"Let Larian do what they want (with BG3). RtwP vs TB - we felt ourselves how hard this topic is. We saw 2 camps. As soon as we announced a TB option, RtwP people started to complain. Both modes should exist in games. Let people decide what they want. We'll try BG3 in Early Access and see".
I think there is a generally feeling that RTwP as a combat system is in danger of dying out, and that is not totally wrong if you restrict it to major western titles, with the PoEs series likely being continued.
Changing the series that did not invent but popularized the RTwP combat system to TB is a worrying signal if you share this fear.
When I look at the Internet I see much more TB fans attacking RTwP games than the other way around except in the very specific instance we have here of the most iconic RTwP series switching to TB.
Honestly though with Pathfinder WotR there was an outcry at the announcement that it 'must' be turn based. Fact that it's a selectable mode is great but with the current trends I'd be very suprised if any devs wanting to make a RtwP game don't get 'encouraged' to make it Turn Based instead.
Precisely. And this is what I have on occasion referred to as TB bullying. Strong language? Yes absolutely. But entirely appropriate and justified imho.
How is that different from the outcry that Baldur's Gate 3 must be RTwP?
Because it is specific to BG3 (given the first two games were RTwP) and not all TB cRPGs. For example, there was no orchestrated effort by RTwP fans to push Larian to change from TB in D:OS. But virtually every time someone offers a RTwP cRPG (and I'm speaking of that very small niche of old-school cRPGs here) there is a very loud chorus of TB fans demanding the game be changed to TB.
@kanisatha Larian decided BG3 should be TB not because of what people wanted. They did it because they were so experienced with TB games and didn't want to risk creating a so-so RtwP game. As developers, as creative people, they envision BG3 that way.
The idea that RTwP is close to dying out seems very unlikely. WotR just has a phenomenally successful kickstarter.
We know from polls and genuine discuss that while TB is more popular than RTwP (right now) - we know there’s a significant number of people who want and enjoy that combat system. It’s is incredibly unlikely that all gaming companies will simultaneously decide to abandon the system.
Lastly - I think @BelleSorciere was being rhetorical in her question. Regardless of the perceived bullying abroad, the most vociferous voices demanding change for a combat system at RTwP. If that’s bullying on Larian against RTwP, it’s bullying here against TB.
@kanisatha Larian decided BG3 should be TB not because of what people wanted. They did it because they were so experienced with TB games and didn't want to risk creating a so-so RtwP game. As developers, as creative people, they envision BG3 that way.
But I never said Larian chose TB for BG3 because of any kind of bullying from TB fans. So I don't understand your point.
To get back to my point, PoE1, PoE2, T:ToN, P:Km, P:WotR, Black Geyser, Tower of Time, all had loud, aggressive, concentrated efforts made by TB fans to try and coerce the developer to make the combat system TB. In some of these instances, not all by any means, those TB fans even threatened future boycott and review-bombing campaigns. By contrast, no such efforts were mounted by RTwP fans against similar TB games. It is only now, finally, with BG3, that RTwP fans have raised their voices against TB combat in a game, a game whose previous iterations were RTwP. So yes, there is (a) a clear pattern to this, and (b) no equivalence (yet) between the two sides in this regard.
@kanisatha Larian decided BG3 should be TB not because of what people wanted. They did it because they were so experienced with TB games and didn't want to risk creating a so-so RtwP game. As developers, as creative people, they envision BG3 that way.
But I never said Larian chose TB for BG3 because of any kind of bullying from TB fans. So I don't understand your point.
To get back to my point, PoE1, PoE2, T:ToN, P:Km, P:WotR, Black Geyser, Tower of Time, all had loud, aggressive, concentrated efforts made by TB fans to try and coerce the developer to make the combat system TB. In some of these instances, not all by any means, those TB fans even threatened future boycott and review-bombing campaigns. By contrast, no such efforts were mounted by RTwP fans against similar TB games. It is only now, finally, with BG3, that RTwP fans have raised their voices against TB combat in a game, a game whose previous iterations were RTwP. So yes, there is (a) a clear pattern to this, and (b) no equivalence (yet) between the two sides in this regard.
Once Owlcat Games announced a TB mode for P:WotR, RtwP fans attacked. You can easily find that on their Kickstarter pages. It's also confirmed by the interview @PsicoVic linked above. In the same interview, they also say that there is an obvious trend and request for such games. That was said by a game designer who knows their stuff.
So, there are no good or bad sides, nobody is better or worse. Each group is very passionate.
And indeed, P:WotR got more money during the Kickstarter campaign than D:OS 2. If that is not an indication that RtwP requests are vocal and developers listen to that, I don't know what will be.
Once Owlcat Games announced a TB mode for P:WotR, RtwP fans attacked.
Ah but this was RTwP fans REACTING to what they perceived as (a) TB fans winning the war that they had waged against Owlcat going all the way back from the beginning of P:Km, and (b) Owlcat caving to those bullying TB fans. This is not at all the same as RTwP fans attacking a TB game.
Yeah - it seems to me that you’re just excusing one side and condemning the other for the same thing. As someone who doesn’t have a strong preference either way, one crowd on this forum has been considerably more aggressive about their combat style preference than the other.
I don’t think either side is “bullying” or being tyrannical - but if you insist we speak in those terms, both sides are not being equal in their animosity here.
I’m not on other forums, so their distribution is irrelevant to me.
Honestly though with Pathfinder WotR there was an outcry at the announcement that it 'must' be turn based. Fact that it's a selectable mode is great but with the current trends I'd be very suprised if any devs wanting to make a RtwP game don't get 'encouraged' to make it Turn Based instead.
Precisely. And this is what I have on occasion referred to as TB bullying. Strong language? Yes absolutely. But entirely appropriate and justified imho.
How is that different from the outcry that Baldur's Gate 3 must be RTwP?
Because it is specific to BG3 (given the first two games were RTwP) and not all TB cRPGs. For example, there was no orchestrated effort by RTwP fans to push Larian to change from TB in D:OS. But virtually every time someone offers a RTwP cRPG (and I'm speaking of that very small niche of old-school cRPGs here) there is a very loud chorus of TB fans demanding the game be changed to TB.
I don't know, sounds like confirmation bias to me. Also, I don't have a preference. BG3 can be TB, RTwP, or both, and I would be okay with that.
deadfire shows you could not just change a combat system design with rtwp in mind and just turn it tb. it made most encounters much slower then they were originally.
Yes, the old slow pace of TB. It can't be denied that waiting for ai opponents to slog forward one at a time is...not fun. Many games have shortcuts for this, if you find them. Often there's a speed up button, other times clicking the active unit warps it to it's destination where some action is promptly completed. I admit that neither is especially conducive to immersion, but then sitting around a table with a bunch of fat balding friends isn't either. If your friends aren't fat and/or balding, just wait.
Realms Beyond is going to have an auto-resolve button for combats. TB combat is so aggravating to me that I will be very inclined to use that button in most (but not all) combat situations, though obviously also with save-scumming. Yeah, even save-scumming is more tolerable than actually playing through most TB encounters.
Lol. Perhaps if scripts were better I'd like RTwP more. If scripts were a lot better pause could possibly be optional. But as it is, I don't really like the scripts that much, so I micromanage on auto-pause which almost feels like TB.
PF:KM is the most old school of the 3. Game jounralists freaked out because "i can't kill a insect swarm with a sword, swords should solve everything from a insect swarm, a knight on plate armor to a rock golem" but sold well and was good rated among the target audience. Time matters in the game. The combat is unforgiving and decisions can take long therm impact. There are so many classes and sub classes with dozen of possible bloodlines only for one class(sorcerer). PFKM is also the hardest one. The normal difficulty was made to be challenging for pathfinder veterans. I saw Jason Bulmahn(pathfinder design) having trouble in some parts of his stream ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQZl536LJrUocOHL9OhtplQ/videos )
Divinity Original Sin 2 is the most modern of the games. Has cooldowns, is up to the modern standards and has full voice acting, focus a lot on environmental gimmicks , and the itemization is very wow like, where most of your power comes from the gear and you need to constant update your gear(not like old school games. On G2, i can get Beliar's claw on chapter 2 and end the game using only it)
PoE is the in between. IS far more old school like than dos2 and far more modernized than pfkm. Attributes for example, aren't measurements about your character capabilities like on old school games but aren't like dos2 either. They impact very little in a homogenized way. Might for eg buffs damage from bows, magic, unarmed attacks(...)
Your favorite is probably linked to how much you like or dislike old school or modern games.
Hmm, I wish I found this thread sooner. Quite an interesting read, and quite an interesting discussion, though it has probably changed its focus from what Julius originally talked about in his post.
I will make no pretenses. I, on a completely personal level, prefer RTwP system of combat, for to me, it feels natural, fluid, non-chunky and dynamic, while also offering you the chance to pause and think, that action games don't. My problem with TB is not how you play them, but how they act. It feels like time is shattered into rigid fragments. It feels like things are moving out of sync, unconcertedly, while others are waiting. Just waiting, for no apparent reason. It doesn't make sense to me. While someone may argue that pausing in RTwP is similar, but no, when I pause there, everything stops. The combat in TB feels like cut into chunks, that I cannot put together into the feeling of realism. You wait, frozen in time, while your enemy hacks at you, staring in mute horror at their bloody axe. You try to move, but you're frozen. The blow comes, and you could only say, "Ouch!" (or maybe "Owowowowww!" if that's what you prefer). The fact that even simple actions like movements are turn-ified makes positioning my party a great ordeal to me. Also, I don't care waiting for the enemy to take their sweet time and play their turn, I... I... I JUST WANT TO KILL THEM AS FAST AS POSSIBLE!
That being said, I personally think that creators should have total freedom in what that want to create, and create what they feel they are comfortable creating, knowing that what they create will be the best that they possible can. But in the end, since they are creating this thing for others, that's where things get complicated. People have different tastes, and not everyone will like the same thing. That is understandable.
However, I think the current outrage is because there will be only one BG3. And everyone would like it to be the BG3 that they envisioned. And in that approach, nobody is to be blamed. The people who are getting what they wanted are happy, those who aren't, are upset, which is only natural. In the end, BG3 and all the FR stuff is owned by those coast wizards, and they will do what they want to do, and what they think is profitable. After all, this is a business, an affair to make money, and I say this not in condemnation.
So, it was WotC's business decision to give BG3 to Larian, and it was Larian's business decision to make the game turn based. And this is how BG3 will be. Whether you like it or not, you will have to accept it. I do understand and also share the feelings of nostalgia, the vibe and the legacy that is the BG saga, but after all, it's not we who own the copyright and IP and all that stuff, and so, we won't be the ones to dictate how we want the game to be, the game that we thought to be "our" game, but which really isn't so. For the reality is that we cannot make the BG3 we want, we will have to accept whatever is given to us.
What is my opinion on all of this? Well, if it matters at all, I was initially excited to hear about the development of BG3. When it was declared that it will be exclusively turn based, I felt disheartened. And then when I finally saw the gameplay trailer, I was... not impressed at all. Not just for the turn-based-ness, but for multiple other aspects (pAsT tEnSe DiAlOg ChOiCeS, a very spoofy % chance to hit and not a definite and sure thing like THAC0 and AC, etc.). I may feel upset because it's definitely not the BG3 that I dreamt of for so long, but I have limited myself to just feeling so, knowing that what I feel doesn't matter in the greater reality of things, because they won't change. I'll just give a sigh, and that's it.
That's my feelings on this matter. Also, let me make it clear that I don't wish to engage in any debate on this issue, for I neither have the time, nor the energy, nor the willingness to sacrifice my peace of mind, for such trivial things as making others come to my point of view, when it's of no use to me. If you don't agree with me, I don't care, and if you do agree with me, I still don't care. I just said what I think and feel, and that's it. Have a good day, everyone!
I don't care one way or the other, because even though I personally probably LIKE real-time with pause better, the two most accurate representations of D&D rules in video games are Temple of Elemental Evil and an indie game called Knights of the Chalice. Both were turn-based. Moreover, real-time with pause is still acting on turns and rounds, they are just on a timer. Really not all that different from what we saw in the '90s with Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VI. It was still based on turns, but you didn't have infinite time to sit there and make choices. The thing is, with BOTH of the methods beings discussed, you CAN take as much time as you like. I've always said, the more you pause in Infinity Engine games (and their ilk), the more successful you will be. You can slow the game to such a crawl that it effectively doesn't matter. You control every millisecond. So maybe people don't like turn-based because it's too slow?? I guess that's not a problem for me, since I shut the AI off on all my companions in real-time with pause games the second they join the party.
PF:KM is the most old school of the 3. Game jounralists freaked out because "i can't kill a insect swarm with a sword, swords should solve everything from a insect swarm, a knight on plate armor to a rock golem" but sold well and was good rated among the target audience. Time matters in the game. The combat is unforgiving and decisions can take long therm impact. There are so many classes and sub classes with dozen of possible bloodlines only for one class(sorcerer). PFKM is also the hardest one. The normal difficulty was made to be challenging for pathfinder veterans. I saw Jason Bulmahn(pathfinder design) having trouble in some parts of his stream ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQZl536LJrUocOHL9OhtplQ/videos )
Divinity Original Sin 2 is the most modern of the games. Has cooldowns, is up to the modern standards and has full voice acting, focus a lot on environmental gimmicks , and the itemization is very wow like, where most of your power comes from the gear and you need to constant update your gear(not like old school games. On G2, i can get Beliar's claw on chapter 2 and end the game using only it)
PoE is the in between. IS far more old school like than dos2 and far more modernized than pfkm. Attributes for example, aren't measurements about your character capabilities like on old school games but aren't like dos2 either. They impact very little in a homogenized way. Might for eg buffs damage from bows, magic, unarmed attacks(...)
Your favorite is probably linked to how much you like or dislike old school or modern games.
I understand you hate cooldowns with a red-hot passion, but I still fail to see how a cooldown is any different functionally than having spells only able to be cast a couple times a day and then just abusing the rest button to reset them for every encounter. Later games in the Infinity Engine-style had to CORRECT this because it makes the game too easy on normal difficulty. You had to put artificial limitations on yourself to make it challenging. See also the ability to have infinite Rejuvenation Potions in a game like Diablo II, rather than having to time your usage based on availability.
Secondly, the idea that what you like is a based on whether you like old or modern games is absurd. Here is a list of stone-cold classics that were turn-based:
1.) Pool of Radiance (and every Gold Box Game afterward)
2.) Wizardry 8
3.) Might and Magic III/IV/V
4.) Fallout 1 and 2
5.) Any Tactics game ever made
Moreover, even the highly though of VI-VIII Might and Magic games let you.......that's right, toggle between real-time and turn-based combat by pressing the space bar.
In the end, I think this argument is silly, because if you only played real-time with pause CRPGs, you'd run out of games to play before you hit 15.
Turn based vs RTWP doesn't bother me much, although I prefer RTWP. I dislike 5th edition enough that using that system is a net negative for me. Basically, any interest I have in BG3 will chalk up to its story and characters, and I don't hold out hope on that front, considering they want to use the done-to-death mindflayers as part of their central plotline, rather than the thousands of more interesting beings in the realms.
I understand you hate cooldowns with a red-hot passion, but I still fail to see how a cooldown is any different functionally than having spells only able to be cast a couple times a day and then just abusing the rest button to reset them for every encounter. Later games in the Infinity Engine-style had to CORRECT this because it makes the game too easy on normal difficulty. (...)
NO, is not. Even people who defended cooldowns over spell slots on sword coast legends recognize that they are different. Cooldowns are extremely more artificial than spell slots since spell slots is sole based on literature and magicians needing to rest to regain power exists in tons of literature works. As for potions, make like Gothic 1/2/3 and Dark Souls. Your character needs to drink the potion, you don't press a button and the easus/potion is insta teleported to your belly.
As for rest scumming, Pathfinder Kingmaker solved it by making the time matters.
Lastly, i NEVER criticized turn based. In fact,, i recommended turn based mod for people who was having problems with Kingmaker combat. Enjoyed a lot Temple of Elemental Evil and Dark Sun : Shattered Lands. I only criticized turn based games when they have slow animations, trash combats, etc; because those problems can make very slow and boring to play. I an neutral in between turn based and real time with pause. Some RtWP encounters, i wish that was turn based and some turn based encounters, i wish that was RtWP. I honestly have no opinion about the best system.
Interesting debate here. I don't really fall on either side of the spectrum. I thoroughly enjoyed turn-based combat back in Gold Box days, I was a huge fan of RTS games in the 90s, so I also loved the RT combat in BG and PoE and P:K, but I was also pleasantly surprised with how much I enjoyed OS -- I was initially skeptical of going back to TB combat. But it's pretty well done!
My only key two cents is that I'm pretty strongly against having both modes in a game. I get that, superficially, this seems like the best solution, but it's not! The two modes call for many different things. Realtime can support larger parties and larger battles, and really is best for games like that. Turn based is better for smaller parties and smaller battles, where small decisions can have extreme consequences. I think Deadfire very much showed that you can't really get the "best" of both worlds here. Instead you end up with a weak combat system overall.
I'm willing to grant a tiny exception to the second Pathfinder game, but only because they specifically fundraised for this goal, so you can't necessarily say that they were sacrificing their labor in the way Obsidian did with Deadfire.
I
My only key two cents is that I'm pretty strongly against having both modes in a game. I get that, superficially, this seems like the best solution, but it's not! The two modes call for many different things. Realtime can support larger parties and larger battles, and really is best for games like that. Turn based is better for smaller parties and smaller battles, where small decisions can have extreme consequences. I think Deadfire very much showed that you can't really get the "best" of both worlds here. Instead you end up with a weak combat system overall.
I disagree with that point. I mean, turn based combat CAN work for huge parties and huge enemies. As longs you have option to have concurrent turns and fast animations. The final battle of Dark Sun Shattered Lands is extremely long but not a problem.
I don't even see where it's a "debate" at all. As far as I can tell, there aren't even a dozen real-time with pause isometric RPGs in existence. You have Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, Icewind Dale 1 and 2, Planescape: Torment, Pillars of Eternity 1 and 2, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, Lionheart: Legacy of the Crusader and the recent Tower of Time. That's it. If you want to get cute, you can throw in Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 and Dragon Age: Origins, since even though they are 3D, they still have the same basic concepts.
I don't even see where it's a "debate" at all. As far as I can tell, there aren't even a dozen real-time with pause isometric RPGs in existence. You have Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, Icewind Dale 1 and 2, Planescape: Torment, Pillars of Eternity 1 and 2, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, Lionheart: Legacy of the Crusader and the recent Tower of Time. That's it. If you want to get cute, you can throw in Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 and Dragon Age: Origins, since even though they are 3D, they still have the same basic concepts.
Agreed. This is why I've never understood anybody that insists on realtime. There's so few realtime tactical RPG's out there, that you're really shortchanging yourself if you refuse to play turn-based ones.
Ultimately, turn-based is probably always going to be the dominant form, because we're talking about tactical/strategic combat here. If we broaden the scope to games that have been focused around that, we see that the trend holds there as well. There was a wave of RTS games in the 90s and 00s, but turn-based strategy is still the norm.
What made me concerned with BG3 was NEVER turn based. Was Vincke comments regardless misses and spell slots. Now i an less concerned BUT still fear that Larian will butcher warlock and necromancer specialized wizards. This two things are the most butchered things in all TT adaptations. But we will only know when people can test the game.
In fact, the perfect game IMO would be a faithful adaptation like ToEE + a epic story like Bg. On ToEE, they din't nerfed even the range of spells, you can hit enemies rooms away with a fireball. And cloudkill is insanely good. There are no reagents on ToEE but the reagent cost of a spell is "reduced" from your gold.
Only to nitpick. " since even though they are 3D"
BG3 is 3D and the next pathfinder will have a camera rotation.
@DinoDin "Agreed. This is why I've never understood anybody that insists on realtime. There's so few realtime tactical RPG's out there, that you're really shortchanging yourself if you refuse to play turn-based ones."
Its kind of the reason so many insist on it though. Despite so many people preferring it, there really aren't many options to choose from. Its why a series that has been rtwp for decades switching to turn based is such a kick in the balls for people.
I couldn't agree with V1ct0r more about the perfect game. ToEE's faithfulness to the core system is unmatched, even today. You can use the actual 3.5 phb and dmg... Nothing in game not there, nothing done through some altered mechanic. Some things from the books not in game. Ride skill, for example, is not needed as there are no mounts. None of the accompanying mounted combat feats either...in other words they decluttered and omitted unnecessary rules, skills, etc, while keeping literally everything else. A game like this with a story as intriguing and well told as BG would be a monster (no pun intended).
Comments
"Let Larian do what they want (with BG3). RtwP vs TB - we felt ourselves how hard this topic is. We saw 2 camps. As soon as we announced a TB option, RtwP people started to complain. Both modes should exist in games. Let people decide what they want. We'll try BG3 in Early Access and see".
Most leveled opinion I read in the past 6 months.
Changing the series that did not invent but popularized the RTwP combat system to TB is a worrying signal if you share this fear.
When I look at the Internet I see much more TB fans attacking RTwP games than the other way around except in the very specific instance we have here of the most iconic RTwP series switching to TB.
Because it is specific to BG3 (given the first two games were RTwP) and not all TB cRPGs. For example, there was no orchestrated effort by RTwP fans to push Larian to change from TB in D:OS. But virtually every time someone offers a RTwP cRPG (and I'm speaking of that very small niche of old-school cRPGs here) there is a very loud chorus of TB fans demanding the game be changed to TB.
We know from polls and genuine discuss that while TB is more popular than RTwP (right now) - we know there’s a significant number of people who want and enjoy that combat system. It’s is incredibly unlikely that all gaming companies will simultaneously decide to abandon the system.
Lastly - I think @BelleSorciere was being rhetorical in her question. Regardless of the perceived bullying abroad, the most vociferous voices demanding change for a combat system at RTwP. If that’s bullying on Larian against RTwP, it’s bullying here against TB.
But I never said Larian chose TB for BG3 because of any kind of bullying from TB fans. So I don't understand your point.
To get back to my point, PoE1, PoE2, T:ToN, P:Km, P:WotR, Black Geyser, Tower of Time, all had loud, aggressive, concentrated efforts made by TB fans to try and coerce the developer to make the combat system TB. In some of these instances, not all by any means, those TB fans even threatened future boycott and review-bombing campaigns. By contrast, no such efforts were mounted by RTwP fans against similar TB games. It is only now, finally, with BG3, that RTwP fans have raised their voices against TB combat in a game, a game whose previous iterations were RTwP. So yes, there is (a) a clear pattern to this, and (b) no equivalence (yet) between the two sides in this regard.
So you think a turn based game and a rtwp game feel exactly the same to play?
Once Owlcat Games announced a TB mode for P:WotR, RtwP fans attacked. You can easily find that on their Kickstarter pages. It's also confirmed by the interview @PsicoVic linked above. In the same interview, they also say that there is an obvious trend and request for such games. That was said by a game designer who knows their stuff.
So, there are no good or bad sides, nobody is better or worse. Each group is very passionate.
And indeed, P:WotR got more money during the Kickstarter campaign than D:OS 2. If that is not an indication that RtwP requests are vocal and developers listen to that, I don't know what will be.
Ah but this was RTwP fans REACTING to what they perceived as (a) TB fans winning the war that they had waged against Owlcat going all the way back from the beginning of P:Km, and (b) Owlcat caving to those bullying TB fans. This is not at all the same as RTwP fans attacking a TB game.
I don’t think either side is “bullying” or being tyrannical - but if you insist we speak in those terms, both sides are not being equal in their animosity here.
I’m not on other forums, so their distribution is irrelevant to me.
I don't know, sounds like confirmation bias to me. Also, I don't have a preference. BG3 can be TB, RTwP, or both, and I would be okay with that.
PF:KM is the most old school of the 3. Game jounralists freaked out because "i can't kill a insect swarm with a sword, swords should solve everything from a insect swarm, a knight on plate armor to a rock golem" but sold well and was good rated among the target audience. Time matters in the game. The combat is unforgiving and decisions can take long therm impact. There are so many classes and sub classes with dozen of possible bloodlines only for one class(sorcerer). PFKM is also the hardest one. The normal difficulty was made to be challenging for pathfinder veterans. I saw Jason Bulmahn(pathfinder design) having trouble in some parts of his stream ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQZl536LJrUocOHL9OhtplQ/videos )
Divinity Original Sin 2 is the most modern of the games. Has cooldowns, is up to the modern standards and has full voice acting, focus a lot on environmental gimmicks , and the itemization is very wow like, where most of your power comes from the gear and you need to constant update your gear(not like old school games. On G2, i can get Beliar's claw on chapter 2 and end the game using only it)
PoE is the in between. IS far more old school like than dos2 and far more modernized than pfkm. Attributes for example, aren't measurements about your character capabilities like on old school games but aren't like dos2 either. They impact very little in a homogenized way. Might for eg buffs damage from bows, magic, unarmed attacks(...)
Your favorite is probably linked to how much you like or dislike old school or modern games.
I will make no pretenses. I, on a completely personal level, prefer RTwP system of combat, for to me, it feels natural, fluid, non-chunky and dynamic, while also offering you the chance to pause and think, that action games don't. My problem with TB is not how you play them, but how they act. It feels like time is shattered into rigid fragments. It feels like things are moving out of sync, unconcertedly, while others are waiting. Just waiting, for no apparent reason. It doesn't make sense to me. While someone may argue that pausing in RTwP is similar, but no, when I pause there, everything stops. The combat in TB feels like cut into chunks, that I cannot put together into the feeling of realism. You wait, frozen in time, while your enemy hacks at you, staring in mute horror at their bloody axe. You try to move, but you're frozen. The blow comes, and you could only say, "Ouch!" (or maybe "Owowowowww!" if that's what you prefer). The fact that even simple actions like movements are turn-ified makes positioning my party a great ordeal to me. Also, I don't care waiting for the enemy to take their sweet time and play their turn, I... I... I JUST WANT TO KILL THEM AS FAST AS POSSIBLE!
That being said, I personally think that creators should have total freedom in what that want to create, and create what they feel they are comfortable creating, knowing that what they create will be the best that they possible can. But in the end, since they are creating this thing for others, that's where things get complicated. People have different tastes, and not everyone will like the same thing. That is understandable.
However, I think the current outrage is because there will be only one BG3. And everyone would like it to be the BG3 that they envisioned. And in that approach, nobody is to be blamed. The people who are getting what they wanted are happy, those who aren't, are upset, which is only natural. In the end, BG3 and all the FR stuff is owned by those coast wizards, and they will do what they want to do, and what they think is profitable. After all, this is a business, an affair to make money, and I say this not in condemnation.
So, it was WotC's business decision to give BG3 to Larian, and it was Larian's business decision to make the game turn based. And this is how BG3 will be. Whether you like it or not, you will have to accept it. I do understand and also share the feelings of nostalgia, the vibe and the legacy that is the BG saga, but after all, it's not we who own the copyright and IP and all that stuff, and so, we won't be the ones to dictate how we want the game to be, the game that we thought to be "our" game, but which really isn't so. For the reality is that we cannot make the BG3 we want, we will have to accept whatever is given to us.
What is my opinion on all of this? Well, if it matters at all, I was initially excited to hear about the development of BG3. When it was declared that it will be exclusively turn based, I felt disheartened. And then when I finally saw the gameplay trailer, I was... not impressed at all. Not just for the turn-based-ness, but for multiple other aspects (pAsT tEnSe DiAlOg ChOiCeS, a very spoofy % chance to hit and not a definite and sure thing like THAC0 and AC, etc.). I may feel upset because it's definitely not the BG3 that I dreamt of for so long, but I have limited myself to just feeling so, knowing that what I feel doesn't matter in the greater reality of things, because they won't change. I'll just give a sigh, and that's it.
That's my feelings on this matter. Also, let me make it clear that I don't wish to engage in any debate on this issue, for I neither have the time, nor the energy, nor the willingness to sacrifice my peace of mind, for such trivial things as making others come to my point of view, when it's of no use to me. If you don't agree with me, I don't care, and if you do agree with me, I still don't care. I just said what I think and feel, and that's it. Have a good day, everyone!
I understand you hate cooldowns with a red-hot passion, but I still fail to see how a cooldown is any different functionally than having spells only able to be cast a couple times a day and then just abusing the rest button to reset them for every encounter. Later games in the Infinity Engine-style had to CORRECT this because it makes the game too easy on normal difficulty. You had to put artificial limitations on yourself to make it challenging. See also the ability to have infinite Rejuvenation Potions in a game like Diablo II, rather than having to time your usage based on availability.
Secondly, the idea that what you like is a based on whether you like old or modern games is absurd. Here is a list of stone-cold classics that were turn-based:
1.) Pool of Radiance (and every Gold Box Game afterward)
2.) Wizardry 8
3.) Might and Magic III/IV/V
4.) Fallout 1 and 2
5.) Any Tactics game ever made
Moreover, even the highly though of VI-VIII Might and Magic games let you.......that's right, toggle between real-time and turn-based combat by pressing the space bar.
In the end, I think this argument is silly, because if you only played real-time with pause CRPGs, you'd run out of games to play before you hit 15.
Just yesterday I found this tweet by the InXile Community Manager - basically, it had expressed the same opinion I have:
NO, is not. Even people who defended cooldowns over spell slots on sword coast legends recognize that they are different. Cooldowns are extremely more artificial than spell slots since spell slots is sole based on literature and magicians needing to rest to regain power exists in tons of literature works. As for potions, make like Gothic 1/2/3 and Dark Souls. Your character needs to drink the potion, you don't press a button and the easus/potion is insta teleported to your belly.
As for rest scumming, Pathfinder Kingmaker solved it by making the time matters.
Lastly, i NEVER criticized turn based. In fact,, i recommended turn based mod for people who was having problems with Kingmaker combat. Enjoyed a lot Temple of Elemental Evil and Dark Sun : Shattered Lands. I only criticized turn based games when they have slow animations, trash combats, etc; because those problems can make very slow and boring to play. I an neutral in between turn based and real time with pause. Some RtWP encounters, i wish that was turn based and some turn based encounters, i wish that was RtWP. I honestly have no opinion about the best system.
My only key two cents is that I'm pretty strongly against having both modes in a game. I get that, superficially, this seems like the best solution, but it's not! The two modes call for many different things. Realtime can support larger parties and larger battles, and really is best for games like that. Turn based is better for smaller parties and smaller battles, where small decisions can have extreme consequences. I think Deadfire very much showed that you can't really get the "best" of both worlds here. Instead you end up with a weak combat system overall.
I'm willing to grant a tiny exception to the second Pathfinder game, but only because they specifically fundraised for this goal, so you can't necessarily say that they were sacrificing their labor in the way Obsidian did with Deadfire.
I disagree with that point. I mean, turn based combat CAN work for huge parties and huge enemies. As longs you have option to have concurrent turns and fast animations. The final battle of Dark Sun Shattered Lands is extremely long but not a problem.
Agreed. This is why I've never understood anybody that insists on realtime. There's so few realtime tactical RPG's out there, that you're really shortchanging yourself if you refuse to play turn-based ones.
Ultimately, turn-based is probably always going to be the dominant form, because we're talking about tactical/strategic combat here. If we broaden the scope to games that have been focused around that, we see that the trend holds there as well. There was a wave of RTS games in the 90s and 00s, but turn-based strategy is still the norm.
In fact, the perfect game IMO would be a faithful adaptation like ToEE + a epic story like Bg. On ToEE, they din't nerfed even the range of spells, you can hit enemies rooms away with a fireball. And cloudkill is insanely good. There are no reagents on ToEE but the reagent cost of a spell is "reduced" from your gold.
Only to nitpick. " since even though they are 3D"
BG3 is 3D and the next pathfinder will have a camera rotation.
Its kind of the reason so many insist on it though. Despite so many people preferring it, there really aren't many options to choose from. Its why a series that has been rtwp for decades switching to turn based is such a kick in the balls for people.