Which do you prefer? Turn based or real time?

[Slaughter]

This poll was suggested by Pete. I guess some people might be a little biased, with all the turn-based games we cover, but you never know. If you prefer something other than turn-based or real-time, please explain the system. And we'll be interested to know why you prefer turn-based or real-time if that is your cup of tea of course!

[Cap'n Kyth]

Both!

[Pete]

I likes Apoc's approach where you could choose, but I'm also extrememly happy with the systems in Silent Storm (Turn-Based, but looks cool, though the turns can take a while to play out) and UFO Aftermath (real time with lots of pauses ).

[FullAuto]

Turn-based, baby. It's the only way to have real strategy. Real time, you just end up reacting to your opponent. Turn-based, you can plan, actually use your mind.

[Pete]

I foresee a huge argument coming up about stuff like "would you wait fo the enemy to have their turn if they really did invade?" and so forth

[FullAuto]

It's ok, I'll ban them.

Of course you'd want the enemy to have a turn, not very fair if you don't. It may be ok for all those foreign types, but we Brits have to find time to fit in time for tea and sandwiches and sweeping chimneys and suchlike.

Cor blimey, guv'nor.

[Blehm 98]

Well, depends for me

brainsuckers are evil on turn based, since my guys rarely react to them

however, if you are fighting megaspawns on real time, you usually get one missile and two or three laser out before you can kill them, which means fatal wounds and deaths. But on turn based, if you see them, you kill them. That's why i like real time. You make split second decisions and react to an enemies actions, not plan your own then the enemy plans theirs

[Solitaire]

It depends on the game for me, generally though I like to be able to take my time and evaluate the situation, otherwise in real time games I do something, then five seconds later realise that I shouldn't have, just as the artillery starts landing on my men.

 

In a game like C&C where men are counted in the hundreds a bad tactical choice is never a problem, since the person who can build tanks faster tends to win.

 

In a game like XCOM however, every man is worth his weight in Elerium and even one loss is a blow.

[Jh316]

I picked other, because what I like is real-time that you can pause and give orders whenever you want.

 

By the way, if you think you can't plan in a real-time game, download a demo of a game called Brigade E-5: New Jagged Union.

 

It's Russian at the moment, but they've released some patches to make it English.

 

I'll make another topic about it...Uh, somewhere. Off-topic, I guess. There's really no general game discussion forum. It's either no game discussion, or discussion about a particular game.

 

Nevermind, making a post in the game topic on the OT forum.

Edited June 17, 2005 by Jh316

[Solitaire]

Real time that you an pause? You should keep your eyes peeled for Space Hulk. Vengance of the Blood Angels. I think that was one of the first games to use that feature.

 

Bit old now though.

[Jh316]

I've played a PC conversion of the Space Hulk board game before, it was a really fun turn based thing.

[FullAuto]

Not to mention Aftermath, or whatever it is. Real-time that you can pause whenever and still interact/give orders/plan/cry is just turn-based with dressing.

[Hellb0und]

I voted "other".

 

I LOVE turn-based games, but i think the best approach so far is the system used in Laser Squad: Nemesis,

where each opponet plans 10 sec of movements ( force-fire/op. fire/hide... ) for all your units, and then you watch the results.

 

...and no, i don't play LSN for almost 6 months now.

[Jh316]

My favorite game to use the kind of thing I'm talking about is Darklands, from '92 or so. It's an awesome game, and available at Hotu. Really shows that Microprose can make a great RPG, too.

[KoMik]

I voted for turn the page (it is like reading a book: you pass it fast as you want and can take 'thinking pauses' when ever you want and maybe some 'drinking pauses' too).

 

I like the tb-games like SSs where is those actionpoints. One big reason for that is I want to see everything! It is not funny to play in big mission maps and see only half of events (shooting and killing) ...it makes me frustrating. In actionpoints based games you can see every move what your characters or enemies make (I play games because I am also a animations freak) I know it takes more time but if animations and AI is good it doesn't matter to me. It is not very realistic but if I want realism I will just turn of the computer and step outside... I don't want to play some kind of realistic alternative realism games.

 

I can see that tb games with 'smart pause' have been developed better and better (Brigade E5 etc) and maybe someday I have to change my mind about those 'controlled' chaos games. But actionpoints based tb-games are still more playable via hotseat (or LAN) and I like good multiplayer games a lot (when we can see Jones In the Fastline 2?!?" ).

 

Hopefully tb-games are forever on developers lists because I think they have only scratched the surface.

[Blehm 98]

yeah, i think the future games will be total RTS

pausable RTS

and turn based

i actually prefer pausable RTS, but the Laser Squad nemesis type sounds very nice. Or in other words, i don't like constant chaos, but chaos, then a chance to review things, the chaos, then a chance to review things

[Bomb Bloke]

Space Hulk was realtime. As you played, you gained 'pause' time, in which you could give orders (much like Aftermath). However, you could only stay in 'pause' time so long, so you needed to build up some more of the stuff by going back into realtime.

 

Quite a good system, if you think about it. Most likely it was wasted on me - I'm a defensive player, and my tactics didn't get me far against unlimited (read: 'respawning') hordes of Genestealers.

 

I played Apocalypse in TB mode about, hmm, once. Played it RT ever since. But, I tend to play Enemy Unknown more then any other strategy game, and that's TB only.

 

TB suits me best, as I like to sit back and think about things, but that's not a luxery you'd get in reality. Aftermath/Apocalypse's implementations of RT can be summed up as 'TB with really short turns', as opposed to the more mainstream style of strategy games today...

[Zombie]

Turn-based, baby.  It's the only way to have real strategy.  Real time, you just end up reacting to your opponent.  Turn-based, you can plan, actually use your mind.

I agree with FullAuto and Bomb Bloke. With real-time you just test your dexterity against a more formidible player (usually the computer). While entertaining, it doesn't really challenge your brain to any large (or deep) degree.

 

At my age, keeping the brain sharp is a always a concern. Turn-based games allow me to plan things ahead and learn from any mistakes. Sometimes this information can be applied to real life. A side-effect of this is that you learn something by application of knowledge/strategy rather than simple prestidigitation. That is a much more rewarding experience than simply clicking faster than a computer at a certain level.

 

- Zombie

[z00L]

Other..because i would select both

 

i've been addicted to command and conquer , red alert 1 and especialy 2 online, the expansion pack yuris revenge. red alert 2 online offers great competition and i play to win knowing all the best build order's, tactics, using the best tank control..where as x-com is different its still just as appealing....its too hard to choose...how about x-com online? now theres perfection ^^

[Slaughter]

Yeah, both modes sure are fun. I tend to lean towards TB as preference however.

 

Regarding X-COM online, UFO2000 is a good step in the right direction! Did you try it? LSN isn't bad either!

 

Like your avatar . Could you possibly make your signature a little smaller however? Oh, and welcome to the boards!

[Bunnysays]

I voted TB. There are certainly some games that I liked RT w/pause (say UFO:AM) but for the most part I would take TB. The problem I have with RTPause is that, in a squad based game, it feels like I am just making a lasoo around my group and using them as sort of "one" complete guy and shooting. As the enemies get tougher, it feels like I need to select say four or more guys at once to deal with the enemy. So I am no longer moving individuals and making strategic decisions. Just bunching up the most guys that I can and shooting back. That's what I felt like in UFO:AM and Xcom Apoc (which is why I used TB in that). I find that in other games NOT squad-based, I like RTPause. If you count it, for example, don't forget Rome: Total War. I couldn't imagine playing something like that fully TB. That game was the best mix of TB for overall movement, then RTS for battles. Then again, imagine trying to play something like Civilization as an RTS. That would just ruin it. If I'm dealing with larger scales, I guess RTS seems a good choice, but for individuals, I want to have more and more control over them and have fun thinking of them as individual people that I am commanding. In an RTS game, I never think of soldiers or people, but instead, "unit types or groups".

 

The only other issue that I have is that, there are plenty of RTS games out there. Only a handful of TB nowadays (if you don't count TB RPGs like, say, on consoles--I don't). If there were more of a selection of TB, I would feel better about RT games and just pick and choose whichever at will and certainly have no grudge against either. But I find I don't have that choice which makes me feel a bit resentful against RT games for dominating the market. I certainly think there are markets enough for both. But marketing geniuses seem to decide everything should be RT as that's the "new thing/what kids only want" (their thought--that kids can only want big explosions and hyper action--which I feel is insulting to younger gamers). It feels as though, we, as an audience, are being told that we are too stupid to enjoy both. That only kids play games, and they only want twitch games. That there is only one type of game player: an 11-15 year old boy who wants to see stuff blow up. Indirectly, it feels insulting to me as a game player. I think there are all kinds. And that they dont' always prefer one type of game and that it depends on their mood. Age of Empires, for example, is probably one of my top ten games. But then, so is Xcom. But wouldn't you want the choice for either? I don't feel like I have that choice. I end up playing xcom/ja/fallout (and now finally, Silent Storm) for the umpteenth time but I can have any number of RTS games to choose from. If there were a glut of TB games out there, I might not feel so strongly about it, but for years now, I haven't seen it. It seems as though only recently has Silent Storm made a sort of semi-resurgence of TB games. I hope it continues. Then maybe you'll see a poll like, "Which of these top ten TB Strategy games do you like the most?"

[Blehm 98]

well, in RT, you are fighting enemies that can fight back, which makes it much tougher. In apoc, i have always liked RT, even though it is extremely tough, when i play turn based the aliens are terrible fighters and i always win.

So RT is tougher and enemies shoot back

[FullAuto]

The only way RT can be tougher is because it involves reaction time. That's it. Enemies shoot back all the time in TB games. I'm unaware of any TB games where the enemy cannot fight back.

Except Death Camp 4: Exterminate the Pacifists, of course. That was a good 'un.

[Spiro]

I vote "other" couse i like both, depends how much time i have.

TB is good couse you must think about few turns in advance and offers good tactics possibilities. It's terribly slow, though (remeber ship rescue missions in TFTD).

RT, on other size, is good for fast missions. Problem is, you can win if you just place few soldiers and blow things up.

So, combinations of those are good, like pauseble RT. But, there may be better way. Just nobody knows for now.

[Azrael Strife]

Yeah, both modes sure are fun. I tend to lean towards TB as preference however.

 

Regarding X-COM online, UFO2000 is a good step in the right direction! Did you try it? LSN isn't bad either!

 

Like your avatar . Could you possibly make your signature a little smaller however? Oh, and welcome to the boards!

Blasphemy! Real Time is the *only* way to go! :mad: