Slashdot Mirror
Turn-Based Games: What Happened?
WarSpite self-promotes: "Over at Firingsquad we have an editorial on the fate of turn-based gaming. We explore how real-time games have taken over from their slower brethren, some of the consequences therein, and try to find the answer to that universal question - "why?" At the least it's an interesting read which gets the brain going - feel free to check it out."
In the old days, the button was always to the left of the joystick. Look at the Atari 2600. This was because game control was more important than pressing buttons, hence the stick was allocated to the right hand (as most peope are right handed). The Nintendo era reversed all this. All of a sudden the button(s) were on the right. And more and more buttons too. You scored well on these newer games just by slamming buttons faster. Skill? What skill? Boom---Boom---Boom for player 1, BoomBoomBoomBoomBoom for player 2. Player 2 wins. Skill. Yah right. And it's only getting worse. Today the "game" is only an annoying interlude to get you to the next FMV movie. Yeesh.
It didn't do so hot, but I have heard rumors of a AoW2 to be put out, so maybe it did sell a good number of copies. But it certainly wasn't a shelf-clearer like DII.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
What was that an article or a novella? Many valid and interesting points, but too too long.
If there are fewer turn based games (TBG's), then let me suggest a relatively recent release that was overlooked. Sure it's one of those wargames which the writer described as being a hopelessly small niche market. I'm not a war nut, I am becoming a "The Operational Art of Warfare - Century of War" (TOAW-CW) nut.
It is the wargamers' wargame. Practically every major offensive of the past century is represented in the scenario library. And if you like to play a game with a friend on your own schedule. TBG's can't be beat. Every other night I play a turn vs. one of the guys from work. Testing each other's prowess in various scenarios. This game could be played for years without exhausting the scenarios or growing bored. And as it ships with its own editor, you're free to create your own scenarios.
The first thing I did was turn the 3D view off, and settle into the informative 2D game view. The variety of units, formations, supply, combat and organizational tactics and strategies that can be mastered are a pleasure to delve into. And here is a game AI which is better on offense than defense...
You can find it for $19.95 at Gamestop
Life is like an egg better scrambled than fried. -- Ken Sawatari
Of course, even rogue-like games have become real-time. Now there's Mangband - multiplayer real-time angband. It's not very popular (in that I never saw more than a handful of people playing when I looked), but kind of neat anyway.
What curious timing you have. I spent 5 hours playing Heroes 3 yesterday. I would have been more had I not needed to go out. I agree that turn based games suffer for multiplayer use though. That's why they turned mangband into a real time game. IMHO, it suffered as a result, though.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
... they're just keeping a low-profile.
My favorite UNIX-based game is a turn-based game, XConq, which is a derivative of the old Empire and Conquest series.
The thing that keeps turn-based games alive is that a large number of people prefer strategy games. There are no real-time strategy games that I'm aware of. Game such as StarCraft, Total Annihilation, and other "gather-resources and make units" aren't strategy games, no matter what the marketing droids say. They're tactical games. Which is a whole 'nother ball of wax.
What I'm waiting for is someone to create the marriage of the 1st-person shooter with the real-time "strategy" game and requiring multi-person teams. Strategy requires a larger time-frame, and a broad view, something with our current generation of realtime games don't have, but turn-based ones have down cold.
-Erik
(who knows more than a few people at MIT who almost didn't graduate because of an Xconq addiction...)
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
If you liked VGA Plants, you should try Space Empires III, or it's recently-commercially-released relative, Space Empires IV. Like VGA planets, it is turn-based, and can use transferred files so you can play with people far and wide. It has a bit more economics, and the ships are restricted by what you choose to research instead of by race, but it does have the minor problem that turns are sequential, not batch, so everyone is at the mercy of a single slow player. The graphics beat the pants off of VGA Planets, though.
SE3 was the yardstick by which I measured WINE performance for a long time, although now it's perfectly playable under it so I need a new yardstick.
A lot of people will not play real-time games because they have high blood pressure and it could endanger their lives. I had that problem until the right drugs were identified.
Perhaps they should file lawsuits under the Americans with Disabilities Act against the makers of games they like that don't feature turn-based play. That seems to be the preferred approach these days.
-
It's an older game, you can probably pick it up for $10-15 if you can find it -- and that's very true for a lot of turn-based strategy games -- older games still play well, as they're generally not so graphics and speed oriented that they seem too outdated...
--
> It is?
You realize, of course, that every word was made up by someone?
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Yes, Star Control had a board game mixed with action sequence, but so did ... ARCHON way back in 1984! Sorry, had to invoke the '80's :)
Let's see... Civ 3 and MOO 3 are coming out soon,
Um... I hate to break it to you but even MoO3 is starting to lean toward RTS-hood. The combat will take place similar to Harpoon (continuous time, but lots of time to do things).
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
I haven't played earth 2060, so I can't answer that part. But yeah, PA has a lot of flaws. It's really simple, and there isn't any real notion of distance. It's a game that you can play by spreadsheet. But for all that, it's still interesting. I'm really interested in the community of players. Other people have their own reasons for sinking the majority of their lives into the game.
Oh, go on, check out my job.
As technology advances, simulation and games get closer to being indistinguishable from everyday reality. I've heard the comment that gamers don't want reality, but I don't believe this. Players may not want realistic plot (though the Sims may show me to be incorrect), but they do want realistic gravity and reflections, and they also want realistic _time_ continuity.
When we are sitting in a holo-deck, are we going to want to take turns each time we do something? Turns are only a model of reality. Even though a single player and a computer can't do the work of an general and his staff (as the article states), players will step into the role of the characters and work with others in a massive online environment and become the general and his staff.
LS
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
There are some great 'independant' companies selling turn based games that are winning tons of awards:
Shrapnel Games
This company sells tons of award winning games, such as "steel beasts".
Another such company is "Battlefront games" at BattleFront Games with games such as "Combat Mission"..
There are lots of turn-based game companes out there.. many of them may not be "big names" but the companies listed above are getting lots of press and business thanks to the power of the internet community.
Who knows, companies such as this may become much larger in little time.. Fans of turn based games won't be left out =)
A Qt version? Oh shit, I've already started downloading. This stupid game affected my grade point average...
--Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
But are realistic games necessarily more fun?
--
-- SIGFPE
Heh, I'm well aware that it's not a real word. If I had delivered that post verbally, the parenthetical statement would have been delivereed with a narrowing of the eyes and a twist of the mouth.
It's a bad habit of mine to make up words by incorrectly adding prefixes or suffixes (like en-). 8)
For a minute there, when i saw your post, I thought that it really was a word...
-J
Karma: T-rexcellent.
Hehehe, I like that. um... what does it mean, exactly?
I think it was last weekend that I used the word "octopusillanimosity" in reference to... well, an octopus, I guess.
-J
Karma: T-rexcellent.
The reason turn based games are declining is uber-simple ... YOU SPEND HALF THE GAME WAITING.
Free Techno/Jazz/DNB/MI Music by guys obsessed with monkeys!
I really want to meet someone that can play a game of Heroes of Might and Magic in 8 hours... must be a genius to think and act that fast...
:) Especially with enough cigarette and pizza breaks.
My games (2-3 players) will go 18-24 hours, easily... but 3 people on 5 computers with the max difficulty takes a while...
I got Heroes III Complete sitting on my desk, and it the game I play most often. They had a successful game, 2 expansions, and a series of standalone campaigns that seems to be selling. They are supposedly working on Heroes IV. Turn based games still exist, because some people prefer them. They are easier to write and have a following.
Not tried buying or selling a house yet then? I've currently been waiting nearly three months from performing an action (accepting an offer on my house) to the corresponding action from the other party (exchange of contracts). On the other hand, that was incredibly annoying which doesn't exactly support turn based games (which I like).
My fave turn based game for anyone who recalls it is "Rebelstar". There were definitely FPS before Wolfenstein too.
Rich
---
---
But what about magic of games? What about that nights only with computer? What about sitting alone and thinking how to win?
Good point. I have not found anything that compares to the olden days, sitting alone in front of a text adventure, staring at the screen for an hour as my mind thrashes on some seeming impossible puzzle.
The good thing about multiplayer though, is in the replay value it adds to the game.
--
You can play turn based games over the internet.
Fight Spammers!
And yet I have been playing chess, Stratego, Risk and go nearly all my life.
Indeed, there are people who do virtually NOTHING but play chess and/or go and people don't even consider it particularly strange. Kasparov is a household word around the world and the idol of many.
Perhaps the younger people of our culture see life itself as little more than an RTS? Why is it that nothing holds interest for more than a few months, or ever just a few hours?
AOE is a great game. There is no inate reason it shouldn't be played 100 years from now, and just as seriously as chess. Yet in a couple of years it will be virtually forgotten. Why?
Frankly I just don't get it.
KFG
So you only play games that test your reflexes and bladder control and don't offer a 'Pause' functionality?
--
Dyolf Knip
Chess is definitely not going to die in the near future. But computer game companies are not going to make millions of dollars selling it, either. In the eyes of those play everything the day it comes out and shelve it a week later, turn based games are nearly nonexistant. There is no question that lots of people still play turn based games. The question is if many people are still buying turn based games, or if many companies are still making them.
Bugrit! Millenium hand and shrimp!
With the exception of the Final Fantasy Sagas (an anomaly of their class) turn-based action is (at least to me) boring and banal.
Ah, yes, the infamous FF games. I remember when VII (I think, this would have been in late 97 or early 98) came out it had eye-catching ads on TV, and gamers around the world were heralding it as the second coming of Christ.
As we soon found out, the TV ads simply played back the cut scenes, and the game play was hardly challenging. Keep pressing circle until you or your foe is dead.
At the time a friend of mine and I were trying to explain why we thought FF7 was the worst game of all time and was hyped way to far. We brought up the gameplay issue (we never criticized the story -- having never played the game all the way through I can't comment on that aspect) on several occasions to some guys we knew who revered the game. They didn't take to kindly to our ideas.
The turning point came when one of these lads had to go to class, but he was fighting some sort of boss or the like, and wanted to keep playing while he was at class. So he calls in his girlfriend and tells her, "I need to go to class, can you sit here and press circle until I come back?"
We witnessed this, and made a point to make our point one final time. We never spoke of it again...
The increase in bandwidth available to users has made networked games popular.. people can act at the same time, and it not only tests strategy, but reaction time, and ingenuity..
Games that take "turns" are to slow for the average user these days. We all want our cake now, and it pre-chewed for us to mitigate eating time..
(Stop your bitching -- everyone reading this site has access to a PC or a Mac, and no amount of zealotry will change that.)
What do you run your copy of Linux on, a mainframe?
"And like that
While real-time games are great if you're sitting in your house alone, turn-based games can be played with a group of people all at one machine. So you get to play computer games and get the social interaction parent-types seem to think we should get, all at once.
Why are there 2-4 joystick ports on the front of the game consoles instead of just one?
That's right folks... real-time, multi-player games that you and your friends can play while gathered around the same machine.
As far as old-school games go, none better than King's Quest I! KQ1 was classic because you had to actually TELL THE COMPUTER WHAT TO DO! None of that sissy click-everywhere-with-the-mouse like the rest of the KQ series had... Classic.
"And like that
An excellent turn based game is the Operational Art of War. This game allows you to play out many battles that have taken place since World War 2. You can play against your friends via email with it's play by email (pbem - After you finish your turn, you save a file and email it to your opponent) feature. Once you finish all the scenerios that come with it you can build your own scnerios with the built in scenerio feature. Overall, it's a great game, and anyone that is opposed to turn-based games has NOT played it.
Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill them right back!
By this, of course, you mean that it was pretty cool in Baldur's Gate, so you took it... Right? Right?
--Come, on! Let us use the basement, Lou! Haaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaa!--
In no function of real life am I ever restricted to performing an action and then waiting for the corresponding action from the other party. Even in something as simple as conversation- it is certainly polite to speak and listen to the response and then speak again, but I am always free to interject, interrupt, ignore, or simply walk away from the other person when it is their "turn" to talk. I can't imagine being in a fight with somebody where we stand facing each other taking turns throwing punches and not being free to do something so simple as blocking.
Say what you will about a lack of imagination/intelligence/attention span on my part, I just have a very difficult time mentally connecting with this style of play.
hoping your rules and wisdom choke you, since 1976
Maybe if we can teach our children to fish they would learn to let time pass them by.
just my 2 cents
I'm not trolling
ONEPOINT
spambait e-mail
my web site artistcorner.tv hip-hop news
please help me make it better
if you see me, smile and say hello.
I think the real reason turn-based games have lost ground is that people's attention span has decreased, frustration tolerance has diminished markedly, and, as a consequence, people are now most likely to seek instant (or fast) gratification.
You gotta love how postmodernism has screwed up the world.
David.
People generally find it more fun to strategize and plan when there's a time limit and the pressure is on. Sure, it can be fun to sit around all day to come up with a plan, but it's just as fun to come up with some ad-hoc thing on the spur of the moment because you just don't have time for something better... and then pull it off.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
Rush rush rush!
People find it easier to react (ie: real-time) than strategize/plan their actions (ie: turn-based).
It's the whole Nike "Just Do It!" philosophy presented at it's finest.
tagline
... hi bingo
>>Real-time games are more fun.<<
For you, I'm sure. Personally, I get bored with them very easily.
Real-time = tactical play
Tactics get your blood boiling, you need to be thinking 3-5 steps ahead. Nonetheless, you are constantly reacting to other's actions, you're not really in control.
Turn-based = strategy
Strategy is cool, reasoned long-term planning. Unless you can plan 10 or more steps ahead, you're not going to cut it.
In tactical games, those with the fastest reflexes win. In strategy games, those with the best planning and creativity win.
I'll take the strategy games any day of the week, I happen to enjoy attempting to figure out the long-term consequences of seemingly minor actions. Plus, I can daydream all day about the various things I can do for my next turn...
Funny thing, I was diagnosed ADD a long time ago. I actually find it an advantage in this type of game, since I can "task-switch" between evaluating various options while planning my next move.
The problem I think is the move towards multiplayer games. Personally I get a little impatient when the computer takes it turn in Alpha Centauri; do I really want to wait for 3 human players to take theirs? I like turn-based games solo, but give me Starcraft when I'm playing against opponents who can't process a hundred million floating point operations per second.
--
And for good reason... it's a blast to play. I have the original, as well as the sequel, and have already pre-ordered the "squad based combat" version called Fallout: Tactics. It is a "real time" game but you disable the real time play for the classic Fallout turn-based mayhem.
I highly recommend Fallout if you like the isometric view of Diablo but don't like the real time game play.
Plus, you get the fantastic post-apocalypic environment of The Road Warrior with some good humor (making fun of themselves at times). Definitely worth picking up a used copy on eBay or from a friend.
Some Fallout sites:
Duck And Cover
No Mutants Allowed
Let's see... Civ 3 and MOO 3 are coming out soon, there are several RPGs coming out with 'phased' or 'initiative based' or full turn based combat, there are always wargames, computer board games and card games, and my personal favourite: Worms World Party. That's at least as many turn based games coming out now as at any time. It's not that turn based games are decreasing, it's just that real time games are increasing.
You don't need a fancy $600 card to play the average turn based game. Think about who buys the 3 page spread advertisements for hardware in the magazines, and the kind of games that usually play on them. Not turn based, thats for sure.
Also, I mean - the flashy screenshots with 4 stage multipass effects and lens flares get great press coverage... buzz words baby, buzz words.
I expect turn based stuff to be relegated to a niche market, as the accelerator vendors gather more and more influence with the industry.
Here is a discussion about real time games vs. turn based games.
--
On the other front the only semi-complete Open Source developed game is FreeCiv. Is it coincidental? I don't think so. Like it or not turn based strategy is more 3l33t than those C&C and populous clones. But it hase a very nice and loyal niche.
Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
I see that another poster already mentioned Fallout where you stop the realtime mode for turn-based combat.
Believe it or not, one of the biggest of what people think of as "pure" RTS (Real-Time Strategy) games actually has a form of turn based play. Age of Empires II:Age of Kings (and the Conquerors Expansion), when played in single player mode, allows the player to stop the game (just hit the pause key) at any time, and scroll around, check units, and issue new orders to their hearts content. When they are done, they unpause the game, and play resumes with the new orders. This creates a hybred mode, where a human player can issue destailed orders and micromanage the game as well as if not better than the computer opponents, even if they have over one hundred active units in the game.
The reason we (the guys who made the Age of Empires games) added this feature, was in response to direct feedback from focus groups made up of people who play our games. They told us what they like and dislike, and how they want to go about playing the game.
If you were to guess from all the hype and reviews, you would think that 50-75% of our audience plays the game in online multi-player mode. In truth, it's more like 7-15% multiplayer, with a huge and vast demographic of people who like to play against the computer. Mostly, these people are not "hard-core" gamers, but 'normal' or 'casual' game players.
This large group that doesn't play online, isn't always accustom to playing the game at a relentless pace. They like being able to stop and ponder specific situations and spend time plotting their strategy.
Unfortunatly, we found we can't let multiplayer games do this, because 2 or more players won't agree on when to pause and when to go... Trust us: it would be very ugly if they could do that.
Its pretty much a safe bet that you will this functionality, if not even more extended 'turn based like' features in the single-player component of all of our future strategy games.
What's happened is that the real-time model provides some play benefits over turn-based for a trade off price: I.e. when 100 units goes into battle in AoE or Starcraft the Unit AI stands in and allows for the battle to be resolved in under a minute, while taking limited but significant decision input from the player (i.e. like which units get targeted first, etc). Done in true turn-based fashion, with 100 units to individually order, it might take 30 to 60 minutes for the same battle to play out, thus changing the game playing experience radically.
Turned based play elements offer the player some gameplay benefits too.. they giving the player time to think, plan complex maneuvers, micromange, and be thourough in ways that the continous turn system of an RTS game can not provide.
Anyway, with respect to the editorial, I think they were a bit too negative in tone. When developers are trying to make a game as good as possible, they'll do what it take to provide maximum gameplay benefits. In many cases that probably will mean games with multiple modes - real time for those portions when its more exciting/interesting and turn-based for when it provides more control.
And as for pure turn-based games? They'll be back around... (In fact, they'll never really go away).
-Mp
... is one turn-based game that will far outlive the rest of the real-time games. I don't see chess dying in the near century.
Fsck cluebie moderators. I'll say what I want, offtopic or not. And fsck having to qualify every bloody statement just
No one wants to spend 8 hours to play one game of heroes of might and magic.
I think the thousands (millons?) of people who bought the Heroes of Might and Magic games might disagree with you. I think a better statement might be "No one wants to spend 8 hours to play one game of heroes of might and magic when four of those hours are waiting for the other player to go."
I agree with you that turn-based games suffer greatly (in most cases) in the multiplayer department. However, I think you underestimate the desire of many players (like myself) for good non-multiplayer strategy games. Many gamers I talk to are frustrated by the movement away from single-player games to multi-player ones, and more specifically to massively-multiplayer online games. My biggest worry is that someday in order to get my game fix I will be forced to play against 13 year old 31337 H4X0Rs because companies have stopped producing good opponent AI in the belief that everyone wants to play online.
Nethack is an excelent turn-based game. It features lots of characters, potions, spells, weapons, aromour, shops, etc. The homepage is here and the Qt version (which i prefer) is here
--
A whole group of us actually went out and purchased copies of Stars! (yes, Stars!) for the sole purpose of having legitimate copies so we could start some lengthy e-mail based campaigns.
;)
It makes so much more sense too. We get about 18 hours to complete our turn, which means we can do it at our leisure, or you can really sit down and play out several different options to see which is best for a really nasty battle/trade agreement/whatnot. We're thinking that with so much more time to make our next move, that our games will be incredibly aggressive, and definitely some of the best gaming we've ever had. Plus there's so much to anticipate. We plan on 1 turn a day... just imagine our anxiety waiting an entire day to find out the outcome of an assult!
Not exactly a stressful game either. Runs on a 486 just great, Windows 3.1 and it runs in Wine just fine. You can order it straight from the UK for about £10.06 (about $14.05 U.S.) from Empire Interactive with shipping included.
Who says turn based gaming is dead?
------
Evidently, they haven't discovered Planetarion -- the most addictive (and free (beer)) turn based game around. More addictive than Empire or Civilization (although, oddly enough, not nearly so interesting), Planetarion will take over your life if you let it. Turn-based games are dead? No, I think it's just game magazine editors.
Oh, go on, check out my job.
Remember playing Civilization? (or later Civ 2, Alpha Centauri..) How many times did you stay up all night because it's so easy to take a break? :)
----------
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
I'm with you on that all the way. Nethack is still my favorite game.
But we mustn't forget the other interfaces available besides the Qt thingie.
http://www.pinn.net/~jry/allegrohack/ ... AllegroHack uses the Allegro libs to enslicken (shutup, that's a word :P) the graphical interface that us DOS users can use. If it works, it's awesome. ... Falcon's Eye is a really neat "isometric 3d" interface with mouse control and everything. Still in development, but cool nonetheless.
http://www.pinn.net/~jry/allegrohack/
The Nethack Site lets you set up a career ont heir server and then telnet in and play there, so that all the scores can be collected and people can compete against one another. Cute.
Also, there are many other Roguelikes out there... Rogue (the original roguelike, hehe), Angband, ADOM, etc.
I'm still partial to NetHack. I could list the reasons, but it's better if you play it for yourself and see.
Diablo is a roguelike, really, just shinier and with realtime action. Durn newfangled games.... ;)
-J
Karma: T-rexcellent.
As nice as it is to play Diablo II with my IRC friends, I miss turn based games. When we were dating my husband and I would sit together talking about stuff and taking turns at Warlords. My parents have only one computer, and my little brothers fight over who gets to play with it. It doesn't occur to them that there are games that they could play together, both at the same time. While real-time games are great if you're sitting in your house alone, turn-based games can be played with a group of people all at one machine. So you get to play computer games and get the social interaction parent-types seem to think we should get, all at once. And without the bother of carrying your machine to a LAN party.
Turn Based RPGs aren't gone, they're just hiding.
Angband is possibly the best game ever. Granted the plot is totally lacking, but I can distribute the complete file on a floppy; and I judge every game against it. Its graphics are simplistic, yet convey more information than most gaming interfaces today. The controls require some learning, but allow the user to execute any command without delay or mouse movements. I've been playing it since 1996. Did I mention that it was Open Sourced in 1984, before the GPL was thought of, and can run on ANY OS that came out since then.
But its strongest aspect is that it is turn based. I can stop, walk away, smoke a cigerate, come back, walk a step, then go to the bathroom. Or I can run down a hall and assult a vault in less than 30 seconds. Because it is turn based the game runs at MY speed. I never feel that I had to make a split second decision. When I'm getting my ass kicked, I can slow down and analyze the situation.
The game kicks ass. I have wasted many a day playing it. I lost a keyboard when my HDD crashed and killed my best character. Check it out, read the help files, read rec.games.roguelike.angband and get hooked:-)
--Cam
All jocks think about is sports. All nerds think about is sex.
It simply isn't realistic. Life doesn't pause for you and let you take a breather. Granted a lot of real time games suck (because they stress building crap and then rushing with everything.)
Actual, life runs closer to turn-based in terms of actual time. "Real" time games are usually accelerated by orders of magnitude, at least in war games like Starcraft.
At operational and strategic levels(battalion and up, for our purposes), an operations order for a single mission is the size of a book - you don't ever want to work on part of one. These behemoths are typed by an entire staff of officers. Yep, we type orders up before we start fighting. The detail involved in planning a real military operation is just staggering.
Turn-based games give you a chance to experience this is in real-life - the sheer complexity of large organizations. A turn-based game is possibly somewhat realistic, just sped up by 10^4 or 10^7. A "real"-time game is completely lacking in realism - your forces appear out of little buildings after 30 seconds, and you all run right at the other side like a bunch of 29th century Soviets. Don't get me wrong, they can be fun. But they're devoid of realism. Turn based games feel more like "the real thing", at least from higher levels.
At the least it's an interesting read which gets the brain going...
Isn't that what I'm not supposed to be doing on a Friday night?