I was wondering which one would you think is better, Turnbased RPG, such as Final Fantasy and Pokemon or Real Time RPG such as Tales of Symphonia and Kingdom Hearts.

Oh and make sure you have a reason for why you picked whatever you picked.

Both are good. I like to have some variety to my games.

Most of the "real time RPGs" come off feeling more like dungeon hack and slash titles with little variety and boring storylines. I know it has very little to do with the gameplay style, but it is a trend I've noticed. It may be due to the pacing of the game. Action RPGs get boring fast if you spend most of your time talking, while the turn based battle systems get boring fast if you spend more time in combat than in plot twists and dialog.

In terms of actual gameplay, though, there is a lot fo room for improvement in both genres. Action RPGs could use more variety in the combat to push replayability or just hold our attention longer. Turn-based systems need better AI routines to push strategy over simply picking attack over and over again.

So far, I've only played one game which really emphasized strategy in an RPG and that was Riviera. It wasn't that the fights were hard, it was that they were ranked and your rank in each fight determined which items you would get. So in order to S rank every fight, you actually had to plan out each fight so you could kill every enemy in one turn and finish with your most powerful attack. It also didn't employ your typical attack/magic/block/run system for attacks. Attacks were limited to the number of items associated with those attacks. So if you only had one of an ultra powerful item, you could only ever use it once and once it was used up, that was it for that attack type. Of course, everything in the game sort of went along with that idea that you had to make choices in the game that were irreversible. Even exploring dungeons required points and once you ran out, you couldn't keep searching the dungeon. It was a very difficult game to get 100% in.

Probably the closest thing to that among the other games that I've played is he original Grandia. It had some interesting elements like positioning characters on the screen to avoid attacks, or distance characters from enemies. You could also hit enemies out of their attacks if your characters were fast enough and there were a few other tactical elements to the combat system. Still, I'd like to see it pushed farther, especially with the added power we have with the current generation of console systems.

Well in my opinion, I think the best battle system was in the Grandia series. It was turn based but still hectic enough to carry a feel of real time. And then when the addition of air combos was made in 3. Turn based ass whooping never looked better in. I played that game solely for the battle system. The story wasn't the greatest but the fighting was just that good to me.

Yes I third the vote for the Grandia series as having the best RPG battle system ever conceived. Grandia 2's system blew me away. I never played Grandia Xtreme but I know it has an even more refined battle system. I don't know about G3 but I'd imagine an even higher evolution.

If there is a RPG Maker using the Grandia X/3 system, I am so there.

It really depends on the game, both can be good.

That said I personally seem to prefer turn based games because I prefer Strategy RPGs and (unless you count RTS's with RPG elements like Warcraft III) they are all turn based games by neccessity.

I will go on to second that Riviera was a really good game, though like most good hand helds in only make me hungery for a more robust game of a similar nature on a more powerful non-portable system.

I prefer turn-based as - for me - there's more strategy involved than to just hack-an'-bash and hope you blast a spell off in time before a werehound butts you in the balls.

Then again, having said that, I do like the game Fable, and just wish that a)Fable 2 would hurry up and b)It came to PS3 as well, dammit! Star Ocean looked like a cool real-time RPG, but I got PWNEd trying to play it.

Currently playing Sudeki on Xbox -verdict's out for now.

Fave Turn-Based RPG: Gotta be Knights of the Old Republic - 1 AND 2!

mlai
Yes I third the vote for the Grandia series as having the best RPG battle system ever conceived. Grandia 2's system blew me away. I never played Grandia Xtreme but I know it has an even more refined battle system. I don't know about G3 but I'd imagine an even higher evolution.

If there is a RPG Maker using the Grandia X/3 system, I am so there.

Grandia 2's system was mind-blowing - too bad the storyline wasn't up to scratch. :/

I suppose it depends on the game. On the one hand, I have a great love for the LMBS (Linear Motion Battle System - it's what they use in the Tales games), but I prefer turn-based systems in other games. Like Final Fantasy, for example - while FFXII's system didn't bother me as such, I prefer the older games' turn based system.

Real Time/LMBS gives a more direct, immediate gaming experience, but turn-based gives you time to think.

mlai
Yes I third the vote for the Grandia series as having the best RPG battle system ever conceived. Grandia 2's system blew me away. I never played Grandia Xtreme but I know it has an even more refined battle system. I don't know about G3 but I'd imagine an even higher evolution.

If there is a RPG Maker using the Grandia X/3 system, I am so there.

I don't know Blue Dragon seems to have a bit of an improved battle sytem from the Grandia series.

@ Frostflowers:
Except for the lackluster ending, G2 had a decent story I felt. I liked it's play on duotheism. I also liked the split-personality love triangle. However, I feel that the game set up all these great angles but then resolved them all pretty poorly.

@ Zgenstru:
Judging by that video you linked, Blue Dragon does not seem to have a better battle system than Grandia series (2 up).

I've played both, and I can say for a fact, Blue Dragon's battle system isn't better than Grandia's. If anything, it's a step backwards. Blue Dragn plays like an oldschool turn-based RPG. It's more like your Dragon Quest and classic Final Fantasy titles, only with a charge system on certain attack types. It has a time bar so you can see who's turn is next, but it's not an ATB system. Also, I don't know about the later Grandia titles, but I know the first one had a fairly deep combat system where attack timing and positioning your characters on the battlefield actually made a difference. Blue Dragon is your typical heroes line up on one side and enemies line up on the other format. The developers were shooting for a more oldschool feel with the game, so improvement wasn't really their goal.

Turn based games are my favorites but I do enjoy action-RPG systems such as Final fantasy:Crystal chronicles, Fable, and Oblivion's battle system.

@ Isukun:

For the man who knows everything, I'm surprised you haven't personally sampled the battle systems of Grandia X and Grandia 3, even though you have such a (deservedly) high opinion of Grandia 1's system.

I picked up an import copy of Grandia on the Saturn, it is still possibly my favorite RPG, generally I'm not all that fond of the low budget voice acting RPGs were getting back then in the US, though, so I never got around to playing the sequels. Maybe if someone released an undub, but in general battle systems can't hold my interest for 40 hours in an RPG, so I need to like the characters and storyline enough to keep going.

mlai
@ Frostflowers:
Except for the lackluster ending, G2 had a decent story I felt. I liked it's play on duotheism. I also liked the split-personality love triangle. However, I feel that the game set up all these great angles but then resolved them all pretty poorly.

While I wasn't too fond of the love-triangle (neither Elena nor Millenia really appealed to me as characters), I DID like the duotheism angle, but like you said, they dropped the ball at the end. :/

I've discovered something in turn-based RPGs that really annoys me - I'm currently playing Dragon Quest VIII for the first time, and they have this Psyche Up command that increases "tension" - i.e: makes your attack stronger after you've used it a couple of times - which eats up an entire turn and leaves you wide open for attack by the enemies, with no chance to defend yourself. It feels a little silly.

I can't off-hand think of any other games that uses a similar mechanic, but I'm sure there are several, and it brings up the thing that annoys me most about turn-based systems - the fact that you can't cancel an action you've decided on based on what the enemy's actions are.

I was thinking more along the lines of "LARPing" [en.wikipedia.org] (real time RPG) or "D&D" [en.wikipedia.org] (turn-based RPG)? I didn't know you meant video games, heh.

...LARPing can be interesting to watch--but damn, it sure is confusing. If you stand around, expect to die. ...Then again, if you were fighting a real battle, I guess it would be like that:



...Minus the foamy swords, bright colors, and birdseed packets!

lastcall
...Minus the foamy swords, bright colors, and birdseed packets!

How do you know when you're dead?

mlai

lastcall
...Minus the foamy swords, bright colors, and birdseed packets!

How do you know when you're dead?

I.... suppose someone tells you? o.O I've never LARPed myself, so I'm not sure.

To me, it always seemed like a more complicated version of the outdoorsy pretend-games you played with your friends when you were little - where we all ran around pretending to be heroes and dragons and fighting monsters and everything. I had elaborate storylines that I carried on over weeks and months, with characters I made up and gave names to. The games themselves involved a lot of climbing in mountains and trees and hitting people with sticks.

.... Of course, I was an outdoorsy kind of girl when I was that age, so maybe it doesn't apply to everyone. >.> You can have your topic back now.

I had some friends who did that once. While I see people online referring to it are LARPing, I'd be really hesitant to do the same. It's about as much Role Playing as you have in your average kendo match. These kinds of games have pretty strict, but straight forward and simple rules and apart from a fairly obvious fantasy influence, they don't have much in common with most RPGs. When I think of LARPers, I tend to think more of those geeks at conventions who run around the halls pretending to be vampires.

isukun
When I think of LARPers, I tend to think more of those geeks at conventions who run around the halls pretending to be vampires.

Well, that's one version of LARPing. There are different types--vampire LARPing is kinda strange. The kind you see in the video above is more to most people's liking, as they stick to the privacy (and beauty) of the woods, and put normal clothes back on when it's time to go for a Taco Bell run or someone needs TP. The vampire thing is just silly, because they're just craving attention as they run around conventions in leather trenchcoats screaming. lol!

Why call it role playing then? This looks more like an SCA meet. I was a member in college. You don real armor and beat the crap outta each other using weapons wrapped in tire rubber, which can literally kill you if you weren't wearing the real armor.

You know you're "dead" when you're so tenderized from repeated beatings that you voluntarily leave the field, or you collapse from exhaustion.

The rules in these things tend ot be a little better defined than at your average SCA meet. Plus they frequently have refs to make sure people play by the rules.

I used to play a lot of turn-based rpg's, but I must say that action RPG's are growing on me. If they let you gain new abilities and techniques as you go on, like many action games, then I like it a lot. They're certainly less predictable than turn-based RPG's.