Turn Based and Random Encounters Gamplay and You!
- Thread starter Spirultima
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Although they may be slow at times, Turn based works very well for me. Ive Played quite a lot of them, some are good some are pretty bad. Also, I mostly play the games for the Storyline rather than the gaming mechanic, but thats just me. I know that there are a lot of people who dislike Turn based games because the system is slow, and ive also noticed that those people also tend to like quick paced games, so I guess its just a matter of personal taste, or something like that.
Random encounters is something I never really cared much about, When I play a RPG game I don't need to see my enemies like in an FPS. Besides, it takes a way more for me to se badly made enemies onscreen than it does not having to see them at all.
Random encounters is something I never really cared much about, When I play a RPG game I don't need to see my enemies like in an FPS. Besides, it takes a way more for me to se badly made enemies onscreen than it does not having to see them at all.
You did actually. Claiming that if I think all RPG have better gameplay than RTS and FPS I'd be talking out of my ass.Nazulu said:
That is claiming all RPGs have crappy gameplay and are worse than ANY FPS/RTS. Because you claim I would be wrong.
How is that taking your line out of context?
If you had some hidden meaning in what you wrote you should honestly write it more clear than you did before.
Might&Magic 6,7 and 8 had the player choose between real time and turn based combat at any time, even during combat.
This way it was up to the player, though it could easyly be broken with a little imagination i.e. while shooting at enemy, you could switch to turn based to make the targets stand still.
That said, I think it worked really well, keeping in mind that they're kinda old.
I hate random encounters in video games though... Luckily M&M 6-8 didn't have them.
This way it was up to the player, though it could easyly be broken with a little imagination i.e. while shooting at enemy, you could switch to turn based to make the targets stand still.
That said, I think it worked really well, keeping in mind that they're kinda old.
I hate random encounters in video games though... Luckily M&M 6-8 didn't have them.
I think they're fun if they make the strategy system good. Random encounters, no problem, it's all part of the challenge.
I love turn based combat any most forms though I have a particular fondness for FF's ATB.
As for Random encounters I don't like it but I can put up with it if the encounter rate is decent. I kinda like it when enemies are on the screen because the game usually lets you get a chance to get the jump on an enemy or they get the jump on you. It adds a little smething more to a game.
As for Random encounters I don't like it but I can put up with it if the encounter rate is decent. I kinda like it when enemies are on the screen because the game usually lets you get a chance to get the jump on an enemy or they get the jump on you. It adds a little smething more to a game.
No it's not. It's saying that one isn't better than the other. You are way out of context, altogether, in a black hole.Zefar said:
I can understand if you don't want to admit your wrong, no one can anymore, everyone is smart ass to eachother and always wants to be right. I can admit I was extreme, I can admit when I am wrong but I did not say anything like all RPGs have crappy game play, no words like it, stop putting words in my mouth and buzz off.
In the old school FF turn based style you line up and take turns hitting each other. There's no movement or positioning or terrain or flanking or other such tactical considerations. Everyone can hit anyone because you're standing in parallel lines, so there's no real differentiation between melee attackers and ranged attackers, or tanks and non-tanks because you're stuck in a line.
Which is why I don't like that style of turn based strategy; to me it has very little actual strategy and is very limited and dull.
Which is why I don't like that style of turn based strategy; to me it has very little actual strategy and is very limited and dull.
I grew up with Final Fantasy VII and VIII so personally I am a fan of turn based gameplay and random encounters. They only time I didn't like it was when I had one for every other step.
Personally though, when they do make a remake of FFVII it would be kind of fun to have a battle system that could replicate the battles in Advent Children.
Personally though, when they do make a remake of FFVII it would be kind of fun to have a battle system that could replicate the battles in Advent Children.
Fallout, X-COM , Final Fantasy.
3 of the best series ever, and they all sport good turn combat/random encounters, or some sort of hybrid. It doesnt matter if its turn or real time, you just have to make a good game out of it.
3 of the best series ever, and they all sport good turn combat/random encounters, or some sort of hybrid. It doesnt matter if its turn or real time, you just have to make a good game out of it.
Turn-based is fine, as long as there's real strategy involved, beyond just "I pick the attack it's weak to". Random encounters are just length padding, they pop up when you're just trying to get from place to place and don't advance the story or present meaningful obstacles.
I have a strong preference toward turn based battles, but I'm starting to have a falling out with random encounters.
I don't mind shifting to another screen for the battle scene, but having a battle pop up out of nowhere gets frustrating after a while. Especially if the encounter rate is high like it is in the Digimon World games for the DS. Even Pokemon has suddenly upped random encounter rates in the 4th gen, but that doesn't bother me in the slightest since Repels are available at pretty much every Pokemart anyway.
But then Pokemon goes and shows that preset encounters can be just as annoying by making most of them unavoidable when, preferably, it should be the opposite. Every trainer battle that isn't directly related to the plot should be avoidable and/or completely optional. No, I do not have to fight you just because you saw me and if you believe I do then you can talk to my fist instead because I'm not interested.
Honestly I don't think turn-based battles or random encounters are bad on their own no matter what way you look at it. They're only bad when bad design choices make them bad. I mean, I can't imagine a pokemon game working well without random encounters. You could probably make it work, but the pokemon catching aspect of the game just wouldn't work as well without them in my opinion.
On another note, turn based combat should play out quickly. Attack animations shouldn't be slow or lengthy unless they're a really awesome technique/spell/skill and you have the option to turn them off. Ironically another mistake of 4th gen Pokemon up until Platinum. Even with animations off, battles went slowly in D/P, but they sped them up in Platinum. Also, as mentioned, there should be strategy involved beyond using your strongest attacks. Boss battles or tough encounters should force the player to use that time between turns to carefully consider their next move. Pull surprises by having the fire-weak enemy retalliate with a nasty attack when the player uses a fire-based technique, something the player will need to have a counter ready for.
If you're not taking advantage of turn-based combat in some way then you're just using it for its simplicity. Which is bad design unless you're making an SRPG (which, I've found, work better than RTS-style RPG's) And the same goes for random encounters. If you're using those you should AT LEAST give an off switch like the Repels from Pokemon or abilities/items to delay or lower encounter rates. After a while the player just spends most of their time fleeing because the battles aren't worth fighting anyway.
I don't mind shifting to another screen for the battle scene, but having a battle pop up out of nowhere gets frustrating after a while. Especially if the encounter rate is high like it is in the Digimon World games for the DS. Even Pokemon has suddenly upped random encounter rates in the 4th gen, but that doesn't bother me in the slightest since Repels are available at pretty much every Pokemart anyway.
But then Pokemon goes and shows that preset encounters can be just as annoying by making most of them unavoidable when, preferably, it should be the opposite. Every trainer battle that isn't directly related to the plot should be avoidable and/or completely optional. No, I do not have to fight you just because you saw me and if you believe I do then you can talk to my fist instead because I'm not interested.
Honestly I don't think turn-based battles or random encounters are bad on their own no matter what way you look at it. They're only bad when bad design choices make them bad. I mean, I can't imagine a pokemon game working well without random encounters. You could probably make it work, but the pokemon catching aspect of the game just wouldn't work as well without them in my opinion.
On another note, turn based combat should play out quickly. Attack animations shouldn't be slow or lengthy unless they're a really awesome technique/spell/skill and you have the option to turn them off. Ironically another mistake of 4th gen Pokemon up until Platinum. Even with animations off, battles went slowly in D/P, but they sped them up in Platinum. Also, as mentioned, there should be strategy involved beyond using your strongest attacks. Boss battles or tough encounters should force the player to use that time between turns to carefully consider their next move. Pull surprises by having the fire-weak enemy retalliate with a nasty attack when the player uses a fire-based technique, something the player will need to have a counter ready for.
If you're not taking advantage of turn-based combat in some way then you're just using it for its simplicity. Which is bad design unless you're making an SRPG (which, I've found, work better than RTS-style RPG's) And the same goes for random encounters. If you're using those you should AT LEAST give an off switch like the Repels from Pokemon or abilities/items to delay or lower encounter rates. After a while the player just spends most of their time fleeing because the battles aren't worth fighting anyway.
Random encounters blow. Turn based battle system in JRPG is good. It's not a hard concept, turn based battles allow for more strategy and greater enemy variety then standard western rpg run and gun (or slash) gameplay. The question then is this, do you enjoy taking your time with your enemies and adapting for what they can do (JRPG) or do you enjoy knowing that you're awesome weapon of awesomeness is going to kill pretty much anything thrown at you, provided it has enough spell charges left over (WRPG)? I guess it boils down to this, JRPG's=getting right strategy for the job, WRPG's= Get the bigger weapon for the job.
The System in FFVII is good, but flawed. The combat animations are slowed down by high level spells, and a lot of them freeze the time bar, thus allowing no actions to take place. A lot of this could be because of the PS1's limitations, but it also could be because there is room for improvement. Nowadays, i like to play most of my active time RPGs in wait mode, but if you ask me, FFVII's battles need a complete overhaul (among the games many other problems). It is a good system, keeps you engaged, fun to play, and just all around works, but i am actually glad that it was taken out of FF.
i really can't think of a better system without describing FFXII, but i still think FFXII's system is in need of improvement also.
Perhaps im over thinking this. FFVII is a great game, despite all the things i hate it for. And if you ask me, WRPGs are going to take over. Sure, we might still see the turnbased encounters, but they will be a little more down to earth, applying open worlds, interesting survival elements, realized worlds, voiced characters and a little more gameplay freedom. BUt im not saying that JRPGs should do away with their strenghts, like superb stories, great music, a colorful cast of characters that make up your party and strange and new locales.
i really can't think of a better system without describing FFXII, but i still think FFXII's system is in need of improvement also.
Perhaps im over thinking this. FFVII is a great game, despite all the things i hate it for. And if you ask me, WRPGs are going to take over. Sure, we might still see the turnbased encounters, but they will be a little more down to earth, applying open worlds, interesting survival elements, realized worlds, voiced characters and a little more gameplay freedom. BUt im not saying that JRPGs should do away with their strenghts, like superb stories, great music, a colorful cast of characters that make up your party and strange and new locales.
I really don't like how all these "FF fanboys" get all pissed off at Final Fantasy XII (which is one of the best FF or RPGs to date), because it's not FFVII which for some reason is the best game EVAR!!!1!11!
You get angry because they changed the combat, when (i dunno, i think it might have been FF7) which changed it from the old fashioned turnbased system to the ATB system, and all the FF12 system was, was ATB in realtime x-x
Plus it had one of the deeper, gripping stories in an RPG, with no one really being the bad guys, everyone having a justifiable purpose for what they were trying to do..
The only bad things i can think of for it are Vaan(which isnt really that bad in the first place and can be looked over), and the story is a bit slowly paced at the beginning.... I;m just so tired of people letting nostalgia cover their eyes, and realize what a good game FF12 was
You get angry because they changed the combat, when (i dunno, i think it might have been FF7) which changed it from the old fashioned turnbased system to the ATB system, and all the FF12 system was, was ATB in realtime x-x
Plus it had one of the deeper, gripping stories in an RPG, with no one really being the bad guys, everyone having a justifiable purpose for what they were trying to do..
The only bad things i can think of for it are Vaan(which isnt really that bad in the first place and can be looked over), and the story is a bit slowly paced at the beginning.... I;m just so tired of people letting nostalgia cover their eyes, and realize what a good game FF12 was
Random Encounters are part of an outdated style of game design that should be allowed to die. No exceptions.
Turn Based is something I feel differently about...
When Turn Based Combat is done poorly, it feels boring as all hell and leaches the excitement and drama out of encounters in the game. A case and point for this would be Suikoden:Tierkries, which has horrid Turn Based Combat based around a simple Attack, Spell, Item formula.
Turn Based Combat does offer some things that set it apart from Real Time Systems, for one, it allows you FULL CONTROL over your party. No Dogmeat diving into your shots or stupid party members walking into walls, you tell them what to do with their every action, you are in control, not some stupid AI. It can also allow for a lot more strategy, assuming the Turn Based System allows you to take strategic action. Take Final Fantasy X, it allows you to strategically manipulate the Turn Order through your actions, a similar (and copied) system can be found in Shadow Hearts 2 and 3.
Another way to do it right would be to follow the Paper Mario/Mario RPG formula, a "turn based" system with Timed Attacks, Active Dodges and various other elements that make it feel more actiony.
The greatest "turn based" battle system can probably be found in Grandia 3, a system that is "turn based" at heart, but Action Packed in execution. You issue orders in a turn based fashion, but Real Time Timing and Strategy are required in order to succeed. You can chain skills, attacks and spells in order to gain extra damage like an Action RPG, but you can issue orders to all your characters in a more strategic manner.
Turn Based is something I feel differently about...
When Turn Based Combat is done poorly, it feels boring as all hell and leaches the excitement and drama out of encounters in the game. A case and point for this would be Suikoden:Tierkries, which has horrid Turn Based Combat based around a simple Attack, Spell, Item formula.
Turn Based Combat does offer some things that set it apart from Real Time Systems, for one, it allows you FULL CONTROL over your party. No Dogmeat diving into your shots or stupid party members walking into walls, you tell them what to do with their every action, you are in control, not some stupid AI. It can also allow for a lot more strategy, assuming the Turn Based System allows you to take strategic action. Take Final Fantasy X, it allows you to strategically manipulate the Turn Order through your actions, a similar (and copied) system can be found in Shadow Hearts 2 and 3.
Another way to do it right would be to follow the Paper Mario/Mario RPG formula, a "turn based" system with Timed Attacks, Active Dodges and various other elements that make it feel more actiony.
The greatest "turn based" battle system can probably be found in Grandia 3, a system that is "turn based" at heart, but Action Packed in execution. You issue orders in a turn based fashion, but Real Time Timing and Strategy are required in order to succeed. You can chain skills, attacks and spells in order to gain extra damage like an Action RPG, but you can issue orders to all your characters in a more strategic manner.
Random Encounters, I rarely think about. Mostly because the only games I've played recently that have them are the old Gold Box Forgotten Realms CRPGs, and Final Fantasy VI. Most of the stuff I play at least lets you see things coming...which I do prefer, honestly.
I've noticed most people don't make a distinction between turn-based combat and active-time combat (probably because Final Fantasy uses the latter, so it must be just as bad), so it's gratifying that some people already pointed it out. Personally, I don't mind turn-based battles at all (if I did, why would I play any pen and paper RPGs?), and Strategy RPGs are made of it, but I still find ATB to be a great compromise on standard RPGs; when done well, it allows most of the control afforded by straight-up turn-based systems, along with a quicker pace and rewards for quick reflexes.
Still, the game I think did ATB the best sacrificed a bit of the control in favor of speed, but still managed to make battles very entertaining to fight: <url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEf4np2Y5Y8>Baten Kaitos Origins.
I've noticed most people don't make a distinction between turn-based combat and active-time combat (probably because Final Fantasy uses the latter, so it must be just as bad), so it's gratifying that some people already pointed it out. Personally, I don't mind turn-based battles at all (if I did, why would I play any pen and paper RPGs?), and Strategy RPGs are made of it, but I still find ATB to be a great compromise on standard RPGs; when done well, it allows most of the control afforded by straight-up turn-based systems, along with a quicker pace and rewards for quick reflexes.
Still, the game I think did ATB the best sacrificed a bit of the control in favor of speed, but still managed to make battles very entertaining to fight: <url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEf4np2Y5Y8>Baten Kaitos Origins.
I like turn-based combat.
There's something extremely gratifying with planning every step of an operation after only seeing the map. If I fail, it's because I planned something wrong to begin with, not because I didn't have the twitch skills to pull off what I planned to do. Not every game has to be fast and hectic.
Random encounters are a tougher sell. The reasoning that "you can have a room with infinite amounts of enemies" with the help of random encounters is kind of silly, since you can do plenty of things to restock those enemies. Respawns for one. There really isn't any reason why you shouldn't be able to see most of your battles beforehand and possibly avoid them. Random encounters do not actually let you enjoy the scenery, though. Mostly the opposite, since your sightseeing efforts might interrupted by an errant rat wanting to get its ass kicked. I wouldn't mind if they rid of these and for that reason I thought FFXII really had the best battle system out of any main Final Fantasy game.
There's something extremely gratifying with planning every step of an operation after only seeing the map. If I fail, it's because I planned something wrong to begin with, not because I didn't have the twitch skills to pull off what I planned to do. Not every game has to be fast and hectic.
Random encounters are a tougher sell. The reasoning that "you can have a room with infinite amounts of enemies" with the help of random encounters is kind of silly, since you can do plenty of things to restock those enemies. Respawns for one. There really isn't any reason why you shouldn't be able to see most of your battles beforehand and possibly avoid them. Random encounters do not actually let you enjoy the scenery, though. Mostly the opposite, since your sightseeing efforts might interrupted by an errant rat wanting to get its ass kicked. I wouldn't mind if they rid of these and for that reason I thought FFXII really had the best battle system out of any main Final Fantasy game.