Turn Based Combat

[Duskflamer]

Sorry, double post.

 

[New Troll]

If turn-based was as immersive as action, then there never would have been a need to make action and everything would still be turn-based. These days, turn-based equals tactics, strategy or low-end OS/ emulation.

Why were there ever black and white movies when color is so much more immersive? Because the latest technology wasn't always around.

 

[lord.jeff]

How can a person attacking with the one same three hit combo repeatedly help with immersion. You have to forgive things in every genre of game in order to be truly immersed. And for The KOTOR argument, it is turn based.

 

[veloper]

There's no problem with turn based combat. Plenty of games do it very well. I actually prefer it in certain games. But it really comes down to a case by case scenario. It wouldn't work in Call of Duty, but for games like Final Fantasy X, Legend of Legaia, or Suikoden II it works perfectly.

Incidentally, I think that was the biggest complaint about FFXIII's combat. It was too fast paced. Combat was moving at such a hectic rate that you couldn't select your actions fast enough. Especially when you had 6 or so slots and 20 different spells. As a result, you largely end up just selecting "auto-attack" to let the game select the most effective attacks itself. And at that point, you're not really playing your own game anymore. If you think turn based combat is boring, letting the game play itself is even more boring.

I thought it worked well in KotOR..

That wasn't really turn-based, though.

You just had the option to pause the game. It didn't really force you to.

OT: Yeah, I don't like turn-based games. I just don't enjoy them.

Um. I hate to break it to you, but KOTOR was a turn based combat system. I believe it works out that 2 seconds is one turn. If you're in combat and you don't select an action, your character just automatically chooses to use a basic attack. You could que up to three actions ahead of time. It was fast paced, yes. But it was fast paced turn based combat. And nothing you or anyone else say will change that. I think Bioware even described it as turn based combat.

Oh, and it actually plays like Dungeons and Dragons, you just don't see the "dice rolls" unless you check your combat log.

The combat abilities may have time delays, but all units can MOVE at the same time, which disqualifies KOTOR from boing turn-based = 1 move at a time.

No, actually, the combat's just shown quickly enough that it seems as though that's the case (much like an actual round of DnD would look like, given that everyone is supposedly taking their move in the same 6 seconds of space). If you look in the combat log, it boils down to:

Ally A Rolled (whatever) And hit Enemy A for 6 damage
Enemy A Rolled (whatever) and missed Ally B
Ally B Rolled (whatever) and hit Enemy A for 8 damage, killing him.
Etc.

If you look closely, you can sometimes even tell where the division is between the rounds (particularly if everyone's using blasters, it's easy to see the .5 seconds of people aiming while the rolls take place in the background before they play out what happened).

I know how the game times the delays, to be a little bit more like turns, but the actual movement (not attacks, abilities or skills) doesn't go in turns at all.
Chess is turn-based. You cannot move your all pieces when it's not your turn, even if the target squares is unoccupied.

 

[Rarhnor]

'The Last Remnant' implemented its turn-based combat into story via attacks and characters within the battle. In key fights throughout story missions you would get attacks named as responses to the encounter or the situation outside the battle.
I remember an almost impossible to win battle that would, after a few deaths of the team members, spark a characters response to the enemy, but also in context to the story and its progress. As if the battle is part of the story.
It isn't as apparent or in your face as a scripted event or the like, but it was a nice reminder of what you're fighting for.
Guest parties would join, that would turn against you mid battle, and the aftermath-cutscenes would then reference the event from the battle.
Quite neat actually.

It is really not that hard to thread story and turn-based combat together. Developers just don't bother i guess.

 

[Firstmark_Bannor]

in many RPG's you generally see a turn based combat system
some take place in turns
some (most) final fantasy games have that arbitary recharge time system (unsure what the name is)
now consider the gameplay of say Oblivion, as it is an action system it creates a sort of realtime feeling and in general ends up becoming a very immersive expierience, however turn based combat is so broken up so arbitary so slow so....well its not AS good as an real time system.

the basic question is: How can a turn based combat system be immersive or work in sync with story?

I have to disagree with some of the assumptions made in your post. Why do you assume turn based battle system are not immersive? Honestly Haveing grown up with ATB (active time battles) and turn based combat in general i find Games like Oblivion not only unimmersive but a little on the hard to get into side. It has always been my opinion that immersion pretty much relies solely on the Quality of writing and has very little to do with the game play. I prefer turn based combat in rpgs.

 

[The Pinray]

Maybe it'd work if some baddie locked the heroes in this alternate reality that forced them to take turns during battle or something like that.

Or say it was some sort of weird fighting tournament that each good strike would give points depending on where it was landed (like torso 1, head 3, etc) and lost you points for each strike missed. So they'd circle each other and take turns swinging or shooting or whatever.

Lame ideas, I know.

 

[godofallu]

On the one hand when I think turn based combat my initial thought is whack a mole garbage such as Final Fantasy.

On the other hand I play Magic the Gathering so I know that turn based combat is possible. I've just never seen it done properly.

 

[Michael Hirst]

Well I'm going to bring up Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne here (also the two Digital Devil sage titles) They're turn based JRPG's that have had the best use of the turn based system I've ever experienced, the games are difficult and learning to use your limited actions effectively are what keep you alive, if you act stupid in these games you get killed simple as. YOu need a balanced part with a wide set of skills so that you can adapt to new enemies.

For those who aren't familiar if you hit an enemies weakness or score a critical you gain an extra action however if you miss an enemy you lose actions and worst case scenario if you use an attack the enemy can absorb you just lost ALL your turns.

The Shin Megami Tensei titles Turn based aciton bring an element of strategy and problem solving to the combat system which isn't in a game like Elder Scrolls which relies mainly on just slashing until the enemy falls over and blocking every so often.

I'm a big fan of both turn based and real time systems in game when made properly. My favourite combat system ever in an RPG is Demons Souls, very solid gameplay built on realistic principles.

 

[TheDooD]

Turn based combat is good I like it. The best Turn based system I found was in the Grandia games its pretty much runs semi auto and you can actively stop your enemies action or avoid attacks if your fast enough. At the very same time they can do they same to you. The game evens have an auto play mode where you can have some characters focus on healing, support and or nuking. I like the whole tactical part of turn based combat and figuring out the fastest way to screw of my enemies. I don't mind real time combat either yet some times it not immersive, just like in turn based it's not that fun to kill enemies without that risk of you getting hurt or complete lack of tactical usage.

 

[Mafoobula]

I think Final Fantasy XII did a good job in bringing the old-school "wait-for-action-bar-to-fill" mechanic into a new generation. It could've been more fluid, maybe by putting the more common special abilities into an action bar, and give the player better control by allowing the player to switch between party members at the player's whims.

So yes, the turn-based mechanic can and does have a place in this modern era of total player control and immersion.

 

[Ace of Spades]

Turn-based combat only entices me when it's in games that are highly stylized, like the Paper Mario games. Every character is literally a cardboard cut-out for some reason, and in that kind of game, it works because it contributes to the slightly cartoony style of play. That, and they added an element of timing to keep me from nodding off in the middle of a battle like in a much worse turn-based system, like FF13.

 

[Evil the White]

If the games still flows well, then there's plenty of room for turn-based gameplay. It just needs to have enough elements to justify breaking everything down into turns, and when you attack something, they do some defense or auto attack back that means that sometimes your attack doesn't work, full stop.

 

[Silenttalker22]

First, I love the ignorant twitching, ADD, sugar popping retards who bundle turn-based up as "Lining up and taking turns whacking each other". I could do the same thing for FPS if you like. Watch:
"I'm glad to see how many people hate the 'point your gun at stuff and pull the trigger until it stops moving' gameplay." I could do more, but I digress.

Good turn-based is immersive if done engagingly. FFX and the Lunar series had my favorite turn based, but more so FFX. The layout of turns coming let you plan moves accordingly and planning felt necessary often enough to be interesting, but not so dire that every fight was a chess game.
FF13 actually felt the least immersive because I only felt like I was suggesting what my char did half the time, and was only suggesting what both other members do the entire time. It felt like I was shouting from the sidelines while way too much happened without my say-so.

 

[Bostur]

If turn-based was as immersive as action, then there never would have been a need to make action and everything would still be turn-based. These days, turn-based equals tactics, strategy or low-end OS/ emulation.

Why were there ever black and white movies when color is so much more immersive? Because the latest technology wasn't always around.

That comparison is a bit flawed since action games or real time games were always around and have co-existed with turn-based games for decades.

One of the first computer games Space War from 1962 was a real time game:
http://inventors.about.com/od/sstartinventions/a/Spacewar.htm


In the 1980's action games dominated the market on arcades, microcomputers and consoles, but in the end of the 1980's and until 2000 turn based games started to become more popular because technology allowed for a lot of complexity and depth, and maybe most importantly better AI.

So why did developers make turn based games like Civilization or X-Com when action games like Wing Commander was possible? I guess because they were different kind of games and could focus on different aspects.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Short answer: It can't.

Medium answer: If for some arbitrary reason the combat took place in some pocket dimension or sci-fi style board game setup that would work. Also card battle games.

Long answer: Does it matter? So long as the turn based combat is interesting and involved enough to engage you and the story is likeable enough is the mesh really that important? I just got done playing Record of Agarest War which had very involved turn based combat and a pretty damn good story that had nothing to do with each other and it was a really awesome game, mostly because they didn't try to relate the combat to the story. I got to take the story seriously and was involved in the combat. It wasn't a pure immersion but I was definitely immersed in the story and the gameplay.

 

[Kotaro]

I think it works.
Depends on the game, though.

 

[Arina Love]

it doesn't have to be immersive with story in my opinion. Only thing it must to is provide good turn based mechanics , balance and verity of skills and ways of tactics. i don't care how it implemented in to a story, for many MANY turn based games i played it didn't bother me in a slightest bit. "its not AS good as an real time system." it's only opinion and you comparing apples with oranges turn based rpg and real time based it two different things. i play both but i still prefer turn based system because it slow not hectic and i can strategize all i want, and while doing that i immerse myself in to world just fine. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[pigmy wurm]

I think the flaw is thinking that it is supposed to be immersive, at least in the way that most people use the term. The classic jrpg system of a bunch of guys standing in a line isn't supposed to be realistic, it's a game. Is chess "immersive" does it make you think of real knights and soldiers running across a battlefield? No, but that doesn't mean it can't be fun. My point is, if someone complains that most turn based battle systems aren't realistic they are making a flawed argument because the system clearly isn't trying to be.

What does break the immersion for me are most real time fight systems in rpgs, like in oblivion. The issue is they feel like they are trying to be realistic, but fail at it. I have played enough action adventure games and brawlers to have expectations for what combat should feel like. It should be somewhat fluid, I should feel like my attacks have an impact, and it should have some variation. But many real time fight systems, both western games like oblivion and japanies games like FF12 (which I know isn't completely real time) feel fake to me. Often it's just a bunch of people standing around hacking at each other with the exact same attack and hit animations. One of the things that I'm actually looking forward to Skyrim for is that it seems to have a more realistic combat system.

Now, taste is relative, so if you don't like turn based systems then that is fine, but I hate it when people treat turn based combat as a relic of the 8 and 16 bit eras and a strike against the game, because when it's done well I really like it. It can create a lot of tension and rewards strategy. I mean you don't see RTS players attacking turn based strategy because its "not realistic."

 

[Silenttalker22]

Does it matter? So long as the turn based combat is interesting and involved enough to engage you and the story is likeable enough is the mesh really that important?

^ Also that.
I don't think turn-based needs to be mixed with complete real time. Grandia 3 and Eternal Sonata had great systems that were both obviously turn-based but still involved keeping up with what was going on in the battlefield. If you want to mix it up, it just takes a good mix.