Jump to content

Which do you prefer? Turn based or real time?


Slaughter

Which do you prefer? Turn-based or real-time?  

82 members have voted

  1. 1. Which do you prefer? Turn-based or real-time?

    • Turn-Based
      57
    • Real-Time
      15
    • Other (explain)
      9


Recommended Posts

I think i have posted a similar message to that about 3 times, but i wish to show my opinion over and over again, to prove my point

 

Typical real time mentality. Give it loads, hope something works. *sigh*

No panache. No elan. No joie de vivre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RT= far harder, more fun

TB = far easier, less fun

 

I think i have posted a similar message to that about 3 times, but i wish to show my opinion over and over again, to prove my point

Well, when harder means less thinking and faster clicking... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, when harder means less thinking and faster clicking... :)

I disagree with blehm, I find it hardest tb, mainly because I lose my patience :P

But I don't like it real time like in C&C (though I love that game), I prefer real time like in X-Com Apocalypse, in which you can use pause in any moment, gives you plenty of time to react and to calculate what to do next, if real time means who clicks first, then I don't like it much (and the computer always has the advantage there, of course :D ). But RT like in Apocalypse, RPGs like Baldur's Gate, Homeworld 2 and such is the way to go. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're right, the systems with pause are better. Aftermath uses a variation of it, and that is nice. Still prefer TB myself, but I hear you on the patience issue. Using 5 hours on a Silent Storm mission can get a little too much...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rather like both modes of gameplay. Each mode is ... well, unique.

 

Apocalypse's turn-based mode however could've done with a quick brush-up.

 

1. To ignore the civilians turn.

2. If not 1, then to at least get an animation speed control like in the prequels to speed up the ruddy wait.

3. To not get into an infinite loop during the alien movement phase. Happens a lot on slower machines. Hasn't happened on a faster machine.

 

It would've been even better if the game allowed you to change modes in the middle of the battle - although I can see that without some restrictions: freely changing modes would be open to some abuse, such as quickly switching to turn-based so that you can freely empty 40 - 50 bullets from a M4000 into an alien and then switching back to real-time.

 

- NKF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rather like both modes of gameplay. Each mode is ... well, unique.

 

Apocalypse's turn-based mode however could've done with a quick brush-up.

 

1. To ignore the civilians turn.

2. If not 1, then to at least get an animation speed control like in the prequels to speed up the ruddy wait.

3. To not get into an infinite loop during the alien movement phase. Happens a lot on slower machines. Hasn't happened on a faster machine.

 

It would've been even better if the game allowed you to change modes in the middle of the battle - although I can see that without some restrictions: freely changing modes would be open to some abuse, such as quickly switching to turn-based so that you can freely empty 40 - 50 bullets from a M4000 into an alien and then switching back to real-time.

 

- NKF

Yeah, both are best, but there are several disadvantages. First of all, my impression is that it's near impossible to properly balance. Second, it takes a LOT more time in development to include both. I'm no game designer, but that's what I have heard and can imagine at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a problem, and it is this. . . .

 

I will sit down to play a turn based strategy game, and I'll sit for a long time formulating strategies. I'll brainstorm different approaches, think of the consequences, budget in elements of unpredictability, and gradually work my way to a grand master plan that couldn't possibly fail!

 

I will go into battle, go to stage one of the plan, suffer a few setbacks, but carry on, I've budgeted for a few wee peoblems, gradually work my way through and then. . .GET SLAUGHTERED!!!!!

 

So does this happen because. . .

 

1) I actually have no understanding of the situation and so formulate strategies that just don't work

 

or

 

2) I'm such an amazing goddamn genius that the strategies I make are just too damn clever for a masly little computer game, so it gets all confused and decides to just cheat and slaughter me.

 

it's very probably 1, I shall keep telling myself it's 2!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A plan is always the first casualty in a battle. Your enemy will always do something you don't expect. You have to adapt and improvise accordingly.

It's nice when stage 1 goes ok, then the enemy buggers up stage 2, but you manage to cope and then wipe them out with stage 3 of a cunning plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love turn based games. I do get along with real time though but not as well. Real Time tends to deal with your abilty to bluid faster then anyone else, and less on strategy. Turn Based tends to allow the player to mirco manage his forces so he can do what ever wants, but loses intensity.

 

One thing i hate about real time when you have a huge army it becomes nearly impossible to control the units the way you want. Especially if you have units with special powers but you can't use them due to the fact that things are going too fast. But that would be no problem if the computer was restriced to the speed at which it could actively used it's ablities. I have rarely met a person with the speed to use characters or units special powers faster then a computer. Also the computer can control all peasant/worker/robots at once so making better use of resouces in a shorter period of time.

 

I Remember playing Warcaft 2 as orcs. There was this evil mission where there was about 30 humans knights who could heal themselve so fast you couldn't kill them useless you attacked with total overwhelming force. Not much strategy there. However some games have built in equalizers, like given the abitily to the units to use theirs abilities on their own.

 

Some games do a good job of mix the two together. Like the Total War series, Where you build in a turn based side. And fight in real time battles, where you can pause for a bit to reorder troops so you can make coordinated attacks.

 

In the end what kind of games i love are ones where Strategy reigns over resource gathering (But still an element) coupled with a good story and complex and or mult. sided gameplay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A plan is always the first casualty in a battle.  Your enemy will always do something you don't expect.  You have to adapt and improvise accordingly.

It's nice when stage 1 goes ok, then the enemy buggers up stage 2, but you manage to cope and then wipe them out with stage 3 of a cunning plan.

 

The only plan that I have yet to see fail or crash and burn on Apoc Realtime is "sit outside, then storm the interior".

 

It works on most mission terrains! :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What i hate about RTS is not just the fact that the computer can control faster, but the fact that the computer can control everything at once!

 

So while you ordering your cavalry to advance his cavalry are commencing the first charge while his infantry are bringing up the rear and his artillery is bombarding you ALL AT ONCE!

 

they should make the computer unable to multi task! that would even things up a bit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
  • Create New...