Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 75

Thread: RTWP vs TB

  1. #1

    RTWP vs TB

    Greetings,

    I feel that this is one of the most polarising issues of the game so far and thus deserves it's own thread so that players can comment on this and so that our voice can be heard on this issue.

    I will repost what I wrote down on the kickstarter comments:

    Greetings,

    I have pledged for this project and this is the first time I ever pledge on kickstarter. The second I read about this I was sold. I love kingmaker, I love pathfinder, and I just want to see a video game done by clever people that renders that spirit of adventure and exploring.
    That said, I do not think I would have pledged if I had known that the game was RTWP (Real time with pause) because to me that just removes the entirety of the strategical aspect that I love so much about pathfinder.

    I feel that RTWP transforms a game and a system into a clickity fest of the least effort rather than having each fight be a carefully thought out strategical debate that really immerses you into this.

    To this day, my favorite adaptation of a D&D setting was TOEE, and that game had no story, complicated quests that made no sense, and lacked a general narrative track. Imagine if they had the storytelling dreamteam that this venture has back then? It would have changed the genre in its entirety!

    So I don't know about the others who support the Turn Based intiative, and I don't know if it's even possible for the devs to insert this in, but I think everyone would be hapy if there was a TB and a RTWP mode in this game (Not a pause at end of turn, it's not the same and is note ven remotely close), so that both sides of this argument could be happy? I would gladly upgrade my pledge from 55$ to 5000$ just to make that happen!!!!

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    12
    I would take Turn Based over RTWP any day of the week, but I remember talk about there being some sort of IP issue with TB. Maybe because of ToEE? Agree completely about ToEE, both the negatives and positives. The TB system would work even better with Pathfinder than with DnD3.5...

  3. #3
    Community Manager Berserkerkitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    170
    Look guys, I hate to be reason for disappointment, but this point has been discussed to death. You're more than welcome to share your feelings on the subject, but turn-based combat is definitely not going to happen. There will be an optional auto-pause feature after every action, but there will be no real turn-based combat.
    http://nutiminn.is/kattarshians/

  4. #4
    Member Pathfinder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Stolen Lands
    Posts
    62
    I personally think that yes, it is in most senses turn based combat if we can pause after our companion + PC every action (and when initiative roll is made and first person in our paty have option to try and do something).

    I mean that IS how turn based things are supposed to work anyway. When DM/GM is computer it would be bit silly to have pause after every action "his" NPC's, monsters and so on do.

    Bonus if we get option to "wait for our move untill enemy is moved first or turn is ending". It all can be done easily with automatic pause I think.

    I guess we might get even "pause game when some effect end" (most usefull when spellkind of effect you are using end) so if we have some items or unlimited zero level spells (somekind of light come mind first) we can easily just re-cost it when need to.

    After all when we play P&P we do not have second timer giving us info when 6 second is gone or so...
    "Road to the man's heart go through the chest"

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Berserkerkitten View Post
    Look guys, I hate to be reason for disappointment, but this point has been discussed to death. You're more than welcome to share your feelings on the subject, but turn-based combat is definitely not going to happen. There will be an optional auto-pause feature after every action, but there will be no real turn-based combat.
    I realise it has been discussed, although I fail to see the IP problem, if turn based games could be IP then I guess Wizards should try to sue square for the FF series.

    I have yet to find however a single thread that encompasses these discussions in the goal of having that thread be accessible to the developpers. I want to believe that if enough of us voice our concerns for this we will perhaps be heard and maybe something can be done about it.

    I've waited years to see that perfect Isometric RPG game be made and this has so many of the right spots, it just needs to have a TB option to be perfect IMHO, so I won't give up on trying to make that happen, even agaisn't impossible odds.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Sochi, Russia
    Posts
    60
    NwN and BG series proved that RTWP is a 100% viable solution for these kinds of games, and this type of combat haven't spoiled those game for me in the slightest. TB is also nice, as was shown by Divinity Original Sin. But not imperative to make a great game.

    So, in the end, i see no reason to start bickering over completely remaking combat. *Especially* with advanced auto-pause setting for those crazy(in the good sense of this word, mind you) fans of "tactical combat". If the devs have already decided on RTWP, no amount of forum threads will change it. Deal with it.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Pathfinder View Post
    I personally think that yes, it is in most senses turn based combat if we can pause after our companion + PC every action (and when initiative roll is made and first person in our paty have option to try and do something).

    I mean that IS how turn based things are supposed to work anyway. When DM/GM is computer it would be bit silly to have pause after every action "his" NPC's, monsters and so on do.

    Bonus if we get option to "wait for our move untill enemy is moved first or turn is ending". It all can be done easily with automatic pause I think.

    I guess we might get even "pause game when some effect end" (most usefull when spellkind of effect you are using end) so if we have some items or unlimited zero level spells (somekind of light come mind first) we can easily just re-cost it when need to.

    After all when we play P&P we do not have second timer giving us info when 6 second is gone or so...
    Even with all the autopause settings, it would not be the same because turns happen simultaneously. So while your wizard is going through the animation to cast that fireball, your hasted warrior is running towards the goblins and will then take the fireball even though when you had initially cast it it was all clear to go. Not to mention that you usually either have the choice of turning AI on and have your whole team behave like a bunch of fucking imbeciles or turn it off and have most of your characters lose a turn now and then because you didn,t give them something specific to do and they're not repeating the previous option.

    Turn based offers clear precise control over the battlefield since each person acts on its own turn and it creates its own inherent strategy. Action economy becomes much more important, battlefield position becomes crucial, the focus is to optimise those two things rather than to kill the ennemy as fast as possible. It is the very essence of the Pathfinder gaming system.

    And it is unfortunately lost in a RTWP, no manner how many autopauses you put in.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Kekmaster ACR View Post
    NwN and BG series proved that RTWP is a 100% viable solution for these kinds of games, and this type of combat haven't spoiled those game for me in the slightest. TB is also nice, as was shown by Divinity Original Sin. But not imperative to make a great game.

    So, in the end, i see no reason to start bickering over completely remaking combat. *Especially* with advanced auto-pause setting for those crazy(in the good sense of this word, mind you) fans of "tactical combat". If the devs have already decided on RTWP, no amount of forum threads will change it. Deal with it.
    While I agree with your second paragraph conclusion, I will still try to make it happen, no matter how hopeless it is ^^

    And Bg and NwN were fine games, but they suffer a lot from the adaptation of TB P&P to RTWP action rpg games. If i wanted to, say, make my iconic wizard build into NwN it would not work, because everything works differently. I would have to make a new wizard build. Probably one that focuses on blasting because control is not as efficient when your whole team and the other guys teams moves at the same time your animation effect goes off.

  9. #9
    Community Manager Berserkerkitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by Alastar View Post
    I have yet to find however a single thread that encompasses these discussions in the goal of having that thread be accessible to the developpers. I want to believe that if enough of us voice our concerns for this we will perhaps be heard and maybe something can be done about it.
    No. Please believe me when I say no. This is not going to happen and it has absolutely nothing to do with the developers hearing or not hearing anyone. This was brought up in both AMAs, on Kickstarter, during our Stream, has been discussed internally by the devs, we've heard each and every argument about it. It's not going to happen. It's not considered. And it's not something we can simply add in afterwards, out of the kindness of our hearts. The entire combat system is built upon RTWP and it's here to stay.
    http://nutiminn.is/kattarshians/

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Berserkerkitten View Post
    No. Please believe me when I say no. This is not going to happen and it has absolutely nothing to do with the developers hearing or not hearing anyone. This was brought up in both AMAs, on Kickstarter, during our Stream, has been discussed internally by the devs, we've heard each and every argument about it. It's not going to happen. It's not considered. And it's not something we can simply add in afterwards, out of the kindness of our hearts. The entire combat system is built upon RTWP and it's here to stay.
    Can you sum up the reasoning behind it because honestly that sounds short sighted considering the strong support for TB there is?

    I know you're a community manager and it must be annoying to see it pop up every time, but most of us didn't have access to those things and AFAIK they're not stored online so I can't listen to them.

    If they are stored online, can you link it please?

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •