The problem with turn-based games is the only "tactics" are the builds.

[Ol' Willy]

I've never played a turn-based game that isn't equivalent to playing chess where you know the AIs first 5 moves. It usually goes like this: you start a game not knowing any of the systems and at first. It's fun to figure out what works, but within a few hours you "crack" the game and it becomes braindead.

Just play chess then. As of yet, as far as I'm aware, it's still not cracked.
Expecting vidya to scratch that itch is pants on head retarded.

Chess is learning openings and end games ad nauseam in this day and age.
Utter shite.

You can't really dry learn the endspiel, you need to understand what are you doing. Too many possible combinations

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

I've never played a turn-based game that isn't equivalent to playing chess where you know the AIs first 5 moves. It usually goes like this: you start a game not knowing any of the systems and at first. It's fun to figure out what works, but within a few hours you "crack" the game and it becomes braindead. Usually, the very first area in a game is the most difficult before you figure out what works and repeat it ad nauseum. Essentially you abuse the very predictable AI, and the actual tactical puzzles are very few.

They give you movement limitations as if the game ever truly takes advantage of them. Increasing difficulty only limits viable builds and game styles without doing much of anything to improve on the puzzles because the only real puzzle is builds and repeating the same tactic over and over once you figure it out.

Peak of gaming are games like doom eternal and dark souls series. Yes, the adventures in codex beloved games like fallout, bg2, etc... are great but the gameplay is basically witcher 3. You are all hypocrites. Nearly all the top 100 rpg codex games suffer exact same problem as Witcher 3 and just because the game is "turn-based" does not make it any less braindead. Instead of spamming left click, you spam the same "tactic" in turns as if it makes any meaningful difference.

I am sure turn-based games where every fight is a puzzle at every turn exists (like chess), I just haven't found it. I am not saying real time are much better (Witcher 3 says hello), but at least I've played quite a few well-designed gameplay loops in RT games. Perhaps forcing quick decision making in a real time fight makes for a much easier puzzle design set up for meaningful combat.

Cope in comments to your hearts content.

Why do you think video games should be like chess?

Chess is a mental sport of sorts, where you pit your skills against other people. Which is ok, people obviously enjoy sports of various types, but video games are nothing like sports in general (minus a few genres like Starcraft-like RTS, MOBAs, online shooters, etc).

Video games in general, on the other hand, are much more about being immersed into a cool alternate reality, where you can do all sorts of cool shit you cannot do in real life. As far as that goes, enemies in video games should be somewhat challenging, to keep up the facade of being in a real, dangerous world, but it definitely doesn't need to be anything like chess.

 

[gabel]

I've never played a turn-based game that isn't equivalent to playing chess where you know the AIs first 5 moves. It usually goes like this: you start a game not knowing any of the systems and at first. It's fun to figure out what works, but within a few hours you "crack" the game and it becomes braindead.

Just play chess then. As of yet, as far as I'm aware, it's still not cracked.
Expecting vidya to scratch that itch is pants on head retarded.

Chess is learning openings and end games ad nauseam in this day and age.
Utter shite.

You can't really dry learn the endspiel, you need to understand what are you doing. Too many possible combinations

Depends on how many and which pieces are left.

 

[Silverfish]

Peak of gaming are games like doom eternal

If you liked circle-strafing, you'll love circle-strafing while switching weapons every 20 seconds.

 

[MerchantKing]

Chess is learning openings and end games ad nauseam in this day and age.
Utter shite.

Go to lichess and play an anonymous unranked game.

That's where you get matched with cheaters 95% of the time. It's lose/lose when you play chess. No way to have any fun at all.

 

[Takamori]

People underestimate turn based combat, devs for sure. Thinking they will save a lot of resources by not having to develop animation for action combat.
They end up ignoring that you need AI to be really good to challenge your players, you need an interesting character/squad building system to keep people hooked with what is going with whatever the player needs to manage constantly and finally the feedback from animations, fallout 1 and 2 got it right by adding those really well done flashy gory animations, so you finish the combat and receive something really badass as reward.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Ugh, Fallout's combat is an atrocity. In melee you can punch nigh anything to death with a 98 lbs weakling with no skills except to walk backwards the correct number of spaces after each attack. When ranged attacks happen it may as well be a slot machine, because crits ignore armour and cause instant death. In neither case does player skill or character stats really enter the picture- you're either cheesing the AI or cheesing the quicksave function. Better stats give the same results just faster.

More modern entries tend to have more refined systems with fewer loopholes; things like zones of control, attacks of opportunity, damage/resistance types, multiple defence layers, and so forth. There's definitely a lot of games out there that require you to think about combat on a regular basis, either to implement entirely different strategies or on how to accomplish your preferred one. Even if you've built your team around a really specific plan, like Guys A and B defend and heal while only C attacks and D buffs, there's always the question of how to do that most efficiently, as long as the devs were smart enough to reward that efficiency, and there's multiple types of efficiency to be had.

Now, ideally you could say all those things can apply to real time combat as well... but that never really happens, because players get super butthurt if their minimum dex lardass in gothic tournament plate can't avoid getting hit 100% of the time once they've gotten good enough at DDR. Which is not to say RPG elements don't suit a real time action game at all, just that they should be less focused on stats and more focused on gameplay elements like enabling different types of AoE attacks, movement and defensive options, and utility functions like creating distractions, summoning minions, creating traps and so forth. The stat based power fantasy of getting your block/evade chance to 99% or killing everything in one hit before it can attack is fun for a few minutes then it becomes very dull indeed. Ultimately something like DMC does the action RPG thing better than something like Morrowind, at least where combat is concerned, because a double jump and a shotgun does a lot more to change your character than the ability to survive 50% more pecks from a cliffracer when you upgrade your armour or train your block skill. In both cases it's the character that got improved rather than the player, but the outcome is wildly different.

 

[Silverfish]

That's where you get matched with cheaters 95% of the time.

Not only do I cheat, but I also tell my opponents to king me just to rub salt in the wound.

 

[Yosharian]

People underestimate turn based combat, devs for sure. Thinking they will save a lot of resources by not having to develop animation for action combat.
They end up ignoring that you need AI to be really good to challenge your players, you need an interesting character/squad building system to keep people hooked with what is going with whatever the player needs to manage constantly and finally the feedback from animations, fallout 1 and 2 got it right by adding those really well done flashy gory animations, so you finish the combat and receive something really badass as reward.

Yeah good AI is really nonexistent in most modern games, not just RPGs

I always find it hilarious when devs say things like 'ah we had better AI but we had to tune it down because it was unfair' fuck off no you didn't.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I always find it hilarious when devs say things like 'ah we had better AI but we had to tune it down because it was unfair' fuck off no you didn't.

Eh, depends on the genre. There's plenty where fighting against good AI would be simply unfun.

 

[laclongquan]

The problem of turnbased tactical game is the limited number of variable. Once you push it up, the variant moves will increase.
One recognizable method to do so is destructible terrains. All TB tactical game use this is hard. Like Jagged Alliance 2, Silent Storm, SS Sentinels, and Hammer Sickle.
Obviously, the complaint about too hard will increase, as most TB gamers dont actually enjoy that kind of hard diff.
Thus destructible terrains stop at HS. No one else use it again~
Remind me again: does JA3 use destructible terrain?

 

[huskarls]

Play Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen, @King Crispy.

No. We're talking about RPGs here, fork. Go away.

RPG Codex voted Dark Souls GotY 2011 2012 and voted Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen GotY 2012 2013 2016.

codex voted some shitty gothic mod goty. being made GOTY on codex is a warning sign for a game (as you continue to prove)