Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
DISCUSSING TURN-BASED GAMEPLAY
Posts
Feldschlacht IV
View playlists
CloseI have absolutely no problem with turn based gameplay, at all, and this is someone who is fully enjoying and loving great modern games as well, so I don't think it's something to 'age out' of either, personally or industry wise. Turn based gameplay is the descendant of old school tabletop gaming, and it still has just as much fun factor and strategy inherent as most other things. I think the industry and video gamers are just figuring this out again after quite some time. Like most people said already, it's about the implementation.
Did I mention how awesome tabletop gaming can be? My girlfriend's dad got me into it and it really deepened my outlook on turn based gaming.
Did I mention how awesome tabletop gaming can be? My girlfriend's dad got me into it and it really deepened my outlook on turn based gaming.
Tabletop gaming is awesome. And if you use miniatures in your D&D campaign on a dungeon grid against monster miniatures then you're pretty much playing a turn based game in real life
Gredge109
4151
Good topic!
I am a big fan of turn-based combat systems. Of course, not just any: there's a few things I really enjoy about turn-based combat, and the system, even though it can be simple, has to be done well. Some battle systems only require the player to spam attack on the enemies repeatedly. For weak enemies this isn't a problem for me, but there needs to be enough variety to force a decision to be made once in a while, and especially during boss fights.
One thing I enjoy is fast-paced combat in a turn-based system. I don't mean an action battle system. I do enjoy an ATB system, but I'm referring here primarily to the attacks. I can not think of the last turn-based game I have played that had this, but one of the more modern games had a turn-based system with fast attack animations. The simple attack command would have the enemy lunge or run out, attack the enemy, and jump back in battle formation quickly.
As I mentioned in my other topic, I've actually quit playing some AAA RPGs because the animations took too long, forcing me to lose patience. Once I queued my character up to attack, when their turn came, there was a long drawn-out scene where they made their way to the opponent, drew back their weapon, attacked, then went back. It looked great, but it took so long that it felt like I was wasting my time. I like my attack animations short and sweet. Flashy is good too, but short. Blue Dragon is a game where I feel the attack animation took a little bit of time to fire up and execute, but it pulled it off well enough regardless to be enjoyable, and quite flashy.
Just yesterday I discovered the game Lisa on Steam. I think it's very enjoyable to play. I like the idea of some characters having combo buttons you have to press in order to activate and get more damage out of a special move. It is something that, if I knew how to do it, I may implement in one of my own games. The animation and graphics for the combat are also impressive, as all of the graphics are custom and, even though you have a first person view, you see your characters jump out towards the enemy and attack. Also, this game spoiled me because of the various classes. Very creative ideas in play that I may adapt - but not copy - for a future game.
As for my personal preferences for turn-based combat, I enjoy systems that have you make choices. Here are some examples:
These are the kind of decision making I enjoy in turn-based battles. I enjoy both active and turn-based battles, but I prefer systems that have you stop and think about your decisions every round.
As for front-view or side-view, I'm okay with either one.
I am a big fan of turn-based combat systems. Of course, not just any: there's a few things I really enjoy about turn-based combat, and the system, even though it can be simple, has to be done well. Some battle systems only require the player to spam attack on the enemies repeatedly. For weak enemies this isn't a problem for me, but there needs to be enough variety to force a decision to be made once in a while, and especially during boss fights.
One thing I enjoy is fast-paced combat in a turn-based system. I don't mean an action battle system. I do enjoy an ATB system, but I'm referring here primarily to the attacks. I can not think of the last turn-based game I have played that had this, but one of the more modern games had a turn-based system with fast attack animations. The simple attack command would have the enemy lunge or run out, attack the enemy, and jump back in battle formation quickly.
As I mentioned in my other topic, I've actually quit playing some AAA RPGs because the animations took too long, forcing me to lose patience. Once I queued my character up to attack, when their turn came, there was a long drawn-out scene where they made their way to the opponent, drew back their weapon, attacked, then went back. It looked great, but it took so long that it felt like I was wasting my time. I like my attack animations short and sweet. Flashy is good too, but short. Blue Dragon is a game where I feel the attack animation took a little bit of time to fire up and execute, but it pulled it off well enough regardless to be enjoyable, and quite flashy.
Just yesterday I discovered the game Lisa on Steam. I think it's very enjoyable to play. I like the idea of some characters having combo buttons you have to press in order to activate and get more damage out of a special move. It is something that, if I knew how to do it, I may implement in one of my own games. The animation and graphics for the combat are also impressive, as all of the graphics are custom and, even though you have a first person view, you see your characters jump out towards the enemy and attack. Also, this game spoiled me because of the various classes. Very creative ideas in play that I may adapt - but not copy - for a future game.
As for my personal preferences for turn-based combat, I enjoy systems that have you make choices. Here are some examples:
- Should I resurrect this character this turn, or throw up a barrier on the rest of my party members?
- Rejuvenation could be helpful, but maybe I should eat the MP cost and cast a direct heal on my party.
- Should this character try to cast a spell to finish off the enemy, or will weakening provide an advantage in the long run?
- I can attack with this character one round, or I can spend some MP and spend one turn to charge their weapon, which will deal double damage for two or three rounds.
- I just encountered a large group of weak enemies. Is it worth it to cast a spell that damages all at once to take them down quicker and save my HP, or should I sacrifice some HP to save my MP for a bigger fight later on?
These are the kind of decision making I enjoy in turn-based battles. I enjoy both active and turn-based battles, but I prefer systems that have you stop and think about your decisions every round.
As for front-view or side-view, I'm okay with either one.
LightningLord2
230
I've said this on page 1 already, but there's one thing you can do in turn based games that you'd be hard pressed to get done right in a real-time game system, which is micromanagement. Handling 4 characters in as real-time environment with unique stats, equipment and skills is already pretty daunting in real-time even with a pause function, but it surely will become nigh impossible if you have to control 15+ at once. Yet Fire Emblem, Advance Wars and Battle for Wesnoth can handle this amount (and more!) perfectly well.
Shinan
4314
author=Sailerius
A good example is anything involving three-dimensional spatial awareness. For instance, aiming a spell or ranged weapon. While you can switch into an aiming mode in a turn-based game (Eternal Sonata did it), it's always a really awkward context switch because it basically thrusts an FPS minigame into the middle of a menu-based game. It's just not a natural transition.
I don't know I've seen plenty of turn-based 3d awareness stuff. It's just implemented in a variety of ways. From the very simple of Fallout's Aimed shots to some of the sound-based gameplay in Silent Storm where you get a sound marker that you heard someone on, for example, a different floor. And most turn-based tactical games give you the option to hit stuff that "isn't there" force-attacking the ground. (mostly used for various AOE attacks like grenades or for breaking down walls or windows) Certain modern turn-based games also have quite detailed Line of Sight rules and penetration values for cover and whatnots.
The conceit usually in turn-based games is that it's not the player who is doing the controlling but the player character and the player can only oversee rather than directly control.
Red_Nova
Sir Redd of Novus: He who made Prayer of the Faithless that one time, and that was pretty dang rad! :D
9192
author=Craze
i'm gonna reply to more to this at large later but i wanted to immediately respond to slaibuouasus
Ah! I completely missed this post for so long since I didn't think you were going to edit it in!
what sooz said but seriously ff3 and 9 have some of the worst examples of drawing out battles through poor optimization and masturbatory camera pans. also suikoden 5 but you didn't mention that, how i wish suikoden 5 was a better game
I didn't mention Suikoden 5 because I didn't play it. I've only played the second one. But yeah, what you and Sooz said. Cinematic cameras are fine, but I'd rather not have the time to make a sandwich when a character casts a spell.
i think your ideas are just as boring! i mean that nicely. it's basically the smt/persona method ("give each character one element or skill type"), and it's just as much a design fallacy as the black mage & co ("give each character all elements within a skill type, whether it be debuffs or attributes or w/e") of ff fame. the most important part of designing a character or class is theme, not fitting some arbitrary archetype.
Yeah, you're right. When I made that post, I was in the mindset of breaking away from the traditional Final Fantasy archetypes. I didn't even realize the SMT connection until you pointed it out. Has Atlus brainwashed me? Hm...
Anyway, I was trying to show how simple it was to give players more thought into a party makeup. There's plenty that can be done to make party members more than just "the healer" or "the mage."
Can you elaborate more on the difference between theme and archetype here? If I wanted to make a character that was primarily a healer, wouldn't that fit the, "theme?" even though it's also the arbitrary archetype?
i'm gonna use this chance to respond to red_nova's "basic attacks and normal turns are boring" with "a" character we've designed for our current project that we've been really quiet about for a while. (well it's easy for him to be quiet since he's not on here often, BUT IT'S HARD FOR ME). this game uses the "free-turn battle system" like most of my recent projects, where it's a player goes/enemy goes alternation but you can execute each character's action in any order. each character can only act once per turn.
immediately screwing with that rule, in THEME (gosh that word), is Lydia & Osric, Who Always Get Their Man, a two-in-one police officer duo. they take up a single character slot but they are, in reality, both lydia and osric. "cdX" is "cooldown of X turns".
I'm doing something similar in my own game, actually! Two characters in one party slot, but each one has their own skill tree instead of one taking the lead. Your idea sounds really cool and would make the basic turn based battles interesting.
LightningLord2
230
I can give you a good example in WoW about archetypes and themes:
Both the Holy and the Discipline specialization of the Priest class fit the same archetype, that of the Healer (Shadow can also heal, but those are the Damage Dealer archetype). Their theme is how they accomplish it - Holy priests rely more on straightforward HP restoration and healing a group, while Discipline Priests throw shields on their allies that have additional HP or reduce damage taken. The former can handle AoE damage better while the latter can protect from burst damage more reliably.
Both the Holy and the Discipline specialization of the Priest class fit the same archetype, that of the Healer (Shadow can also heal, but those are the Damage Dealer archetype). Their theme is how they accomplish it - Holy priests rely more on straightforward HP restoration and healing a group, while Discipline Priests throw shields on their allies that have additional HP or reduce damage taken. The former can handle AoE damage better while the latter can protect from burst damage more reliably.
i mean kinda, LL2, but i meant even more character-based.
when i say theme, i mean "how a character breaks the rules to help the player understand who they are." the "rules," very basically, being "heal a guy," "damage a guy," etc.
Lydia & Osric break the rules by having a consistent damage output even on turns you don't attack (fits their "two people" concept), having one of the very few hard CC moves in the game (breaks the rule of "hard CC is too OP to balance well" because they're police officers), and not following proper cooldown practices (since their "first" skill, the I'm Going In!/Got A Visual pair, each have their own cooldown but can only be used when their particular character is in the lead -- again, the "two people" concept).
Another description/example below of what I mean by "theme," using the pacifist character:
Laufey, the Toymaker, immediately breaks the rules by being the only character without a basic attack. Naturally, this helps promote her pacifism theme.
Primordial Shell gives a huge defensive buff to protect her allies. Laufey herself is frail, but she is still adamant (heh) about staying safe.
Playful Friends absolutely destroys the rules. She can reset even the highest cooldowns, which is very useful in a game where a CD of ten turns isn't uncommon. She can also lower her OWN cooldown on the ability by playing into her class being an Artificer, who interact heavily with Familiar equipment (think like Scabbers and Crookshanks in Harry Potter; the equipment's effects only go off when the Master uses a Familiarity proc).
Unfaltering is major, and helps her deal with being frail and having that low Vitality score. In this game, your Vitality dictates how high your buffs can reach before they start rapidly decaying, and how quickly you regenerate from debuffs. Laufey breaks the rules here to show, again, that she is set in her way and will do what needs to be done to survive (except harm).
Pacifism should speak for itself. Tiny Army is shared by all Artificers and Wind-Up Octopus, her unique equip, is included for completion's sake.
So, in short, Laufey breaks all kinds of rules to let her steadfast pacifism be shown to the player in more than just words and naming schemes.
We do also do stuff like what LightningLord2 mentioned though -- wide themes that help shape the classes. For example, Guardians and Crusaders are both tanks. Guardians naturally Cover their allies (taking hits for them a la FFIV's Cecil). Crusaders, on the other hand, get more damage potential because their tanking is riskier -- they steal Hate from allies, causing enemies to target them more (usually). For example, Elesca, Who Stands Beside Two Kings, can completely absorb each enemy's Hate against a targeted ally. Elesca then gets an enchantment that raises her Speed and Defense buffs whenever she's attacked. (Of note: Elesca counterattacks once per enchantment on her when she is attacked.)
So, yeah. Theme is how a particular character (or, in something like FF5, a class) breaks the rules to let their purpose in the world be seen.
when i say theme, i mean "how a character breaks the rules to help the player understand who they are." the "rules," very basically, being "heal a guy," "damage a guy," etc.
Lydia & Osric break the rules by having a consistent damage output even on turns you don't attack (fits their "two people" concept), having one of the very few hard CC moves in the game (breaks the rule of "hard CC is too OP to balance well" because they're police officers), and not following proper cooldown practices (since their "first" skill, the I'm Going In!/Got A Visual pair, each have their own cooldown but can only be used when their particular character is in the lead -- again, the "two people" concept).
Another description/example below of what I mean by "theme," using the pacifist character:
Laufey, the Toymaker, immediately breaks the rules by being the only character without a basic attack. Naturally, this helps promote her pacifism theme.
Primordial Shell gives a huge defensive buff to protect her allies. Laufey herself is frail, but she is still adamant (heh) about staying safe.
Playful Friends absolutely destroys the rules. She can reset even the highest cooldowns, which is very useful in a game where a CD of ten turns isn't uncommon. She can also lower her OWN cooldown on the ability by playing into her class being an Artificer, who interact heavily with Familiar equipment (think like Scabbers and Crookshanks in Harry Potter; the equipment's effects only go off when the Master uses a Familiarity proc).
Unfaltering is major, and helps her deal with being frail and having that low Vitality score. In this game, your Vitality dictates how high your buffs can reach before they start rapidly decaying, and how quickly you regenerate from debuffs. Laufey breaks the rules here to show, again, that she is set in her way and will do what needs to be done to survive (except harm).
Pacifism should speak for itself. Tiny Army is shared by all Artificers and Wind-Up Octopus, her unique equip, is included for completion's sake.
So, in short, Laufey breaks all kinds of rules to let her steadfast pacifism be shown to the player in more than just words and naming schemes.
We do also do stuff like what LightningLord2 mentioned though -- wide themes that help shape the classes. For example, Guardians and Crusaders are both tanks. Guardians naturally Cover their allies (taking hits for them a la FFIV's Cecil). Crusaders, on the other hand, get more damage potential because their tanking is riskier -- they steal Hate from allies, causing enemies to target them more (usually). For example, Elesca, Who Stands Beside Two Kings, can completely absorb each enemy's Hate against a targeted ally. Elesca then gets an enchantment that raises her Speed and Defense buffs whenever she's attacked. (Of note: Elesca counterattacks once per enchantment on her when she is attacked.)
So, yeah. Theme is how a particular character (or, in something like FF5, a class) breaks the rules to let their purpose in the world be seen.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
What does "hard CC" mean in this context?
author=Sooz
What does "hard CC" mean in this context?
CC = Crowd Control.
They're things like slows, stuns, disables or pretty much status effects that allow you to stop or hinder another unit's ability to take action.
You'll hear it a lot when you play competitive MOBA games.
