(First off, I apologize in advance to the Mods if you decide to lock this outright - this seems to me like a topic people want to talk about, and it's dragged a number of threads off-topic. I just want to put this out there to clear the air, and maybe help people understand where everyone is coming from on this. That said, this debate doesn't always go anywhere productive, so I'll understand if you think this is a bad idea for a thread topic. )

I don't recall stating any such thing, can you point that out to me? Please keep your responses professional.

As clearly stated, and as the author of this post requested, I stated my opinion on the matter and tried to elaborate as best as possible. If that's not the real purpose of this thread, if in fact this more a group of turn-based advocates looking to bash the other side, then this isn't meaningful.

So simply put, of course you can get wiped out in turn-based games - anyone suggesting otherwise hasn't played enough. But to me, it is Easier to be overwhelmed in real-time than when you have time to form a plan of attack. If you feel otherwise, excellent.

M

See thats where your "wrong" or what ever you want to call it. TB isn't about You move them I move. Whats "really" is going on to me is the samething that happens in real-time. Just I get to stoptime and do all the preperations and desisions and planning ing the split seconds between the actions. one "round in a TB game (your turn and my turn stopping back when it get s to your turn) would be the same things that happen in a RT game in a few seconds time. If I understand you, you are stuck on the idea that turn-based games have to be slow. Like those examples of FO where you have whole cities taking there turn in a combat even if they aren't involved. With the computing power we have in in your average PC they could run right through NPC turns in seconds. In a TB situation you have as much or as little time you want to make your Desisions and preperations.

And yeah - I'll be the first to say that Fallout wasn't the height of turn-based gaming. I liked it nonetheless, but it's not like I'm holding that game up as the paragon of ultimate game design.

And to be clear - my purpose in creating this thread wasn't at all to imply that turn-based rocks and everything else is "lesser" by default. I just have my preferences. All things being equal, I'll almost always pass up a good action game for a good TB game. My worry in creating this thread was that it would spiral into a debate about which one is "better" (which is patently ridiculous, of course.) Because if that happens, this thread will quickly find itself locked, I have no doubt.

Dont confuse whats in Fashion with being superior. Ikea is in Fashion, but nothing bought at Ikea is ever going to last anywhere near as long as something by a master craftsman. You'll never see Ikea junk in an Antique store going for a small fortune, but that master craftsman's item made of real timber (not that chipboard with laminate stuck on the front nonsense) stands a chance.

i didnt said you said the game svcked, i just made a point about generalizing a genre based on your experience



case and point.


again TB is about you attack i attack, which translate as unrealistic crap in terms of warfare (unless you like fantasy implementation of board games and the likes)
while how quickly you can move + reflex + whatever else is just interface/game orientation not TBvsRT related.

like i said look at Hoi3 and then speak to me about, focus on the tactics and strategy etc...

It's lose/lose in my mind.

When I'm playing an rpg, I don't want to have to worry about timing.

On the other side of things, when I'm playing an action game I don't want stats detracting from my ability to play well.

I mean, Deus Ex and Vampire: Bloodlines are good games, but it's NOT because of their great combat.

Well as the old saying goes, if I wanted Realism, I wouldnt be playing video games...

Considering the compressed time, how can we say that RTSs are any more realistic? Can you name any great battles that lasted only a minute?

Fallout is a computer implementation of PnP RPG gameplay, actually. Originally GURPS, to be specific, but they lost the license in the end.

Indeed, Again your failing to see past what you physically see. It's not pieces standing there taking turns pucnhing each other. Like I said it's taking what you see in real time and breaking it in to chunks of time. SO it's just as "realistic" as a Realtime game.

See this is the kind of actitude that rises a lot of hate. So we are guilty because Bethesda made a game and we like it? Come one... like we are stealing anything from you... and i think the vets general imagination is this, "you stole our property" or "we hate you because you stole our right to have our expansion". Pathetic.

Empire total war was released on the last months and is and incredible successful franchise, mixing rts and tb.



The vanilla game is horrible too easy. I got some mods and worked heavly on some changes to make the game much more dificult to my tastes. Now eating food have some importance. Usually im stuck surrounded by lots of mutants with low life and even the magic of vats cheat cant save me.

That was tried on Morrowind by Bethesda. While i generally like this approach, in pratical terms, when you relate skills like sword fighting, its a bit unrealistic to miss a lot of attacks, its something you cant in front of you.
Oblivion dealed with it in a much better way, graduating damage. The problem is that FO3 its all about firearms, and if you simply lack skills it ends being a pain. For people who are bad with aiming or are wishing to play by the skills system, there could be a option (can be implemented with mods) that induce target error at low levels, and at high skill levels includes an aimbot auto feature, to hit shoots, unless you are aiming in the opposite direction.

Anyway, if you have high weapons skills and use vats, you almost hit 100%. With low level skill the chances can be as low as 30-40%, and sometimes, being without vats is bad. A lot of other skills have importance like lockpicking.

Are you not capable of making a non-flammatory comment?

Try posting your opinion Without calling out failings of other people, see if you can be non-offensive in posting an opinion instead of presuming fault in other people because they view something differently than yourself.

This cheapens the discussion, and turns it into exactly what the author did Not intend.

M

As A fallout 3 loving Fallout vet, I wish you'd cut out those gross generalizations.

And all these Fallout newbies are a bunch of Bethesda acolytes happy with any piece of crap thrown their way by them. See what I did there? Heh. But seriously, what the hell are you on ?

Closed for unparliamentary discussion. The moderators will confer and determine sanctions.