MRhappy wrote:Allrighty. If you are one of those people who thinks that a game with TB combat cannot possibly succeed in todays market, there are two things you should consider.
Number One: you probably have an undersized member. thankyouverymuch
Number two: How mainstream gamers percieve TB combat vs. what potential a TB system has, what it can do, and good TB games. I 'll tell you what I mean. Fallout was the first game I played and enjoyed that had TB combat. Fallout is not the best example of this system, but its not terrible, and is fun, as long as you are not a moron and make sure the combat speed is all the way up.
But any way. What impressed me? The "tactics" in aiming at different body parts and being able to move around, and of course the bloody animations. LOL. Of course calling aiming for different body parts excellent tactics is a bit of a strench. But when you consider the experience I had with other TB games, this is understandable. Most games of this sort, you were rooted to the spot. And then it proceeded.
Me: attack chosen from a few all of which have similar effects > MISSs
Opponent: attack one hit point
(continue until massive critical, where the orc falls over bloodlessly then disappears)
This is called not taking advantage of the advantages of turn based combat (I'm sure you saw that in your minds eye). No wonder I was impressed by Fallout. And the thing is, I'm sure this is how many perceive TB.
When I showed the fallout combat to some of my friends how played mostly sports action games and previously had no interest in tb games, they were impressed for the same reasons. They had never heard of things like action points and hadnt considered the advantages that tb combat can have (BTW, if you cant see that TB combat can do things that RT cannot, like allowing for more application of character skill and theoretically unlimited tactical options, reconsider your life plz) . When I had seen games like Silent storm and JA2, the sorts of games most people never hear about, I was even more impressed with the tactical options. How awesome would those things be in FO3 combat? Totally awesome.
Have you played recent “mainstream� TB games, like that LOTR THE THIRD FUGGIN AGE? Its no surprise that they flopped. Dumbing down tb combat is usually a bad idea, because you are taking away from its advantages.
I do like fallout combat, and its possible that adding to much more in the way of tactics would mess up its simple beauty. But there are plenty things that could be added to Fallout combat that could make it appeal to mainstream gamers, and many of them to me. Cinematic camera swings, destructible environments a la that lobby scene in the matrix, ability to target non living things, crouching, going prone, a cover/interruption system, ability to change cone of burst weapons, etc. I will probably come up with more later, so brace for awesome.
Also, imagine FO combat in real time. It would have sucked some significant ass. There are games for that kind of stuff, and fallout is not one of them, moorons. For one thing, tb applied the character’s skills very nicely, in real time it would have been about your skill. TB also lengthened combat, it would have been over real quick in real time, as many enemies took only one or two shots. In real time, it would have been a massive clickfest. Again, maybe in an action game.
There are also many silly misconceptions considering game combat. One is that RT is more realistic. Not really. Of course, in real life you don’t have time to plan out each of your moves, but you also don’t stand right in front of a guy blasting away in his general direction (while he is doing the same to you) until somebody dies. RT may look more realistic, or at least cinematic, but TB is probably a better simulation of the tactics and all the combat skill that you don’t have. In the end they are both abstractions, so your argument fails. Another misconception is that RT is obviously more exciting. But says who? You fail too.
Even Todd Howard once had a few words to say on this matter in a fun interview:
Whilst every fan tends to have a different idea of what precisely Fallout 3 should be, there are a few things that most of us are unified on. Are you aware of the strong desires for turn-based combat and the classic 3/4 top-down viewpoint? Do you think pure turn-based combat in an RPG is viable in today's market?
Todd: Yes, of course we've heard many of the old-school fans regarding the view and combat resolution. What's viable today? Certainly turn-based combat limits your audience to a small number, but I do find that audiences will come if your game is good enough and the presentation is superb. Ultimately we'll do what we think will be the most fun.
Of course, completely ambiguous, and I have a good guess of what Todd thinks is most fun and its not TB combat, but even he said that if its good enough the audiences will come.
Also, turn based internet flash games (like strategy war or something and that gladiator game) are pretty popular. Just as a side note.
But, I do agree that fallout was not defined by its combat. It was still a part though, as fallout ultimately was a sum of its parts. It was everything that came together so smoothly that is its lasting appeal. I would say that, unlike many games of the time, fallout is still plenty viable today. What’s every 14 year olds favorite RPG these days? KOTOR (or maybe Oblivion). Yeah, I know, LOL. And kotor did a lot less than fallout.
But lets talk about other things that I’m afraid of Bethesda considering not viable today:
FIGURING THINGS OUT ON YOUR OWN: is what you had to do a lot in fallout. There were no journal entries for hints, no pop ups and quest arrows guiding every step of your way. You had to go on the clues you had, and there were multiply ways that you could be lead to.
CHOICES AND CONSEQUENCES: One very sad day iI saw someone write on a forum. “GAWD I hated Jade Empire, I hated having to reload to see all the choices erswews.� Now I have never played said game, but that’s not the point. Games today seem to be made for people who play it once through to see everything. You can join one faction, but its isolated from the world, so you can be the king of all of them. No world reaction to your actions. ‘A choice without a consequence isnt really a choice� – A wise man.
DETAILS: Im sure bethesda is going to do something like make universal ammo, or get rid of radiation or dehydration, or make the world scaled down so you can walk from town to town in hour. They should be adding details, nuances of gameplay to consider, not removing them.
DIALOGUE: After Obivions dialogue, who isnt?
50’s THEME: Im sure they’ll get the “grittyness�, but not sure not the nuclear scare theme, 50s culture etc. Plus the Brotherhood of steal sux.
Again, I will probably think of more things to add later, so have fun.
good night. and good luck.
