Skip to content

Turn-Based? Real Time With Pause?

DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
in Off-Topic
I find this debate fascinating. This debate also has a tendency to derail discussions about other things. But I think it's a good discussion to have, so I'll formalize it into a conversation.

Some ground rules:
- Everyone's entitled to their opinion. You don't have to agree with someone's opinion in order to discuss the topic with them. Accept that everyone's perspective is different, because...
- I'm not interested in changing anyone's minds; I'm interested in fostering the discussion, and to gain more insight into why people think the way they do about this topic.

So, all that being said, here's the discussion prompt:

Which do you prefer, in a rules-intense RPG? Turn-based? Real-time? Real-time with pause? What is it about your preferred style that you like? What is it about the other styles that turns you off?

«1

Comments

  • brusbrus Member Posts: 944
    edited July 2016
    Dee, could you make a poll about this? Just to see statistics.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited July 2016
    It's really a matter of speed I suppose, though it really depends on the mood I'm in. For one thing, real-time with pause is just a more dynamic form of turn-based combat, since you are constantly plotting out your next move at your leisure. Real-time combat (and I'm talking about games in a 3D setting here) require you to plan out what you are going to use beforehand, then you have to go execute your strategy given the controls of the game.

    You can certainly make a "wrong" move in turn-based combat, but you can't fail to execute it, since the spell or strike is then done automatically. If I misjudge a sword thrust in Dark Souls, it's going to put me in a compromising spot, but the IDEA of doing the sword thrust may have been exactly correct for the situation. On the flip side, you may choose the wrong spell or attack in turn-based that will put you at a severe disadvantage, but the spell or attack will still be "performed" as correctly as it ever would.

    Anyway, to answer the question, I enjoy all 3 styles pretty much equally.
  • GodGod Member Posts: 1,150
    None of the above.

    The question implies a necessity where there is none. I'm actually working on an RPG game right now, such that is by all means rule-intensive, but which does not utilize any of these mechanical concepts at all.
  • Mr2150Mr2150 Member Posts: 1,170
    It depends on the complexity of the game - if there are a lot of rules and factors for consideration, then a slower more methodical approach is needed, I think.

    With RTwP, I can just let it go when I'm confident OR micro-manage in my own time when I'm less than confident. It also allows me to plan and think ahead, and change strategy as the game evolves - and for me the strategy is half the fun.

    Button mashing and hoping I pull off the right combo at the right time is a skill but I'd rather lose because I mentally failed, than because I physically failed to press the right combo at the right time (if that makes sense). I especially hate those moments in games where you are forced to press a random button combo that flashes up on the screen for a second or so, or you find yourself skewered in the neck (Lara Croft, I'm looking at you).

    Also, and I hate to admit this, the older I get the more I realise that my reaction speed is not quite as good as it once was and I gave up with most online multiplayer games simply because I can do ok in them, but younger people are just naturally faster than me now - I'm only 38 *SOB*.

    I recently started replaying all the Final Fantasy games from the beginning on my iPad and the turn based mechanic for battles is really frustratingly implemented. Yes, you can plan ahead and think through each round, however I can't count how many times I've wasted a spell or what have you because my target is no longer there. Grrrr...
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    It depends. I can't imagine Dark Souls working as a turn based game. On the other hand I would prefer BG to be turn based, possibly with a movement grid.
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    Real time with pause.

    Turn based is fun, but the lack of perceived realism pulls me out of the story.

    I wouldn't want to do without pause, I don't want to be tested on how quick my reactions are.
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    Like many other people my reaction time isn't what it used to be (and neither is my dexterity for that matter) - so real time isn't even an option for me.

    If I wanted to play a turn-based game I'd go looking for a D&D group to play with, where the slowing effect of playing by turn actually enhances the group dynamic.

    So for me, playing on a computer, 'real time with pause' is far and away the best (and possibly only) option.
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    It occurs to me that with the current popularity of various kinds of PvP game the older demographic (pretty much anyone over 30) isn't being catered for. I see a gap in the market.
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    Lots of good insight here! Thanks for sharing, everyone.

    I'd like to ask some clarifying questions, if I may. Feel free to answer any or all of the following, or ask questions of your own.

    Just a note: a number of these questions focus on turn-based gameplay, because (this being a primarily BG forum) I'm assuming that most of us are familiar with real-time with pause games.

    - Slow gameplay: Can you think of a game with TB combat that didn't feel slow? What about games with an auto-combat feature, like Heroes of Might and Magic?
    - Rules: Does your preference shift one way or the other if the game is using a system of rules you're familiar with?
    - Local Multiplayer: TB could potentially allow hot-seat local multiplayer. Is local multiplayer something that would make TB more appealing as a player?
    - Online Multiplayer: RTWP allows all players in an online game to act simultaneously--until someone pauses the game. How does pausing an online game help or hinder your gameplay experience? Do simultaneous actions make RTWP more appealing?
    - Immersion: If you prefer TB games, how do you reconcile the turn-based gameplay with immersion in the world? Are you still able to connect to the world when turns are being taken one at a time?
    - Tactics: If you prefer RTWP games, how do you feel about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast)?
    - Are there other ways you would like to see rules-intensive games handle tactical gameplay?
  • NimranNimran Member Posts: 4,875
    I personally don't have a preference. I generally like all kinds of gameplay, from turn-based to realtime, though if RTS games would implement a pause button I would like them more (I still like them as they are though). My opinion may not be worth much, but I'd likely be satisfied with whatever you put out next.
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    edited July 2016
    Dee said:

    Lots of good insight here! Thanks for sharing, everyone.

    I'd like to ask some clarifying questions, if I may. Feel free to answer any or all of the following, or ask questions of your own.

    Just a note: a number of these questions focus on turn-based gameplay, because (this being a primarily BG forum) I'm assuming that most of us are familiar with real-time with pause games.

    - Slow gameplay: Can you think of a game with TB combat that didn't feel slow? What about games with an auto-combat feature, like Heroes of Might and Magic?
    - Rules: Does your preference shift one way or the other if the game is using a system of rules you're familiar with?
    - Local Multiplayer: TB could potentially allow hot-seat local multiplayer. Is local multiplayer something that would make TB more appealing as a player?
    - Online Multiplayer: RTWP allows all players in an online game to act simultaneously--until someone pauses the game. How does pausing an online game help or hinder your gameplay experience? Do simultaneous actions make RTWP more appealing?
    - Immersion: If you prefer TB games, how do you reconcile the turn-based gameplay with immersion in the world? Are you still able to connect to the world when turns are being taken one at a time?
    - Tactics: If you prefer RTWP games, how do you feel about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast)?
    - Are there other ways you would like to see rules-intensive games handle tactical gameplay?

    - Slow gameplay: Yes. Divinity Original Sin turn based combat feels great. So does Wasteland 2 I think. A more far-fetched example would be Pokémon, which I also like. Some sort of auto-combat feature can be useful, but not required if the game is well designed.
    - Rules: No. Even though I am quite familiar with BG rules, I would like to see it in a proper turn-based engine.
    - Local Multiplayer: Probably not unless the game was specifically designed for this purpose. I would not be interested in a hypothetical hot-seat mode in BG.
    - Online Multiplayer: I have no experience but I can see how it could be annoying to play a strictly turn-based multiplayer game. But isn't Divinity: OS like this? I'm not sure.
    - Immersion: I don't see how pausing the game at your discretion adds to immersion compared to turn-based. It's more immersive to me that the flow doesn't vary.
    - Tactics: I would prefer a turn based BG :)
    - Gameplay should become first. If you want to design a real-time game, you design the game to support that.
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    edited July 2016
    Dee said:

    Lots of good insight here! Thanks for sharing, everyone.

    I'd like to ask some clarifying questions, if I may. Feel free to answer any or all of the following, or ask questions of your own.

    Just a note: a number of these questions focus on turn-based gameplay, because (this being a primarily BG forum) I'm assuming that most of us are familiar with real-time with pause games.

    - Slow gameplay: Can you think of a game with TB combat that didn't feel slow? What about games with an auto-combat feature, like Heroes of Might and Magic?

    Auto-combat resolution sounds like a good idea for trivial fights.

    - Rules: Does your preference shift one way or the other if the game is using a system of rules you're familiar with?
    Not really. I prefer a familiar rule-set, but I prefer RTWP either way.

    - Local Multiplayer: TB could potentially allow hot-seat local multiplayer. Is local multiplayer something that would make TB more appealing as a player?
    - Online Multiplayer: RTWP allows all players in an online game to act simultaneously--until someone pauses the game. How does pausing an online game help or hinder your gameplay experience? Do simultaneous actions make RTWP more appealing?
    Not interested in multiplayer at all.

    - Immersion: If you prefer TB games, how do you reconcile the turn-based gameplay with immersion in the world? Are you still able to connect to the world when turns are being taken one at a time?
    As I said, TB takes me out of the world. I found this a problem with Divinity Original Sin. The world never felt real to me. On the other hand, I didn't find it too distracting in Shadowrun: Dragonfall. Possibly because I was playing the later on a tablet.

    - Tactics: If you prefer RTWP games, how do you feel about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast)?
    Trying to anticipate enemy movement is part of the fun.
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    FinneousPJ said:


    - Immersion: I don't see how pausing the game at your discretion adds to immersion compared to turn-based. It's more immersive to me that the flow doesn't vary.

    I put it down to my party of trained warriors being able to think far more quickly than I can.
  • scriverscriver Member Posts: 2,072
    I think turnbased combat is better for the purposes of strategic and tactical depth, particularly for squad/party based games. Among the DnD based games I've played Temple of Elemental Evil has the most challenging and involved combat, as well as the most entertaining. I am fairly certain it wouldn't been nearly as fun had it been RTwP.

    To me, RTwP works better with simpler, more straightforward combat designs, like BG or Dragon Age. But I do not prefer those over a well functioning TB system.
  • mf2112mf2112 Member, Moderator Posts: 1,919
    edited July 2016
    Fardragon said:



    - Tactics: If you prefer RTWP games, how do you feel about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast)?
    Trying to anticipate enemy movement is part of the fun.


    RTWP for my preference, and echo @Fardragon here, I run away from spells, only fair that smart enough enemies will too.

    If you could implement the "Aura cleared" autopause request by @Alonso then we could have both RTWP and turn-based combats if the player chooses.
  • brusbrus Member Posts: 944
    edited July 2016
    I was mainly influenced by Morrowind, Diablo 2 and Baldur's gate. I think that these games set my mindflow how to play an RPG.

    I like Divinity: Original Sin and co-op multiplayer. I played it with friend when we had time before and enjoyed it. It was different and unique experience.
    In single player game I didn't like the feel as the time stoped when you enter the combat
    and that you can't control your characters in the order you prefer. As if the natural game-flow breaks.
    But overall game's presentation didn't ruin my want to play more.

    I started Witcher 2 but never got the time to finish it. It has pause system implemented if you want to switch you spell (sign) or weapon/item.

    Then it happened Demon and Dark souls. Dark souls revolutionized modern RPG in every way. Being minimalistic storywise, narration was infused with environment and level design.
    Dark souls is RPG in modern times what Baldur's gate was before.


    I think that people who played TB games before, enjoy them more and easily come to new ones.
    Dee said:


    - Tactics: If you prefer RTWP games, how do you feel about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast)?

    For me this wasn't frustration. It adds to the game's charm. If you roughly know the radius of the spell AOE, you can calculate so that the spell hits target who is moving out of that area. So, it's a PRO skill of the player. :smile:
    You have to adapt the speed of the fireball's sprite and AOE radius.

    In Mass effect games it was implemented that particle system reaches your target. But that is slightly inaccurate when physics is involved.
    Post edited by brus on
  • scriverscriver Member Posts: 2,072
    Dee said:

    Lots of good insight here! Thanks for sharing, everyone.

    I'd like to ask some clarifying questions, if I may. Feel free to answer any or all of the following, or ask questions of your own.

    Just a note: a number of these questions focus on turn-based gameplay, because (this being a primarily BG forum) I'm assuming that most of us are familiar with real-time with pause games.

    - Slow gameplay: Can you think of a game with TB combat that didn't feel slow? What about games with an auto-combat feature, like Heroes of Might and Magic?
    - Rules: Does your preference shift one way or the other if the game is using a system of rules you're familiar with?
    - Local Multiplayer: TB could potentially allow hot-seat local multiplayer. Is local multiplayer something that would make TB more appealing as a player?
    - Online Multiplayer: RTWP allows all players in an online game to act simultaneously--until someone pauses the game. How does pausing an online game help or hinder your gameplay experience? Do simultaneous actions make RTWP more appealing?
    - Immersion: If you prefer TB games, how do you reconcile the turn-based gameplay with immersion in the world? Are you still able to connect to the world when turns are being taken one at a time?
    - Tactics: If you prefer RTWP games, how do you feel about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast)?
    - Are there other ways you would like to see rules-intensive games handle tactical gameplay?

    - Slow gameplay: In my mind not being rushed is one of the things that make TB better than RT. Usually the only time TB feels too slow for me is if there are a lot of enemies and/or other NPCs and the game makes me sit through each of their turn in sequence, possibly even the ones I can't even see (a la Fallout 1 and 2). This could be solved by having each enemy turn in row play out simultaneously or near simultaneously.

    - Rules: My preference to not shift at all.

    - Local Multiplayer: I am not certain why TB more or less allowing of multiplayer than RT or RTwP.

    - Online Multiplayer: Same as above, and simultaneous multiplayer actions do not make RTWP any more appealing to me.

    - Immersion: Combat turns do not hurt my "immersion" any more than dice rolls, hit points, or character models standing right next to each other and repeating the same animations over and over again does. It's not relevant to my connection to the world at all.
    -
    God said:

    None of the above.

    The question implies a necessity where there is none. I'm actually working on an RPG game right now, such that is by all means rule-intensive, but which does not utilize any of these mechanical concepts at all.

    Protip: Don't let your first two test players cheat and read the rule book.
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,725
    @Dee

    Unfortunately, I would agree that an RPG game with TB combat would feel slower to me. HoMM games are not RPGs, they're wonderful TB strategies. Turn-based system suits such strategies.

    Even if I'm familiar with rules, I will still say that a game with real time with pause is preferrable for me that a TB game.

    Local and online multiplayer - I've been playing HoMM 3 in a local MP for many years, it works great. But it's a strategy game, ie. you have to develop your town, gather army, fight for resources, while your opponents do exactly that. I don't think the experience is alike for an RPG. In the same time, I've playing EEs both in local multiplayer and in online multiplayer, and I can assure it offers wonderful experience. Exactly that thing - that the game flows and anyone can pause when they want, and can communicate as long as they need before unpausing.

    Pausing online BG helped the gameplay experience. It was something I liked very much - when all the participants start discussing what to do after the pause, how to react to the world.

    Probably the best ever BG experience for me came as a result of an online BG battle in the Durlag's Tower - https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/695486/#Comment_695486.

    I feel absolutely right about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast). It's something that makes the game alive. It's one of those factors to contribute to the overall fun. I look at that as if it's rolling your dice, actually.

    I really think that the formula of handling gameplay in BG and Might and Magic VI-VIII games is golden.
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    There's definitely no need to apologize for your opinions, @JuliusBorisov ;) - the goal of this thread is to encourage insightful conversation. As long as you're contributing to that dialogue, I'm not all that concerned about whether anyone agrees or disagrees. I have my own biases and preferences, but I'm doing my best not to place judgments anywhere.

    I was primarily using HoMM as an example of auto-combat to handle simpler combats, rather than as an example of fully functioning gameplay systems.

    For those who haven't played the HoMM series, auto-combat is a toggle that you can turn on during combat, which hands control of your creatures to the computer. The combat plays itself out exactly as if you were taking turns, but the computer decides what to do on each turn for you. (HoMM also has a speed slider so that if you want to rush through simpler combats, you don't have to sit for five minutes waiting for your Zombies to cross the battlefield two hexes at a time.)

    You can turn off the auto-combat feature at any time to take back control of your units. It's functionally the same as the Party AI in Baldur's Gate, just applied to turn-based combat.
  • batoorbatoor Member Posts: 676
    edited July 2016
    I like both as far as I've experienced.

    The only additional requirement I have is that the action is based on rolls.. As in no Diablo/hack and slash mouseclick party.
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811

    - Slow gameplay: Can you think of a game with TB combat that didn't feel slow? What about games with an auto-combat feature, like Heroes of Might and Magic?
    Pay to play games like Galaxy of Heroes.

    - Rules: Does your preference shift one way or the other if the game is using a system of rules you're familiar with?
    Rule bending is allowed as long as it fits with the mechanics of the game IMO, but the spirit of the rules should be there.

    - Local Multiplayer: TB could potentially allow hot-seat local multiplayer. Is local multiplayer something that would make TB more appealing as a player?
    For me no, however, the question you need to ask yourself is does adding local multiplayer make the game less appealing to someone?
    If the resources are there, and it doesn't hinder the game or a player's experience then adding it would only be benicifial even if you are reaching a small group of players.

    - Immersion: If you prefer TB games, how do you reconcile the turn-based gameplay with immersion in the world? Are you still able to connect to the world when turns are being taken one at a time?
    No. All immersion needs to happiest of the battle, unless it is a text heavy game like Hands of Fate.

    - Tactics: If you prefer RTWP games, how do you feel about the compromise in tactical precision (for example, casting a fireball on an area and then watching an enemy move out of that area before the spell is cast)?
    That's part of the charm of it, and adds to the tactics and skill set a player must adapt too. It is also more realistic. The creature is charging at you, it doesn't stop because it moved 6 feet amd is waiting for you to do something.

    - Are there other ways you would like to see rules-intensive games handle tactical gameplay?
    All rules should be behind the code to a point where a player doesn't have to worry about them. Baldur's Gate does this extremely well.

    If the rules start seeping out, it can break immersion as the player is more concentrated on how to make the rules work for them than actually playing the game.
  • killerrabbitkillerrabbit Member Posts: 402
    Turn Based

    And thanks for the introduction -- on a forum dedicated to a RTWP game I know I'm in the minority. Not looking to change minds just putting my preferences out there. It seems all but certain that we will get RTWP but I want the pause to replicate turns as much as possible.

    What I want from any D&D game is to feel as much P&P as possible and that means turn based. While BG, as a whole, was worlds better than ToEE I really enjoyed the tactical precision of the ToEE system. (Which is saying something because in my view of D&D 2.5 > 3.5 and Faerun > Greyhawk). BG was the better game, ToEE had superior combat.

    To me, turn based doesn't break immersion. I'm always thinking of what I'm going to do, how the opponent's move makes me alter my initial strategy and what impediments there are to my successful completion of that move. Probably because I started with P&P turn based just seems like D&D.

    It also has something to do with the classes I play -- I only play mages, clerics and 2nd ed thieves. Relatively weak classes that I try to keep out of the fray so they can cast their spell at the right time or get themselves into the right position for the backstab. I don't feel much immersion in whatever Minsc is doing -- he's just making sure that my PC can get her spell off.

    So , no, I don't feel any lack of immersion with turn based games. And in truth I often feel *less* immersed in real time games. When my character does something I didn't intend for her to do I feel like I'm watching the game play itself. Why did that happen? I guess the AI thought that was the better move.

    So yes, for me I dislike the imprecision that comes with RT.

    And like others I don't like who-can-click-fastest games.

    On rule intensive games -- I prefer D & D because I know and I like the rules. If I don't like or don't understand the rules that diminishes my enjoyment of the game. While I understand that PoE has been responding to requests from fans -- and that is a good thing -- the combat rules have changed so much I sometimes feel like throwing up my hands and saying "what just happened"?

    I also like the rules to make sense. Fantasy-sense of course but I don't like things that feel completely unreal like "sleeping bonuses" -- what bonus do I want from sleep? Err . . . the reset of the fatigue timer and some modest healing? Another example -- 4th eds healing surges that allow a barbarian to heal the thief who is 20 feet away. So, yes, I want to be immersed in the rules.

    I don't play multiplayer so no opinions there.

    So, TL;DR -- what I don't like about real time: "what just happened" feeling / lack of tactical precision / arcade game feel / lack of immersion
  • kjeronkjeron Member Posts: 2,367
    I don't care for TB primarily because it does not allow for reactionary game-play. In RT(with or without pause) I can stop someones action/movement and redirect them to do something else as the situation requires. Such as moving out of an impending AoE as previously mentioned. Pause and Auto-pause are only there to prevent the player's reaction time from being a factor.

    I also have never played a TB game that allowed someone to willingly "wait" to take their turn until later in the turn sequence without imposing some form of penalty upon the player or the player's next turn.
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    How about both? There are already RPG's out there which let the player decide whenever they wish to enable turn-based combat or real time with pause. With just a single click in the game option's menu.

    That way everyone gets their prefered game styles. And more satisfied customers is always nice to have.




    If I absolutely *have* to pick one of the two, I would probably choose real time with pause.
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    edited July 2016
    @Kamigoroshi Can you give some examples of games that have that option?

    EDIT: I'd also be interested to know your reasons for your preference. In games that have both options, what is it about each that makes you choose it (or not choose it)?

    To be clear, I'm offering this discussion for its own sake; it's not tied to anything Beamdog is currently working on. I just find the two sides of the issue very interesting.
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    @Dee The crowdfunding RPG "Project Resurgence" offers such a dynamic battle system:
    https://kickstarter.com/projects/nectargamestudios/project-resurgence/description

    Took a while until I remembered its title. I blame the age for that. :p
    The reason for my preference is quite simple. Different modes allow for diffrent gaming experiences.
    For instance roleplaying as a hotheaded warrior may be more fullfilling in real time combat. While another, more calculating character, could be better roleplayed with turn based combat.

    Personally I enjoy both systems. So having the possiblity of having two different ways to play one game is a win-win solution for me.
Sign In or Register to comment.

2024 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2024 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.