Legshot said:
okay people so let's finish this off
I have no clue!
This much is clear.
Let's stick to TB because TB/RT cannot work even when an expierenced developer tells us so.
This has been tried by developers with much more experience than the ones we're talking about here, and they failed. There's a reason they failed - because TB and RT have a hell of a lot of differences.
I've even pointed out several problems with this due to the differences, including situations where you have to rig the AI not to respond as much to the player in real time where you can make them all respond to a combat situation in turn based.
You also have the trouble of balancing rules. Because turn based is sequential, you can do rules that rely on this such as the AoO in 3E D&D and all the feats and skills that are in place just to enhance and avoid this one rule. In real time, however, because everything is simultaneous and each animation for the attack is going on in real time as well, these things have to be limited.
The knockback effect from Fallout was dropped in Fallout Tactics because of the addition of real time combat. Why? Because you have to take the time for the guy to fly from where he was hit to where he stops sliding, and then gets up in real time. In turn based, you could knock an enemy across the map with a good hammer hit, but you don't have the luxury of the sequential timing that allows this in real time.
Hell, I could go on and on with the problems that having both introduces.
Let's stick to 2D because 3D can never have the same atmosphere as 2D even when we have screenshots which look pretty promising.
Yet they still don't demonstrate the atmosphere we've been talking about for the last five years.
LOL The fact that Fo1+2 are prerendred even helped me in my argumantion. But I didn't know that, that's true.
No, it only proved that you were a complete idiot. I can whip out a 3D model in a few minutes that you can't render in real time. It's really not that hard. That's why when you make models for 3D games, you have to make them with triangle polygons and you have to limit the amount of them. If you could read, you would have seen that I've already explained this once.
yeah blah blah.. you can always find something against it and why we just shouldn't believe anyone on the topic because you know it all... but you know what? I rather believe someone who's DOING it and SEEING who it turns out than someone who just thinks he knows it...
Especially when they can't back it up and are trying to sell you something?
There's also the matter of developers often saying something isn't possible, because they're trying to sell you something. The big example is that developers often say that you can't have visual clothing and items in 2D on a sprite, but then you have independent developers like the guys who made
Siege of Avalon which has more layers of clothing, all visible on the sprite, than most 3D games.
If I may interject, I believe he was referring to how the Valve devs, at that point, were actually still fans themselves. They knew what people wanted, because they were some of the people who wanted it.
That's opinion not a fact. Totally irrelevant to the topic... but thanks for poiting it out.. doesn't matter anyway...
Actually, it is a fact. Most of the people at Valve when they made Half-Life were nothing more than Quake fans with deep pockets because fatass Gabe Newell used to work for MicroSoft.
The guys who made Counter Strike were just nothing more than fans who made a mod for Half-Life, now look at it.
