View Single Post

Default 

February 2nd, 2008, 20:19
That was way less vitriolic than I expected. And the game seems more and more interesting the more I hear about it.

I realize that in an interview format, sometimes "pithy" is more important than "fair," but this bit still stuck in my craw:

Originally Posted by Vince
Now, fun is a very subjective concept. Some people think that playing chess is fun. Some people think that playing in traffic is fun. Go figure. So, if tactical chess-like combat filled with “what happens if I do A vs what happens if I do B vs. …” decisions sounds like fun to you, then you won’t find TB odd or slow. If you prefer non-stop, mindless by definition, action requiring nothing but manual dexterity and fast reaction, then RT is your friend.
I think this is a false dichotomy. Real-time isn't "playing-in-traffic" brainless by definition any more than TB is wonderfully tactical and brainy by definition. For example, the Close Combat series features extremely demanding, real-time tactical combat, and Fallout features brain-dead, repetitive, and boring as hell turn-based combat.

IOW, the TB/RT thing is a red herring. If your goal is to make a combat system that's engaging, intelligent, and tactically challenging, you can do it in either mode. If your resources are limited, it might be somewhat easier to do this in TB. And, of course, if you just *prefer* TB, then obviously TB is the way to go.

But railing against "the market" for preferring RT is just silly, and branding people who prefer RT as twitch-addicted morons is actually stupid.

Edit: I noticed that VD addressed this in the comments on RPS, so never mind (I guess).
Last edited by Prime Junta; February 2nd, 2008 at 20:38.
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#8

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540