The Decay of Turn-Based RPGs

Yes and no.

For example, the Dragon Quest series will continue with turn-based mechanics and the series will remain ever popular. I think in Japan, turn-based gameplay will always be around.

But it mostly depends on how turn-based is incorporated. Sometimes the design is so fun that even though it's turn-based, it's still fast-paced and exciting, like Grandia III's battle-system for example.

They are going anywhere if they continue to sell like this

Final Fantasy Tactics A2 would probably argue with you, as would Puzzle Quest (to a certain degree, I guess). Mass Effect is also essentially a turn-based RPG that only looks like a real time RPG

I don't think that the turn-based RPG is dead, I just think that it's going to be more niche. Look at Atlus, they almost exclusively publish turn-based RPGs, and those games do relatively well..no, they don't sell like CoD 4, but they sell enough to keep the company afloat

FFTA2 is a tactical rpg dude, not the Standard rpg Z3rg is talking about.

The problem with a lot of turnbased RPG's is that after a while you become powerful enough to simply spam attack and kill eveyrthing off. This is why I liked Lost Odyssey, despite being slow paced the battle system stayed interesting because you had to play types and attack order strengths most of the way through the game. You never became powerful enough to just spam attack and win a encounter.

There is nothing wrong with a slowly paced game so long as it is engaging (and in LO's case the skill and battle system are engaging...actually more so than the actual game).

Innovation is the introduction of new things or methods, LO introduced the rings system, it's innovative. Innovation isn't this mythical and magical secret ingredient thats super hard to find, it's common place and simple. Turn based RPGs are rare, and dying out, because the fanbase is being outnumbered. Just enjoy the occasional cookie we get thrown, like LO.

Innovation is the introduction of new things or methods, LO introduced the rings system, it's innovative. Innovation isn't this mythical and magical secret ingredient thats super hard to find, it's common place and simple. Turn based RPGs are rare, and dying out, because the fanbase is being outnumbered. Just enjoy the occasional cookie we get thrown, like LO.

VegetaJr

exactly

In practice the ring system of LO is little more than a watered down version of Shadow Hearts' Judgement Ring. If you're looking for innovation, Sakaguchi is not the answer.

There's nothing wrong with turn-based RPGs. In fact, Bioware's KotOR series IS a turn based RPG, just as NWN is and past titles like Baldur's Gate were. The difference is the developers came up with a brilliant way of implementing it, but it still functions on rounds, combat is still essentially decided by stat check rather than player input, and the player can pause inbetween rounds to give commands. This is where turn-based JRPGs fail - they've never evolved..JRPGs basically play like they did on the NES. There are, of course, exceptions. The battle system in Grandia 1 and 2 was highly enjoyable, offering a level of strategy seldom seen in JRPGs. Unfortunately, you can circumvent the strategy by grinding levels to the point where you're so much more powerful than your opponent, you don't even need to use strategy. WRPGs typically avoid this sort of thing by including level caps or limiting the amount of enemies within an area to a finite number (the only JRPG that comes to mind that's done this is Chrono Cross). This keeps the game in control of the difficulty rather than the gamer and allows the developer to create a game that will offer a steady level of challenge throughout, assuming the devs balance it right (which Obsidian absolutely did not do with KotOR 2).

Turn-based RPGs offer an element of strategy that real-time simply cannot offer at this point in time, mostly because turn-based allows you to coordinate the actions of many characters simultaneously, while in real-time you only control one. In Baldur's Gate, the joy of coordinating an attack and watching your enemy be utterly decimated in only a couple of rounds is something that simply cannot be expressed. And while i love what Tri-Ace has been doing with real-time, Star Ocean and Valkyrie Profile both phenomenal takes on real-time RPG combat, there's just no real-time RPG out there that canduplicate the sort of satisfaction i feel playing Baldur's Gate, for example. Turn-based RPGs are still very much relevant, it's just up to JRPGs to start thinkin up ways to take advantage of this form of combat, to put as much time into their battle systems as they do into their cinematics.

Mass Effect is also essentially a turn-based RPG that only looks like a real time RPG

Radiohead85

~ in Scooby Doo voice ~ Ruhhh?

The only thing turn based in Mass Effect is the dialogue

I still have faith in turn-based RPGs. It's just a matter of finding a dev who will take the time and expense to make a good one. If the game has an original and immersing story with well-developed characters and decent graphics, that makes a strong foundation. It also needs good dialog and voice acting and a decent system for learning spells and abilities. Lastly, it needs plenty of side activities and bonus content.

It's no use having a turn-based system that only offers a couple of choices anyway. Turn-based systems have to be deep and complex in order to work. Those who still remember the original Pools of Radiance, or the original Battletech Crescent Hawks series, will know what I'm talking about.

Here's a thought. We pretty much know that FFXIII (not versus) is going to be turn based, though highly advanced. I was wondering do you guyz think that once they release a non turned based FF, maybe every one else will do the same?beastmr2

Turn based combat is valid even today. The problem is that few people ever expand on the normal mechanics. They need to build upon turn based combat rather than abandon it.

Like group synergy being more prevalent instead of having each characters turn be such a singular effort. There are countless ways to do this without having to resort to real time all the time combat.

Im not saying real time combat is bad but turn based combat is a long time staple of the genre which should be supported and revised rather than left for dead in favor of the current day norm.

[QUOTE="beastmr2"]Here's a thought. We pretty much know that FFXIII (not versus) is going to be turn based, though highly advanced. I was wondering do you guyz think that once they release a non turned based FF, maybe every one else will do the same?King9999

FFXII is not real time, its just you dont stand still in battles, there are still turns, just like earlier FF games you have a bar that fills in time but this time you can change its speed to max to act like real-time but its still the same, turn-based.

Personally I really enjoyed FFXII and it became my favorite FF game after I played it for hours. So I look forward to FFXIII and I believe it will be again this kind of fast turn-based game and obviously people who are stuck on FFVII wont enjoy it

these types of post come around all the time. and i glad. reminds me that people have not forgot a lost art. turned based is my favriot type of RPG.

In recent years, the genre of turn-based RPGs seems to have become completely stagnant. Innovation has become extremely rare, and they seem to have just all become mediocre. Looking at most of Microsoft's upcoming RPG lineup only furthers my belief. Bioware seems to be the only one pushing the envelope, but even they only take minor steps at a time. So will turn-based RPGs go the way of the dodo bird? What qualities are their strong and weak points? What possible innovations can be made to the genre?Z3rg_Rush

[QUOTE="King9999"][QUOTE="beastmr2"]Here's a thought. We pretty much know that FFXIII (not versus) is going to be turn based, though highly advanced. I was wondering do you guyz think that once they release a non turned based FF, maybe every one else will do the same?TheLegendKnight

FFXII is not real time, its just you dont stand still in battles, there are still turns, just like earlier FF games you have a bar that fills in time but this time you can change its speed to max to act like real-time but its still the same, turn-based.

That's not the distinction between turn based and real time. All real time RPGs have ability delay, it a must for simple realism and playability. Not sure what to classify FFXII as (been a while since I played it so can't recall the exact function), but ability delay alone does not mean that game X is turn based. Generally speaking, whether something is turn based or real time mostly depends on the enemies. Can you stop them, or temporarily pause them in any way to decide actions, or do you have to decide in real time. That's usually the distinction, not generally your control of your characters.

GBT games will be strong and alive long after all other genres are dead and extinct.

We are in a low atm, and it seems that it will remain a low for quite sometimes, but eh, never lose faith. GBT has strong basics which appeal to peoples who want a FAIR game or to focus on something that is not related with l33t reflexes.

Westerns devs couldn't make a good GBT atm even if they would be threaten with death, but have no fear, these devs will have kids. And kids often exceel where their parents totally lack.

I wonder if Chess or card games are going to go real time. I mean, waiting for your opponents to take their turn is SO boring! Chess hasn't changed AT ALL since I first played it. No evolution whatsoever. Yet I still find myself playing it for some reason...lostn

Mmmkay..

On that note, I think Chess is a wonderful game of strategy and skill. Does anyone remember an old pc game called BattleChess? I would LOVE to see a next-gen remake of that!

[QUOTE="lostn"]I wonder if Chess or card games are going to go real time. I mean, waiting for your opponents to take their turn is SO boring! Chess hasn't changed AT ALL since I first played it. No evolution whatsoever. Yet I still find myself playing it for some reason...EnigManic

Mmmkay..

[QUOTE="beastmr2"]Here's a thought. We pretty much know that FFXIII (not versus) is going to be turn based, though highly advanced. I was wondering do you guyz think that once they release a non turned based FF, maybe every one else will do the same?King9999

yeah i know, what i meen is if ff stops bein turn based maybe the it will completely die out in japanese rpg's (american rpgs really dont follow any spesific mold)

I call FF12's battle system "autonomous". Its not turn based but you dont really control the action either. _AbBaNdOn

"autonomous"?, not bad.

My opinion of Turn-Based RPGs is this: GOOD RIDDANCE! You look at the stuff Bioware and other western companies have been doing versus the stuff Square has been doing in the past decade, and it's just no comparison. Mass Effect and KOTOR just blow any JRPG out of the water. I loved FFVII and all the PSX RPGS, but that's old stuff. Games have to evolve. FFXII was a small step in the right direction, but the battles were still boring to me, especially cause there were so many of them and the fighting maps were just huge. Western companies have pretty much ditched the whole turn-based RPG idea altogether. Good for them, and good for gaming. The sales speak for themselves. If you want "nostalgia", than keep playing SNES games and gobble up the few Atlus games tha come your way. But there's really no room for them on the main stage. They're niche games that are niche for a reason.

Square has been complaining abut the decline of their company in the international market, and it's ridiculously obvious why that's so. They're way behind, and I know the last thing Square wants to be is a niche company like Atlus. Square knows this, so I'm really excited to find out what FFXIII has in store for us. JRPGs need to evolve desperately. You can start by ditching silly anime cliches and not making your main character a 15-year-old pre-teen boy.

That's not the distinction between turn based and real time. All real time RPGs have ability delay, it a must for simple realism and playability. Not sure what to classify FFXII as (been a while since I played it so can't recall the exact function), but ability delay alone does not mean that game X is turn based. Generally speaking, whether something is turn based or real time mostly depends on the enemies. Can you stop them, or temporarily pause them in any way to decide actions, or do you have to decide in real time. That's usually the distinction, not generally your control of your characters.

DerekLoffin

its still turn based because there is atb bar for both you and your enemies. real time is real time, you press attack your char attack, doesnt wait for a bar to be filled, same for enemies.

turn-based = in your attack turn you attack, in enemies' attack turn they attack, to define this atb is used in FF games, so its turn-based.

in FFXII you give orders to your characters so they act automatically but still they cant act before their bars are filled.in short, its always dependent on your turns defined by atb

The "Innovation" in the Turn-based system was awful in most cases.Look at FF8 or Chrono Cross...not totally bad games,but I had prefered the "usual Chrono-Trigger-like"-System.Most games try to innovate at the cost of gameplay...I think no one wants or needs that.

Western RPGs really need to be revolutionized.KOTOR for example was ok for itself back then,it´s also acceptable in MMORPGs but the lack of strategical content makes it pretty boring.Turn-based games had IMO a much better basis from the beginning.

I can only speak for turn-based JRPG here, but for the most part, they are completely homogenous inhow they play, how they feel.

It seems in every JRPG, there is a strong archetype of charachters from which the developers can pick from, the setting always derives from a fantastical structure, and even how the story usually unfolds has became hackneyed and cliched, although, admittedly, JRPG storylines do have some deoth, the problem is that they usually aren't presented or told very well.

Turn-based RPGs need to stop becoming a tribute game to their predecessors.

The best example of innovation for turn-based RPGs, I think, is the Paper Mario series -- a completely new setting, and style of gameplay -- this genre needs more innovation, and although not completely new, Golden Sun also introduced some new aspects to the genre, hell, even Pokemon introduced a fresh breath of air.

I think RPG developers should take a cue from Parasite Eve 2. Technically, it was a survival-horror game, but it felt like a live-action RPG. The combat system wasn't turn-based, but you acquired experience points for leveling up your character and learning new abilities. The combat system worked beautifully, and the game has a deep storyline, not to mention being scary as hell.

I think RPG developers should take a cue from Parasite Eve 2. Technically, it was a survival-horror game, but it felt like a live-action RPG. The combat system wasn't turn-based, but you acquired experience points for leveling up your character and learning new abilities. The combat system worked beautifully, and the game has a deep storyline, not to mention being scary as hell.

EnigManic

PE2 was horrible compared to the Original.I persnally was misssin eveything I liked on the original.PE1´s fighting system ws nice..they could build that up,for example.

I cringe at the mention of Turn-Based RPGs and JRPGs. Why? Because they aren't RPGs. /sigh

Turn-Based "RPGs" are more RTS games with a behind the back perspective. You have no say in the character progression, and the characters are always androgynous 16 year old boys with spikey metrosexual hair, you play no role in the combat aside from selecting your next move, and most important of all you have no say in the story's progression.

If people like these games, I am not going to argue. Opinions are opinions and I don't even disrespect said opinions. But they are not RPGs.

To answer the OP's question; no I do not think these games will disappear. I think it will take a while before Square-Enix appreciates their lack of innovation and inability to update their franchise, but once this happens they will get their act together as will other companies and the genre will be reinvented and revived. I couldn't care less, but I suppose it is good for the industry.

I personally love TBRPG's but I must admit myself you are right about the lack of innovations because that is because there is not much to innovate.

But as most will tell you, like myself, will play the game for the stories.

[QUOTE="EnigManic"] I think RPG developers should take a cue from Parasite Eve 2. Technically, it was a survival-horror game, but it felt like a live-action RPG. The combat system wasn't turn-based, but you acquired experience points for leveling up your character and learning new abilities. The combat system worked beautifully, and the game has a deep storyline, not to mention being scary as hell.Ash2X

PE2 was horrible compared to the Original.I persnally was misssin eveything I liked on the original.PE1´s fighting system ws nice..they could build that up,for example.

You are way off base here, and that's an understatement. PE2 was far superior to the first. For one thing, the controls were improved, as was the AI. The graphics are notably better and the story was longer and deeper. In addition, PE2 had plenty of unlockable content and they did away with the retarded weapon configuration system.

To Be honest I think that this is a good thing.

Like most people I don't Pay RPG's for the story. The gameplay has to be good and Turn-Based system just Doesn't do it for me.

But I guess some people like it so....yeah.

[QUOTE="Ash2X"][QUOTE="EnigManic"] I think RPG developers should take a cue from Parasite Eve 2. Technically, it was a survival-horror game, but it felt like a live-action RPG. The combat system wasn't turn-based, but you acquired experience points for leveling up your character and learning new abilities. The combat system worked beautifully, and the game has a deep storyline, not to mention being scary as hell.EnigManic

PE2 was horrible compared to the Original.I persnally was misssin eveything I liked on the original.PE1´s fighting system ws nice..they could build that up,for example.

You are way off base here, and that's an understatement. PE2 was far superior to the first. For one thing, the controls were improved, as was the AI. The graphics are notably better and the story was longer and deeper. In addition, PE2 had plenty of unlockable content and they did away with the retarded weapon configuration system.

I actually liked the weapon configuration system in PE1. While I enjoyed PE2's battle system, my only gripe with it was how you could only access your Armor Attachments during the course of a battle. It was frustrating for me whenever I ran out of bullets and felt the urgency to access my inventory where all the extra bullets were located.

Other than that, I do agree that PE2 was an overall better game than the first.

[QUOTE="Ash2X"][QUOTE="EnigManic"] I think RPG developers should take a cue from Parasite Eve 2. Technically, it was a survival-horror game, but it felt like a live-action RPG. The combat system wasn't turn-based, but you acquired experience points for leveling up your character and learning new abilities. The combat system worked beautifully, and the game has a deep storyline, not to mention being scary as hell.EnigManic

PE2 was horrible compared to the Original.I persnally was misssin eveything I liked on the original.PE1´s fighting system ws nice..they could build that up,for example.

You are way off base here, and that's an understatement. PE2 was far superior to the first. For one thing, the controls were improved, as was the AI. The graphics are notably better and the story was longer and deeper. In addition, PE2 had plenty of unlockable content and they did away with the retarded weapon configuration system.

WOW, we must have played a completely different game. The PE2 I played was a Resident Evil clone, except with clumsier, one-dimensional gameplay. It's like Square decided to take everything away that made the first game cool, and water it down completely.

PE2 goes down on my list as one the worst follow-ups in gaming history.

Turn-based RPGs need to stop becoming a tribute game to their predecessors.

MetalGear_Ninty

Clearly one of the few intelligent statements made in this thread.

For all the shock of the X360 being the new hub of the RPG genre, it has very little to show for it to date. Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey are precisely the WRONG way to go.

Fortunately, the future seems to be very bright, and led by the seemingly left for dead SE. SO4 so far looks to be everything that SO3 should have been.

WOW, we must have played a completely different game. The PE2 I played was a Resident Evil clone, except with clumsier, one-dimensional gameplay. It's like Square decided to take everything away that made the first game cool, and water it down completely.

PE2 goes down on my list as one the worst follow-ups in gaming history.MarcusAntonius

I suppose you must have played a different game. I've played through PE2 several times, even after I bought a PS2. I thouroghly enjoyed the play mechanics, the mitachondria abilities were cool, it had a chilling music score and some of the boss battles were pretty intense. I just wish it had a few more timelessly freaky cutscenes like the first one had. Overall, it's still one of my all-time favorite games, it just wasn't quite as dark as the first one.

[QUOTE="EnigManic"][QUOTE="Ash2X"][QUOTE="EnigManic"] I think RPG developers should take a cue from Parasite Eve 2. Technically, it was a survival-horror game, but it felt like a live-action RPG. The combat system wasn't turn-based, but you acquired experience points for leveling up your character and learning new abilities. The combat system worked beautifully, and the game has a deep storyline, not to mention being scary as hell.MarcusAntonius

PE2 was horrible compared to the Original.I persnally was misssin eveything I liked on the original.PE1´s fighting system ws nice..they could build that up,for example.

You are way off base here, and that's an understatement. PE2 was far superior to the first. For one thing, the controls were improved, as was the AI. The graphics are notably better and the story was longer and deeper. In addition, PE2 had plenty of unlockable content and they did away with the retarded weapon configuration system.

WOW, we must have played a completely different game. The PE2 I played was a Resident Evil clone, except with clumsier, one-dimensional gameplay. It's like Square decided to take everything away that made the first game cool, and water it down completely.

PE2 goes down on my list as one the worst follow-ups in gaming history.

Exactly.The Idea behind it wasn´t totally bad,but the weak storyline and pretty obvious lack of almost everything that made the first one great made the game a flop for almost every fan of the first.

I cringe at the mention of Turn-Based RPGs and JRPGs. Why? Because they aren't RPGs. /sigh

Turn-Based "RPGs" are more RTS games with a behind the back perspective. You have no say in the character progression, and the characters are always androgynous 16 year old boys with spikey metrosexual hair, you play no role in the combat aside from selecting your next move, and most important of all you have no say in the story's progression.

GSU28

Well then what is Diablo,exept a Hack´n Slay,Oblivion could be said as Action-Adventure (It´s fighting is not really tactical in any case) or KOTOR a Point-N-Click Adventure.You shurely didn´t play a JRPG exept Final Fantasy.RTS (Real Time Strategy?) no,far from it.Some FFs had at ATB (Active Time Battle) but 95% of all other RPGs didn´t.Many JRPGs have also Character-Development (FFX,FFXII,DQ8 just to name the most famous).Sorry Buddy,but you shouldn´t judge a Genre just because you played or seen Final Fantasy 7.Nothing Personal,many people fell into that trap.An if you´re a PC-only gamer it´s not like you got any other JRPGs.

[QUOTE="MarcusAntonius"]...The PE2 I played was a Resident Evil clone, except with clumsier, one-dimensional gameplay. It's like Square decided to take everything away that made the first game cool, and water it down completely...Ash2X

Exactly.The Idea behind it wasn´t totally bad,but the weak storyline and pretty obvious lack of almost everything that made the first one great made the game a flop for almost every fan of the first.

How was it watered down? The grahics were definitely better. There was more to the gameplay including leveling up to gain mitachondria abilities. The boss fights were better. There's a decent variety of unlockable content. Plus the second game seemed longer than the first.