means, at best, that on each round you have to make many choices. And i mean choices who can change the battle, to your good or bad. So that you need to think, what to do, each round.

[Althernai]

How many Kickstarter (or similar) RTwP games are there anyway? Every game I can think of is turn based:

 

Shadowrun: Returns is turn based as is the sequel (Dragonfall). The combat is not bad, but it's hardly a high point of either game.

Divinity: Original Sin is turn based. I haven't played this one.

Wasteland 2 is turn based. The combat is mediocre at best due a high density of easy encounters (each of which nevertheless takes time to resolve).

Torment: Tides of  Numenera will be turn based. They've promised to cut down on the time-wasting encounters -- we'll see.

Then there's a bunch of other games which I've backed, but are probably not worth mentioning individually since they're either not out yet or nowhere near as good (e.g. Lords of Xulima), but all of them are turn based.

 

The only RTwP game that's out is PoE. Of the ones that are not out, I guess there's also Sword Coast Legends, but that one is aiming for some weird mix of indie and mainstream. So yeah, please keep the PoE sequels RTwP -- it's basically the only game of this kind that there is.

[Osvir]

I believe a hybrid system would work better than both. A system where the Player could choose to play in TB or in RTwP.

In most Turn-Based games, your characters are very static, and can only attack 1 tile/1 square next to them. Very chess-like, statue-like. You move your unit within the square- or hex-grid, and your abilities and commands are pretty straight forward.

But what if your "Attack" command was available 6 squares away?

Example/Concept:
Turn 1: Enemy Spotted 6 tiles away. They are within your "Attack Range" and you can use the "Attack Command". In motion, your character advances to tile 2 of 6.
Turn 2: Enemy reacts, and moves in attack motion to tile 5 of 6 (closer).
Turn 3: You can choose to press on with your attack, move to tile 3 of 6, or choose to do something else, keep the distance by side-stepping one tile? Retreating? Positioning? Etc. etc.

This way, you would be able to seemlessly switch between Turn-Based and Realtime with Pause, because in your characters animations would be "frames" in Turn-Based, designated within a square-tileset.

Combat Phase:
Turn 8: 1 tile away, and your character now has the physical range to swing, you could get options to Attack, Block, Parry, Defend, Dodge and similar. Let's pretend "Attack", and your character will begin the motion of attacking. Turn end.
Turn 9: The enemy gets a chance to react, and can roll a dice for a Block, Counter-Attack, Dodge, Parry and so on and forth. Let's say they pick "Block". The animation here could be that the characters "Clash".

Your character hits with the Sword, and the enemy holds up their Shield and blocks it. Depending on dice rolls and similar, you could've hit the enemy, or you could've gotten staggered and the enemy would get the "opportunity" (an extra turn) and then you'd get to react to it.

The system I imagine, is something like NEO Scavenger meets graphical fidelity of the latest Batman games, animation-wise, or of the latest tech, combined with something like the duel system from the Suikoden series.

 

The game would have to be made in Turn-Based, so that the animation sequences and gameplay systems are functional, then it's just a matter of "unlocking" the animation, and letting the frames play by themselves to create a fluid Realtime system.

AI and gameplay should be naturally compatible in both modes, if a designer would be capable of envisioning this system.

 

Another example, 2 tiles away:
Turn 1: You have the "Leap" command, which can be used 2 tiles away. Because your characters can only move 1 tile per turn, your character would begin the leap, and freeze mid-air with weapon slashing towards the enemy.
Turn 2: Your character being in mid-air one tile away, the Enemy reacts. Do they Block, Dodge, Parry, Counter-Attack? Let's say they side-step.
Turn 3: Your character lands, finishing the animation, then turning towards the enemy that just managed to side-step. You get to react, do you Attack, Dodge, Block, etc.?
Turn 4: Enemy reacts to your command.

It would look awesome, I think, if the animations of the models and the game system is balanced around it properly. There'd have to be tons of dice rolls too.

In Realtime with Pause, it'd be extremely tactical, as you'd move command your units/heroes to attack, and they would begin their motions towards attacking/targeting and everything from far away. Sword duels where they circle each other, parry blades. Then you could pause, move, re-position, cast abilities and so on. A Realtime with Pause system with qeueing commands. If a character has begun swinging his sword, you wouldn't be able to just "cancel" the command and do something else.

You'd have to commit to actions, and account for what to do afterwards. Thinking several steps ahead, especially in Realtime.

So, my vote goes to "Both". Beacuse why settle for making a game with only Realtime or Turn-Based, when you can make a game with Realtime and Turn-Based?

Edited May 25, 2015 by Osvir

[bussinrounds]

How many Kickstarter (or similar) RTwP games are there anyway? Every game I can think of is turn based:

 

Shadowrun: Returns is turn based as is the sequel (Dragonfall). The combat is not bad, but it's hardly a high point of either game.

Divinity: Original Sin is turn based. I haven't played this one.

Wasteland 2 is turn based. The combat is mediocre at best due a high density of easy encounters (each of which nevertheless takes time to resolve).

Torment: Tides of  Numenera will be turn based. They've promised to cut down on the time-wasting encounters -- we'll see.

Then there's a bunch of other games which I've backed, but are probably not worth mentioning individually since they're either not out yet or nowhere near as good (e.g. Lords of Xulima), but all of them are turn based.

 

The only RTwP game that's out is PoE. Of the ones that are not out, I guess there's also Sword Coast Legends, but that one is aiming for some weird mix of indie and mainstream. So yeah, please keep the PoE sequels RTwP -- it's basically the only game of this kind that there is.

 Staglands is RtwP and looks really good.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmjZYIndaCA

[GrapeJam]

Nope never liked traditional turn based games. I prefer real time turn based games as positioning is fun to me.

 

Positioning is just as important in TB games as it is in RTwP, just play Jagged Alliance and you'll see.

[crackwise]

Play the Jagged Alliance 2 and see how a perfect turn based tactical game is supposed to be

[Nakia]

I gather that there are modern games with TB that people can play and like.  How many modern games have RTwP that we who like RTwP can play?

 

My point is that if there are already TB games why does PoE have to be TB to make you happy?

[luzarius]

POE got me into the scene of old school CRPG's and I'm thankful for that

[Althernai]

 Staglands is RtwP and looks really good.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmjZYIndaCA

This does look potentially interesting and I might give it a try, but it's certainly not of the same order as PoE, D:OS, etc. or even comparable to most of the smaller games -- it's a two-person team and their Kickstarter only asked for $10K and only got $28K. It might still be good though; sometimes two brilliant people are better than a team five times the size.

[scrotiemcb]

I believe a hybrid system would work better than both. A system where the Player could choose to play in TB or in RTwP.

Absolutely not. You cannot hybridize discrete turns with continuous "turns," it's like saying "let's hybridize rational numbers with integers," the result is just one or the other, each of which has totally different design needs.

[MunoValente]

 

So, my vote goes to "Both". Beacuse why settle for making a game with only Realtime or Turn-Based, when you can make a game with Realtime and Turn-Based? 

 

Arcanum's combat didn't turn out so well.