I think I'd still rather face 16 rats in real time. :)

As somebody who's typically obsessed with data, I'm loving seeing this poll. This feels like the first time somebody has definitively sought the answer to the question, "what kind of combat do gamers prefer?". I mean, I know that such polls have been done before, but never has it been with the behavior of a beloved game at stake, which makes the sample size outstanding.

It's looking pretty much 50/50, which I find surprising, and so does Fargo based on his twitter response. I'll be curious if he was expecting one or the other, or and wouldn't be surprised to see some thoughts on this in future interviews or industry talks…

As for my preference, I have one simple guideline: If I'm controlling multiple characters, I want turn-based. I think it's the controlling nature in me.

Yep, the stats are very interesting and I also didn't expect it to be that close. Actually I thought people would rather vote for real time with pause. Because the first game had it, and because it has more appeal to "casual" gamers.

But you really can't take this game and say that it represents the overall sympathy for one system or another. Well, from the numbers you can at least say that neither of the systems is completely extinguished and it makes it pretty obvious that a lot of people want back turn based combat (which should be common knowledge for like 2 years).
But it's not "globally" representative.
It's not a global poll, but a poll limited to kickstarter which has a different audience than global box sales. Within this kickstarter "bubble" it's also limited to Fans of Torment or people knowing Fargo or taken by the hype. Which shifts the audience again a little bit.

So to give a counter example: If you ask in a Jagged Alliance forum whether you want TB or RTwP I am pretty sure you'd get 80% or more for TB. About the same goes for Baldurs Gate forums, which will be in favor of RTwP.

I'm a big fan of turn based as it's easier to maintain spacing, flank, backstab and use AOE's. Also it can allow you to specify exact routes for you characters so you can avoid AOO and getting stuck or running of in different directions because they run into each other or get bottle necked.

RTWP is fine though as long as you can turn off companion AI, which would give you most of the benefits of TB. If you can't however then you run into the problem of your companions taking bad routes and running into AOO and all of them bunching up together and destroying tactics and proper spacing.

We really don't want to do trash fights tho. Combat encounters will be carefully crafted and not too common. No wading through rats.

Turn Based for sure. The worst part with PS:T was the combat, so it's idiotic trying to defend RTwP by saying "but then it won't be like PS:T!". Well GOOD! I think it's a LOT easier for developers to get away with sloppy, unstrategic combat with RTwP, throw in some trash mobs here and there etc. With TB they have to make an effort.

I've also gotten the impression that the game will not be combat heavy at all, nowhere near BG or even PS:T. If they make it TB obviously they wont make the game a complete grind. The "I don't want to kill 100 rats in TB mode" argument is idiotic, it's not gonna be Fallout1-2..

Another one for TB :)

And while I love tactical combat, it seems to me that this is a game were the focus can shift even further away from it, than the original.

They could make combat just part of the feature set instead of the "main course" and it definitely doesn't have to harm exploration as someone noted. I don't see why "encounter" has to mean a combat one when populating a world…

Of course filling up a world with interesting quests/puzzles/npc interaction and handcrafted locations in order to avoid trash combat isn't really something that we are used to see done (and definitely not the last few years) but something like this would line up nicely with the design goals they seemed to have set early on (if I understood them correctly) and the Numenera setting perhaps ?

It might turn out to have a more "choose your own adventure" flavor than some would like but I certainly would not mind seeing such a game be made (once in a long while ;) ) in the vein of torment…

Then it sounds like you guys should absolutely go with turn-based combat. Have you all made up your minds yet? I have, and it was easy. Voted turn based.

Also just voted for turn-based. With turn-based pulling ahead in the vote now, and the devs (in update #24) saying they're leaning towards turn-based themselves, sounds like it's a likely outcome.

Well, it sounds like the intention was always to go with TB then - obviously if encounters are scarce it makes sense. I don't think,though, that this is the game that many were expecting or backed - PS:T had plenty of combat along with its great story and dialogue. I (and many others) just read "spiritual successor to Torment" (and looked the the dev team) and pledged. Yes, the RTwP combat was not brilliant, but going fully TB will mean this game plays out (and feels) very different. I probably would've backed it still, had I known, but not for the $80 I put in.

Assuming it would be RTwP based on the original Kickstarter info was silly. IIRC, they clearly said they hadn't decided on the combat system yet. Not to mention, the original Torment wasn't a combat-focused game anyway, so its combat system isn't really part of its "legacy". And the "spiritual successor" thing? Well, lots of actual sequels and remakes (much less "spiritual successors") these days don't even keep the same combat system. See Jagged Alliance: Back In Action being RTwP (instead of TB), Fallout 3 being a first-person shooter (instead of isometric TB), M&M 10 being TB (instead of switchable TB/RT like the last 4(?) entries in the series), etc.

Another vote for turn based. I have no real preference but with PE going RTwP I like to have bit of mixed flavors.

The combat in PS:T wasn't bad because it was RTwP, it was just bad in general. As far as trying to "defend" RTwP, why would anyone need to do that?

Because it's currently losing in both the vote and developer preference. He didn't mean RTwP in general, he meant RTwP for this new Torment.

And this is indicated where?

Vote is currently 5925 turn-based, 5768 RTwP, 631 indifferent. (Is this info visible to non-backers? Not sure)

As for developer preference, read update #24, under "Combat":

The difference in the voting is insignificant especially since this vote probably doesn't determine anything anyways.

I'm glad I didn't back this though. I've still yet to see anything that makes this a definite purchase for me, and the fact that they're even having this vote makes it seem like they're not completely sure what they want to do.

Well, if the devs are leaning towards TB, and only a minority of people want RTwP to begin with (46.8% currently), then it makes sense they'd go TB - why wouldn't they? But if the vast majority wanted RTwP, and the devs wanted TB, then they would have some much more serious thinking to do. So that's probably their angle on all of it.

But I agree with you in that I think developers should just do what they want with their own game. I'm not all that fond of this trend towards democratic game development. When I buy a game, I generally want to play the game the developer wanted to make.

That is a tad over 50% - hardly unequivocal support for TB. If the devs take this as a ringing endorsement for TB, they they are pretty naive. A lot of people on both sides are really 'het up' about this. They should have made this decision when they launched their KS - the combat system used has a profound impact on encounter types, frequency etc. Yes, they did equivocate - but clearly everyone thought their precious combat type would be implemented.

Hmm I could see this turning to bite them in the ass a bit.

Personally I couldn't possibly see myself making a big fuss about combat in a game like Torment and it was always my impression that they would go for quality over quantity in combat (It might have been from Dev comments on the KS page though. I honestly don't remember).

Fargo seems to have been expecting some strong opinions and vocal minorities, just not that close a vote I guess… Lets see how he handles that one, the man can definitely do PR ;)