Support NeoGAF

[MrCheez]

I was just thinking about this earlier. I'm having the time of my freaking life with Tales of Symphonia. The likeable characters and funny dialogue are a part of why the experience has been so enjoyable, but the main draw by far has been the gameplay. Very very rarely do I find myself saying that about an RPG. The real-time fights are fast, addicting, and just so much damn fun.

I've never been a fan of turn-based gameplay. To me, the only real reason to have turn-based gameplay in the first place should be to make battles more strategy-based... but half the time (Final Fantasy series, I'm looking at you) in battles you execute the same handful of spells or abilities over and over, and never really change up what you're doing. Sure there are some exceptions, but most of the ones that come to mind with me are older games. With turn-based games, I find myself getting bored quick and only continuing on to experience more of the story. I begin to dread battles, try to avoid them, and constantly wish dungeons would end much sooner.

It's probably part of the reason I hold the Zelda series high above the Final Fantasy series. Gameplay is more important than story in video games. If it wasn't, why play video games at all and why not just watch anime or something?

So... what d'yall think? I love plenty of turn-based games... but the turn-based gameplay is always my least favorite aspect of them.

 

[Late Stage Marxist]

I think RPG's should play more like Zelda with stats. Fable looks to be something along those lines.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Depends on what style you're talking about. For example i'll take Grandia's battle system over the Tales battle system. But that's really the only game i'll take over a battle system like that. Other than Grandia i'd prefer a Tales style battle system.

 

[iapetus]

I prefer some of each. I'm in favour of lining up the people who think there's only one way for games to be played and having them punched in the face. Sure, bad turn-based combat systems are a problem. But then, bad real-time combat systems are every bit as bad, if not worse.

 

[Ferrio]

I like turn based.

When I play an RPG i do so because I want a relaxing experience where I don't have to worry about reflexes, just sit back and relax and glide through a menu.

 

[MrCheez]

Not really saying all games should be one way, just honestly curious how much enjoyment people get out of turn-based games.

I've just always had a hard time having fun with them. =/

 

[iapetus]

And that's the wonder of choice.

Yes, I get a lot of enjoyment out of turn-based RPGs, provided there's a bit more to the combat system than you-hit-them-they-hit-you tedium (which there normally is). And where would we be without turn-based SRPG goodness?

 

[Late Stage Marxist]

If I have to play a turn-based RPG I prefer that it's 4-6 per party a la FFVI/IX or Suikoden III.

 

[Link316]

Zelda's not a RPG

 

[MrCheez]

Zelda's not a RPG

Yeah, I know. =) Shouldn't have used it as an example.

Just comparing my enjoyment of two different series. The real comparison I'm offering is between Tales of Symphonia and other RPGs.

 

[Ferrio]

Zelda 2 was an RPG.

 

[MrCheez]

And that's the wonder of choice.

Yes, I get a lot of enjoyment out of turn-based RPGs, provided there's a bit more to the combat system than you-hit-them-they-hit-you tedium (which there normally is). And where would we be without turn-based SRPG goodness?

Ahh, good old SRPGs are a different animal. =) See, I love strategy... I think my beef with traditional RPGs is that the menu-based combat feels like it is only there TO create strategy... but doesn't (most of the time).

 

[Teknopathetic]

Baldur's Gate and Temple of Elemental Evil's battle systems slaughter all. ToEE's pure Turn based, where's Baldur's Gate is Pseudo-real-time.

 

[jiggle]

Gameplay has never been the reason for me to play RPGs. It doesn't matter if it's turn based or real time. I actually do play them for the story(it's quite a different experience than reading a book), the characters, the experience of seeing each game's unique world. The battles had always been the mean to get to all those good parts.
I mean, a good battle system will just make the fights less of a chore to button thru while a bad one will simply make the experience more mundane or a chore. Even if the fightings are really well done, I never seek them out just for the fun of it. It would be because I need to progress thru the game, or to collect exp/money/items.
When I want gameplay or good fightings, I go and play action/adventure games.

 

[Belfast]

Real-time has a lot of merit and I almost always find action-RPGs to be a lot of fun, but real-time engines become a lot to handle when you include more than one character, IMO. The Tales and Star Ocean series are great examples of this, IMO. They have great engines and I can tolerate what I don't like about them, but I've always disliked the fact that everyone else in my party is being controlled by AI. Advances in AI have made these things better, but you still don't have 100%, unfettered access to the things you want your characters to be doing at all times. Turn-based systems allow you a LOT more control. It all comes down to whether you want control or action. With one character, I prefer action-based, real-time systems. They're fun AND easy to manage. With at least three or more characters, generally turn-based in preferred. However, I do realize that turn-based systems could use a little more variety.

Honestly, though, I think in both situations you end up using roughly the same techniques over and over again, the only difference is that real-time engines keep you more engaged by asking you to input commands on a more constant basis. Ultimately, its no different from turn-based RPGS. You're still going to figure out what techniques/attacks/spells work best on enemies and continue to use those for the rest of the game. If all Final Fantasy boils down to is tapping the x button a bunch of times to scroll through attack menus with the occassional spell or something thrown in, then all most real-time engines consist of is constantly hitting whatever button makes you attack while throwing in a special attack here or there. They're honestly just two ends of the same spectrum and both have the potential to be fun.

 

[MrCheez]

Gameplay has never been the reason for me to play RPGs. It doesn't matter if it's turn based or real time. I actually do play them for the story(it's quite a different experience than reading a book), the characters, the experience of seeing each game's unique world. The battles had always been the mean to get to all those good parts.
I mean, a good battle system will just make the fights less of a chore to button thru while a bad one will simply make the experience more mundane or a chore. Even if the fightings are really well done, I never seek them out just for the fun of it. It would be because I need to progress thru the game, or to collect exp/money/items.
When I want gameplay or good fightings, I go and play action/adventure games.

See jiggle, this is what I mean though. I also play Final Fantasy for the stories.

I'd just like to play a Final Fantasy game for the story AND the gameplay. =) In their current state, I do not.

 

[MrCheez]

Great post, Belfast.

Maybe we need more RPGs that are part turn-based part real-time to balance out the problem of multiple characters? I dunno.

Good point about using the same techniques over and over with real-time in addition to turn-based. But yeah, like you suggested, with real-time you're engaged and (hopefully) having fun. You don't necessarily need strategy to enjoy it. With turn-based, repetition is more of a problem because your fun should be coming from using strategy, IMO.

 

[seismologist]

My favorite battle system is a mix of both like FFXI...and FF12.

 

[golem]

i prefer turn based, but will play anything. what i really hate are unending random encounters...

 

[SolidSnakex]

Maybe we need more RPGs that are part turn-based part real-time to balance out the problem of multiple characters? I dunno.

If that happens i'll lose alot of interest in the genre. I can't stand battle systems like that, its the main reason that I have no interest in MMORPG's.

 

[MrCheez]

Mmmmm MMOs... =) There have been a lot of threads debating over the quality of the genre lately... I love em but I would agree their gameplay tends to be weak.

Anyway, thanks for all the opinions so far peeps. I think it's a pretty interesting topic, esepcially with RPGs being as popular as they are.

 

[Belfast]

Great post, Belfast.

Maybe we need more RPGs that are part turn-based part real-time to balance out the problem of multiple characters? I dunno.

Good point about using the same techniques over and over with real-time in addition to turn-based. But yeah, like you suggested, with real-time you're engaged and (hopefully) having fun. You don't necessarily need strategy to enjoy it. With turn-based, repetition is more of a problem because your fun should be coming from using strategy, IMO.

I would agree and that's why a turn-based game without strategy isn't as fun (and why, conversely, SRPGs *are* so fun, because they actually include the strategy), likewise, when you're engaged in the fast-paced action of a real-time engine, you aren't really thinking too much about strategy and its easier to get hooked. The ideal battle engine is a tough one, because you're always running into problems with a human's ability to function. In order to play ToS as effectively as possible, you'd need a person with about eight hands and at least two brains. Obviously, that isn't going to happen. Thankfully, though, ToS *does* let you play with friends if you have some willing to play along.

Someone mentioned FFXI, though, and that's why MMORPGs are so successful. The ones that promote team tactics can allow for the depth of an engine like ToS while allowing each character in the party to be independently and fully controlled by a (usually) competent human being. Then you have access to both the strategy and fun. Its a lot easier to trust the judgement of a like-minded human being than that of a questionable AI you only have limited input on. Now MMORPGs just need to make their engines more physically engaging, but that'll come with time and new technology. Servers aren't ready to handle a Tales MMORPG just yet.

 

[MrCheez]

Good points all around. And... I would pay approximately ten gajillion dollars to play a Tales MMO

 

[Ghost]

Turn based was/is (gba) perfect for 2D, its the best way of portraying potentially complicated battle sequences when you've got limited graphical capabilites.

In the early days of 3d too, creating a fully fledged real time combat system that offered the range of options and strategies that turn based systems had was pretty much impossible.

But with todays systems i find i cant sit and play a game like FF. The character models are so precise and the the combat is shown in such a way that nothing is left to the imagination anymore so im just left with the image of 'i stabbed you in the face 30 times, 20 more times and you should be dead' naturally that just doesnt seem right to me, so i quickly get bored. Basically it seems to me turn based combat developers (and im not just talking eastern ones) expect me to be totally submersed into their worlds out of combat, then in combat come out of their worlds and try to imagine that it actually looks like a fight.

It's not that i think turnbased combat cant be done in 3d, i just think its being done wrong right now. Rather than just using the technology to make the enviroments and characters seem more life like they need to use it to make the combat more involving. For example KOTOR, it goes some way along the way to fixing the problem, Sabres actually clash and characters duel it out, but its not enough. Using the KOTOR example, if they put in different stances (different styles of saber fighting, like dokus over hand grip and yodas bouncy around style), you'd choose a stance as a character, and as you went up in level your attacks would animate differently, when your higher level than the enemy you defend their attacks with ease (even multiple enemies). And rather than just watching a 3 second animation before someone gets a hit in and a little number floats up above their head, you have momentum, as your watching the fight and picking your moves (you can pause if need be) the momentum swings between your victory and defeat.

We have games like ninja gaiden which for me offers an experience that looks superb in motion and forces you to think about what you are doing, but it does it in that order. imo we need turn based RPGs that do things the other way round, make you think about what you are doing, and then show it to you in a way that makes you feel like you are really influencing a fight, and not just picking the best way to stab a guy in the face 50 times.

 

[Belfast]

To be honest, I hope that's where MMORPGs are headed. But its just all a matter of server/graphical lag at this point. Having four characters on-screen running and jumping around like that is one thing, having about 15-20 onscreen at any given time is quite a bit different. Things are slowly moving in the direction of being more active, though. For the time being, people will have to settle for "faux-active" systems like in FFXI, where there actually is a lot of active participation going on, but it isn't necessarily shown in its entirity on-screen.

 

[sprsk]

Turn based is fine when theres alot of strategy involved (not kotor), like in strategy games.

 

[etiolate]

I do prefer Tales system to Final Fantasy, but I wouldn't just rule out turn based. It needs to be improved though. Perhaps a roudn to select your actions and then a time to carry them out? If you choose fight, then when its that characters turn you have to move them in and attack and not just watch them do it. Mario RPGs are turn based but are more interactive just by lhavng you hit buttons while the actions are carried out in order to execute them.

 

[MrCheez]

Man I forgot about the Mario RPGs (which is suprising since I love them so much).

Great point. I didn't mind the battles nearly as much in those games, though I still think it could be even more fun as real-time (while still playing like an RPG).

Regardless, Paper Mario 2 is going to own. =)

 

[MrPing1000]

Fallout wins, best of both worlds

 

[ourumov]

Turn Based for me.

 

[Arcticfox]

I like turn based battle systems the best, with real-time in a close second. What I really hate is the battle systems that can't make up their mind, such as the active time battle systems in most Final Fantasy games. Its too slow for the real-time fans, yet too fast to think up any strategies (not that you ever needed one). It's essentially the worst of both worlds.

 

[AniHawk]

It'll be really freakin' hard to go back to turn based RPGs after playing ToS. I felt the same way about SRPGs after playing Disgaea. I couldn't bring myself to finish FFT, or start Fire Emblem.

 

[Fjord]

KOTOR

 

[DarienA]

I love turn based games, always have. The whole idea of not really controlling your part(a la Star Ocean) is not something I've ever really been comfortable with which is why I'm a bit leery about this new FF. Though if it's more like KOTOR(turn-based that almost looks real time), then I'm game.

 

[Baron Aloha]

If I can't move around then I prefer turned based. If I can move around to dodge attacks I don't mind real-time.

 

[demon]

I like for the gameplay to flow seamlessly throughout a game. Switching to a turn-based, glorified rock-paper-scissors form of battle has become extremely dull to me. Please give me Fable, now.

 

[dark10x]

Depends on what style you're talking about. For example i'll take Grandia's battle system over the Tales battle system. But that's really the only game i'll take over a battle system like that. Other than Grandia i'd prefer a Tales style battle system.

Damn straight. Grandia's battle system absolutely owns!

Believe it or not, I almost like FFX's as much. There are some issues that hold it down, though.

 

[Gruco]

I think it's essentially irrelevant, as long as the battle system, or underlying setups for them, involve something requiring skill and/or thinking on your part.

 

[AniHawk]

Damn straight. Grandia's battle system absolutely owns!

Believe it or not, I almost like FFX's as much. There are some issues that hold it down, though.

I liked FFX's battle system too, but I enjoyed X-2 more. FFX was like a game of baseball, while FFX-2 was more like basketball.

 

[Die Squirrel Die]

I've not played ToS so that may factor into how some people interpret my point.

I guess I feel that the theory of real-time battles is generally let down by the practice in much the same way most turnbased battles don't really live up to the theory that they'd be more strategic. I'm not expecting NG/DMC but if realtime battles are to develop I think they have to start going beyond mashing the attack button over and over.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Grandia is/was the solution to this issue. I'm shocked that more people haven't adopted that system.

 

[MetatronM]

I like turn based. I also like real time. I guess that means I always win, huh?

I also pick Grandia's battle system as one of the very very best of all time. I think FFX is right up there with it, though. X certainly has by FAR the best battle system of any FF game, though I've heard nothing but good things about XII so far.

 

[Ferrio]

A note about Grandias. Just cause you can move around more freely doesn't make it anymore strategic. I found grandia's battle system to be quite dull, it was different but sure enough 99% of the time I was just using regular ole attack.

 

[SolidSnakex]

A note about Grandias. Just cause you can move around more freely doesn't make it anymore strategic. I found grandia's battle system to be quite dull, it was different but sure enough 99% of the time I was just using regular ole attack.

Grandia Xtreme's battle system has alot of strategy.

 

[Ferrio]

Grandia Xtreme's battle system has alot of strategy.

Hmm have yet to play that one.

 

[Solid]

Turn-based here. I can level for hours when I play the FF games. Wonderful.

Can't comment on real-time battles since I haven't played a single W-RPG

 

[ArcadeStickMonk]

Generally prefer turn based if any strategy over "hit the guy" is involved.

Fav RPG battle system, BTW, would have to be Valkyrie Profile's turn based system where you order and link your attack in real time, almost like a fighter. It gots mad combos.

 

[Mejilan]

There's room on my shelf and in my heart for all kinds.

 

[AniHawk]

Turn-based here. I can level for hours when I play the FF games. Wonderful.

Can't comment on real-time battles since I haven't played a single W-RPG

Play ToS then.

 

[belgurdo]

FFVIII pretty much IS an action RPG once your characters start hitting a certain speed and strength threshold...