UnemployedVillain
Member
Sure as fuck isn't real time
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What is the best RPG combat system? (Real-time, Turn-based, RTwP)
- Thread starter Sad Affleck
- Start date
arts&crafts
Member
Anything but real time with pause.
Good action RPG (Dragons Dogma) > Good Turn based (Divinity: OS) > Real Time with Pause (Pillars of Eternity)
Good action RPG (Dragons Dogma) > Good Turn based (Divinity: OS) > Real Time with Pause (Pillars of Eternity)
Trogdor1123
Gold Member
Lol, love the gifs op.
I like turn based myself. Most are good though when done right.
I like turn based myself. Most are good though when done right.
I think there are good arguments to be made for both Turn-Based and Real-Time with Pause, but Real-Time is the worst by far. There are reasons why you may opt for Real-Time, such as in a first-person RPG where exploration is emphasized, but when the combat systems themselves, it's a poor choice.
Although I enjoy RTwP a lot as well, I have to lean towards Turn-Based (with meaningful positioning). I find that one of the major distinctions between the two is that your actions have immediate consequences, and thus reinforce look-ahead planning that can't be corrected so easily.
There have also been some really good Turn-Based games as of late too:
Although I enjoy RTwP a lot as well, I have to lean towards Turn-Based (with meaningful positioning). I find that one of the major distinctions between the two is that your actions have immediate consequences, and thus reinforce look-ahead planning that can't be corrected so easily.
There have also been some really good Turn-Based games as of late too:
Lux R7
Member
cripterion
Member
I prefer turn based. RtwP is a huge turnoff for me for some reason.
Shake Appeal
Member
Good Turn-based > Good Real-time > Good RTwP > Bad Real-time > Bad RTwP > Bad Turn-based
~fin~
~fin~
ResourcefulStar
Neo Member
I prefer pure TB systems with no RT gimmicks (like the Judgement Ring in Shadow Hearts) because of their complete lack of an execution barrier. The only thing that matters in games that utilize them is your understanding of the rules.
Depends on the game.
I'd probably be recognized as a turn-based partisan and I usually do find myself supporting it.
I tend to value party-play. I think turn-based has a clear edge in this regard. Even in relatively loose and unexciting turn-based systems, you still tend to have the option to play with all your characters and it is really easy to do so.
Ideally for me there is a focus on party synergy and tactical ability usage, but there doesn't really need to be if the game has me otherwise engaged.
But...with actual other players or no party, action can also be lots of fun. Just recently I finally got around to Horizon and the battles are definitely a highlight there. Same thing with Bloodborne, which I've been playing on/off throughout this year.
Or take MMO hotkey style action RPG. I really like trying to maximize my role, be situationally aware, and working with friends to accomplish stuff.
I just don't think the MMO hotkey approach translates well to single-player RPGs. Take Xenoblade. There is all this built in opportunity for player synergy, which, if I was playing with other people, we'd take advantage of it all. Similarly, you can't rely on AI to deal with complex fight mechanics involving patterns of movement and strategic ability use. I just play these systems, sort of enjoy myself, and then sit back and think 'gee, this is quite limited compared to what it is clearly taking inspiration from and just because the party play is so poor.'
I end up wanting those games to be MMOs, be single-character action games, or be turn-based.
...
Haven't played enough RTwP. It is something I've been curious about as it seems to address my party play concern.
I'd probably be recognized as a turn-based partisan and I usually do find myself supporting it.
I tend to value party-play. I think turn-based has a clear edge in this regard. Even in relatively loose and unexciting turn-based systems, you still tend to have the option to play with all your characters and it is really easy to do so.
Ideally for me there is a focus on party synergy and tactical ability usage, but there doesn't really need to be if the game has me otherwise engaged.
But...with actual other players or no party, action can also be lots of fun. Just recently I finally got around to Horizon and the battles are definitely a highlight there. Same thing with Bloodborne, which I've been playing on/off throughout this year.
Or take MMO hotkey style action RPG. I really like trying to maximize my role, be situationally aware, and working with friends to accomplish stuff.
I just don't think the MMO hotkey approach translates well to single-player RPGs. Take Xenoblade. There is all this built in opportunity for player synergy, which, if I was playing with other people, we'd take advantage of it all. Similarly, you can't rely on AI to deal with complex fight mechanics involving patterns of movement and strategic ability use. I just play these systems, sort of enjoy myself, and then sit back and think 'gee, this is quite limited compared to what it is clearly taking inspiration from and just because the party play is so poor.'
I end up wanting those games to be MMOs, be single-character action games, or be turn-based.
...
Haven't played enough RTwP. It is something I've been curious about as it seems to address my party play concern.
Niceguydan8
Member
It's clearly used as an example of the type of combat.
Bolivar687
Banned
That's part of the genius of FFVII, I believe there was a hybrid option to pause the bar progress for lengthier animations.
Jon of the Wired
Member
Whether a combat system is real-time, turn-based, or RTwP is less important than a million other decisions. A great combat system can be implemented using any of those three approaches, and it all comes down to the details and specifics of the execution.
Probably unpopular opinion: Real-Time > Turn-Based > RTwP
RTwP feels like the worst of both worlds to me. I don't find micromanaging pathfinding and click-and-wait-until-dead MMO combat as engaging as either actually fully controlling your character OR a turned-based system that abstracts out all of the run-around-the-obstacles nonsense and has you participate in each blow.
RTwP feels like the worst of both worlds to me. I don't find micromanaging pathfinding and click-and-wait-until-dead MMO combat as engaging as either actually fully controlling your character OR a turned-based system that abstracts out all of the run-around-the-obstacles nonsense and has you participate in each blow.
Conkerkid11
Member
Real-time. If done right like in Souls games, nearly everything comes down to the player's skill, and not some RNG bullshit.
I want to be playing the game rather than choosing an action and letting the game decide the outcome for me.
I want to be playing the game rather than choosing an action and letting the game decide the outcome for me.
SatoAilDarko
Member
Real-time
Lister
Banned
The player's skill at pushing buttons Vs the player's skill at tactics and character builds. I think BOTH require some level of skill.
I think the two tend to appeal to a different audience, but not always. Lots of people enjoy both.
There's no one size fits all solution but my least favorite is real time with pause. Despite some of my favorite titles (Baldur's Gate II, Planescape Torment, etc) using it, it always just feels like a mess that exploits cheesy stacking or line of sight based strategies in a way that feels more meta than tactical to me. It also makes little sense to me since the pen and paper systems it tries to emulate are strictly turn-based.
Lord of Ostia
Member
Turn-based or Real Time action-based. Way easier to fuck up real time combat systems though, turn-based is way more dependable that way. I find that most games that try to have a combination of the two either completely ruin and neuter the real time aspect, or make the pausing/Turn-based aspect completely pointless.
That said, there are some really good hybrid systems out there. Like Transistor, for example.
Examples of games that got a hybrid system wrong would be Fallout 3/4, Dragon Age, FFXV. FFXV isn't really a hybrid system, it just sucks so bad it might as well be one.
That said, there are some really good hybrid systems out there. Like Transistor, for example.
Examples of games that got a hybrid system wrong would be Fallout 3/4, Dragon Age, FFXV. FFXV isn't really a hybrid system, it just sucks so bad it might as well be one.
Hibiki Kurosawa
Member
Picking the best of anything is always frustrating becuase whenever I try to think of my favourite, I swear I'm forgetting something I like more, so I'm just going to go with a few I love off the top of my head:
Turn-based: Baten Kaitos (love the card collecting and time aspects of it and I always love a good card based battle system. Really loved making card combos in this one)
Also SMT press turn. Can be exploited, but makes playing around with the battle system and abilities and demons you choose fun.
Real-time: Souls I guess, just because it's so addictive in nature and with enemy types and encounters, but I can't say it's particularly impressive.
RTwP: Resonance of Fate count? If so, totally that. It's one of the most original, challenging, deep, and satisfying battle systems I have ever played.
Turn-based: Baten Kaitos (love the card collecting and time aspects of it and I always love a good card based battle system. Really loved making card combos in this one)
Also SMT press turn. Can be exploited, but makes playing around with the battle system and abilities and demons you choose fun.
Real-time: Souls I guess, just because it's so addictive in nature and with enemy types and encounters, but I can't say it's particularly impressive.
RTwP: Resonance of Fate count? If so, totally that. It's one of the most original, challenging, deep, and satisfying battle systems I have ever played.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Lister
Banned
Surely you don't mean Origins!
OK.
What I mean by "meta" is basically that they require you to do things that aren't strictly logical in the game world or even in the game's typical rules. Encounters like the Lich in the tavern basement of BGII or the fights on the lower levels of Watcher's Keep. These are things that require a sort of exploitive use of abilities and that are very finicky with positioning - stacking in tiny places or being in a pixel perfect spot to get an enemy to go where you want it to.
I know some would say that this is the definition of "tactical," but when I compare it something like Divinty Original Sin, where I can generally think things through based more on the environment and basic logic, RTWP tends to feel much more focused on micromanagement and / or knowing the game engine and its particularities. Similarly with straight up real time, there tend to be many paths to victory given a knowledge of your own abilities and basic enemy observation.
Edit: Also, see the post below me.
Again, to compare.
RTWP strategy: shoot with crossbow to pull, pause, cast a bunch of buffs, run around the corner like a pussy, have the enemy follow me, bum rush when he comes through the door, micromanage the beat down with constant pauses and micro adjustments in positioning.
Turn based strategy: Check out the environment, place my guys tactically and then carefully set up a flank, casting debuffs and spells in a clean and predctable order as the enemy approaches.
Obviously it varies game by game but there's a difference in mindset. One feels like I'm outsmarting my enemies, the other feels like I'm outsmarting the game engine.
Even in newer RTWP games like Pillars of Eternity I have distinct memories of save scumming my way through a doorway in just such a way so that all these spiders would cluster in a specific way, allowing me to hit them all with a cone of flame. Move a pixel or two in the wrong direction and your whole strategy goes to shit.
To me, it's the lack of tools RTwP games give you to actually use real tactics.
A lot of tactics is route planning, for things like flanking, hemming enemies into disadvantageous parts of the environment, providing cover, pressuring opponents into firing lanes, etc.
Fallout is great for stuff like this, in turn-based combat. Games like Myth mastered this on the real time party-based side. Hell, even the Soulsbourne games let you be tactical in your approach as an individual.
But RTwP games almost universally give you shit tools to actual plan out how the archer should spray attacks while your rogue traverses from point A to B via roundabout route C to avoid exposure.
So you just end up riding the spacebar while you constantly microclick around the map to con the dumb route planner into kind of doing what you want, while your archer is stuck swivel shooting at enemies or doing one-off AoEs instead of continuously targeting only units in an area.
The meta (to me) is that it's a constant fight to shove tactical actions into a combat engine that doesn't actually give you a vocabulary to express them -- so the game is to figure out how to best abuse the pause button to your advantage. Contrast that with Myth, where you could tell 6 combat units to go to a point in a given formation, while another group of ranged units trailed behind them in another formation, and they should all arrive facing a certain direction. That's a real tactical vocabulary that isn't expressed in pause-click-unpause-nowait-pause-click-unpause-pause-click-etc, as you individually creep each person around the map on a practically step-by-step basis.
Lord of Ostia
Member
Nope, never played Origins, talking about Inquisition.
This question is fairly meaningless. Real time, turn-based, and real-time with pause are not combat systems, they're just paradigms under which combat systems are built. Both Divinity: Original Sin and Dragon Quest are turn-based, and yet could not be more different from each other.
Lister
Banned
This isn't a problem with RTwP, so much as implementaitons of RTwP. I agree that most do feature this lack of nuanced tactical maneuvering.
Something Like a total War system might be better, coupled with some type of automatic actions based on abilities.
I always thought these games should feature the ability to paint down travel paths on the ground so you know exactly where all your characters are going. Your archer scenario could be handled by this plus say a "Run and shoot" ability that would have him fire at a selected target along his route (maybe he'd move a bit slower while active, or have an aim penalty).
Turn Based > Real Time with Pause > ATB > Real Time
Turn based is king, always has been, always will be.
What RPG's have the best combat of all time?
Divinity OS 1 and 2. Temple of Elemental Evil. The Gold Box games. Ultima 5. The Northlands Trilogy. Underrail.
All turn based.
Turn based is king, always has been, always will be.
What RPG's have the best combat of all time?
Divinity OS 1 and 2. Temple of Elemental Evil. The Gold Box games. Ultima 5. The Northlands Trilogy. Underrail.
All turn based.
Grindlefly
Member
SomeRandomWeirdGuy
Member
Action is great, believe me, but I love parties. Parties are a huge chunk of the whole fun of RPGs for me, and they shine the brightest in turn based RPGs. ARPGs tend to focus on just one character, with party characters just being slight augments to playstyle if they're available at all, while in a turn based game, everyone gets to shine together.
Maybe I'm weird, but I also genuinely like the aesthetic of "good guys line up on one side, bad guys on the other".
I also really enjoyed FFXIII's combat, and would take that as well, though I hesitate to call it either action or turn based
Maybe I'm weird, but I also genuinely like the aesthetic of "good guys line up on one side, bad guys on the other".
I also really enjoyed FFXIII's combat, and would take that as well, though I hesitate to call it either action or turn based
Sad Affleck
Member
I don't agree. Games implement different variations of a basic template.
For sure, although to a certain extent I think the Pause in Real Time with Pause only exists as a crutch for how bad the tactical inputs are.
With a deep vocabulary of tactical inputs, I'm not sure that the Pause wouldn't become OP. But I've never played Total War so it's hard for me to judge.
Cheesyhobo
Member
Real-time for single character RPGs, turn-based for party RPGs. Turn-based is the only way to properly simulate the amount of options and depth available to you without having it turning into a chaotic mess of pausing every 2 seconds like in RTwP. RTwP is just a travesty that needs to go away, sorry.
Lanrutcon
Member
If your game is RTWP and you don't have REALLY good party AI then you done fucked up. I'm going to need to pause so often to direct characters you might as well have made it TB. (which is why I've finished FFXII multiple times, but you couldn't pay me enough to replay Pillars of Sterility)
So my answer is: TB.
So my answer is: TB.
Yes, all Real-Time fans must take equal ownership of FFXV alongside their Dragon's Dogma and Dark Souls.
Tertullian
Member
RTwP = 80% of the tactical depth of turn-based in 1/10 the time.
DeadPhoenix
Member
Turn based. Real time with pause is a weird compromise that gives you the worst of both worlds and real time can get da fuck out of here.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Hear hear
HEAR HEAR
Action-RPGs can also require tactics and character building aspect. If your build sucks or you use sub-optimal tactics in Dark Souls, you can technically still win, but it'll be magnitudes harder.
So the question should be "which combat system *type*/paradigm do you prefer and why"? Seems like splitting hair.
Obviously each of those can have great variety (and variety of quality) within them (Ys is very different than Souls which is very different than The Witcher), but that doesn't mean one can't have general preferences for a paradigm. I for one cannot stand real-time-with-pause no matter what.