Even more funnehs.
Gimble said:
As it is, somebody at BIS/IPLAY is going to have to make a decision on how "sellable" a turn-based game is, all other factors being equal. And, today, a TB PC game is more than a gamble that a RTwP implementation, based on what kind of games are currently selling.
Judging by how the majority of real time with pause CRPGs flop, I'd say it's the other way around now. The only ones that have done really, really well are the D&D based ones. The majority of the others range from flops to mediocre. Of course, real time with pause didn't help IWD2 much, did it?
Hector Syr said:
That is why ToEE is going to sell. It will be the first DnD game that actually follows the rules of the game. Its pretty sad to say thats unique because of all the games that have DnD in their logo. I want something different.
NWN plays like Diablo, which plays like Divine Divinity, which plays like the IE games, which play like Dungeon Siege, which plays like and so forth and so on.
I think this is probably the smartest thing in this thread so far. You can't just keep offering the same thing rehashed to consumers over and over again and expect them to keep lining up for it. One of the best reasons to do something if it's good is that your competition isn't doing it.
Gimble said:
And thus my above comment. If VB hadn't started full-fledged production, and ToEE had come out with incredibly good sales, the turn-based fans within BIS would have ammunition to talk to the bean-counters and say "See? Turn-based games can have great sales!" As it is, there's really no PC-based TB games to use as an argument that the TB combat style can assist in improving sales.
Like Civilization III? Master of Orion 3?
Even PoR2, with all the bad press, managed to sell fairly well.
Gimble said:
Wait... you want something different from other CRPGs, but the same as the PnP product? I find that a little inconsistent.
I find it a little inconsistant that this guy wants something
different from the PnP rules in a CRPG that supposedly uses them, but that's just me.
=ColdbringeR= said:
I can name countless logical reasons why i dislike turn-based games. For instance.. What is this magical force that prevents me from moving at the same time as my enemies? As if i'm just going to stand there, frozen in space, while i get surrounded by ten monsters? How stupid is that? If i see a bunch of freaking scorpions moving in on me, i'm going to do something contructive. Unfortunately i usually can't until they are right up on my @ss. Pure stupidity. And then some people have the nerve to call this "control".
That's why you're allowed to move during your turn. If you get surrounded in Fallout, it's because you're not moving. That's
logic.
What's sad is he doesn't get this argument can apply to paused situations as well. Or not moving while aiming a bow. Or casting a spell.
DocBeard said:
I'm not sure that I think that turn-based combat is so integral to the Fallout experience that no other system should even be considered. Any more than I think that Van Buren should have only three or four character models, cause that's all that Fallout did.
Except Fallout was designed to emulate PnP style gameplay. That means turn based on a hex grid.
=ColdBringeR= said:
When my character standing there doing nothing while the enemy is doing something, and vice versa, all i see is wasted time. And it's just unrealistic to the point of stupidity at times.
But two guys swatting one another at the same time with swords until one falls down is so much more realistic?
If he wants to see wasted time, he should check out NWN. It's real time, and you only get one swing ever six real time seconds.