Yay or Nay?
Nay
I don't like slow games, I mean they bore me when gameplay is not dynamic. I like puzzles and games where I have to use my brain, but slow paced gameplay is not fun for me.
Comment has been collapsed.
I prefer turn-based. With real- time, you may have a plan and a strategy in mind, but once things start it becomes more about action and reaction than planning and strategy. Imagine chess in real-time, it would be more about who can move the fastest and less about out thinking your opponent. Real time with pause is a sort of in-between. In turn-based, don't think of your characters as sitting still. Time for them is not passing when they are still. Imagine the whole thing playing out in real time from their perspective instead. Look at it like the replay in Frozen Synapse at the end. If you don't know what Frozen Synapse is, it's a turn based strategy game. When a battle is over, you can view a replay of it playing out in real time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Theres nothing wrong with reactioning and planning, because thats the exact same thing you do in turn based gameplay, you tought you had a plan, a strategy, but you never stick to it as new enemies pop up, enemies become unpredictable, some other new developments occur, theres always something new you have to react, something new you have to plan for, the very same thing you do in real time where its more mandatory.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't say there was anything wrong with it. I just prefer turn-based because i t has more strategic planning and thinking. You have time to think and plan ahead and be prepared for any changes. In turn-based combat, I'm always thinking several turns ahead, having multiple plans in mind for what I want to do, and plans for what my opponent may do. With pure real-time, there's less time to plan far ahead and it's mostly actions and reactions. I also feel more in control in turn-base combat where real-time combat I feel I'm just a spectator.
It's also easier to control multiple characters in an RPG or larger armies in turn-based games. With RTS games, it usually comes down to lumping all your units into one big group. In turn based games like Civilization, I can have multiple armies all across the map engaged in different wars. Playing Civilization in real-time would be a nightmare. Tactical combat like that in Divinity: Original Sin (1 & 2) would not be possible in real-time.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you prefer real time based strategy because just like turn based, it has more strategic planning and thinking, gotcha! Surely so many options and decisions and tools at any given time, doesnt make it less planning and less thinking involved, surely not, ahahah. You also have time to think and plan ahead and be prepared for any changes, you ever heard of scouts? Building phase? Tech Tree Knowledge? Have you? Everything youre saying, applies to RTS aswell. the two arent apart from eachother that far as you want to believe they are. Oh, multiple turns in mind ahead, sure, fair enough, but then its because the combat has stagneted to a slow predictable crawl where its EASY to predict whats gonna happen next so you prepare for it. In real time, theres ENOUGH TIME to plan ahead, you have enough time while youre building your stuff to think, hmmm, with what array of units, from what direction, from which moment, i will build, move and attack at, to counter what, hhmmm. And thats fine when its mostly actions and reactions because strategy doesnt exist without its sexual partner reactions and actions. How can you execute your strategies without reacting to what just happened? How can you do that without taking action upon getting your NEW strategy out? Without those two, you dont have strategy, you dont, you just bum rush without thinking because youre not reacting, youre not taking smarter, more needed actions, thats not strategy, strategy doesnt exist without those two, capiche? Do you need examples which i could provide? YES, YES, YES, it IS easier to control multiple characters, but you forget one big detail i mentioned ALREADY WAY AHEAD OF YOU, YES YOU HAVE LESS CONTROL IN REAL TIME, DUH. No it fucking doesnt, if you dump all your avaivable type of units into one big group, youre not using them right. You seriously think, scouts, flankers, artillerly, maybe even support units, more fragile infantry units, should be right next to the big group that should be made of armored, strong vehicles? HELL NO. You send the tanks in first, you send the infantry right behind them, you send support units along with them like a camoflaguer or shielder, you either deploy or only now begin moving out your artillerly into position, while at the same time, you only now send your flanks to the sides or behind the main enemy forces or try to find their pesky special units, and only now do you send scouts to look for potential danger, to spot for the artillery, you dont fucking amass everything into one big group, are you mad? That shit worked in OLD, OLD RTS like Red Alert 1 and not every time if adequately prepared for such a dumb but effective strategy with either mines, a backdoor base, as many strongest turrets as possible, super weapon to annihilate those masses of enemy units, etc. If you dump all your many varied units in one big group like its fucking red alert 1 or starcraft, youre not going to win sonny jim if your opponent has a functional brain and knows what hes doing and isnt shit. In any RTS, i can have multiple armies all across the map engaged in different wars. Playing Command and Conquer in turn based time would be a nightmare (not for civilization though). Tactical Combat like that in Divinity Original Sin would be possible in real time.
Comment has been collapsed.
I keep forgetting that having a different opinion offends people these days. I never said there isn't strategy in real-time games. I just find RTS games too simple minded. You generally have one resource and fewer things to manage. Turn-based games (the ones I like at least) have more depth to them than an RTS. They have multiple types of resources to manage, more types of units, each with multiple abilities, trade, diplomacy and lots of other things to manage that would be impossible for one person to do in real time. That's what I prefer. If you like real-time games, I don't have a problem with that. I don't know why you're so upset that I like different style of game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Said it like someone who has never played an RTS before, litearly everything you just said is wrong. Command and conquer has 2 resources, credits and power, warcraft 2 has 4 resources, food, lumber, oil and gold, age of empires 3 has population, food, coin, wood and export if youre playing the asian dynasties civlizations. Do you know how many resources Cossacks has? 6, Cossacks games has 6 resources, wood, food, stone, gold, iron, coal, so youre dead wrong there. RTS games are not simple minded, again, youve never ever played a RTS before so youre just talking utter nonsense. And theres a crapload to manage, again, youve never played an RTS before, you have no idea you have to manage building, haveresting, training, scouting, positioning, formation, composition and eventualy the massive huge armies youl make, you have no idea what youre talking about. 1 faction in any random RTS has more units than any of your turn based games you can think of. Warcraft 2, humans have 14 units in just their faction FOURTEEN. Command and conquer tiberian dawn, how many units does NOD have? 16, Nod alone has SIXTEEN units. Krush Kill and Destroy Xtreme, how many units does the Survivor faction alone have? EIGHTEEN UNITS by just survivors alone. So once more, you dont know what the fuck youre even talking about, RTS has more units than TBGs, period. Multiple abilities? Red Alert 3, Warcraft 3, Starcraft 2, etc. would like a word with you. EVERY SINGLE UNIT in Red Alert 3, HAS AN ABILITY, there is THREE factions, how many units does one faction have? Allies for example have TWENTY FIVE units, that means TWENTY FIVE ABILITIES, SEVENTY FIVE in total roughly around in the whole game, and youre here saying theres fewer things to manage, get outta here with that god awfull ignorance, if you dont know what youre talking about then dont talk. Age of Empires 3, Warcraft 3 and more have trading and diplomacy, your argument is invalid, sure, not every RTS but RTSes have them here and there. Its not impossible to do in real time, you just dont have to be slow or thinking youre in a race. Im not upset at you liking a different style of game, im upset that youre lying.
Comment has been collapsed.
if you dont know what youre talking about then dont talk
You should probably take your own advice. I've been playing games since the 1980's. There was a time when I was into RTS games. I've played games (Populous & Dune) that are now considered RTS before the genre "RTS" was coined. I've played Command & Conquer: Red Alert, Red Alert 2 and Tiberian Sun, Age of Empires and more that I don't remember the names of.
I eventually grew tired of RTS games. They're all very similar, and they just don't appeal to me anymore. They are simpler games that have less depth and complexity than turn-based games. There is nothing wrong with that, so don't get all upset and post another ranting wall-of-text. They tend to be designed to be played in one sitting, lasting an hour or two and there is only one victory condition, destroying your enemy. I'm sure there may be some RTS with different victory condition, but you don't need to go out of your way to find them and tell me about them because I don't care.
I've also played all of the Civilization games from the original up to Civ V. Civ V alone has more of everything than any of your RTS examples. Civ V Complete has 43 playable civilizations, 72 non-playable city states and 144 different units. You can have up to 22 civs and 40 city states on the map. There are 40 resource types, which you will never get all of within your own territory, so trading and diplomacy are necessary. You also have to manage gold, food, production, happiness, culture, tourism and religion. You have to manage your cities, what they produce, what tiles to improve, what improvements to place on them and what buildings to build in them. Some buildings require certain resources or terrain to be available in the city, some you can only have one of in your empire and some there can only be one of in the world. The placement of those unique buildings is important. You also have to decide on what government type to have and pick social policies and ideologies. There are different ways to trade, through diplomacy or trade routes. You also have espionage and the world congress, and different victory conditions besides domination (cultural, diplomatic and technological). I'm sure I'm forgetting some things, I haven't played a game in a while.
There is a reason the majority of 4X games are turn-based, they are too complex to be played in real-time. Before you start typing, I know there are real-time 4x games, but most allow you to pause at any time, where as pure real-time 4X games are not as complex.
Comment has been collapsed.
I only liked very few turn-based RPG games, but dislike them otherwise. XCOM: Enemy Unknown was lots of fun but made me ragequit due to an insane difficulty curve (from one mission being challenging, to the next with the enemies 2-shotting your entire team). Overall I think most turn-based games, especially RPGs, are boring, obnoxious, repetitive and tiring. Most are pointless and strategy doesn't really matter once you figure out you just have to spam [skills] until you win. I'd rather play the same kind of mindless grind while actually doing something via a realtime combat system than turn-based crap.
Personal opinion of course, but yeah, that's my thoughts on turn-based combat systems. If done correctly (turn-based strategy such as XCOM and Civilization) it's fantastic, but as a combat system... eh.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not exactly the greatest player, but I didn't have anywhere near such an issue with the difficulty curve.
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly have no idea where I went wrong, but it's just another reason I dislike strategy/management games in general - one fuck up and you're screwed forever because you don't have [item/gear] or whatever that is that causes my entire team to get destroyed in a few turns. Guess I'm really bad at those. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah,any strategy games are ended prematurely due to a less than stellar start (most players don’t want the challenge of slogging it out if they’re in an inferior position)
Comment has been collapsed.
Lemme guess.. It was the first time you ran into Mutons. And all of a sudden you were on the receiving end of cover-stripping grenades and other fun stuff.
For Enemy Unknown, that's usually the mid-point of the campaign where the challenge bumps up and you need to re-think your tactics. (Also, the point by which you really want to have researched better weapons & armor)
Comment has been collapsed.
Had to look up images, but yeah, pretty sure that's the one.
Comment has been collapsed.
Their good, alright. overdone games maybe i guess? But RTS is far better, far superior, have Fallout Tactics as an example, its far better in real time than turn based, much more fun, much more fluid, much more, well, everything, except control and ability to asses, that becames harder but honestly can be worth taking a risk. But nyeah, i think turn based can or is boring and real time, god bless command and conquer and dune, is better. Thats not to say i didnt enjoy turn based games, Warhammer 40K Squad Command on the PSP by THQ is one of my all time favourite games and its a turn based one, i love that game, i realy do. Maybe it just depends then realy, i dunno. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NG1I9RSxh74 but as for the vote, i will have to vote for a nay.
Comment has been collapsed.
The question that come up at my side is...
What did you have from the answers, from internet strangers, to your question ?
Comment has been collapsed.
Strategy - yay. Allows for more careful planning.
RPG - nay. Highly repetitive and interrupts the game flow.
Non-Video - yay. Tabletop gaming is fun, and is more accessible than sports.
Comment has been collapsed.
RPG - nay. Highly repetitive and interrupts the game flow.
I hear this a lot when discussions like this come up, and it doesn't make any sense. Dialog is turn-based, but it doesn't disrupt the flow of the game. As I said above, I feel more in control of my characters in turn-based combat, where real-time combat I feel like I'm just spectating. I don't mind real-time with pause if auto-pause options can be set up right to get a turn based feeling. Divinity: Original Sin would have been much less enjoyable with a real-time combat system.
Comment has been collapsed.
Dialog is mostly turn-based in real life. Unless of course you're rude.
Divinity: Original Sin is a good example of how to do turn-based combat in an rpg well. Personally I think that real-time with pause, which is usually a great option all around, would have also have worked for the game. Divinity: Original Sin only works as turn-based because of its tactical focus.
The big problem is that so many turn-based rpgs follow the stereotypical jrpg style of combat. That style of combat usually involves spamming the same moves over and over again. More thought is required to play even the most generic action rpg than these turn-based games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Dialog is mostly turn-based in real life. Unless of course you're rude.
There are polite ways to interrupt someone, or if the person you're talking to is a jerk, you can just walk away. That's the one thing I liked about Skyrim's dialog, just to be able to walk away from someone at any time during dialog.
Divinity: Original Sin is a good example of how to do turn-based combat in an rpg well. Personally I think that real-time with pause, which is usually a great option all around, would have also have worked for the game.
It probably could have worked with a RTWP combat, but I don't think it would have been as good. It also probably would not have had coop if it used RTWP. I still prefer pure turn-based, but I do agree that RTWP is a good all around system though. If it has the right auto-pause options, it plays almost like a turn based game.
The big problem is that so many turn-based rpgs follow the stereotypical jrpg style of combat. That style of combat usually involves spamming the same moves over and over again. More thought is required to play even the most generic action rpg than these turn-based games.
I don't like JRPGs, so I probably have not played the games you're thinking of.
Comment has been collapsed.
i like the, they give you time to plan ahead, think, and relax at the same time.
rpg with pause (baldur's gate, dragon age) are also ok.
Comment has been collapsed.
You have all the time in the world when it isnt in pause assuming youre not living with brain damage that makes you slow.
Comment has been collapsed.
thanks for your always-condescending reply trying to dismiss and make my opinion stupid, because yours is the only truth in the universe.
btw, no one cares.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for your always snarky, stingy, repulsing reply, trying to dismiss and make logic stupid, because your opinion is the only truth in all the universes
btw, you cared
Comment has been collapsed.
I like turn-based JRPGs a lot! It gives you time to think and consider your plan. Active Time Battle systems like in FF12 are the best of both worlds, allowing for dynamic action with gambit systems but you can stop the action at any time to have finer, more pin-point controls.
Comment has been collapsed.
Crisis Core was better, was the best in real time action, active battle systems, pheh, awfull...
Comment has been collapsed.
You must be real fun at parties! I can tell, because I went to blacklist you and lo and behold, I had done so already. Enjoy the rest of your Thursday c:
edit: holy shit you just went through the whole thread and had a shitty remark for nearly every single comment! get_a_load_of_this_guy.jaypeg
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, that's super kind of you, thank you! I appreciate the sentiment very much.
Comment has been collapsed.
I totally like standing still while the enemy is wrecking me. Yep.
Comment has been collapsed.
I almost always prefer turn based combat (Final Fantasy 1-10, Chrono Trigger, Grandia, Lunar, Parasite Eve 1-2, Panzer Dragoon Saga, etc.) over action based (Final Fantasy 15). It's one of the main reasons I'm not really looking forward to the FF7 remake.
That said, I'm not really a fan of extremely long battles found in some strategy jrpgs (Disgaea).
Comment has been collapsed.
I have to say that I think that they are for specific folks. For example, I don't enjoy having my physical abilities limit my ability to game. Reaction time and complicated controls making a difference in my gaming is something that, in general, I just don't love as much as I do a game where whatever it is I want done can be done without interference from the real world. So I LOVE turn-based stuff. 4x games, RPGs, whatever genre. Twitch reaction stuff is fine for me for a lot of online games, but when I'm by myself I'm just not excited by having to spend hours and hours practicing the controls just to do a thing that is intellectually obvious to me. There are a lot of people though who LOVE the process of perfecting controls, getting the perfect reaction time down, etc. it's just not me, and I think that's why we still see both.
Comment has been collapsed.
Theres nothing complicated in clicking a mouse, controls are fine.
Comment has been collapsed.
I love them :) I wish Final Fantasy Tactics was on Steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well and truly yay. I'm terrible at thinking on the spot, my perception is poor and my reflexes are slowing, so turn-based is much more suited to me.
Comment has been collapsed.
Poor you. Not even easy difficulty is enough for you then. Truly sad.
Comment has been collapsed.
Megatenfag here so obviously a yay for me. Second Dante fight in Lucifer's Call was the single most stressful bossfight I've ever done in a video game and there's no way one could emulate such a nerve-wracking encounter with real-time combat
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, yes there would one who could, back in the 90s, because they sure as fuck dont want to do it nowadays, it would be too hard for the children, the console kiddies.
Comment has been collapsed.
??
I'm not talking about the difficulty, at least that's not the most important thing here. Dante was a terrifying fight for me because at that point of the game you're all too aware of how dangerous his attacks are, but more importantly, you know that there's barely any room to work around them and this is the part which makes this so stressful. Taking damage isn't an issue of "if" but of "when and how much". Also, if he starts getting too aggressive/you dare to fuck up even once, the game, as it's a turn-based jrpg, forces you to watch how the boss wipes the floor with your whole party which is hardly motivational. Real-time combat doesn't have any ways of properly inducing this type of anxiety imo.
You also are generally aware of the fact that the glorious pc beggar race never got a single mainline SMT game, right?
Comment has been collapsed.
You also are generally aware that the pathetic console hobbo race never got a single good quality game, right? Pc beggars, go fuck yourself hipocrite.
Comment has been collapsed.
Glad turn-based game exist because i feel RTS are too stressful.
The last turn-based game i tried was from a bundle :
https://store.steampowered.com/app/624690/NEXT_JUMP_Shmup_Tactics/
Didn't manage to defeat the boss (it's a rogue-lite), but a turn-based shmup was a fun and nice idea.
Comment has been collapsed.
If RTS is too stresfull, i fear about FPS, Horror games and and...REAL LIFE to kill you, geezus christ what a softie.
Comment has been collapsed.
I love 'em!:)
I prefer turn-based strategy game series (such as Age of Wonders, Heroes of Might & Magic) over RTS series (such as Warcraft). Now, that isn't to say I don't like RTS games, I just like TBS games more.:)
I also like turn-based combat in RPGs when it fits the game. Good examples would be the Infinity Engine games (such as Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Fallout 1 & 2). I also really enjoyed Fallout: Tactics (a nice TBS game).
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout Tactics is not a TBS game because its broken, boring, unfun, shitty in that mode, Real time is where its at. And TBS doesnt fit Fallout 1 & 2, the game is a TBS due to technical limitations. And while i love HoM&M, Warcraft is obviously better.
Comment has been collapsed.
Turn based is about thinking at all, real time is about reacting without thinking.
Comment has been collapsed.
Turn based is about reacting without thinking, real time is about reacting with thinking.
Comment has been collapsed.
Turn based strategy >> turn based RPG for me
Turn based rpg is just slow, repetitive, and their lack of depth (simple fights, time to think, everything is calculable) is often "balanced" out by resistances, gimmicks that have to be from an external source than your character, like weapons, equipment, or levels - ending up grinding for levels or for equipment as a solution.
On the counterpoint, games like Heroes of Might and Magic - manage your resources, you town(s). Recruit creatures and heroes, and try to move the heroes (and a necessarily strong army) to points of interest - mines, enemies, collect resources -. Manage your heroes' levels, expertise, and how to utilize it. And then each battle is different based on the map layout, terrain type, enemy composition, even by how many stacks of units you have ends up manipulating the fight.
Turn based RPG more often feels like a slowed down version of what I would enjoy, and removes the feeling of doing something, taking actual part in the fight. With strategy it's fine to only click aorund and pick options from menus, because you're a commander.
edit: with the turn based RPG I realized I had JRPGs in my mind, with the "pick from menu" type of combat. western RPGs like Fallout and Arcanum are way more to my liking, or even Knights of the Old Republic.
Comment has been collapsed.
Real time is not a real role playing game at all, just reacting as yourself, so just play FPS and don't pretend it's about playing a role that is not yourself.
Comment has been collapsed.
And you're making every choice in every game yourself, so stop pretending you're someone else as a coping mechanism by playing videya to hide from the world
Comment has been collapsed.
You should stop pretending to want to be yourself while being a part of the most weeb Nep-Nep group there is.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm too old / too slow for RTS, so I strongly prefer turn based, but real-time games with active pause are ok as well (like Baldur's Gate etc.).
Comment has been collapsed.
Dont say that crap, youre not too old, otherwise the Skyrim grandma, would be too old for Skyrim.
Comment has been collapsed.
I kind of like grand strategy turn-based games, but I prefer real time with active pause for squad tactics games (I started loving it with UFO:Aftersomething games and X-Com Apocalypse where it was optional).
Pure RTS are rarely about tactics (you simply don't have enough time for that), pure turn-based are a bit weird sometimes (some actions make no sense in real world).
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes it is about Tactics, if you play it as a Strategy game, there will always be it about tactics, where are you attacking from, what unit compositions are you attacking with, are you rushing, turtling or waiting for him to attack and then use the backdoor to base rush? There IS simply ENOUGH time, thats what keybinds are for.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is not enough time to properly position units, if you watch "pro" games/tournaments (i.e. Starcraft) they usually pick up everything, pack it as a single group and go towards the enemy base (or whatever they want to attack). They don't really place armor in front of infantry, position artillery or things like that, they just go forward with everything they have in one big blob, the only actual decision is "where do I send this blob".
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes there is, you just have to be aware of your enemy by using scouts, and if you see movement, or you know what their going to do based on your vision or his previous actions or attacks, you prepare as needed, there is time, you just have to be ready for it. but thats STARCRAFT, thats liteartly the only RTS where that happens, Starcraft 2 litearly a blob control game, people call it that, and just that game, dont accuse other, actualy good RTSes with that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Anything that isnt Starcraft, 2 specificaly. Maybe tell me your preferences so i can help you narrow down some choices. But there are great, many RTSes to play, all of them can be worth it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, the title says it all. I have mixed feelings because on one side it gives you more time to think the perfect move to do, or to manage your characters but on the other side it feels anticlimactic in the middle of the fight have the opponents face each other like inanimate objects for an indeterminate time. In most JRPG's it looks kinda dumb but in other games like XCOM it doesn't bother me at all. What are your thoughts?
Comment has been collapsed.