Pro's and con's of realtime combat...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

<<Plus, i like post-apocolyptic-nuclear nightmare/wastelandish enviroments.>>

The post apocalyptic nuclear nightmare wastelandish environment will still be there, TB or no TB.

-evian
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

><<Plus, i like post-apocolyptic-nuclear nightmare/wastelandish enviroments.>>
>
>The post apocalyptic nuclear nightmare wastelandish
>environment will still be there,
>TB or no TB.
>
>-evian

That's exactly the reason he said "plus". It was an addition to what he already said. :-)

Personally I wouldn't mind if a semi real-time system like the one in planescape: torment or Baldur's Gate was introduced to fallout.
 
RE: implementation

Real time with pause is better than just plain real time, but I still prefer turn based. Actually, real time with pause is basically continuous turn based.

Turn based is so much better from a tactical stand point. It affords much more of a character's depth in combat, as Xotor said. It's also much better for controlling more than one character, because it's very difficult to control multiple people otherwise with the same degree of control.
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

I really don't think I'd buy a Fallout 3 without the traditional turn based system of the previous two.

If they're going to deviate from something that made Fallout such a great game in that area, chances are, they're going to deviate in other areas.

Planescape: Torment was fairly good for a lot of things, but seriously.. It was no where near as good as Fallout when it came to combat situations, even with the pausing.
 
RE: implementation

>Real time with pause is better
>than just plain real time,
>but I still prefer turn
>based. Actually, real time with
>pause is basically continuous turn
>based.
>
>Turn based is so much better
>from a tactical stand point.
>It affords much more of
>a character's depth in combat,
>as Xotor said. It's also
>much better for controlling more
>than one character, because it's
>very difficult to control multiple
>people otherwise with the same
>degree of control.

It also prevents the player from jumping into the inventory and healing up 100 hit points in 1 second.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

Yeah, the combat situations weren't as good as Fallout. Then again, it was AD&D. I don't think a turn-based AD&D game would have as good of combat as Fallout.

But, Planescape excelled in areas like NPC interaction, dialog, and story. It made the combat less of a factor. It was, also, nice to slaughter a bunch of weak enemies quickly. In Fallout taking out a bunch of rats could take a half-hour.

Skie
 
RE: implementation

But, in Fallout combat you should only be controlling one character. I would be irked if Fallout incorperated full control over NPCs.

Skie
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

That's true about the rats, but conversely, would you have wanted to do an attack on Navarro in real time? I know I wouldn't.
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

As long as there was a pause feature, I wouldn't have a problem. It, also, would've made the turrets a threat.

Skie
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

Those turrets are a pain if you're not a high agility player. Even if you are, and they hit you, they did a good deal of damage even with the Adv Power Armor.

Also, real time doesn't allow for the nice AP system fallout has. Even with pausing, you're still going to have to deal with the fact that the player can't react as fast as the computer, so his speeds versus his character's speed will have a large discrepancy.
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

Only if you have to click-click-click-click-click like Diablo. If your character performs more actions in a given time; then agility figure in. If a 10 agility character runs faster than a 7 agility character; then the game doesn't rely on your dexterity.

It doesn't have to be like BG where speed had very little affect in combat.

Skie
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

Even if it's not like Diablo or BG, it's very hard to make the player's stats in to what the character does in real time. Sure, you could make said player "faster" movement-wise, but what about attack speeds?
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

Well, simple. For the average person a gun takes 6 seconds to fire. Someone with a Agility of 1-2 it would take 8 seconds; while someone with a 9-10 it would take 4 seconds. A 3-4 would be 7 seconds, and a 7-8 would be 5 seconds.

So a character with 9 or 10 agility could get off 2 shots in the time it would take someone with 1-2 agility to get off one.

Skie
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

>Well, simple. For the average
>person a gun takes 6
>seconds to fire. Someone
>with a Agility of 1-2
>it would take 8 seconds;
>while someone with a 9-10
>it would take 4 seconds.
> A 3-4 would be
>7 seconds, and a 7-8
>would be 5 seconds.
>
>So a character with 9 or
>10 agility could get off
>2 shots in the time
>it would take someone with
>1-2 agility to get off
>one.

But that's basically like Action points except it deals with time. Also, unlike the speed of swinging a weapon, which *can* be based on time, pulling the trigger of a gun is not something that is really hard. Someone can empty their clip in under two seconds even without much agility. I'll stick with turn-based.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

Yeah, why does burst firing take 1 ap more while targeting does too? I think targeted shots should take more AP. Plus, i know turrets are nearly harmless in TB, but that can be solved by something called reaction fire!
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

>Yeah, why does burst firing take
>1 ap more while targeting
>does too? I think targeted
>shots should take more AP.
>Plus, i know turrets are
>nearly harmless in TB, but
>that can be solved by
>something called reaction fire!

You'd think that bringing up your gun to your eye to aim at something like a person's eye would take a lot longer than lifting your thumb to turn on automatic mode at the same time you're raising your gun to fire.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

It also takes aim to fire in burst mode as well, and you're firing a few more than one round.. :)
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

<< But that's basically like Action points except it deals with time. >>

Exactly, so what's the problem? And, don't say it's not realistic; because that's an inane (not insane) reason.

<< Also, unlike the speed of swinging a weapon, which *can* be based on time, pulling the trigger of a gun is not something that is really hard. >>

So, account it for aiming. It does take some time to aim a weapon; at least, if you plan to hit something.

<< Someone can empty their clip in under two seconds even without much agility. >>

Yeah, and they probably won't hit a damn thing either. I can't see why this is a problem in real-time; but not turn-based.

Skie
 
RE: Turn-Based -- Real-Time -- Whatever

<< Plus, i know turrets are nearly harmless in TB, but that can be solved by something called reaction fire! >>

So, something along the lines of X-COM combat?

Skie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top