Poll: Will we ever see turn-based WRPG's again?

Recommended Videos

thiosk

New member
Sep 18, 2008
5,410
0
0
As much as I love booting up the ol' champions of krynn, I think they're gone. I truly love the baldur's gate series, which is essentially turn based but running really really fast and people don't wait for you to finish your turns.

Niche developers will make niche games.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
HG131 said:
You do know that alot of those people they claim to have playing their games played like once and never played again. They count anyone who has ever played, much like WoW.
And look at the numbers of people who are reported to play WoW compared to those who are reported to play Mafia Wars.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
HG131 said:
crimson5pheonix said:
HG131 said:
There seems to be something wrong with your statement.
It may be that you said people who play games aren't gamers.
Is someone who drinks wine and says if they like it a wine critic? No, he's someone drinking wine. Is someone who watches movies and says if they like it a movie critic? No, he's someone watching a movie. Is someone who plays a video game and just plays a video game and doesn't play alot and doesn't post or argue or discuss them a gamer? NO, HE'S SOMEONE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME!
No. The correct argument is:

Person who drinks wine wine critic. Person who drinks wine = wine-drinker.
Person who watches moves movie critic. Person who watches movies = moviegoer.
Person who plays game game critic. Person who plays games = gamer.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
HG131 said:
BonsaiK said:
HG131 said:
You do know that alot of those people they claim to have playing their games played like once and never played again. They count anyone who has ever played, much like WoW.
And look at the numbers of people who are reported to play WoW compared to those who are reported to play Mafia Wars.
.. or have ever played Mafia Wars in their life. You forgot that part.
Same goes for WoW though. That's my point. Both games are using the same methods of reporting their player population. Which one has the higher userbase?
 

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
36,678
3,877
118
HG131 said:
crimson5pheonix said:
HG131 said:
There seems to be something wrong with your statement.
It may be that you said people who play games aren't gamers.
Is someone who drinks wine and says if they like it a wine critic? No, he's someone drinking wine. Is someone who watches movies and says if they like it a movie critic? No, he's someone watching a movie. Is someone who plays a video game and just plays a video game and doesn't play alot and doesn't post or argue or discuss them a gamer? NO, HE'S SOMEONE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME!
I believe "game critic" is what you are looking for. Because someone who drinks wine is a drinker. Someone who goes to the movie is a moviegoer. Someone who plays games is a gamer.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
It would depend on the game and how it was handled, but mostly no, I don't want it in a "WRPG". It would totally mess up the sense of immersion in a game like Mass Effect if all of a sudden you had some flash screen effect and you get magically teleported to some battle zone to fight the random geth that appeared.

Of course, that's one of the worst parts about the RPGs that do the turn based thing, is when the encounters are just random. I much prefer a style like Grandia where you can actually see baddies on the overworld along with your character, and you can try to avoid them if you don't want to fight. Ones where it just goes "ZOOM YOU BATTLE NOW" randomly over and over can get grating after a while. You generally need some spell or item if you want to avoid combat. Especially annoying in a game like Pokémon where you can always go back to old areas (and probably will) and you have to have a bag full of repel to keep the completely useless Pidgeys and Rattatas out of your way.

But bottom line... There's a time and a place for it, and it's usually in "JRPGs" where the game in general is more "You will do this how we say", whereas "WRPGs" are more along the lines of "Do what you want, that's why it's called role playing."
 

blindthrall

New member
Oct 14, 2009
1,151
0
0
Turn-based RPGs are boring. The only excuse for slowing the game down that much is if you've got too much to do and the AI can just outpace you everytime, so I only think strategy games should be turn-based. Unless you're managing a continent's worth of resources at once, it just turns an exciting game into a chess match.

Not that I have anything against chess itself.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
HG131 said:
BonsaiK said:
HG131 said:
crimson5pheonix said:
HG131 said:
There seems to be something wrong with your statement.
It may be that you said people who play games aren't gamers.
Is someone who drinks wine and says if they like it a wine critic? No, he's someone drinking wine. Is someone who watches movies and says if they like it a movie critic? No, he's someone watching a movie. Is someone who plays a video game and just plays a video game and doesn't play alot and doesn't post or argue or discuss them a gamer? NO, HE'S SOMEONE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME!
No. The correct arguent is:

Person who drinks wine wine critic. Person who drinks wine = wine-drinker.
Person who watches moves movie critic. Person who watches movies = moviegoer.
Person who plays game game critic. Person who plays games = gamer.
No, you're wrong. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamer]

Wikipedia said:
While the term nominally includes those who do not necessarily consider themselves to be gamers (i.e., casual gamers), it is commonly used to identify those who spend much of their leisure time playing or learning about different games.
If you've actually had to refer to Wikipedia to back up your case, I think you've conceded defeat. Anyone can write a Wikipedia article. If you want a proper definition of a word, try a dictionary.
 

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
36,678
3,877
118
HG131 said:
BonsaiK said:
HG131 said:
crimson5pheonix said:
HG131 said:
There seems to be something wrong with your statement.
It may be that you said people who play games aren't gamers.
Is someone who drinks wine and says if they like it a wine critic? No, he's someone drinking wine. Is someone who watches movies and says if they like it a movie critic? No, he's someone watching a movie. Is someone who plays a video game and just plays a video game and doesn't play alot and doesn't post or argue or discuss them a gamer? NO, HE'S SOMEONE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME!
No. The correct arguent is:

Person who drinks wine wine critic. Person who drinks wine = wine-drinker.
Person who watches moves movie critic. Person who watches movies = moviegoer.
Person who plays game game critic. Person who plays games = gamer.
No, you're wrong. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamer]

Wikipedia said:
While the term nominally includes those who do not necessarily consider themselves to be gamers (i.e., casual gamers), it is commonly used to identify those who spend much of their leisure time playing or learning about different games.
Can't let you do that, Fox.
 

Bullfrog1983

New member
Dec 3, 2008
568
0
0
I really enjoy turn-based combat games regardless of their country of origin, but many fail to present a strategic challenge when you are playing them. Those that do not present a challenge are usually not worthy of wasting time on (games like the Last Remnant would certainly be included here.) However, turn-based WRPGs are by no means dead as at least a few independent developers are still producing solid turn-based RPGs. The Eschalon series by Basilisk Games is entertaining, and the Avernum series by Spiderweb Software is also quite fun. However these games have little to no speech. This means that you have to use your imagination and would need to read, which many people are not inclined to do in the gaming community. Therefore I recommend those games only to people who like to read, and aren't expecting to have the same level of graphics as those released by larger companies.
 

s0denone

Elite Member
Apr 25, 2008
1,196
0
41
BonsaiK said:
No. The correct arguent is:

Person who drinks wine wine critic. Person who drinks wine = wine-drinker.
Person who watches moves movie critic. Person who watches movies = moviegoer.
Person who plays game game critic. Person who plays games = gamer.
You are whooping some serious ass in this thread, BonsaiK. I like it.

That being said, I simply cannot support using Facebook games(Mafia Wars, or anything else) in an argument of whether or not turn-based games are already here alive and well, or at least should return.

Yes, I can see the inherent logic of your argument there, but it still, quite frankly, does not apply to the group you classify as "hardcore gamers"(the users here) in that they aren't thirty-something mothers playing Farmville, or ten-something bastards playing Mafia Wars.
 

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
36,678
3,877
118
HG131 said:
BonsaiK said:
HG131 said:
BonsaiK said:
HG131 said:
crimson5pheonix said:
HG131 said:
There seems to be something wrong with your statement.
It may be that you said people who play games aren't gamers.
Is someone who drinks wine and says if they like it a wine critic? No, he's someone drinking wine. Is someone who watches movies and says if they like it a movie critic? No, he's someone watching a movie. Is someone who plays a video game and just plays a video game and doesn't play alot and doesn't post or argue or discuss them a gamer? NO, HE'S SOMEONE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME!
No. The correct arguent is:

Person who drinks wine wine critic. Person who drinks wine = wine-drinker.
Person who watches moves movie critic. Person who watches movies = moviegoer.
Person who plays game game critic. Person who plays games = gamer.
No, you're wrong. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamer]

Wikipedia said:
While the term nominally includes those who do not necessarily consider themselves to be gamers (i.e., casual gamers), it is commonly used to identify those who spend much of their leisure time playing or learning about different games.
If you've actually had to refer to Wikipedia to back up your case, I think you've conceded defeat. Anyone can write a Wikipedia article. If you want a proper definition of a word, try a dictionary.
Ahh, so you're also one of those idiots who thinks Wikipedia isn't a reliable source? Well, there's just no way to beat you're kind, as any proof presented to you is shot down no matter how reliable it is.

crimson5pheonix said:
HG131 said:
BonsaiK said:
HG131 said:
crimson5pheonix said:
HG131 said:
There seems to be something wrong with your statement.
It may be that you said people who play games aren't gamers.
Is someone who drinks wine and says if they like it a wine critic? No, he's someone drinking wine. Is someone who watches movies and says if they like it a movie critic? No, he's someone watching a movie. Is someone who plays a video game and just plays a video game and doesn't play alot and doesn't post or argue or discuss them a gamer? NO, HE'S SOMEONE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME!
No. The correct arguent is:

Person who drinks wine wine critic. Person who drinks wine = wine-drinker.
Person who watches moves movie critic. Person who watches movies = moviegoer.
Person who plays game game critic. Person who plays games = gamer.
No, you're wrong. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamer]

Wikipedia said:
While the term nominally includes those who do not necessarily consider themselves to be gamers (i.e., casual gamers), it is commonly used to identify those who spend much of their leisure time playing or learning about different games.
Can't let you do that, Fox.
Dictionaries give literal definitions, while Wikipedia actually takes the usage of it into account. Wikipedia > Dictionary.com
Then it becomes colloquialisms, which vary from person to person and place to place. It's the literary equivalent to opinions. Literal definition is more precise. Dictionary.com>Wikipedia