| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
I'm generally with you about liking ISO party-based RPGs, Hexy, but I do enjoy TB. I had lots of fun with all the IE games but I expect ToEE to be even better.
There's a number of reasons that TB is better but to keep it short I'll just name two:
- The IE games are all based on D&D which is inherently TB. The continuous phase-based IE games modified or removed many rules to cope where a TB system can remain true to the source rules.
- RT or phase-based systems usually rely on large numbers of low-end enemies to mow through, thus making it exciting. A good TB system would usually have a smaller number of more powerful enemies. In this case, a TB system can allow more interesting options like called shots and has a higher degree of stategy.
I know someone is going to point out that Lionheart will have RT with called shots, but TB is better suited to this depth IMO.  |
Mon Jul 28, 2003 12:16 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dhruin
- The IE games are all based on D&D which is inherently TB. The continuous phase-based IE games modified or removed many rules to cope where a TB system can remain true to the source rules.
I really don't mind when things change for the better. I can't see entire rulsets removed in most IE games.
Just because the PnP has a major disadvantage in this area, there's no need to move that disadvantage over to the CRPG.
quote:
Originally posted by Druhin
- RT or phase-based systems usually rely on large numbers of low-end enemies to mow through, thus making it exciting. A good TB system would usually have a smaller number of more powerful enemies. In this case, a TB system can allow more interesting options like called shots and has a higher degree of stategy.
Oh, really now?
See, the way I remember it, games like Fallout had fricken ARMIES of rats and whatnot, which you had to plough through in the boring style TB presents. NOT TO MENTION, TB being a very explotable and simplified way of combat, giving you the ability to crush armies with one character, running behind walls and whatnot, although I guess one could say it's a way of using strategy, it's a very poor way IMO.
Probably ALL Final Fantasy games also had ridiculous ammounts of enemies.
Furthermore, many TB games like Final Fantasy, Betrayal at Krondor, Wastelands whatever, don't give you the option of moving around on a very large map like in most IE games, thus REMOVING many strategical options (using terrain height, mobility etc.) from the combat.
Hell, the FF games and Wastelands just show the enemies and the party members, no map or anything at all.
Called shots, BTW, what do you mean? Is it like aiming/targeting special body parts or using special abilities? Because they are both QUITE feasible in a pause-and-play style combat.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance
Last edited by Hexy on Mon Jul 28, 2003 3:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 2:34 am |
|
|
hoyp
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Oct 2002
Posts: 501
|
IMO tb is much better than pausable real-time (except in tb games where you dont move in combat, ie Final Fantasy) as it alows you to plan better because you dont have to hit the damn pause button every 3 seconds. Just look at baldurs gate, in most of the combat scenes, all you have to do is cast offensive spells and protect your fighters with defensive spells and you can mow down your enemies. No real tactics required. In real turn based games, ranged weapons become much more important and you have to think more tactically.The only drawback is the time as it can take a long time to finish epic battles in TB games.
@ hexy
Most of the games your mentioning are the poor tb console games that are for people who dont want to think. You dont mention many GREAT TB games such as the older ultima games, the exile series, Wizardry 8 etc..
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I sure hope that Lionheart turns out to be a good rpg, because the only decent ( or excellent  ) rpg that we've had in the last several months is Gothic 2. |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 2:51 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Originally posted by hoyp
IMO tb is much better than pausable real-time (except in tb games where you dont move in combat, ie Final Fantasy) as it alows you to plan better because you dont have to hit the damn pause button every 3 seconds. Just look at baldurs gate, in most of the combat scenes, all you have to do is cast offensive spells and protect your fighters with defensive spells and you can mow down your enemies. No real tactics required. In real turn based games, ranged weapons become much more important and you have to think more tactically.
Yeah, you know like in Fallout, where everything you need to do is to get a rocket launcher or a plasma rifle and mow down everything coming at you, while running back and forth behind a wall. MUCH more tactics involved, yes? ESPECIALLY since you can do it solo. You don't need those other freeloaders.
I like being able to CHOOSE wether I want to pause the game to adjust my tactics while in a challenging battle, or if it's an easy fight, simply charge head on and be done in a jiffy. I don't want to focus long periods of time on combat while playing an RPG. MAYBE in an strategy game, where combat is more in focus.
quote:
Most of the games your mentioning are the poor tb console games that are for people who dont want to think. You dont mention many GREAT TB games such as the older ultima games, the exile series, Wizardry 8 etc..
Oh, ok, please explain the major differances between Ultima whatever and Fallout/Final Fantasy/Wizards and Warriors/Wastelands etc. I mean, the differances have to be HUGE!!!
As for Wizardry 8, isn't that like Wizards and Warriors, you know, a first-person perspective with a party? That's just as horrible as those old Final Fantasy games. No mobility, and no individual strategy.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 2:57 am |
|
|
hoyp
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Oct 2002
Posts: 501
|
The difference IS huge.
In party based games such as the exile series, you actually have to move and have some sort of strategy to win, unlike in those friggin final fantasy games where all you do is attack. The other problem with pausable combat is that they turn out to be more hack'n slashy in the earlier and later levels of the game because one tactic will usually work for every enemy.
First person TB games have better athmosphere than iso games so IMO that more than makes up for the lack of individual strategies.
I dont know why you have such a problem with people who dont agree with you. |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 3:54 am |
|
|
elkston
High Emperor
Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 691
Location: North Carolina, USA |
[quote="Hexy"]
quote:
Originally posted by hoyp
As for Wizardry 8, isn't that like Wizards and Warriors, you know, a first-person perspective with a party? That's just as horrible as those old Final Fantasy games. No mobility, and no individual strategy.
Don't knock it before you've tried it. Wizardry 8 has soo much strategy/planning that its not even funny. If you truly like games with parties as you have mentioned, you will LOVE Wizardy 8, trust me. The whole game is built around how you play your party.
_________________
All shall hear the words of Karras...the words of Karras |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 4:06 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
I really don't mind when things change for the better. I can't see entire rulsets removed in most IE games.
Just because the PnP has a major disadvantage in this area, there's no need to move that disadvantage over to the CRPG.
You'd rather play PnP D&D in real-time? Making a TB D&D game isn't bringing a disadvantage - it's staying true to the spirit of the original rules. Again, I liked the IE games but I think a good TB system would have been better.
quote:
Oh, really now?
See, the way I remember it, games like Fallout had fricken ARMIES of rats and whatnot, which you had to plough through in the boring style TB presents. NOT TO MENTION, TB being a very explotable and simplified way of combat, giving you the ability to crush armies with one character, running behind walls and whatnot, although I guess one could say it's a way of using strategy, it's a very poor way IMO.
Probably ALL Final Fantasy games also had ridiculous ammounts of enemies.
Furthermore, many TB games like Final Fantasy, Betrayal at Krondor, Wastelands whatever, don't give you the option of moving around on a very large map like in most IE games, thus REMOVING many strategical options (using terrain height, mobility etc.) from the combat.
Hell, the FF games and Wastelands just show the enemies and the party members, no map or anything at all.
I agree Fallout had too many rats - and so do the designers. In hindsight and with more time there's a number of improvements they'd have made, according to numerous interviews and forum comments I've read.
As for being exploitable - it's not the fact that it's TB that's the problem in your example: it's poor weapon balance and AI. This is a good argument for enough time and resources to balance a game properly, not avoid a TB combat system. If a game has an uber-unbalanced weapon, how does being real-time (or anything else) fix that?
I've never played any console games or Japanese RPGs so I can't comment on them.
quote:
Called shots, BTW, what do you mean? Is it like aiming/targeting special body parts or using special abilities? Because they are both QUITE feasible in a pause-and-play style combat.
Yes, which is why I said someone will raise Lionheart as an example. 
In IE games, the D&D rules are translated to continous 6-second rounds. Assuming one attack per round (only as an example), your character performs one action and then the game performs animations (just animations, nothing actually happens) to fill the time until the next round. If you haven't given another order (or your order comes after the action has begun because your timing is off), the game assumes a default action etc.
I would prefer to have control over each round, choosing a specific action rather than the characters assuming a default action or missing a round because of timing. If I use called shots, I can decide each round how appropriate that is against the extra Action Points needed: do I perform 2x standard shots - or one called shot and not enough AP for another attack that round?
I also had trouble in IE games keeping track of when a spell would launch (when did I order it in the round?; have they already performed an action in which case I have to wait for the next round or did I press pause a split-second before the action was committed?), how long it would last and why it had failed. A different interface could fix that BTW, but it's much harder than in TB.
Initiative, movement rates, position and ranged weapons also have less importance in a RT or phased system.
However, I accept that many TB games got some or many elements wrong. As you've pointed out, Fallout had too many rats, poor weapon balance and average AI. I also agree that combat can get too long. That's why a game like ToEE with improvements like simultaneous movement for enemies with the same initiative should bring the best of both worlds to RPGs. |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 6:51 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
First, I do suppose you're right about not knowing 'when' you are in a round though, missing a little time here and there. It can be annoying.
quote:
Originally posted by Dhruin
You'd rather play PnP D&D in real-time? Making a TB D&D game isn't bringing a disadvantage - it's staying true to the spirit of the original rules. Again, I liked the IE games but I think a good TB system would have been better.
Oh yeah? Adding what, 70 extra hours of playing time? Spending 20 minutes taking out those 5 limp spasmatic kobolds? Yeah, I'm exaggerating, but you get tha point.
Actually, it would be nicer to have some kind of faster, more chaos-producing combat in PnP. Not that I see how it can be done.
Well, I guess I just enjoy the strong REALISM in a "phase-based" combat system. That goes specially for party-based games, since it's hard to have deep combat and true real-time when controlling more than one person. So I see phase-based as the most realistic thing.
How does ranged combat and positioning matter less in a phased-based game? Because the enemies will ACTUALLY be ADVANCING continuously?
I found that movement rates actually did matter, and where QUITE apperent in some IE games, I mean, hello haste? hello monks? HELLO?!
quote:
Originally posted by Dhruin
In IE games, the D&D rules are translated to continous 6-second rounds. Assuming one attack per round (only as an example), your character performs one action and then the game performs animations (just animations, nothing actually happens) to fill the time until the next round. If you haven't given another order (or your order comes after the action has begun because your timing is off), the game assumes a default action etc.
Oh, puh-leeze!
The animations are there in TB as well. Like in teh Fallouts, it's pretty boring to watch those 7 mutants sluggishly walking forward one at a time. Or those 20 raiders tear your character to shreads, in a VERY slow way. It's TORTURE, man.
Default actions depend on how powerful A.I. you have/ the script you have activated (at least in the IE games). Have party AI turned off and no scripts on, and it'll be quite different.
However, if the A.I. is TOO powerful, the game will become like Dungeon Siege, playing itself while you watch.
quote:
Originally posted by Elkston
Don't knock it before you've tried it. Wizardry 8 has soo much strategy/planning that its not even funny. If you truly like games with parties as you have mentioned, you will LOVE Wizardy 8, trust me. The whole game is built around how you play your party.
I guess I should try it someday. It's just that since my last fp-rpg (Wizards and Warriors), I wake up some nights, clawing at my face while screaming. The memories while haunt me forever...
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance
Last edited by Hexy on Mon Jul 28, 2003 2:53 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:21 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
How does ranged combat and positioning matter less in a phased-based game? Because the enemies will ACTUALLY be ADVANCING continuously?
I found that movement rates actually did matter, and where QUITE apperent in some IE games, I mean, hello haste? hello monks? HELLO?!
After my verbose previous response, I'll try to be more succint. Yes, movement rates do matter but not as much. Leaving haste aside (I agree it makes a very big difference but it's a special case), most combatants can reach the enemy in a round = no effective difference. This also means a difference in position has a limited effect and reduces the effectiveness of ranged weapons - you can close the gap and engage in melee with no real penalty in a round or so.
Contrast with TB. Initiative can be critical - the first blow may be telling. A difference in position of one hex may be the difference between reaching the enemy and getting a shot in or falling short and being a sitting duck. With the AP that movement consumes, the choice of using ranged weapons (perhaps with more than one shot) or using all your AP to move closer and engage in melee becomes very important.
quote:
Oh, puh-leeze!
The animations are there in TB as well. Like in teh Fallouts, it's pretty boring to watch those 7 mutants sluggishly walking forward one at a time. Or those 20 raiders tear your character to shreads, in a VERY slow way. It's TORTURE, man.
Default actions depend on how powerful A.I. you have/ the script you have activated (at least in the IE games). Have party AI turned off and no scripts on, and it'll be quite different.
However, if the A.I. is TOO powerful, the game will become like Dungeon Siege, playing itself while you watch.
I didn't convince you with that, huh? Yes, TB games still have filler animations. My point is simply that it's not really RT - there's still rounds but the game makes it look RT. Anyway, not an important point. The bigger issue was that IE games spend a fair amount of time reverting back to default attacks, so it is a bit like Dungeon Siege. With a TB game I have to choose every attack, which for me is a better experience than just letting it run, occassionally pressing pause to issue an order.
Again, the time taken for 20 slavers to move (or whatever) is a matter of poor design and/or balancing, not TB as a concept.
Still too long. Oh, well. |
|
Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:29 am |
|
|
Windwalking
Fearless Paladin
Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 227
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
Oh, puh-leeze!
The animations are there in TB as well. Like in teh Fallouts, it's pretty boring to watch those 7 mutants sluggishly walking forward one at a time. Or those 20 raiders tear your character to shreads, in a VERY slow way. It's TORTURE, man.
Default actions depend on how powerful A.I. you have/ the script you have activated (at least in the IE games). Have party AI turned off and no scripts on, and it'll be quite different.
However, if the A.I. is TOO powerful, the game will become like Dungeon Siege, playing itself while you watch.
Uh, you do realize that in Fallout, you can turn the combat animation speed way up, right? In Fallout II, the highest setting would just breeze through turns extremely fast (too fast for my taste).
I understand what you mean by the tactics in Fallout being messed up, but as someone pointed out, it is more the fault of the AI than anything else. And I think it's grossly unfair to lump Fallout and Final Fantasy together in terms of combat... In the Final Fantasy games I've played (4, 6, 7), battles almost exclusively consisted of pressing "Fight" (or a damage spell/item that did basically the same thing), and healing spells/items. There was absolutely nothing to manuever, no way of avoiding combat (in Fallout you can sneak or just run away if you see potentially bad guys in front of you), no way of just attacking someone by surprise (in Final Fantasy, you can only attack when someone else wants to kill you). Combat in Fallout may be primitive, but at least it does have options, such as standing in a narrow hallway and waiting for them to come at you one at a time, or throwing an area effect weapon when they're clumped together, or running behind cover when you need to heal. In Final Fantasy, well, just "Fight" and "Heal"
Huge difference there, methinks.
- Wind |
|
Thu Jul 31, 2003 3:08 am |
|
|
roboninja
Village Dweller
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 2
|
The first thing I do when I read about a new RPG is try to find out if it is turn-based or real-time, and it seems like over 75% of the time recently, I am disappointed to learn the it is RT. RPGs came from PnP, and are turn-based by nature. That was not a drawback of PnP, it was the way things were meant to work. I am puzzeled as to why so many designers now decide upon the RT appraoch; I blame the BG/IE games, of which I am not too fond. Because thye sold well, especially for CRPGs, other studios try to emulate them. Hopefully the upcoming Temple of Elemental Evil by Troika will shift the balance. If I want RT, and to test some reflexes, I'll just jump online for some Return to Castle Wolfenstein; I play RPGs for story and strategy; I should not die because I couldn't click the beastie quick enough  Obviously, having a choice between the two would be the best solution, but Arcanum proved that such a choice can be difficult to implement well. I am just venting now, but when you seem to be in the minority for liking turn-based (Diablo and BG sold pretty well), it can be frustrating to see all these otherwise good games come by that I find much less enjoyable because of a design decision that leads the game away from it's true RPG roots more into the realm of an action game. |
|
Thu Jul 31, 2003 9:08 pm |
|
|
Nocturnal
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 28 Jul 2003
Posts: 30
Location: Vault 13 |
im also more inclined to turn based combat, maily because i only played TB strategy before i started to play RPG, i have to say i played diablo until i faint and im plying Dungeon Siege right now, but when you are playing a turn based game is when u feel u´re on control of the entire world.
first i shifted to rpg because of the similarity of the combat system to TB strategy, man i love UFO, INCUBATION, etc.. but almost all strategy games lacks good history, and when i played my first rpg (Return to Krondor) i got hooked in th genre.
but today every game developer thinks TB is in the past, oh i pray for them to open their eyes and bring back TB to every game again. |
|
Sat Aug 02, 2003 6:03 am |
|
|
GokYabguHan
Head Merchant
Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 62
|
If you appraise a RPG mostly with its graphics then its story and atmosphere; than i think you should;
First change your nickname
Second buy a high end pc
Third play the empty minded FPSs that occupied the most of the markets and do not bother us anymore
Because, i think you are not a real RPG player and these forums are wrong place for you. |
|
Sun Aug 10, 2003 2:44 am |
|
|
Seth
Last Man Standing
Joined: 23 Jan 2002
Posts: 1008
Location: Faerun |
Another discussion about which modus operandi is better. The only sure thing is nobody gets convinced to change their mind, so what’s the point.
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
Oh yeah? Adding what, 70 extra hours of playing time? Spending 20 minutes taking out those 5 limp spasmatic kobolds? Yeah, I'm exaggerating, but you get tha point.
Actually, it would be nicer to have some kind of faster, more chaos-producing combat in PnP. Not that I see how it can be done.
If you don’t have patience for TB in CRPG’s then you definitely wouldn’t like PnP. I was asking people just out of curiosity who actually play PnP and they said that the fighting sometimes takes MONTHS!! Lots and lots of sessions. 
_________________
Money - An article which may be used as a universal passport to everywhere except heaven, and as a universal provider of everything except happiness. |
|
Sun Aug 10, 2003 3:57 am |
|
|
Thormiel
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 12 Aug 2002
Posts: 33
|
You know, I really don't care whether the game is TB or RT, or is it 3rd person view, or isometric, or 2D or 3D. As long as the game is well done, I'll play and like it. |
|
Fri Aug 22, 2003 7:40 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:20 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
