Thread: Turn-Based Controversy

ARPGs like Kingdom Hearts or Crisis Core are very simple. You just press X to attack, and move your character out of the way of other attacks. Sometimes you use a spell. ARPGs are really just turn based without the turns and with the ability to move. It's taking away restrictions on the player. I clearly stated that preferences are fine, but let's not pretend that an antiquated system is where the genre as a whole should stay. A hybrid like Valkyria Chronicles allows us to enhance the turn based system, by giving us the ability to move the characters. Where we move has consequences both positive and negative to the battle at hand. It's more dynamic and interesting then two sides lined up at each other. We literally have MORE unique gameplay opportunities. I'm not saying that there is absolutely no room for anything turn based at all. One of my favorite RPGs of the last generation was the Last Remnant, while I never finished the quirky and unique Resonance of Fate. The Last Remnant had a battle system that was simple and vague on the surface, but had layers of depth like few others. It managed to blend real-time visuals with a combat system that was entirely turn based. However, it still suffered the rigid limitations and lack of flexibility that turn based combat enforces on the player. I'd also argue that turn based games are instant gratification as well. You press a button, and get the reward of watching the damage and attack animations. It's super gratifying to press R1 when Squall is about to hit. It feels great to get a perfect on the attack ring in Lost Odyssey. It's gratifying when your new weapon boosts your attack damage by a thousand. All you're doing is taking the instant gratification whatever it may be from a fast game and adding some filler. The slowness of a turn based JRPG game offers nothing but slowness. It's nothing like moving your troops around in XCOM and setting up an ambush, or perfectly setting up an organized flanking maneuver in a strategy game. If you want to talk about slow and deliberate, then those are the kinds of games you want. You shouldn't look down on instant gratification, because your preferred game style is chock full of it-- or at least slightly delayed gratification, if you want to get picky with terminology. While simplicity is fine, you need to understand that we are human beings. We are not satisfied with a base simplicity. Look at any aspect of human culture, and you will see complexity. Our instruments are no longer sticks, stones, and reed flutes. The most highly regarded music and art has layers of depth that intrigue the mind and spark the imagination. As we grow older we are no longer satisfied with forms of entertainment that are basic. Children shows do not have the emotional depth of a drama, or the wit of a good comedy. Our dolls and action figures will rarely engage us in the same way that a video game will. Pong gave way to Pac-Man, and Pac-Man to Mario. There is nothing wrong with simplicity, but you need to understand that it is natural to seek out complexity. Our brains adapt and the things that were new become old and boring. Who wants to go back to watching Leave it to Beaver when we have Game of Thrones?