Alright fair enough, what I thought you meant was "because it isn't real time, and gives me more time to think about what to do next, then it isn't a game!"TheNecroswanson said:Wait, there's strategy to turn based games? Holy crap, when did this happen? Let's see, here's the rundown of the combat for Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy 8, Final Fantasy 7, and Dragon Warrior, IE: JRPGS I have played: Press A/X. Press A/X again. Adversely, before that second pressing of A/X, I sometimes will press up or down once or twice. There is never a need for me to press any other button. EVER.ElArabDeMagnifico said:I assume you've never used the "pause" button or "save" feature in a game, correct? I don't see how planning out your strategy and then clicking "go" can be a lack of interactivity. Unless it's multiplayer or something - where not even the pause button can save you.TheNecroswanson said:I unfortunately crusade against turn based. If a game lacks so much interactivity that I can download porn, prepare a decent chili dog meal for friends and finish up my character sheet for D&D, ALL WHILE completing the final battle, then it's nolonger a game. It has become a simple chore. A mindless task that nolonger entraps me, has failed to keep me entertained, and has ruined my gaming experience.
Not sure what pausing or saving has to do with combat. And as for turn based strategy games, can't stand them. At all.
The biggest problem with turn-based systems is that it turns *every* fight into an unnecessarily time-consuming venture. In a real-time system, if it's just a mook, you run up to him and whack him. There, done. With turn-based, you have to go through the whole turn-based rigmarole just to one-shot him.Magnetic2 said:Seeing and reading up on the combat system being implemented for Final Fantasy 13 (refuse to use roman numerals) makes me wonder, "is it still turn base?" or at least some kind of hybrid of it. To me the appeal of some rpgs has always been that, there are games you sit on the edge of your seat playing with your eyes dilated to the slightest change in pixels in order to pull ahead, and than there are games that you can play with one hand without messing up so long as you make sure to hit the right button. So in the mean time you can do things like relax, take your eyes of the screen, think of what you want to do next, eat a sandwich.
For some reason I feel this has been looked down upon, or as old school. I don't mind if the action happens on screen, or you see enemies in advance and interact with them in real time, so long as it still boils down to "press x to see awesome attack, any day now, take your time". Simple, easy, not a whole lot of having to buck up to do in order to get through the game. Anyone else agree?
This is where the Earthbound / Mother 2 (SNES) system is great, because if you are blatantly too strong for an enemy it gives you an instant win and lets you get on with what you are doing. Earthbound also isn't completely random fights either. You see the enemies on the screen and can try to get around them without fighting them, though it's tough at times to not fight them. By being able to see the enemies on the screen it allows for the game to be able to easily give you advantage or disadvantage in the game. If both parties are headed towards each other, it proceeds as a normal fight. If you are facing away from the enemy, the screen turns red and the enemy has the first turn before you have a chance to even select your move. And, if the enemy is facing away from you, the screen turns green and you have the first move completely to yourself.BloodSquirrel said:The biggest problem with turn-based systems is that it turns *every* fight into an unnecessarily time-consuming venture. In a real-time system, if it's just a mook, you run up to him and whack him. There, done. With turn-based, you have to go through the whole turn-based rigmarole just to one-shot him.
Thank God someone mentioned that game.gamshobny said:I've been playing Jagged Alliance 2 for waaaay to long now (about 5 years), and still loving it, after all the extra stuff 1.13 adds to it.
I love turn based because you can just think things over, wich means that you can defeat a force much larger then yours quite easily, since you can focus on one point at a time.
Funny thing is in games like Supcom and Total War, I'm ALWAYS pausing and planning my next move, there is no way I can control the madness in real time.Saevus said:Thank God someone mentioned that game.gamshobny said:I've been playing Jagged Alliance 2 for waaaay to long now (about 5 years), and still loving it, after all the extra stuff 1.13 adds to it.
I love turn based because you can just think things over, wich means that you can defeat a force much larger then yours quite easily, since you can focus on one point at a time.
90% of what I see here is people talking about 'OH THOSE TURN-BASED JRPGS' - and completely ignoring all other turn-based stuff. Turn-based war games, especially tactical ones, practically demand turn-based combat. Why? Because there is so much shit going on that if the game was in real-time, it'd fall apart. You can pull off some styles with real-time, a la Total War franchise, but once you get into WWII era and on, where combat is far less regimented, set it in real-time and any hope of an intense, deep experience goes out the window. You simply can't control all the details in real-time. Same with many turn-based RPGs or squad sims. Jagged Alliance 2 is absolutely fantastic - it allows you to control nearly everything, and forces you to bend every aspect of the situation in your favour if you hope to succeed. Compare Temple of Elemental Evil to Icewind Dale and you have a prime example of how turn-based combat changes a game from real-time.
tl;dr if you think turn-based is 'too slow' or 'lacks strategy', go play chess in real-time and enjoy the fail.
Oooh Jagged Alliance 2 rocks my goddam socks. Especially Fox.gamshobny said:I've been playing Jagged Alliance 2 for waaaay to long now (about 5 years), and still loving it, after all the extra stuff 1.13 adds to it.