Saint Proverbius's daily wisdom

[Killzig]

<strong>[ -> N/A]</strong>

Saint Proverbius has presented the perfect argument as to why Real-Time in Lionheart is preferable to Combat with Pause/Issue Orders.

<blockquote><em>

Basically, it boils down to this, you have a bunch of fat geeks lounging around in basements wanting real time with pause? Why? Because they're so damned fat, they have no manual dexterity other than what masturbation to Xena gets them. However, because they're hopped up on cheetos and other high carb junk food, and Mountain Dew, they don't have the attention span for turn based. In short, fuck them.</blockquote></em>

Thank you Saint, you are a gentleman and a scholar. Almost sounds like something Kevin Smith would write.

[Section8]

Fuck them in their stupid asses...etc

Nail. Head. Proverbial Hammer. You do the maths.

[Ghetto Goose]

It's poetic, that paragraph. *sniff* It's beautiful.

[Saint_Proverbius]

No, I just said that to shut LordChaos up. The best argument for why Lionheart shouldn't have Real Time/Pause is this:

Black Isle Studios can't keep making the same game over and over again.

Of course, he said that about Fallout 3 not being like Fallout and Fallout 2, and then announced IWD2 a few months later, but I digress.

[Seven]

Isn't Lord Chaos a fat guy who likes mountain dew... you do the math.

[VasikkA]

Hmm, is that your vision of Bioware fanboys?
I'm not that fanatic about combat should be real time. It would definately change the nature of fighting, as there is no pause function to ease your victory. It's all about speed and reflexes now, and quick thinking. However, I have always thought pausable combat is a working solution between real time and turn based combat. It kinda adds tactical elements to real time combat, not in the same amount as in turn based though.

[Saint_Proverbius]

Well, the thing about real time with pause is that other than clicking on a monster, there's really not much to do unless you need to cast a spell every so often. It boils down to just watching your little avatar chop away at the enemy you clicked on. It's dull.

[Red]

I think the fatfanboyz need realtime as clicking is the only excercise they get in the day... That's probably why diablos are so successfull.

[Forty-six & Two]

Like... Jeez. Well said, but just because a game doesnt have turn-based it cna be well done and fun with lots of challenge to the expirienced player. I enjoy both turn-based and real-time games. The game shouldnt adapt to the combat style it should be the other way around.

[Seven]

You miss your own point. The SPECIAL system was designed for turn based combat, which is to say (as you put) the combat system is adapted to the game. The game rule-set (in this case SPECIAL) is what determines the combat type. I'm not saying the SPECIAL can't be adapted to real time, but it would be complicated to do so. For example FOT let AP's regenerate at a fixed rate; this meant that you didn't need a high Agility score. If Lionheart were to take this route then they would have to increase AP regeneration based on the Agility score to add balance (obviously FOT did not do this), and ensure that players place a moderate weight upon agility. This is only one example, and the fact of the matter is no one t hought about this until month's after FOT was released. Adapting a turned based system to real time is hard, and in most cases it's better left undone.

[Nightstallion]

Well, the thing about real time with pause is that other than clicking on a monster, there's really not much to do unless you need to cast a spell every so often. It boils down to just watching your little avatar chop away at the enemy you clicked on. It's dull.

And... what would be the reason why real-time without pausing would be better then?

[Red]

Who said it was?

[OnTheBounce]

I would think that Lionheart would be better as a turn-based game, especially if the player isn't given complete control over NPCs...which he/she should not have.

While RT w/Pause might have been a good idea to implement in FoT - it would have helped quite a bit w/managing a squad of six in RT - I don't think that a Swords & Sorcery-type game would play very well in RT, pausable or not. For one thing, you really don't have a lot of the issues that a RT or CTB system helps to reduce in ranged combat-oriented games.

OTB

[Saint_Proverbius]

And... what would be the reason why real-time without pausing would be better then?

Because it can be a lot more interactive than the real time/pause system. When you make a RT/P system, you're assuming that clicking on a monster once is the extent of the player's involvement in the combat for the most part. Sure, you can have spells or special moves that the player might have to push a key to use as well, but for the most part, it's just click the monster and watch. There's no real involvement for the player.

That works fine for RTS games, which birthed the whole RT/P thing, but it doesn't allow the kind of "You are in control" type situation RPGs should have.

Ideally though, an RPG should have turn based combat, because it best reflects everything an RPG should be in terms of combat. It's both interactive and non-twitchy action, and you can reflect the attributes the player has better.

[Forty-six & Two]

This is true, yes. Although I think RT worked fine in Tactics, it could have been improved. Well having a high agility score does matter, in a stand up 1v1 battle for excample the guy with 10AG can fire his gun 1 or 2 more times than the guy with 5 AG before either fo them has to respawn AP. Firing your gun the most times, of course, wont always make you the victor but it does make the difference you said there was not. I wasnt talking about games with the SPECIAL system only you know.... Just games in general.

You miss your own point. The SPECIAL system was designed for turn based combat, which is to say (as you put) the combat system is adapted to the game. The game rule-set (in this case SPECIAL) is what determines the combat type. I'm not saying the SPECIAL can't be adapted to real time, but it would be complicated to do so. For example FOT let AP's regenerate at a fixed rate; this meant that you didn't need a high Agility score. If Lionheart were to take this route then they would have to increase AP regeneration based on the Agility score to add balance (obviously FOT did not do this), and ensure that players place a moderate weight upon agility. This is only one example, and the fact of the matter is no one t hought about this until month's after FOT was released. Adapting a turned based system to real time is hard, and in most cases it's better left undone.

[Saint_Proverbius]

This is true, yes. Although I think RT worked fine in Tactics, it could have been improved. Well having a high agility score does matter, in a stand up 1v1 battle for excample the guy with 10AG can fire his gun 1 or 2 more times than the guy with 5 AG before either fo them has to respawn AP. Firing your gun the most times, of course, wont always make you the victor but it does make the difference you said there was not. I wasnt talking about games with the SPECIAL system only you know.... Just games in general.

Actually, AG matters less in FOT than it does in Fallout. The difference in 7 and 8 APs in Fallout is the difference between one and two shots per turn with a 4AP weapon. In FOT, you get two shots off right away with 8AP and after that, you're just trading licks for a long time before the 8AP guy will get two shots in on the 7AP guy.

[Max-Violence]

And don't forget that the more AP an actor has, the faster he/she/it regenerates them (in CTB, of course). So if one actor with 10 AP and another has 5 AP, the actor with 10 AP would kick the living monkeys out of the other guy. Especially if the actor with 10 AP is using a pistol or melee/unarmed weapon.