What combat system do you prefer?

What combat system do you prefer?

  • Turn-based

    Votes: 42 50.0%
  • Time-based turns

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Real-time

    Votes: 2 2.4%
  • Real-time with Pause

    Votes: 13 15.5%
  • UgoIgo (copyright Chien)

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • I don't care, I like them all

    Votes: 25 29.8%
  • I don't like combat

    Votes: 1 1.2%

  • Total voters
    84
E

Eye

Guest
Seeing the recent discussion I thought it would be a nice idea to see how many vote for a specific combat system, how big/small is the majority, how small/big the minority. Choose whatever you like best.
 
Last edited:
Lemme (also) do an unconvenient answer.

I love any system that plays smoothly with k+m.
So premade action lists in Summoner were equally fun to me as qwer/df based skills/spells in LOL or initially odd and later awsome Gothic controls setup. Or any other game where k+m is an actual tool and not my enemy, a game where I game the game not struggling with controls.

Sometimes a system is not that good but is still acceptable. For example Berseria system is kinda meh, but that game has other strengths to cover for it.

And then there are systems I cannot believe how bad those are. For example, anyone played FF13? Whatta joke. It's some sort of ATB that practically plays itself. FF series already had similar systems in the past, FF9 has one, but in there it rocks. Or helicopter controls in GTA5. A horror, still having nightmares from it.

Do I have a preference? Actually I like to shuffle and play a bit of actiony stuff, then chill a bit with roundbased stuff, etc. Assuming those games have a story. If there is no story, even the most brilliant combat system won't keep me invested for long.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
I like most systems when they are done well, also like the variety they offer in playstyle.

Yep, simple as that. I don't pledge allegiance to things. I enjoy different systems in different games, if they're done well. And I like to mix things up. If I've played a lot of turn based stuff recently, I might be in the mood for an action based system or a RTwP.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
5,118
Location
Portland, OR
Sometimes a system is not that good but is still acceptable. For example Berseria system is kinda meh, but that game has other strengths to cover for it.

For the few hours I've spent with Berseria, I kinda sleepwalked through the combat, just jamming on the same button (I played with a controller.) Hopefully it gets more interesting (and challenging) as you progress and gain more artes?
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
5,118
Location
Portland, OR
I have a firm answer, but need to qualify it a bit. When it comes to rpg party-based games, then turn-based combat is a must! The point is when having several different party members in your group, each of which presumably has a wide variety of spells and/or abilities, I think turn-based combat is definitely the way to go, as it allows a far richer and more interesting tactical style of combat, where thinking is encouraged and if designed well, required, rather than frantic clicking like in an action rpg.

Having said all that, I don't want turn based combat for all my games and genres!
No way. :-/

I'm a first person shooter gamer as well, and love playing the real-time combat style in those games. While I could see playing a turn-based first person shooter as an interesting experiment, it definitely should not be the norm like real time is with traditional first person shooters.

And, don't get me wrong, I also enjoy an action rpg from time to time, when in the mood. So I can appreciate real time combat in rpgs as well, I'm not an "extremist" and hate it with a passion or something. But as I said, if talking about a hard core, party-based, rules complex/heavy D&D style of rpg, then for me, turn-based is supreme! :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
2,273
Location
Pacific NorthWest, USA!
Hmm, Dark souls is my favorite game so I should probably go with RT, but Diablo is RT and I really dislike it's combat. I think RT is hard because it can be so different. Dark souls combats very different from Diablo which is different than batman or Shadows of mordor, which is different than Dragons Dogma and then there's RTS's and First person RT which are again different. and … Well you get the point.

Then I do love me some party based games which would be RTWP or TB. I guess the only one I'm not too keen on is timed TB.

I don't even mind some QTE combat systems ( yes, you can start throwing stones now. :biggrin: )such as until dawn or inigo prophecies.

So I guess I'll go with don't care, I like them all. Even if there's a couple types I don't.

Nice poll @Eye; .
 
As I mentioned in the other thread, I prefer TB over RTwP. WIll not go into details, but mainly because RTwP has a big difficulty buffer by the frequency of pressing pause, and before the game starts getting difficult you have to max out your headroom in frequency until you hit a diminishing returns.

RTwP CAN be good, and it works in Paradox Games. Mostly because there is only so many actions per second and a very limitied split second time sensivity.

UGOIGO (or more commonly used: IGOUGO) which is turnbased, just that you do all your movements in your turn instead of just a single unit, is just a subform of TB. So depending on the game the one system makes more sense then the other. E.g. Jagged Alliance or other games like this would barely work without IGOUGO as you need to synchronize your team.

So this isn't really a either/or question.

Realtime is also fine with me. A game like Fallout 4 or Skyrim just works in Realtime and thats fine.

Time Based Turns - that COULD be really cool. I just don't know of any game which pulled that off. All walls must fall tried to do something like that…but the game was just not any good.

There is also another type: Which is turns which happen at the same moment and where you plan on what to do within the next seconds with trying to foreseeing what the enemy is going to do. When you are finished, your planned actions and the actions of your enemy play out. Can also work really well, and can be seen in Frozen Synapse. It's a Multiplayer game though, but definitely worth to check out.

Oh, and then there is the upcoming game Iron Danger, which is using a Real-Time with Rewind Time-Manipulation System. That can also be really interesting. Looking forward to test that one out.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,713
I don't have a preference, I don't mind as long as the game is any good. But sometimes I get the itch to play a certain type of combat so I'll seek out the game that uses it. For example, at the moment I'm playing Grim Dawn since I got the itch for that type of game. But like sakichop mentioned, some of these choices can have very different subcategories. Witcher 3 and Grim Dawn both have real time combat but couldn't be farther from each other.
 
Joined
Jun 24, 2014
Messages
905
Real time with pause is my favourite if it is done like infinity engine or pathfinder games. If it is done like Pillars of Eternity then nah.

Turn based is also very enjoyable but you cannot have the diversity of encounters that you can with real time with pause because of how long it takes to play out each battle imo. My preference for turn based is for something like divinity: original sin 1 or xcom (new and old).

I like also real time hack n slash games like Diablo and Grim Dawn and it can be quite compelling if they really focus on the fundamentals (environmental sounds, music, flow of combat, enemy diversity etc) I like feeling in that world when I'm playing those games.
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
Messages
9,321
Location
New Zealand
Well…drum roll…wait for it…One vote for I don't care, I like them all. I may prefer action combat but I sure as hell don't mind playing turn-based games. So I'm a hypocrite.:roll:
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
37,332
Location
Spudlandia
Depends on the game and how many tactical options there are. Prefer RT for simple hack and slash or shooters, through to turn-based for something OS2. Generally have no problem with whatever the developers choose assuming the keys can be rebound as necessary. Oh RTS games do my head in - too much to think about without pause!
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
966
I'm with pretty much everyone else. I choose RTwP but to be honest that's only because I'm currently playing and loving PF:KM. Had I been playing say Xcom or Kings Bounty right now the answer might have been different.

I can certainly enjoy action combat as well, but since I like party based games the most it isn't my first choice.
@Kordanor;; synchronous turns (Frozen synapse) is fine too. If you choose to play a RTwP pause game with an automatic pause at the end of every round that's actually what you get.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
3,216
Location
Sweden
@Kordanor;; synchronous turns (Frozen synapse) is fine too. If you choose to play a RTwP pause game with an automatic pause at the end of every round that's actually what you get.

The difference is, whether or not the game is designed for this in mind.
In frozen synapse you can do several steps after each other and really have to plan ahead which in most RTwP you wouldn't do a lot, even without pressing pause that often. You would queue up some actions ofc, but you wouldn't go through this chess-like thinking. E.g. doing something like that in melee combat would be far more problematic.

RTwP games are usually not designed that way. That's why I mentioned before that you actually profit in most of the RPGs with RTwP to press pause until a frequency of maybe 3 times per second.

If RTwP only allowed for fixed pauses in set intervalls, I would like to give it a try. Forcing myself into that limitation though into a game which isn't designed for that feels rather stupid. Like playing RTwP without pause at all to have a "fixed" difficulty factor. It's pretty much the same as the question about whether or not you want to be able to reload in combat. A game where you often have a 50% hit chance, and which then allows to reload in combat is already flawed as it invites you to reload for each hit until you end up on the good end of luck. Most games do not allow for that and disable saving in combat. One of the things I wasn't happy with in JA2 at release. They added in the "no saving in combat" feature later on though (i think in the gold version).

Alternatively games could have a "beat" based system where all elements basically can only "flip"through states by every second or two. But most RTwP games already break that concept by having seamless movement on the battlefield.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,713
Agreed, I didn't claim it was a good synchronous turn based, just an example.

I actually really liked the battle system in JA:BiA where you had RTwP but you could also plan ahead and choose which actions would be executed simultaneously, thus allowing for proper ambushes and planning ahead without having to pause. To bad the game was terrible in other departments, because the base mechanics were solid.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
3,216
Location
Sweden
I voted "I like them all". And would like to remark that a more specific answer would depend on other aspects of the game.

Both RTWP and TB (and some variants) are especially reasonable for games with strategic or tactical aspects. Where you control groups, rather than a single individual. For a single individual, I'd say that real-time is usually the most enjoyable for me.

For instance, I never quite saw the point of the VATS system in Fallout 3. Some people called the slow-mo in Outer Worlds similar to VATS. In some way, it is. But the integration in the game is much more smooth. It's actually rather taking inspiration from action games such as Max Payne ("bullet time").
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
2,315
Turn based is my preference every time, simply because there's a lack of quality turn based games at the mo IMO.

Overall I like 'em all if they're done well. But turn based has the added bonus of allowing you to chill & have a nap, then pick up where you left off. Doesn't sound much, but I've some health issues at the mo, and having a 5 min kip during gaming session is spot on.

Sometimes a system is not that good but is still acceptable. For example Berseria system is kinda meh, but that game has other strengths to cover for it.

And then there are systems I cannot believe how bad those are. For example, anyone played FF13? Whatta joke. It's some sort of ATB that practically plays itself. FF series already had similar systems in the past, FF9 has one, but in there it rocks. Or helicopter controls in GTA5. A horror, still having nightmares from it.

Amen.

FF13 was just mind blowingly bad. It was like I wasn't even there. Crazy. As for Berseria.....

For the few hours I've spent with Berseria, I kinda sleepwalked through the combat, just jamming on the same button (I played with a controller.) Hopefully it gets more interesting (and challenging) as you progress and gain more artes?

.......I agree with Joxer on that too. The combat is mostly a nonsense in the Tales games unless you ramp up the difficulty & spend ages working out all the, what are to me, BS systems.

It's the characters, banter & pacing which carries Berseria and I loved it. But I loved it despite the combat, not because of it.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
480
Turn-based is by far my preferred combat system, but if the story is good and the characters are rich, almost anything will work for me. As long as the combat mechanics are cohesive.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
19,647
Location
Holly Hill, FL.
Funny thing is that in generally TB and RTwP are tied at the second place for me.

By all means not complete and probably covering more than just the combat system but:
1. Twitch-based (with stealth. Mmm deus ex)
2. TB and RTwP (preferably cover-based, dragonfall, DOS2, PoE)
3. Twitch-based (souls-like)
4. Don't really like click-fest ARPGs anymore (diablo-like, because WoW overdid the mindless skill spamming).

I particularly found Kings bounty TB's system unfair. I might just have been bad. After the first turn some dragons would fly over the whole field and decimate my best units. Sure I still win, but every 2-3 battles I had to resupply until I ran out of money. And there seemed no way to avoid that. No cover system, keeping your distance was useless because of the highly mobile dragons, and in my first turn I'm unable to kill enough enemy dragons. Yes, that was a traumatic experience. :(

Edit: yes, FF's system is really bad. Also I rather not have timers in TB combat
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
1,502
It would probably also interesting to know what importance combat has in a game for you and on which difficulty you play.

For me Combat has a very high importance. There are games where the combat is rather bad but acceptable due to the other strengths of the game. For example I liked Insomnia but the combat was really not good.
Witcher 1 had a horrible, horrible combat system, but I switched to easy and finished it for the story.
Witcher 2 however I tried two times (before and after the combat revamp patch) and I just resigned because of the combat which I couldn't stand.

I usually play on hardest difficulty and if I switch to something different, that must be because I think the combat is terrible. And chances are I would then just stop playing the game alltogether.

I think RTwP is preferable for people who put less weight into combat and play on easy, as you can get past it faster and almost skip it if it annoys you.

For me this damages the game however. Similar to 3rd person perspective and combat.
Usually the immersion is worse than in first person, and I hate controls which are made for audiences playing with a controller and who need aim assistance and similar to make it playable - which on a PC with Mouse and Keyboard just makes it worse.
I cannot think of any third person RPG where I really liked the combat. They usually have to come with other strengths to appeal to me. (btw: never played Dark Soul and Co due to this, but this is also because I dislike asian "settings" with gigantic weapons and other things which make the world unauthentic and for me un-immersive, but thats a different topic).
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,713
Back
Top Bottom