Poll: Your opinions on RPG combat

[Kahunaburger]

Turn-based combat can quite literally put me to sleep. Real-time has never done so.



so I say any turn-based combat can go to hell.


I also think the outcome of battle should hinge as much on your skill at the keyboard as it does on the numbers, perhaps even moreso. Nothing shatters immersion more than numbers deciding that an attack that hit by every other cue the game has to offer didn't hit.


Basically, something like Fallout 3/NV.

Although my impression of FONV was that it was very build-dependent. You basically set up something powerful (in my case crits + energy weapons, but I imagine you could do something ridiculous with the brush gun) and then shot everything in the face 1-2 times. Although that might just be the way I play games like this.

My personal opinion is that in ARPG design tactical skill > twitch skill > build skill. Coming up with a good build is fun, but it shouldn't be the basis of an entire combat system because otherwise there's not much point of the player being involved in the combat part of the game.

 

[-Seraph-]

I will take combat for what it is, be it turn based or real time. What matters is how well implemented and meticulous I can get with it. Turn based combat should always present a good deal of strategy that allows me to utilize abilities to their fullest extent and yet still present some challenge. While real time should not be button mash and allow me to put some skill behind it.

As far as favorites go:

Turn Based- Valkyrie Profile probably has one of my favorite turn based combat systems, it's just fucking awesome and rewarding. Turn based - combo combat gives you enough control over the fight to not feel so automated, and there is some skill in how you time your attacks to rack up big ass combos. Having your whole party pretty much juggle a boss with a barrage of attacks and then letting loose a limit break or two is so damn satisfying to do and to watch.

Just look at it!!
Fucking awesome!

Real time- I really like Witcher 2 and the Souls games. Witcher 2 does have a bit of an inverted difficulty curve, but the higher difficulties remedy that. These games allow you full control of what your character does in real time, and have a lot of depth and skill behind them which is required to succeed. I just love punishing combat that forces you to think and use the proper gear, items, skills at your disposal to defeat enemies. Ys7 is a runner up (a lot like the mana games), with its brisk and fluid combat that is simple and yet never feels brainless.

 

[Darknacht]

Turn Based is way too slow and boring. No strategy is really involved especially in games like Pokemon if you just play the cpu. *Thunder pokemon, SPAM THUNDERBOLT!* *WATER POKEMON, SPAM WATER BLAST!" etc.

A proper turn based combat usually requires far more strategy then the more simple action real time games you just haven played any good isometric turn based games. Just look at games like Fallout, and Arcanum.

 

[MammothBlade]

In a nutshell, the more combat mechanics RPGs steal from other genres, the better they will be.

I like turn based combat too, but a lot of games screw it up. A turn based game should be about planning your actions, not about being forced to take turns performing the same actions over and over again.

Exactly, and this is what made Final Fantasy XIII in particular, feel so dull and repetitive to me. Auto-battle? Wtf. It often confined the player's role in combat to nothing more than the ape who presses auto battle and paradigm shift. And that is not what makes a fun RPG.

I prefer turn-based systems, particularly the press-turn used in Shin Megami Tensei games. You have have to coordinate your party's actions carefully, or you could lose a turn and let the enemy thrash your arse back to the title screen. Though there is an option to rush, which is useful if you want to skip easy random encounters.

Dragon Age allows something of a hybrid between turn-based and real-time combat. You can pause right in the middle of a battle, which is a must have to get a good grasp of the situation. Pressing the space bar means the difference between victory and defeat.

 

[Chemical Alia]

I don't know what half of that shit is. The only RPG combat that I ever played that didn't bore me to tears was Paper Mario and Paper Mario 2. Whatever that is.

 

[Kahunaburger]

LMAO. Wow, I never saw that shit. They REALLY tried to turn Dragon Age's combat into some over dramatic Hollywood type bullshit. What a nonsense.

Bioware, smh,you even make Bethsdurpia look good at this point. So sad to see what the great RPG genre has become.

If the fact the combat in their "RPG" resembles the Dragon Age [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG7_vmgLPUA&feature=related] anime [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEHTlYQXoNc&feature=related] isn't a sign they need to seriously re-think things, I don't know what is.

 

[Random Fella]

Hard to decide, but probably first person for me
Although third person and wow clone combat is close up there
Not really one for turn based, but don't get me wrong, turn based combat can amuse me much, like in FF5 (I think 5 I don't know.)
Also multiple units, like Dragon Age Origins, oh that game was amazing

 

[Belbe]

All.

 

[thehorror2]

While I enjoy "action RPG" combat, a la KoA and ME, but I prefer the kind of turn-based real-time combat that KotOR, Dragon Age, and (to an extent) Baldur's Gate and the like used. Pause and command is nice, and there's nothing that makes me feel like a strategic genius like going from completely surrounded at the beginning of a battle to (after pause and carefully considered commands) standing waist deep in the corpses of the people trying to kill my party.

 

[AD-Stu]

Depends on the game but for the most part turn-based combat (particularly the JRPG "let's all line up in neat rows and take turns" style) really annoys me. Same goes for first-person combat in a predominantly melee-based game (the Elder Scrolls style).

I could live with the pseudo-real time (but really turn based) combat in KOTOR and the like, but I much prefer the Dragon Age: Origins / Mass Effect third-person style.

 

[skywolfblue]

I think it's one of the more silly complaints people use against DA2. Most of the time pushing a button did do something nifty, I don't know why people think that's a bad thing. Sure there were cases of going overboard, but on the whole I think it was a good idea.

Why is "button awesome" shorthand for all the terrible combat decisions in DA2?

In a nutshell.

It makes for an an amusing exaggeration, but it's not all that simplistic.

Button-mashing aside, I don't want something "awesome" to happen every time I hit a button in an RPG. "Awesome" things happening are only actually awesome if they're a reward for good gameplay. For instance, in the game I'm playing right now, Brogue, fire literally looks like this: ^^^^^, except red. But when you trap a powerful enemy in a burning room, it's satisfying because it's the result of using your resources in a creative way. If, on the other hand, my character does some kind of complicated ninja flip every time I mash A, it gets old quickly.

I disagree. I'd prefer more interesting attacks to boring ones. Now there do need to be a variety of animations for each attack so that it doesn't become old too quickly, and there is need for moderation, some are a little too over the top.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

First person although my favorite RPG is Fable 1.

 

[sms_117b]

Although I enjoy turn based stuff, real time is always my prefered style of combat. Depending on the game 3rd or first person. I don't know why but for Skyrim/Oblivion First person is perfect but I can't see myself using it for another similar game, Amlur and ME both have really good camera control....wow, gone a little off topic here.

Going to go, 3rd person/hacky slashy type.

 

[Torrasque]

I like and have played all of those kinds of RPGs, the only one I don't like that much is third person.
I have no favorite really, it just depends on the kind of game.

 

[Lunar Templar]

pretty much all of the above.

one's not really better then any other, it really boils down to what you like game play wise, and i've been around long enough to just not care about RPG combat if the STORY is there

 

[Bostur]

It depends on the game. I do like action combat but I think real-time pausable or turn-based combat fits the RPG genre better. If an RPG has action combat it feels to me like the RPG is interrupted with an action sequence. In a turn-based system it's the character doing the moves, in an action system it's the player.

The worst case really is when a game can't decide whether to do tactical combat or action combat. DA2 was one of the worst offenders of this.
Another bad system is Bethesda's "Spam left button and pray". It doesn't have any interesting tactical decisions, nor does it require any skills of coordination from the player.

How come toolbars are considered a wow-clone? It's a nifty invention used in many types of games. Both Baldur's Gate and Minecraft have toolbars and I don't consider either of them a WoW-clone.

 

[Aurgelmir]

So I've been replaying Final Fantasy X and pretty much realised I am in love with the combat system. I like being able to take the fight as fast or slow as I need to so I can actually plan what I'm going to do ahead of time.

But a lot of people seem to dislike turn based combat in all its forms. Or at least that's what one would be led to believe since it seems to have faded into disuse among modern RPGs.

At first I just wanted to know how many people actually DO like turn based combat, but now I'm more interested in the kind of combat people want to see in games. And I don't mean your favourite RPG. FFX's combat is my favourite, but it's not exactly my favourite RPG as a whole.

So let me know what you think. I apologise in advance for forcing you to generalise your favourite combat system into one of the poll options, feel free to expand on it in your post.

I think I agree a lot with you. FFX had a great combat system, from how you leveled up to how you fought.

That said I dont ONLY want those types of combat, sometimes I like Skyrim other days Amalure.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Button-mashing aside, I don't want something "awesome" to happen every time I hit a button in an RPG. "Awesome" things happening are only actually awesome if they're a reward for good gameplay. For instance, in the game I'm playing right now, Brogue, fire literally looks like this: ^^^^^, except red. But when you trap a powerful enemy in a burning room, it's satisfying because it's the result of using your resources in a creative way. If, on the other hand, my character does some kind of complicated ninja flip every time I mash A, it gets old quickly.

I disagree. I'd prefer more interesting attacks to boring ones. Now there do need to be a variety of animations for each attack so that it doesn't become old too quickly, and there is need for moderation, some are a little too over the top.

But is the difference between an interesting attack and a boring attack an animation, or the ability to actually do something interesting in the context of the game mechanics?

 

[Togs]

Action game style, the rest just feel horribly antiquated.

Im really interested to see where the current trend goes next, KOA took what Fable and DA2 did and tried improving on it, but they were only partially succesful and get the balancing completely wrong.

 

[RagTagBand]

FYI, Ability bars + "click your enemy once and let the PC do the rest" has been around a shit ton longer than WoW has.

Personally I like FPS mechanics for RPG's but thats simply because I prefer FPS mechanics in most games; It's my favoured combat mechanic. So, really, the question you've asked isn't really the question you've asked

You ask "How do you prefer your RPG combat?" but really the question boils down to "How do you prefer your combat?"; the RPG bit is largely irrelevant.