Someone please explain to me...

jaykhunter

How is turned-based combat in videogames not gay*?

Is not the notion of a battle being played out like on a chess board not the gayest? It's so fake, so contrived in the basic sense. I'll hit you, wait for your strike, and then strike again. It's so unrealistic. I realise that we're talking about RPGs with massive crazy hair, swords etc etc, but holy God, that's not combat.

Please excuse the crudeness of the question but it is how I feel about it. I also realise that I'm missing out on what must be some phenomenal games (like Final Fantasy 7) because I despise this game mechanic.

(*i don't actually mean homosexual, I just mean lame)

Retr0gamer

To be honest I much prefer turn based combat in RPGs. I can't stand the Diablo or Bioware model were all you do is click on a guy and invisible dice roll in the background until someone falls over.

For me turn based combat offers a lot more strategy to fights. You get more time to think about your moves and as a result the game designer can give the player far more options. You mention Final Fantasy VII but it actually has one of the worst and least complicated turn based RPG engines with practically zero tactics to it. If you want to criticise turn based RPG combat then you should try a game that does it right like Final Fantasy X, Grandia 1 and 2, Persona 3 and 4, Shin Megami Tensei: Lucifers Call or Panzer Dragoon Saga. Then there is also Turn based strategy RPGs that take place on a grid. I really like these games. Even simple ones like Shining Force I find utterly compelling. However Final Fantasy Tactics is by far the best in this genre of games and the amount of tactical depth and customisation you have is staggering and totally necessary to master if you are to beat the steep difficulty of this game. Also not all JRPGs are about kids with massive hair. Go play Persona.

Turn based combat isn't realistic, I'll give you that. However when was being unrealistic the mark of a bad game? Not every game has to Call of Duty MW2. Super Mario World is unrealistic and the combat is contrived. Doesn't stop it being one of the best games ever. Similarly Chess is turn based and far from an accurate representation of warfare but it's still the greatest board game ever created.

Maybe you are just like me in that turn based combat games don't work for you. I can't stand Bioware games. However I can see how people do love bioware games and that they just aren't for me. Don't dismiss every JRPG just because they have turn based combat. Also don't label them all with the same brush because you played FFVII and didn't like it. FFVII isn't all that especially with it's very weak combat and teen pandering story thats not going to appeal to older people just getting into it. There's better examples like Persona and Grandia.

Coriolanus

jaykhunter wrote: »

(*i don't actually mean homosexual, I just mean lame)

So why not just say that? :rolleyes:

Anyway, turn based combat no more makes a game "unrealistic" than does the super human ability of your character to shrug off injuries after 10 seconds of breathing space.
They're games, not real life. Unless a computer application is training people for something (pilots using flights sims etc) then the arguement for realism is more or less irrelevant. Games should be fun, and for some people turn based combat ticks those boxes.

jaykhunter

Thanks for your reply! It was polite and informative and that's awesome.

I've never played any FF or turn-based game (or if I have I turned it off immediately) because I despise the idea in general. I just mentioned FF7 because it came to mind first when giving an example. Something about turn-based combat in a non-chess setting just turns me off so quickly. I imagine that there's a lot of diversity but i'm roping all TBC's together (i'm making that a new acronym) as you stop before you strike, and is conducted in an orderly fashion. I'm sure there's lots of intricacies and nuances but surely they've all got that in common, just like all platformers have "run/jump (to a different platform) to get to the end of the level".

I imagine "invisible dice" is somewhat fair, surely combat should be based on skill, reflexes and not luck.

I agree "realism" isn't necessarily a hallmark of a great game (because sure fantasy/imagination is much more fun than realism) but Mario and CoD etc do play in real time. Imagine if you get to take a shot at a soldier and had to wait for him to take a shot at you! Waah!! Shenanigans!!

I can definitely understand wanting to make the best attack possible by having the time to think about it, a specific tactical strike, but that mechanic with a live fight between you and something else just seems really contrived. I can 'wrap my head around' delayed tactical decisions in (example only) an RTS game where you're commanding an army, but for individual-based combat it just seems foreign.

I appreciate you offering other games that have varied/impressive mechanics (and without manga hair) but TBC's simply don't compute with my brain. I hate them, and it's my loss.

Nevore wrote: »

So why not just say that?

"gay" and "fag" are some of my favourite words to use. I really enjoy using them (lol). I just wanted to add the disclaimer just in case some outspoken PC-friendly man/woman gets their panties in a bunch because I used the word.

I suppose I can suspend my belief in that "say you have super-powers" or "you're in this car" or "you're a soldier in WW2" or something like that, but just as now I'm having a hard time not thinking "contrived game mechanic" in (eg) Resi 5 for lots of infected running at you until they get a certain distance, and then going into a walking animation, I can't get past TBC. It looks so wrong. I understand why it's there, and it definitely has merit/advantages (as Retr0 pointed out) but I can't suspend my disbelief for it. Why are you waiting there for me to strike? It's like a broken game that doesn't move until you move (i.e. it only reacts)

There's other contrived game mechanics that I kinda take you out of the experience but anyway, I wanted to talk about TBC.

Greyfox

jaykhunter wrote: »

How is turned-based combat in videogames not gay*?

When I first played FF7 I was thinking EXACTLY the same thing, I went from hating FF7 because of the turn based fighting to now rating FF7 the 2nd best game of all time and absolutely loving turn based fighting in other games. As retrogamer says it's all about the fact that theirs a HUGE amount of strategy involved in fights, far, far more then you can ever possibly get with fighting in real time.

What makes turn based fighting so popular is not something that can be explained, it's just something you have to give a chance to and then your far to engrossed in the many ways of winning a fight to be thinking of your characters as standing still. I'd say playing Pokemon is the easiest way of getting into turn based fighting although theirs better RPG's out their

leninbenjamin

Retr0gamer wrote: »

To be honest I much prefer turn based combat in RPGs. I can't stand the Diablo or Bioware model were all you do is click on a guy and invisible dice roll in the background until someone falls over.

I never really played RPGs much, only on the game boy really, but got Dragon Age recently and find the combat system ruins it. Grand at the start when you can bash your way through, but towards the end when strategy really comes into it I often find myself having to restart a battle because the AI will do something completely daft with one of my characters if I've highlighted another and get killed without warning. Really put me off the game towards the end...

There are times though when turn based can become very tedious though, particularly in games that involve a lot of levelling up or that. It really boils down to the game in question and more importantly the skills of the designers to create something engaging. I don't think any system is better than the other.

Retr0gamer

I'm with you there on the fact that games that involve levelling up to be beaten turn me right off. Good game design will eliminate the need to level up though. I haven't played a turn based RPG in years that required any levelling up. Many people say that Persona requires levelling up but I didn't do any in the game and with decent tactics was able to beat any boss.

As for Pokemon, it is a good way to get into turn based games. It is quite grindy and samey at times but it doesn't ruin the game since it's best played in short bursts since it's a handheld game. It'salso got one of the best and deepest turn based battle systems of any RPG.

Stercus Accidit

jaykhunter wrote: »

"gay" and "fag" are some of my favourite words to use. I really enjoy using them (lol). I just wanted to add the disclaimer just in case some outspoken PC-friendly man/woman gets their panties in a bunch because I used the word.

Grow up.

noodler

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'm with you there on the fact that games that involve levelling up to be beaten turn me right off. Good game design will eliminate the need to level up though. I haven't played a turn based RPG in years that required any levelling up. Many people say that Persona requires levelling up but I didn't do any in the game and with decent tactics was able to beat any boss.

As for Pokemon, it is a good way to get into turn based games. It is quite grindy and samey at times but it doesn't ruin the game since it's best played in short bursts since it's a handheld game. It'salso got one of the best and deepest turn based battle systems of any RPG.

P4 needed a bit of grinding tbh.

FF7 was my first and I thought it was weird to begin with but a game of chess is also done in turns in fairness. There can be many variables involved in your decision making process and can require you to really think ahead a few moves in advance.

Fnz

Nevore wrote: »

jaykhunter wrote: »

(*i don't actually mean homosexual, I just mean lame)

So why not just say that? :rolleyes:

He plays by his own rules, nobody else's, not even his own! :rolleyes:

jaykhunter

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Grow up.

I'm sorry, do you not have words you enjoy using? Thanks for the stimulating hit-and-run feedback and adding so much to the conversation.

L31mr0d

jaykhunter wrote: »

How is turned-based combat in videogames not gay*?

You did not just call "X-COM: Enemy Unknown" gay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX0Cm3N_n6k

jaykhunter wrote: »

"gay" and "fag" are some of my favourite words to use.

Hey you shouldn't talk about people who ride Harleys like that.

Retr0gamer

noodler wrote: »

P4 needed a bit of grinding tbh.

I'll make a bet with you that I won't need any I'm a bit strange when it comes to JRPGs, I very good at them I have to say. Usually when I get stuck on a boss and have to consult a faq the tactics they use are no use to me since I'm usually way underlevelled than the faq recommends so I end up having to use my own strategy anyway

sarumite

I like real time combat on my PS3, I love COD, but the combat is all about reflexes.

I play some TBC games on my DS (currently Valkyrie Profile...just started it, the combat is good, but the graphics could have been better)....the combat here is all about strategy.

Both require different skills to win. Personally unless you play a combat system where one hit kills is the norm, then all combat systems could be considered "contrived"....although I would rather "contrived" than boring and frustrating anyday.

noodler

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'll make a bet with you that I won't need any I'm a bit strange when it comes to JRPGs, I very good at them I have to say. Usually when I get stuck on a boss and have to consult a faq the tactics they use are no use to me since I'm usually way underlevelled than the faq recommends so I end up having to use my own strategy anyway

Best of luck. I did about half the dungeons twice (for the bonus item and boss) and still had at least 4 bosses I was too underlevelled to fight. Skill I found to be a major part no doubt but nearly half the bosses seemd to require a basic level.

Retr0gamer

I found a good Persona that was way over the level I should have gotten because of social links helped me a lot more than any extra level in Persona 3. You get huge stat bonuses from a good persona but only HP bonus from an extra level.

wayne040576

Retr0gamer wrote: »

To be honest I much prefer turn based combat in RPGs. I can't stand the Diablo or Bioware model were all you do is click on a guy and invisible dice roll in the background until someone falls over.

For me turn based combat offers a lot more strategy to fights. You get more time to think about your moves and as a result the game designer can give the player far more options. You mention Final Fantasy VII but it actually has one of the worst and least complicated turn based RPG engines with practically zero tactics to it. If you want to criticise turn based RPG combat then you should try a game that does it right like Final Fantasy X, Grandia 1 and 2, Persona 3 and 4, Shin Megami Tensei: Lucifers Call or Panzer Dragoon Saga. Then there is also Turn based strategy RPGs that take place on a grid. I really like these games. Even simple ones like Shining Force I find utterly compelling. However Final Fantasy Tactics is by far the best in this genre of games and the amount of tactical depth and customisation you have is staggering and totally necessary to master if you are to beat the steep difficulty of this game. Also not all JRPGs are about kids with massive hair. Go play Persona.

Turn based combat isn't realistic, I'll give you that. However when was being unrealistic the mark of a bad game? Not every game has to Call of Duty MW2. Super Mario World is unrealistic and the combat is contrived. Doesn't stop it being one of the best games ever. Similarly Chess is turn based and far from an accurate representation of warfare but it's still the greatest board game ever created.

Maybe you are just like me in that turn based combat games don't work for you. I can't stand Bioware games. However I can see how people do love bioware games and that they just aren't for me. Don't dismiss every JRPG just because they have turn based combat. Also don't label them all with the same brush because you played FFVII and didn't like it. FFVII isn't all that especially with it's very weak combat and teen pandering story thats not going to appeal to older people just getting into it. There's better examples like Persona and Grandia.

Have you tried Kings Bounty on the PC (RPG with grid battles)? Just interested in others' opinions on it. I got the first one last year in a Steam sale and the second one this year but I've yet to give it a proper run through. My biggest failing with turn based games is that I don't spend enough time reading all of my characters' skillsets and just select them on the fly during battles.

Which is what I was doing with kings's bounty.

noodler

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I found a good Persona that was way over the level I should have gotten because of social links helped me a lot more than any extra level in Persona 3. You get huge stat bonuses from a good persona but only HP bonus from an extra level.

Sure thats possible, still only appilcable to one of your four characters though!

GothPunk

I would say that crossing your fingers would be more use to you than any tactics or skill with some of the bosses in Persona 4 (well the latter ones anyway). If a boss has a one-hit KO attack that there is no buff or equipment in to protect you from it what else can you do? Die-reload-repeat-hope. :pac:

Retr0gamer

There's plenty of times in Persona 3 when I went up against a boss and died due to having the wrong characters and Persona Equiped. However on the second try I'd usually beat them. I'd just bring a set of characters who's weaknesses the boss can't exploit and bring a Persona with immunity or strenght against the elements the boss can use. I usually end up winning. I did have to solo one boss that was giving me trouble though. I just took the main character on his own with a persona with immunity to all physical attacks and a piece of equipment that nullified the bosses electric attack. I think the only other one that gave me trouble was a really tough boss near the start who didn't have any weakness except to charm spells. The game never tells you status weaknesses so had to look at a faq for that one.

P4 seems to be a bit easier since you can use guard to take a character out of the battle so they don't become a liability. Beaten a few bosses with bad teams that way.

kisaragi

First of all I think you should consider that using fag and gay in that context can be really offensive to many people. It's not about being PC it's just being respectful.

Secondly, everyone has different preferences. I don't like getting really stressed out by games so I don't play survival horrors etc., rather I prefer to play at a comfortable pace, enjoy the story, and have time to think about what I want to do in battle. I only played Oblivion for about 2 or 3 hours and then got sick of it whereas I've played FFVII through about ten times haha.

Fnz

jaykhunter wrote: »

TBC's simply don't compute with my brain. I hate them, and it's my loss.

You hate Worms™?.... GET HIM!!!

noodler

Fnz wrote: »

You hate Worms™?.... GET HIM!!!

I'll hold him down, you work the crotch.

Greyfox

kisaragi wrote: »

I don't like getting really stressed out by games so I don't play survival horrors etc.

Survival horror stressfull? Nonsense

mawk

i like the strategy of turns, i like the frenetic gameplay of fps. They both have their time and place.
But saying tbc isnt realistic is the wrong argument. I dont think any realistic video game has ever been fun to a mass audience

Retr0gamer

The original Operation Flashpoint begs to differ

johnny_ultimate

Games are unnatural. Getting shot in the head, ducking behind cover, waiting five seconds, and then popping out to continue is unnatural. Fire coming out of your hands when you do half a rotation of an analogue stick is unnatural. Pretty much everything about games is not in any way natural.

Perhaps that is why I enjoy turn based games much more than western style RPGs. JRPGs in particular embrace the inherent falsity of a game world and build upon it. They realise what you are playing is a game, a piece of fiction, and challenge the player to think outside the box and come up with strategies that obey the rules of the particular world. Persona has been mentioned many times already, and I'll mention it again. The best battles in that game have you thinking five or six moves ahead, and demanding you to alter your gameplan on the fly should a particular boss unleashes a ****-storm on you when you least expect it. The joy of actually using a strategy all of your own (well, one whose foundations are built by a developer, allowing you to understand and exploit as you wish) to defeat a boss is hard to beat in gaming.

What always gets me about something like Oblivion, Fallout 3 or the Bioware games is that there is always a tricky balance between real time and turn based combat. In an action game when you shoot you have a lot of control, and the success of the shot is your own doing. In a turn based game, whether you hit or not is based entirely on your stats and game rules. Fallout 3's VAT system, for me anyway, feels like an uncomfortable mixture of the two. Shooting at, say, the head in real-time doesn't always work as it would in reality - stats govern whether it will hit or not. Pausing the game in VATs feels unnatural given the real-time aspects of the rest of the game. Now I really like Fallout 3 as a game, but I still prefer, say, Persona or Dragon Quest, as I think they have a more coherent overall vision in terms of combat in particular. Fallout 3 may have a more atmospheric world, but I still feel it struggles to mesh heavy RPG elements with real-time shooting - combat always felt awkward to me.

Last night I turned on my PSP for a quick game of Disgaea. What seemed like half an hour of play turned out to be two hours! It is a game that boils turn-based combat down to its very basics (particularly with the ability to level up your items with no narrative interludes) - stats, stats, stats! - and is ridiculously successful at it. The mini-victories, crushing losses, and joyous recoveries are addictive. You always genuinely feel like you are getting better, and it is delightful when a good strategy ends up successful. I think that is the appeal of turn-based combat - it allows for deep individual strategy, and why I always think RPGs that embrace the admittedly unnatural nature of 'taking turns' are more to my taste! After all, they aren't called role playing games for nothing