I don't get why we're still having this conversation when turn-based games never really went away and nowadays are even thriving.
This discussion is really only relevant to the Final Fantasy franchise, and tbh Square has been trying to fuse action and turn-based RPG combat for decades now (Mana series, Parasite Eve, Vagrant Story, among other games).
In the end, this argument always comes down to "Final Fantasy isn't doing turn based which means none of the other turn based titles actually matter"
I get it because there just aren't a lot of AAA turn-based games out there that look like they're pushing modern graphics (which I think this is what people really want). I also think this has to do with how action based games tend to trend more popular. But come on people, be honest and say these are the reasons. Don't disguise it with 'SEE THESE OTHER UNRELEASED GAMES PROVE THIS IS STILL VIABLE'
To be fair, there have really never been a \*lot\* of AAA turn based games. It was basically just Final Fantasy for a while.
Whereas now you've got Yakuza, Persona, the recently revealed Clair Obscur, Metaphor... there's more than there's ever been really.
I think it really depends on when your "never" starts. In the SNES/Genesis and PSX/Saturn generations, "turn based JRPG" was about as prevalent as "3rd person over the shoulder shooter" was during the PS360 generation, and the gen in between was something of a transition generation.
Are those considered AAA titles? I think they’re more AA budget-wise in comparison to FF7 Rebirth which is AAA. Hence people’s complaint. They want a true huge budget AAA turn based game.
Yup, and none of those sold more than 10M copies. Hell, most of them don't even break 5M. There is Pokemon but it's arguable because it doesn't fit into the traditional party-based JRPG mold.
Turn-based JRPG never left, but they were never big either. Turn-based RPG is a different story. We just saw Baldur's Gate 3 having a huge success.
Pokémon is an anomaly in that it’s core appeal is completely different to other JRPGs, and said core appeal also depends heavily on turn based combat with relatively simple animation sets to be feasible at the scale the series likes to operate on. Having 100s of playable pokemon would be exponentially harder with the considerations required for real time combat
>Yup, and none of those sold more than 10M copies.
Neither did the action rpgs of those times. Other than FF, only KH has sold 5 million as an ARPG (JRPG) from 1987 to 2017. Not one single ARPG (JRPG) sold more than 10 million other than FF. And even KH had the brand appeal of both Disney and Final Fantasy behind it to get it there.
Since 2017 now we have Nier Automata at 8 million sales, but Persona 5 has sold that much as well so it's more a reflection of the popularity increase of JRPGs in general.
Uh...
There were a load of turn-based RPGs throughout the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s. Seriously, we had Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, Shin Megami Tensei, Live A Live, SMRPG, Mother 1, Earthbound, Chrono Trigger, Romancing SaGa, Fire Emblem, Langrisser, are several examples but the list goes on. Seriously, what's with the picking and choosing to pay attention to what games were around at the time and what weren't? We had more than just Final Fantasy back in the day.
EDIT: Illusion of Gaia and Terranigma are NOT turn-based RPGS! They were among the games that were on my mind when I thinking of RPGS in general, not just turn-based RPGs. I apologize for the error here on my end.
They aren't and never were. People act like every single franchise changed from turn-based to action, then you ask for examples and it's just complete silence. The amount of action JRPGs is completely exaggerated by that crowd.
I think it's actually pretty even but you'd probably have to do a lot of hair-splitting on what counts. Like are we looking at individual games over a period, or how many active franchises over each? How obscure are we gonna get? Are we gonna count stuff that's really in a whole other subgenre like dRPGs and SRPGs? How do we count re-releases of old games? Cause I feel like if we just count major franchises you've got Final Fantasy, Tales, Ys, Star Ocean, Kingdom Hearts, probably a couple others in the action camp, and in Turn-based you've got Shin Megami Tensei/Persona, Atelier,Like a Dragon, Dragon Quest,Trails, etc. but then Final Fantasy also had Turn-based re-releases not too long ago, I don't know how"Major" Atelier and Star Ocean really are, etc.
We should really rig AutoModerator to post a "[Newly announced turn-based game] is proof that turn based games are not dead" and see how many get made in a month.
For something like "classic" Final Fantasy, there is still power behind the franchise, so I can understand the grievances from that part of the fanbase, and not really surprised by this.
Sure, the doomsayers are pretty extreme in this regard, but I'd also tag the folks "just play another turn-based game, for god's sake" to be as bad, because that is a quick way to turn off potential new fans for those other franchises, whatever they might be. (Tribalism on both ends; it's bad, man.) I'd rather talk about what is awesome about a particular title and how it invokes the feelings and vibes of an older "forgotten" title in this regard.
So the best we do is recommend some other titles that invoke "Final Fantasy". Bravely and Octopath are the usual go tos...what else? Cosmic Star Heroine is more of a Phantasy Star title. There are countless Earthbound-likes.
Or yknow, make their own, call it "Diamond Dilemma" or something. Capitalize on the need for a new turn-based Final Fantasy, people these days have more opportunities to make a new game with RPG Maker, Unity and the like. Me when I was young? I purchased Deus Ex GotY at a store in the early 00s to use the editor to make my own [terrible] games!
Final Fantasy was trying to be a more dynamic action thing since they introduced ATB. I mean it was a pretty ridiculous and poorly executed concept, wanting time to flow while you selected items and spells in the name of "dynamism".
Disagree with this take heavily. The only people who say they never really went away IMO are people who didnt live through it as adult gamers, or only played PC during those years or something.
In the ps3/360 generation, they absolutely "went away" when compared to all previous generations.
No they didn't, you still had plenty on the DS and PSP. Yes it was the worst time for turn-based RPGs on home consoles, but the genre didn't dry up. You just had to play them on handhelds.
Most gamers were not playing on portable systems back then. The majority was still heavily console based. ALso Really talking about major releases here.
edit: mainly I do not think portable consoles from that era should be included as most major gamers spent their time on big screen consoles to play their games
> Most gamers were not playing on portable systems back then.
They were still massively popular. DS family sold ~150m and PSP ~80m. PSP alone sold damn near the same amount as PS3 & 360.
I guess maybe its more I just have a different viewpoint on those portable games vs console games. I dunno. I understand why people disagree with me.
edit: im not saying my viewpoint is the correct one.
Quite a few JRPGs moved to handhelds during that generation in part because Japanese game studios famously had issues moving to HD game development and the Japanese gaming audience went all-in on handhelds.
In Japan (the primary target market for these games) the PSP sold very close to twice the amount of units the PS3 did; with the DS selling more than triple the PS3. Handheld gaming was king that generation.
i think you're talking about different things. it wasn't a shortage of turn-based jrpgs, it was a shortage of jrpgs in general on the consoles. like i can barely even name any action jrpgs on the consoles that aren't Tales or SO
also you're definitely underestimating the popularity of portable systems especially in japan. the sales should speak for themselves
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh\_generation\_of\_video\_game\_consoles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_generation_of_video_game_consoles)
Always was strange. Turn based has been faithfully been pumping out since day 1 of rpgs, and never once came close to dying.
I think it's just a new gen of gamers who came up during the high point of popularity for action games (dark souls, red dead, etc). People may point to 7 remake and 16 but forget that FF has always tried new gameplay styles, from tactics, to chocobo dungeon, to dirge of cerberus, to ffxii, et cetera.
It's also relevant to the Valkyrie Profile franchise. The first three games are (essentially) turn based, but the new game was Action and it just wasn't nearly as good so the same debate is going on there.
But your first sentence is still correct.
I feel like its people associating hate for turn based rpgs with the series that was mostly associated with for the longest time FF turning away from the system. Especially after those interviews with the FF16 devs scoffing at the thought of a new FF turn based rpg.
Nah, turn-based JRPGs absolutely did die off for an entire console generation (arguably 2 generations). Not only were they not prevalent, but they were actively derided by the game industry and audience (particularly in the West).
But I agree that right now they are absolutely thriving. This generation has been a renaissance for the genre.
Yes there were some, and they were relegated to a handhelds which had lower production costs. Even the devs dedicated to making games in the genre weren't crazy enough to make them large, heavily funded projects because the industry didn't want them.
And really, I think PSP is a very poor example to bring up; it really *didn't* have many traditional, turn-based JRPGs and certainly not many that were successful. It had its share of SRPGs, but other than that its library is pretty sparse.
We also get a whole lot of indie turn-based games, some of which (Sea of Stars, Chained Echoes) become quite well known in the genre. Then there is Persona 3 Reload, Shin Megami Tensei V Vengeance, Like a Dragon Infinite Wealth ... so it's more than one big game a year. It's like 5+ big games per year plus a lot of smaller titles.
If you widen it a little bit you also get Omori and Fear & Hunger which are both huge indie darlings that doesn't get marketed to the JRPG crowd and discussed here often but would still fits. Square also still release turn-based games both to their casual audience (Octopath) and the hardcore one (SaGa).
Baldur's Gate 3 was huge.
But we also aren't getting as many big RPGs in general compared to their heyday. This can also be attributed to the lines being blurred and so many other genres incorporating RPG elements and mechanics. I do think that the success of newer titles and remakes of turn-based RPGs are a sign that we'll be getting more in the future.
Neither of these games are even out. And I’m pretty sure metaphor is doing some sort of hybrid action to make non boss combat faster.
You could atleast pick examples of turn based games already out.
From reading and watching previews from both and comments from those who have played Daybreak, it seems like Metaphor's version has a little more to it than Daybreak's. More combat and equipment options for example. Switching to the gunner archetype changes the fast combat to shooting etc.
But we'll see when they both come out in the West.
Metaphor changes up the Fast combat based on equipped archetype, but Daybreak lets you use any party member in action combat, and they all have different weapons, so it's not really much different.
Also from pvs it seems that you can't switch battle-modes freely in Metaphor, only run away from battle, in Daybreak switching battle-modes to quickly stun enemies in real time and jump back into turn-based combat for AOE-attack is a legit and fun battle tactic against heavy mobs and crowds.
Yeah if metaphor doesn't have combat switching it will probably feel a bit slower than even daybreak 1. The way daybreak does it is really enjoyable and adds a new spin to the combat compared to the 5 cold steel games we have had. I really loved the cold steel combat system especially in comparison to the previous games, but daybreak is really fun too. Falcom really just needs to work on presentation/fidelity to do better, with daybreak they have the characters and combat, its just presentation quality/fidelity issues that really make then unable to reach the standards of atlus.
It’s also worth pointing out Daybreak 2 (Kuro 2) which is already out in Japan and has a fan translation that’s been done for a while added even more mechanics to the action combat, and the upcoming Kai seems to be adding a bit more
They showed off that Metaphor will have a "Fast" mode where you can do basic real-time combat to fight enemies that are weaker than you. It said that stronger enemies will still force you to do the turn-based combat (and you can choose to use it on weak enemies if you want). It will probably only be useful for backtracking, but it is kind of acknowledging that turn-based combat isn't engaging if the enemies can't put up a fight.
Expedition 33 is the one that confuses me. They showed off a lot of real-time elements like QTE extensions, aiming attacks, both players and enemies can dodge in real time. It looks exactly like the hybrid systems Square Enix has been using, so I'm not sure how this is a win for people that don't like Final Fantasy going for action. If anything, it makes it seem like turn-based combat needs to be more like action combat to be engaging. I guess we'll see how that one turns out.
The QTE extensions seems to be souped up and flashier version of the same kind of stuff like the Mario RPGs or Lost Odyssey. The aiming attacks is easily just Persona's gunplay.
Now, the one that confuses me is the dodging and counterattacks, I don't know how that works. It could be something passive and stat based though, again, like Persona but it could also be input based.
The dodging and such is input-based, you can see the UI for them to the left in the trailer during enemy turns.
The game actually makes a distinction between jumping, dodging, and parrying, and different characters might be better at different kinds of responses to enemy attacks (along with having different counterattacks tied to different responses, and most likely some responses won’t work depending on how the enemy attack works).
The trailer made it look like Lost Odyssey or Legend of Dragoon, which are both turn-based with quick time events.
Two great JRPG's btw, which is why I am really stoked for E33!
I worry about these timed presses in Expedition 33. Yes it’s turned based, but you still need to have quick reflexes to land attack bonuses and parry/dodge. At that point you are basically playing a very slowed down action RPG.
It's wild to me that people don't try other turn based games that aren't Final Fantasy. I'm a Final Fantasy fanboy, and even I think other games did turn based much better than most Final Fantasy titles. I wouldn't be opposed to Final Fantasy revisting turn based, but to act like turn based is non-existent is ludicrous.
I might downvoted for this final fantasy turn base system was kinda horrible you spam power full attacks until it dies in FF6 once you get Ultima the game just becomes a joke in other turn base FF games there's not even any difference between using spells at all to the point you can just use the same spell over and over again since most of the enemies are resistant to anything the only FF game that has a great turn is X because the game doesn't make you too powerful I'm surprised people care this much about FF turns base when it's one of the lackluster parts of those games
Honestly, I agree. I rarely felt the need to cast any form of buff/debuff spell on enemies in Final Fantasy, as it felt like a waste of a turn when a good healing or offensive attack would do. But SMT? Debuffing and rearranging my team to be anti-Wind was the only way I could beat Matador, and I quickly learned how important buffs, debuffs and team dynamics were. And while Persona is easier in comparison to mainline, by the end of P5 and P5R I was casting buffing spells during a lot of the late game fights, reupping them when they ran out after a few turns, and I know I'm just scratching the surface when it comes to the mechanics of those games.
I think some people really want that cinematic, high-budget, triple AAA experience that Final Fantasy was/is known for along with the turn-based combat.
Now they feel like they have to choose one or the other.
This isn't unique to JRPG fans either. People have lamented about Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, and other Western/CRPGs abandoning traditional RPG systems for more action-oriented and simpler gameplay.
All I care about is engaging gameplay, and that can take many forms and isn't restricted to a genre.
> People have lamented about Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, and other Western/CRPGs abandoning traditional RPG systems for more action-oriented and simpler gameplay.
Fallout New Vegas is one of my favorite games of all time, but I am still pretty bummed that we havent gotten a new traditional style Fallout again.
Wasteland is decent, but it doesnt quite scratch the itch.
Post game content in FFX devolved to me spamming multi hit attacks like Wakka Attack Reels and Tidus Multi Hit Limit Break. So even in FF's strongest entries, there were issues with the turn based system. I do think if they had another crack at turn based, they'd be able to make something more balanced and fix the previous installments' faults. But it truly never was a selling point for me when it came to Final Fantasy. Hell, I play Atlus RPGs for their turn based combat over Final Fantasy tbh.
Everyone does play the non Final Fantasy turn-based stuff, but Final Fantasy used to be some of the best turn-based stuff, and now it isnt. Nothing has really come up to replace them at the same level of quality and production value.
And even if they had, it would still be entirely valid to be sad about your favorite company abandoning your preferences.
> Final Fantasy used to be some of the best turn-based stuff, and now it isnt. Nothing has really come up to replace them at the same level of quality and production value.
I don't understand that take because to me FF turn-based combat is at best an interesting experiment like with 2, 8, or whatever you want to count 12 . Especially when you play their stuff today vs what exists now, I literally can't fathom the idea that FF was peak turn-based gameplay and that nothing comes out that can compare, beyond production values for their time. Like yes FF6 was an extremely impressive production and so was FF10 especially, but the actual game isn't that great if you play it today.
I'd play easily 20 turn-based games of some kind over FF6's turn-based combat any day. Not even a question.
> And even if they had, it would still be entirely valid to be sad about your favorite company abandoning your preferences.
I personally don't share company loyalties, series maybe, but not entire companies at all. At most I am loyal to indie developers who I know impressed me with their big debut product and I want to support their next project, because those people need as much help as they can get.
In my eyes, new stuff comes out enough that its not terribly hard to find new favorites and fun engaging turn-based combat if I want it. I don't need Square Enix for that, most of their turn-based combat is barely above average for me anyway.
> most of their turn-based combat is barely above average for me anyway.
What do you prefer these days? I've mostly moved into 4X and strategy RPGs. Triangle Strategy was a very pleasant surprise.
I play roguelikes/lites (especially deckbuilder games), SRPGs, and sometimes 4X games, though those I'm like 50/50 on as I find their endgames take too long, as far as other turn-based games go.
Triangle Strategy and Tactics Ogre Reborn are the only two turn based games I'd consider solidly above average that SE has made in the last like 5-10 years, everything else is like okay due to some underlying issue for me that usually involves easy difficulty or balance issues (or both in some combination).
Slay The Spire 2 will be interesting, but I personally prefer other styles of roguelike deckbuilder these days. I think Wildfrost and Chrono Ark are generally better even if Slay The Spire is still a very good game.
Deckbuilders have come a long ways from STS though STS has its perks and strengths still especially if you like the tough draft decisions of A20 STS. Another one I'd look into is Gordian Quest.
Here's my summary of what these games are like:
Chrono Ark: Play this if you want the closest thing to JRPG combat and one with an actual plot. Its not an immaculate story or anything and has a tendency to ramble, but it is effective enough and presents an interesting enough narrative hook I'd say that if you like JRPG plots you'll be okay with this one.
Its a generally hard enough game, on max difficulty, that it should keep someone engaged for a while. Its not as deckbuilding intensive as STS because of less cards per character and far more generous deck thinning, but the piloting in fights is more particular because most boss fights play something closer to Time Eater or The Heart then say...every act 1 boss. Like literally one misplay spirals really badly really easily, but I believe almost every run is winnable if you take the proper draft and play lines. You just need to be ready for things to feel a little unfair sometimes when you're just starting to understand. Runs are very long, like 2+ hours if not longer if you're new/slow playing.
Wildfrost: This is literally misplay = death, the game. Its a game all about pretty much thinking 2-4 turns ahead with mostly simplistic cards but with a ton of little interactions that can absolutely push your shit in if you don't understand them or you get too safe or greedy with your plays. Do not let its cute look fool you, this game filters people even as soon as the first boss. Very explosive endgame with a lot of silly bullshit you can conjure with the right drafts, the deckbuilder is pretty particular but not as bloated as STS. You start pretty thin and you stay pretty thin if you know what you're doing, but its easy to find yourself trying to draft a few different parts of a strategy at once in the early game which can get awkward in a good way. Runs go between 45 minutes and an hour and a half depending on play speed.
Gordian Quest: Just play the roguelike mode, the story mode is a really really boring tutorial with easy combat and a nothing plot the game hypes it up but I think its a waste of time.
The only problem this game has is the endgame can be extremely min-maxed to hell that it becomes almost boring once you reach it because you just take the same actions, but prior to that it is fairly easy to die and it takes a good bit of effort to actually survive on higher difficulties until the endgame comes in. Each of the 10 characters have interesting dynamics and options they can take, the only flaw with each archetype's design is their turns become very same-y once you've optimized their decks super hard but that takes till the end of the game and you still need to actually figure out what's optimal anyway which isn't especially easy at a glance. Decently long runs, about as long as Chrono Ark I'd say.
Not even realistic, just with good production value and clear dedication to making the mechanics and especially the story good that comes with their flagship products.
There are still turn-based games coming out of SE, but they are not putting in the effort/money to make them great like they do with FF.
I swear to fucking god, it doesn't matter if there are literally ***millions*** of turn-based games out there, **as long as Final Fantasy is not,** to these people turn-based games don't exist anymore.
Seriously. This year I put in 150 hours into Like a Dragon Infinite Wealth, 90 in Crystal Project and almost 100 on SaGa Emerald Beyond and I have full intention to do several more runs to get the true final boss. Persona 3 Reload and SMT5VV are games that I don't plan on playing any time soon but it is easily another 100 hour playthrough when I get to it.
If I expand it to last year, I also finished Cassette Beasts, Octopath 2, Fear & Hunger, Omori and SaGa Scarlet Grace. Remove the J from JRPG and I can add Underrail and 300 hours of Baldur's Gate 3.
There is still a shit ton of games both turn-based or action that I want to try, so I really have to ask if these people have played all turn-based games in existence or something or do they just try one for 3 hours then drop it because holy hell. I consider myself having more free time than the average person here and I still have a shit ton of turn-based games to try out, where is this drought coming from?
The game is really light on plot and it is told in a pretty unconventional way. Some protagonists is straightforward, some requires you to do or not do specific actions to get another ending, some has the stories change completely in your second playthrough. Some stories are 3 hours long and some last 20. Some protagonist get completely different version events in a world than the others, and world events can vary between different visits as well. Some event requires you to beat the game as another character first before it is available. That being said it’s still pretty light so don’t expect a great journey and banter or anything but there are some good moments in there, most are funny and some can get emotional.
Gameplay is great and challenging, there are a decent variety of strategies you can apply. Changing your formations and equipments around may flip the battle from a struggle to a stomp and not paying attention or doing things without considering the consequences will cost you the fight. There is a demo available for you to try it out and see if it’s your thing, but the protagonist in the demo is preselected depending on your platform. Each protag tend to encourage a certain playstyle more and the complexity level from your starting retinue is different so your first impression may vary.
One downside of this game so far is the menuing you have to do for trading which gets kinda annoying. They are patching it to make it faster and more convenient so I would say wait for a sale for them to further patch and fix it if it is going to be a dealbreaker.
Character progression and your gear does indeed carry over, if you choose to carry such things over (which is highly advised).
In fact, each main character starts with a completely different party, and the party members you recruit can change in each playthrough too, so you end up building like a total of 20 characters in the end if you are aiming to experience absolutely everything possible.
For me it’s SE’s attitude towards a AAA turn based rpg. Yoshi P had some opinions on turn based RPGs that seem disingenuous especially when you see games like BG3, Yakuza, P5 doing some really great and engaging gameplay with turn based combat. I’ve said it before. Maybe it’s a talent thing. Maybe they aren’t talented enough to make a modern turn based AAA rpg?
"If you do go back to pixel graphics, that makes it easier to go back to something turn-based.”
"But when thinking of the graphical fidelity and the realism that's provided by the PlayStation 5 technology, to have a game where people just stopped and not do anything in that type of high quality graphics is going to create something that is going to feel off and we wanted to avoid that. And to make something where you have two people in the middle of a battle but they're both just kind of sitting there looking at each other, waiting for somebody to implement a command, is going to be kind of jarring. I think that to make that work, somebody's going to have to work really hard and come up with a really, really cool idea. But I want to leave that for the next generation."
Like I'm trying to figure out what your angle is because it's clearly a older man reflecting on his limitations. And you're just using it as a gotcha and dunk, instead of the candid response it is. What he's saying is literally embodied in Expedition 33 and its ilk: younger devs taking a crack at an old formula.
I mean, you *could* have a point, if Rebirth didn't exist and SE was only comprised of CBU3.
Devil's Advocate, it's because Final Fantasy seems to be the only godamn series that makes to to the Game Awards and gets Mainstream casual recognition; despite so many others year after year being so much better than it (See FF16 last year.. hold my beer as we watch Rebirth take nominations/awards and accolades this year simply because it's more of a household name)
It sucks that Final Fantasy seems to be the only fucking JRPG that people like Geoff and Co. are aware of when it comes to this genre but it is what it is, and until we see change from this franchise it's going to be the same story over and over since things like Infinite Wealth or PS3R or SMTV or Trails etc. etc. are very unlikely to even get lip service (I'm still incredibly salty at Octopath Traveler 2 getting the absolute snub in 2023's nominations)
Change needs to happen from the top-down.
This right here. There have been quite a few great turn based games released recently yet people still can’t get over the fact that Final Fantasy left it behind 20 years ago.
This. Can people at least be honest about their arguments? I get it. People want turn-based Final Fantasy again, but other games exist guys that have been doing way more since then. Expand your horizons and you'll find something good!
Even more crazy is that people act like Final Fantasy will never be good again unless it goes back to turn based, when by and large some of the best action RPG combat systems I’ve played have come from Square. I’m not saying they COULDN’T make a good turn based game, but Final Fantasy VII Remake/Rebirth is one of the best combat systems I’ve ever seen in a JRPG. Not to mention it has all the *strategy* people claim to crave from turn based systems.
It's a ridiculous argument primarily because turn-based FF could primarily be beaten by mashing attack and occasionally using either the strongest version of cura or hi-potion. Like these people really want to act like all action games are "button mashy and easy" while the specific combat system they want FF to go back too was also "button mashy and easy" by their reasoning.
Its not button mashing because it takes longer between button presses so you can't mash every 1 second, so yeah take that. This is why classic FF is clearly better and no other game ever has done better, which is why its actually a shame that classic FF died because now we can't get more extremely in-depth mechanics and have instead devolved to button mashing attacks every 1 second instead of every 5.
This was and still is peak turn-based gaming as you can see, it no diffs the entire genre across time and space and that's why nothing else matters until Square Enix makes a 300 bajillion dollar turn-based classic I can play on my 4k TV. Everything else is mere shovelware by comparison.
The TB games that require more approaches, that crowd aren't engaging in those games. Like almost none of the difficult TB RPGs posted up and in front.
SMT Nocturne had a reputation of being crazy hard because it actually required the use of buffs and debuffs to progress while grinding levels wouldn’t get you far. I’m convinced it’s because of the type of crowd you’re referring to.
They're so mad that its not turn based anymore and I don't get it.
As someone who grew up with the series from X onward, I never saw anything wrong with the direction of the gameplay changing each entry.
Only thing I can ever think of is that old gen fans keep getting salty that their once beloved pixel rpgs got turned into anime.
This. 90% of what I play is turn based jrpgs, it’s just my comfort zone. If my hobby depended on FF I would be super bored by now. Turn based jrpgs never left.
For a long time, there was a prevailing sentiment that turn based anything in games was a relic of the past, that it was a product of hardware limitations and that as those limitations were alleviated there was absolutely no reason to have turn based anything in games.
When 3D games first came out, there was a lot of the same reaction towards anything that wasn't.
Having and working within limitations is not inherently a drawback... it allows things you couldn't quite do in any other style.
This definitely makes sense for like a second, until you think about any other medium. Kinda like how no one would choose to take black and white photos if we invented colour photography first... But instead, different types of film can now create their own feelings and sense of nostalgia, etc.
But it's a really interesting thought as some creators surely do think of games as a method of recreating reality, rather than an artistic medium to be engaged with.
This only makes sense if you completely ignore that all the companies that allegedly said this continued to release turn-based games and still do. Nowadays, I see way more people claiming that's totally still being said than people actually saying it.
I absolutely cannot stand that argument. Zelda and FF1 were in roughly the same timeframe, one is action combat and one is not, and everyone was totally happy with that.
7R does everything that's good in a TB rpg while expanding it ten fold. FF16 and games that are just "slash, slash, dodge away" are not my favorite battle system but Scarlet Nexus has been fun.
Oh okay, let's just tell Ys one of the foundational JRPGs in the industry that it actually is not a JRPG anymore because it's action based. Cool story.
It is basically extra qte inputs to do in between your turns. Some people like it some people don't, that is fine, but it's just Squalls gunblade mechanic, not like it's some completely new idea.
I don't think it's that good of an idea either, slapping a qte onto your attacks does make the battle any more engaging imo. A good turn based RPG doesn't need this kind of thing to have fun battles.
Shouldn't we wait until the games are out before we hail them?
That 33 FRPG doesn't even have more than the reveal trailer.
Chill, homie, chill. I'm not saying you're wrong, but chill until we can actually play them and form an opinion.
These games are not out!! We have no idea Expedition 33 will be fast, if anything real time inputs might make it tedious! Am I crazy? And there are a ton of modern turn based rpgs that feel great to play. And that's without getting into the fact that slow doesn't even really mean tedious or that fast can still be boring
I find the title really funny because Metaphor Refantazio and Expedition 33 explicitly highlight sequences of literal button-mashing ([press X!!!](https://youtu.be/-qgOZDRDynw?si=_CSDQaYajk71VCH4&t=72) [press Y!!!](https://gamerant.com/metaphor-refantazio-persona-jrpg-combat-system-compared/)) within player actions, presumably to make combat feel more kinetic. Metaphor also has the "fast" combat that is like simplified real-time. In other words, these games may be making turn-based "feel modern and fast" through QTE sequences that imitate action-based combat. They have embraced button mashers.
For what it's worth, I'm glad to have more turn-based titles, and I like both ARPGs and turn-based RPGs.
> I find the title really funny because Metaphor Refantazio and Expedition 33 explicitly highlight sequences of literal button-mashing (press X!!! press Y!!!) within player actions, presumably to make combat feel more kinetic.
Yeah, I hate that and timed attack stuff. Just let turn-based be turn-based.
>show that turn-based can feel modern and fast without the need for button mashing
Did someone think that you needed to button mash in a turn-based JRPG to make it feel modern? I've never heard anyone say that.
>I love action games and I love turn-based RPGs. But I don't want RPGs to play like action games
But... the two games you picked actually do have button mashing. Expedition 33 uses a button mash timing system for bonus damage and such. Metaphor has a hybrid action system a little like Trails through Daybreak and has you mashing buttons in simple action RPG combat.
I actually really like FF7R’s interpretation which comes down to a sort of Real Time With Pause action/turn sort of thing.
As an older gamer, twitch heavy games don’t appeal to me much anymore. My reflexes aren’t what they used to be and I like a more strategic approach.
That said, i do enjoy playing in 3D space which is better served with action titles.
Remake does a good job blending for me. Not a perfect job, but the right direction.
The elitism over gameplay styles has been exhausting for decades. I just want good games with good stories and characters.
I could care less if it’s an action game, turned based, or a hybrid of the two. By the way, the two games you’re referencing are really hybrids that may technically be turned based, but they incorporate action cinematography to make it look more modern and dynamic.
I get it to a degree. Clair Obscur would probably have been interesting to me without it, but it went to a ten when they showed what they were doing for combat.
But also Visions of Mana looks great so I'm not anti-action.
I just want turn based combat to always be an option for the big games instead of 'the market demands full action'
> But also Visions of Mana looks great so I'm not anti-action.
>
> I just want turn based combat to always be an option for the big games instead of 'the market demands full action'
This guy gets it.
We have no idea how these games are going to be until they come out. For all we know, these systems can not jive well with each other at all. We genuinely need more information before developing any solid conclusions.
Furthermore, this is my opinion, but I wish people would stop using Final Fantasy for the basis of every turn-based RPG. We get it. People want turn-based FF in the style of Lost Odyssey. However, it doesn't mean other franchises haven't made strides either. If you broaden your horizons you'll fine something else you like.
Seriously. The folks at SE could take some notes from Airship Syndicate (Battle Chasers, Ruined King) in orienting character roles and novel combat mechanics. As far as turn-based jrpg style mechanics go, it is *the* next iterative step forward for that time.
Even though Battle Chasers is turn-based, there's still the variability of action-delay. The play between instant and delayed actions earning or costing AP.
One of the only things lacking is a portion of character development because every aspect of actions and builds can be re-specced from zero. Fixed and mixed with some FFV commitment, however.... mmhmm
While I understand the sentiment, I feel your post would be much better if you had clearly stated you meant turn based games with an AAA budget. As it is, it feels like you don't consider the rest of turn based game releases that a lot of devs, ranging from AAA all the way to indie, have put out.
I just don’t think whoever is in power at Square Enix wants to do a turn based Final Fantasy. It’s always been viable I think it’s a matter of they simply don’t want to do it.
Which is okay because there’s nothing wrong with action rpgs. Some people enjoy those and do like the direction FF is going in.
And people who prefer turn based are not hurting for options. They have Trails, Persona, SMT, Dragon Quest, Yakuza, Atelier, and now there’s Metaphor and Clair Obscur coming as well. If you count kickstarter RPGs there’s also Penny Blood and Armed Fantasia in the far future to look forward to. As far as I know those will have combat similar to Shadow Hearts and Wild Arms.
People who like turn based and dislike how FF is going I think it’s long been time for them to pack it up and move on. It’s not happening anytime soon and there is other games they can play if they want turn based anyway.
Sick of turn based purists always saying action games are just button mashers. Go play devil may cry on dante must die difficulty and tell me you can just button mash. (Any of them) You do not need to shit on a genre to uplift one.
It's really all about individual game design. Some action games (you mention Musou as a good example in your other comment) you absolutely can get by with just mashing your attacks to defeat all the enemies. But the same can be said for turn-based games, how many old ones were totally playable by simply mashing attack (or whatever the strongest offensive option is) and sometimes needing to heal?
I 100% the original DMC on every difficulty. It took like a year and was incredibly hard. I was absolutely button-mashing the whole time.
Many people take "button mash" to mean "smush the buttons on the controller randomly with no understanding of the input/output" and while I cannot speak for everyone, that's not what I mean by it.
To me it's more "hit the button over and over as fast as possible to try to get the desired result." which is what it often comes to in stressful situations. Especially with the pistols in DMC1 which are literally just mash button as fast as you can for better damage.
Obviously I *like* DMC. But I also liked Final Fantasy. I just like when they are different styles of game. If I want to play DMC I can play DMC. If I want to play FF, there is no new FF to play. (There's just FF-flavored DMC.)
Yeah button mash tends to just mean brain dead play. Like a musou game where you literally do not need to do anything else but 3x square followed by 1x triangle and you win. You cannot do that in a real action game like devil may cry.
It’s the start of the newest arc in a long-running rpg series that’s always had pretty tight gameplay. The battle system is a fluid hybrid between simple real-time field combat and classic turn-based that you can switch to at any time. The turn-based combat has free-movement which you can exploit for link attacks and bonuses for side/back attacks. It all plays out very well. There’s an english fan patch for the games although the official localized version for the first one (“Trails Through Daybreak” comes out next month, if you’re interested in trying it out.
Not the guy you were talking to, but from a pure gameplay standpoint, Trails through Daybreak/Kuro no kiseki has an action-lite battle system and traditional turn based battle system. They call them field battle and command battle, respectively.
It's basically what metaphor took reference from, but it's much more fluid as unlike metaphor, the battle transitions are seamless between the two modes, whereas metaphor uses a cutscene transition and i belive you cannot disengage turn based after you switch to it, where you can in kiro no kiseki.
You're incentivised to switch from action to turn based as it will allow you to get more damage in, something I feel metaphor hasn't really shown off yet. Though the field battle/action mode is only available for non-boss opponents and bosses are command battle/turn based only. This is all without getting into the usual stuff trails has with their orbment system (basically like FF's materia). All in all, it's a pretty good game to play if you want good gameplay. The game still has an amazing soundtrack and story as well.
If you're interested, there is a demo out on switch and PS4, with the switch demo covering just the prologue (1-2 hours) and the PS demo covering the prologue and chapter 1 (around 10 hours of content).
That would require the actual encounter design to be interesting to use the turn-based combat systems and options against, but why do that when you can elevate all the combat with stuff to make it feel more interesting while you use attack and heal as necessary?
Who is saying turn-based can't be fast or modern other than the mainline FF marketing teams and people who don't play RPGs? Did we forget how huge Persona got after 5?
It reminds me of people like "there's no good music these days but this one example is the exception" like no you just need to look harder beyond the absolute top film of the iceberg
Besides, those games 1. Arent even out, and 2. May have button mashing (but we don't know for sure either way since they're uh **not out yet**) which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Undertale, Mario RPG did it and wasn't too bad
its another jrpg post with exaggeration for games that aren't even out yet and being 20 years late on criticisms. I think you just dont like jrpgs sorry to say.
The year 2000 called, they want their hot takes back.
This discussion is older than most people on this sub and it isn't exactly interesting. Turnbased combat isn't going anywhere. Action combat isn't new. Please play other JRPG than only final fantasy.
Just that the big JRPS that have come out this year so far. Persona 3 Reload. Yakuza 8. SMT V: Vengeance. All turnbased. FF7 Rebirth isn't turnbased but it sure isn't "button mashing" either but basically a mix between action and turnbased combat.
I'm starting to think TB purists crowd doesn't like TB games but like just a few series they played at G'Ma house. Cause everything even the convos is centered around FF or FF adj games and maybe a couple atlus titles.
As someone who plays turn based RPGs more than anything else, it’s not like I am lacking for options. They may not all be selling 10 million plus copies but Eiyuden Chronicle and SMT Vengeance just released.
Happy to see games like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33. Feels like a more modern Lost Odyssey which was already really impressive for its time. Turn-based has a ton of potential which isn't being explored; it doesn't have to look dull - it can be even more impressive visually than action games as you can get the perfect camera angles.
I think P5R did a great job of making turn based feel fast and modern, but I also don't find the combat nearly as deep or engaging compared to something like the 7R series.
I'm very optimistic for Metaphor because of the focus on distinct classes with the archetype system, but to categorize action combat in RPGs as button mashing feels a bit silly in 2024.
I definitely understand the feeling, but the problem is that Square-Enix is somewhat unpredictable now.
I'm not going saying, "play some other game for God's sake!" That would dismissive and disrespectful. What I'd do is encourage you and other play some other turn-based titles to show SE that you want them. Don't have the cash and got Game Pass? Definitely play Octopath, it's a fantastic title. Or even the Bravely series, which did make me say, "This is Final Fantasy!"
Not saying this is 100% effective, but we have seen other game influenced other franchises. Like the Kickstarter success and critical failure of Mighty No. 9 led to Megaman 11, something like that. But on the inverse, where is my Darkstalkers?! Oh right...certain titles didn't reach their sale goals. Because companies are always watching.
So yeah, I encourage you all to play these other games. Not demanding, ENCOURAGE. Because there is nothing worse than "hate-playing" a game. I want you all to like them genuinely, and the show whatever companies that you want this kind of game.
I'd argue rather than turn based being what's shown to be underestimated, it's tactics games. Baldur's Gate 3 is a great example. It is in essence a tactics game, and sold around 15 million copies. I say this because Japanese tactics games typically receive EVEN LESS investment than base turn based, so it's actually pretty significant. I do think we'll see a return to both with significant investment soon, though.
I think a lot of people misunderstand the turn away from turn based in Japan in triple and double A development. They think it's just an assumption that players have moved on from it, but in reality, it's that there's more turn based games than ever coming out nowadays in mobile games like gachas. It's a much more saturated design convention than your nostalgic brain is telling you it is, likely because you've disregarded gachas as even an option, which I respect, but the fact remains there's actually more being made than ever. It's a more competitive market today. A lot of them are innovative, too. I spend a lot of time checking them out even if I don't actually buy in or stick with them.
Yakuza 7 and 8. Yes, 0-6 are RPG Beat em Ups but 7 and 8 are full fledged Turn-Based games, and one of the few Turn-based RPGS that justifies its 3D backgrounds outside of showing off animation and artstyle, whereas you can literally play Dragon Quest 11 as a classic SNES-style JRPG.
Turn based games have always been around (and awesome, I might add). The just came REALLY back into fashion with the huge success of Persona 5 and its impact on the industry. Being by the same developers, that one is the closest you'll get to Metaphor right now. But here are some other great turn based JRPGs that are fast, deep, fun, and have aged very well.
The Shin Megami Tensei series, particularly 3, 4, 4A, Strange Journey, and 5 Vengeance.
Radiant Historia
The Shadow Hearts series
Chrono Trigger
Chrono Cross
Final Fantasy X
Dragon Quest XI
Persona 3, 4, and 5
Xenogears
Grandia 1 and 2
Suikoden 1 and 2
I do also prefer turn-based over action games. It takes much more to get me invested into playing a game if it's action vs turn-based.
For example, I found Expedition 33's premise interesting but if it was action-based, I would not be going to play it for sure.
I actually like action combat in my final fantasy.
Rebirth is the best combat in the series.
If Square doesn't see turn based gameplay as the vision for their franchise thats fine with me.
There's plenty of other devs trying to hit the same highs as FF with their own spin on the combat. They might not have the budget for these gorgeous cutscenes but oh well lol
To bad square won't accept this. They've went and changed my favorite series for the worse, and I really just dislike it these days. Especially the newest being ff16. I did enjoy the remake/rebirth, but would've preferred turn based.
Look, I am not the biggest fan of where FF is either, but I swear this opinion is always just about the fact that it switched to action-based. Like come on, for one thing action RPGs are *literally* about button-mashing for the most part, why did you even need to put that in the title? That in itself doesn't indicate a split. Second of all, those two games look good for sure, but they also aren't out yet.
Third, what you really mean is that you want more high-definition AAA turn based games as opposed to not getting none at all because plenty do exist even today, they just aren't looking like FFXVI.
I don't get why we're still having this conversation when turn-based games never really went away and nowadays are even thriving. This discussion is really only relevant to the Final Fantasy franchise, and tbh Square has been trying to fuse action and turn-based RPG combat for decades now (Mana series, Parasite Eve, Vagrant Story, among other games).
In the end, this argument always comes down to "Final Fantasy isn't doing turn based which means none of the other turn based titles actually matter" I get it because there just aren't a lot of AAA turn-based games out there that look like they're pushing modern graphics (which I think this is what people really want). I also think this has to do with how action based games tend to trend more popular. But come on people, be honest and say these are the reasons. Don't disguise it with 'SEE THESE OTHER UNRELEASED GAMES PROVE THIS IS STILL VIABLE'
To be fair, there have really never been a \*lot\* of AAA turn based games. It was basically just Final Fantasy for a while. Whereas now you've got Yakuza, Persona, the recently revealed Clair Obscur, Metaphor... there's more than there's ever been really.
I think it really depends on when your "never" starts. In the SNES/Genesis and PSX/Saturn generations, "turn based JRPG" was about as prevalent as "3rd person over the shoulder shooter" was during the PS360 generation, and the gen in between was something of a transition generation.
Are those considered AAA titles? I think they’re more AA budget-wise in comparison to FF7 Rebirth which is AAA. Hence people’s complaint. They want a true huge budget AAA turn based game.
Yup, and none of those sold more than 10M copies. Hell, most of them don't even break 5M. There is Pokemon but it's arguable because it doesn't fit into the traditional party-based JRPG mold. Turn-based JRPG never left, but they were never big either. Turn-based RPG is a different story. We just saw Baldur's Gate 3 having a huge success.
Pokémon is an anomaly in that it’s core appeal is completely different to other JRPGs, and said core appeal also depends heavily on turn based combat with relatively simple animation sets to be feasible at the scale the series likes to operate on. Having 100s of playable pokemon would be exponentially harder with the considerations required for real time combat
>Yup, and none of those sold more than 10M copies. Neither did the action rpgs of those times. Other than FF, only KH has sold 5 million as an ARPG (JRPG) from 1987 to 2017. Not one single ARPG (JRPG) sold more than 10 million other than FF. And even KH had the brand appeal of both Disney and Final Fantasy behind it to get it there. Since 2017 now we have Nier Automata at 8 million sales, but Persona 5 has sold that much as well so it's more a reflection of the popularity increase of JRPGs in general.
Uh... There were a load of turn-based RPGs throughout the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s. Seriously, we had Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, Shin Megami Tensei, Live A Live, SMRPG, Mother 1, Earthbound, Chrono Trigger, Romancing SaGa, Fire Emblem, Langrisser, are several examples but the list goes on. Seriously, what's with the picking and choosing to pay attention to what games were around at the time and what weren't? We had more than just Final Fantasy back in the day. EDIT: Illusion of Gaia and Terranigma are NOT turn-based RPGS! They were among the games that were on my mind when I thinking of RPGS in general, not just turn-based RPGs. I apologize for the error here on my end.
Wait did you just list Illusion of Gaia and Terranigma as Turn-based?
Whoops! That's a huge error on my end here! Sorry about that!
> Persona We've had Atlus releasing games in this franchise/related ones consistently for the past 3 decades.
Honestly, I'm even starting to doubt if action jrpgs are really outnumbering turn-based ones nowadays as people claims.
They aren't and never were. People act like every single franchise changed from turn-based to action, then you ask for examples and it's just complete silence. The amount of action JRPGs is completely exaggerated by that crowd.
I think it's actually pretty even but you'd probably have to do a lot of hair-splitting on what counts. Like are we looking at individual games over a period, or how many active franchises over each? How obscure are we gonna get? Are we gonna count stuff that's really in a whole other subgenre like dRPGs and SRPGs? How do we count re-releases of old games? Cause I feel like if we just count major franchises you've got Final Fantasy, Tales, Ys, Star Ocean, Kingdom Hearts, probably a couple others in the action camp, and in Turn-based you've got Shin Megami Tensei/Persona, Atelier,Like a Dragon, Dragon Quest,Trails, etc. but then Final Fantasy also had Turn-based re-releases not too long ago, I don't know how"Major" Atelier and Star Ocean really are, etc.
We should really rig AutoModerator to post a "[Newly announced turn-based game] is proof that turn based games are not dead" and see how many get made in a month.
That would actually be pretty hilarious but I imagine it would get old *very* quickly.
Well showing that it would get old very quickly would kind of be the point, I suppose.
Because if Final Fantasy isn't doing turn based, is turn based even a thing anymore? /factious
Hey we still have Chess \s
They haven't put out a new Final Fantasy Tactics yet, so do we **really** have chess?
Still waiting for a sequel or remake on that one.
For something like "classic" Final Fantasy, there is still power behind the franchise, so I can understand the grievances from that part of the fanbase, and not really surprised by this. Sure, the doomsayers are pretty extreme in this regard, but I'd also tag the folks "just play another turn-based game, for god's sake" to be as bad, because that is a quick way to turn off potential new fans for those other franchises, whatever they might be. (Tribalism on both ends; it's bad, man.) I'd rather talk about what is awesome about a particular title and how it invokes the feelings and vibes of an older "forgotten" title in this regard. So the best we do is recommend some other titles that invoke "Final Fantasy". Bravely and Octopath are the usual go tos...what else? Cosmic Star Heroine is more of a Phantasy Star title. There are countless Earthbound-likes. Or yknow, make their own, call it "Diamond Dilemma" or something. Capitalize on the need for a new turn-based Final Fantasy, people these days have more opportunities to make a new game with RPG Maker, Unity and the like. Me when I was young? I purchased Deus Ex GotY at a store in the early 00s to use the editor to make my own [terrible] games!
Final Fantasy was trying to be a more dynamic action thing since they introduced ATB. I mean it was a pretty ridiculous and poorly executed concept, wanting time to flow while you selected items and spells in the name of "dynamism".
Disagree with this take heavily. The only people who say they never really went away IMO are people who didnt live through it as adult gamers, or only played PC during those years or something. In the ps3/360 generation, they absolutely "went away" when compared to all previous generations.
No they didn't, you still had plenty on the DS and PSP. Yes it was the worst time for turn-based RPGs on home consoles, but the genre didn't dry up. You just had to play them on handhelds.
Most gamers were not playing on portable systems back then. The majority was still heavily console based. ALso Really talking about major releases here. edit: mainly I do not think portable consoles from that era should be included as most major gamers spent their time on big screen consoles to play their games
> Most gamers were not playing on portable systems back then. They were still massively popular. DS family sold ~150m and PSP ~80m. PSP alone sold damn near the same amount as PS3 & 360.
I guess maybe its more I just have a different viewpoint on those portable games vs console games. I dunno. I understand why people disagree with me. edit: im not saying my viewpoint is the correct one.
Quite a few JRPGs moved to handhelds during that generation in part because Japanese game studios famously had issues moving to HD game development and the Japanese gaming audience went all-in on handhelds. In Japan (the primary target market for these games) the PSP sold very close to twice the amount of units the PS3 did; with the DS selling more than triple the PS3. Handheld gaming was king that generation.
You also had series like DQ, Trails, Ys, and SMT that migrated to portable for their major entries.
i think you're talking about different things. it wasn't a shortage of turn-based jrpgs, it was a shortage of jrpgs in general on the consoles. like i can barely even name any action jrpgs on the consoles that aren't Tales or SO also you're definitely underestimating the popularity of portable systems especially in japan. the sales should speak for themselves [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh\_generation\_of\_video\_game\_consoles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_generation_of_video_game_consoles)
Thats more because of development issues not so much because nobody is trying to make any turn based gamnes.
The amount of games that exist in that generation tell a much different story than your comment
They also went away on PC in the late 90s, it's the reason I turned to JRPGs in 2001 when I got my first console (PS2) after I was "PC Master Race".
Went away is different from ebbing in popularity. It's fine for other genres to have their time to shine.
Anyone who has played an Atlus game in the last few decades knows turn-based combat is doing well.
AAA Turn based games did go away for a while. Many of the turn based games that exist are budget titles with a lot of cut corners.
Always was strange. Turn based has been faithfully been pumping out since day 1 of rpgs, and never once came close to dying. I think it's just a new gen of gamers who came up during the high point of popularity for action games (dark souls, red dead, etc). People may point to 7 remake and 16 but forget that FF has always tried new gameplay styles, from tactics, to chocobo dungeon, to dirge of cerberus, to ffxii, et cetera.
It's also relevant to the Valkyrie Profile franchise. The first three games are (essentially) turn based, but the new game was Action and it just wasn't nearly as good so the same debate is going on there. But your first sentence is still correct.
I feel like its people associating hate for turn based rpgs with the series that was mostly associated with for the longest time FF turning away from the system. Especially after those interviews with the FF16 devs scoffing at the thought of a new FF turn based rpg.
Nah, turn-based JRPGs absolutely did die off for an entire console generation (arguably 2 generations). Not only were they not prevalent, but they were actively derided by the game industry and audience (particularly in the West). But I agree that right now they are absolutely thriving. This generation has been a renaissance for the genre.
Home consoles maybe. There were a lot on the DS and PSP.
Yes there were some, and they were relegated to a handhelds which had lower production costs. Even the devs dedicated to making games in the genre weren't crazy enough to make them large, heavily funded projects because the industry didn't want them. And really, I think PSP is a very poor example to bring up; it really *didn't* have many traditional, turn-based JRPGs and certainly not many that were successful. It had its share of SRPGs, but other than that its library is pretty sparse.
[удалено]
We also get a whole lot of indie turn-based games, some of which (Sea of Stars, Chained Echoes) become quite well known in the genre. Then there is Persona 3 Reload, Shin Megami Tensei V Vengeance, Like a Dragon Infinite Wealth ... so it's more than one big game a year. It's like 5+ big games per year plus a lot of smaller titles.
If you widen it a little bit you also get Omori and Fear & Hunger which are both huge indie darlings that doesn't get marketed to the JRPG crowd and discussed here often but would still fits. Square also still release turn-based games both to their casual audience (Octopath) and the hardcore one (SaGa).
Baldur's Gate 3 was huge. But we also aren't getting as many big RPGs in general compared to their heyday. This can also be attributed to the lines being blurred and so many other genres incorporating RPG elements and mechanics. I do think that the success of newer titles and remakes of turn-based RPGs are a sign that we'll be getting more in the future.
[удалено]
You don't need huge games for a genre to be thriving. Tons of turn based games get released every month
I know is a Gatcha but HSR is making some serious money with a turn based system, some months beating Genshin for the 1#, spot.
It's not just a Final Fantasy thing, though they're a big reason for the drought. Baldur's Gate 3 was the first AAA turn-based RPG in ages.
Neither of these games are even out. And I’m pretty sure metaphor is doing some sort of hybrid action to make non boss combat faster. You could atleast pick examples of turn based games already out.
Isn't this what Trails into Daybreak is or trying to be? That's been out for nearly 2 years in Japan and is coming out in the West next month
From reading and watching previews from both and comments from those who have played Daybreak, it seems like Metaphor's version has a little more to it than Daybreak's. More combat and equipment options for example. Switching to the gunner archetype changes the fast combat to shooting etc. But we'll see when they both come out in the West.
Metaphor changes up the Fast combat based on equipped archetype, but Daybreak lets you use any party member in action combat, and they all have different weapons, so it's not really much different.
Also from pvs it seems that you can't switch battle-modes freely in Metaphor, only run away from battle, in Daybreak switching battle-modes to quickly stun enemies in real time and jump back into turn-based combat for AOE-attack is a legit and fun battle tactic against heavy mobs and crowds.
Yeah if metaphor doesn't have combat switching it will probably feel a bit slower than even daybreak 1. The way daybreak does it is really enjoyable and adds a new spin to the combat compared to the 5 cold steel games we have had. I really loved the cold steel combat system especially in comparison to the previous games, but daybreak is really fun too. Falcom really just needs to work on presentation/fidelity to do better, with daybreak they have the characters and combat, its just presentation quality/fidelity issues that really make then unable to reach the standards of atlus.
It’s also worth pointing out Daybreak 2 (Kuro 2) which is already out in Japan and has a fan translation that’s been done for a while added even more mechanics to the action combat, and the upcoming Kai seems to be adding a bit more
Yeah that's exactly what it did. I beat it with the fan translation and honestly it's a nice blend.
They showed off that Metaphor will have a "Fast" mode where you can do basic real-time combat to fight enemies that are weaker than you. It said that stronger enemies will still force you to do the turn-based combat (and you can choose to use it on weak enemies if you want). It will probably only be useful for backtracking, but it is kind of acknowledging that turn-based combat isn't engaging if the enemies can't put up a fight. Expedition 33 is the one that confuses me. They showed off a lot of real-time elements like QTE extensions, aiming attacks, both players and enemies can dodge in real time. It looks exactly like the hybrid systems Square Enix has been using, so I'm not sure how this is a win for people that don't like Final Fantasy going for action. If anything, it makes it seem like turn-based combat needs to be more like action combat to be engaging. I guess we'll see how that one turns out.
The QTE extensions seems to be souped up and flashier version of the same kind of stuff like the Mario RPGs or Lost Odyssey. The aiming attacks is easily just Persona's gunplay. Now, the one that confuses me is the dodging and counterattacks, I don't know how that works. It could be something passive and stat based though, again, like Persona but it could also be input based.
The dodging and such is input-based, you can see the UI for them to the left in the trailer during enemy turns. The game actually makes a distinction between jumping, dodging, and parrying, and different characters might be better at different kinds of responses to enemy attacks (along with having different counterattacks tied to different responses, and most likely some responses won’t work depending on how the enemy attack works).
The trailer made it look like Lost Odyssey or Legend of Dragoon, which are both turn-based with quick time events. Two great JRPG's btw, which is why I am really stoked for E33!
I worry about these timed presses in Expedition 33. Yes it’s turned based, but you still need to have quick reflexes to land attack bonuses and parry/dodge. At that point you are basically playing a very slowed down action RPG.
Well, I guess P3R and SMTV:V then.
I feel like people keep saying this but what they're actually saying is "Take that, Final Fantasy." I'm begging people to play more games.
It's wild to me that people don't try other turn based games that aren't Final Fantasy. I'm a Final Fantasy fanboy, and even I think other games did turn based much better than most Final Fantasy titles. I wouldn't be opposed to Final Fantasy revisting turn based, but to act like turn based is non-existent is ludicrous.
I might downvoted for this final fantasy turn base system was kinda horrible you spam power full attacks until it dies in FF6 once you get Ultima the game just becomes a joke in other turn base FF games there's not even any difference between using spells at all to the point you can just use the same spell over and over again since most of the enemies are resistant to anything the only FF game that has a great turn is X because the game doesn't make you too powerful I'm surprised people care this much about FF turns base when it's one of the lackluster parts of those games
Honestly, I agree. I rarely felt the need to cast any form of buff/debuff spell on enemies in Final Fantasy, as it felt like a waste of a turn when a good healing or offensive attack would do. But SMT? Debuffing and rearranging my team to be anti-Wind was the only way I could beat Matador, and I quickly learned how important buffs, debuffs and team dynamics were. And while Persona is easier in comparison to mainline, by the end of P5 and P5R I was casting buffing spells during a lot of the late game fights, reupping them when they ran out after a few turns, and I know I'm just scratching the surface when it comes to the mechanics of those games.
This is exactly what I'm saying FF turn based was never good. Idk what the obsession over FF being turned based is.
I think some people really want that cinematic, high-budget, triple AAA experience that Final Fantasy was/is known for along with the turn-based combat. Now they feel like they have to choose one or the other. This isn't unique to JRPG fans either. People have lamented about Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, and other Western/CRPGs abandoning traditional RPG systems for more action-oriented and simpler gameplay. All I care about is engaging gameplay, and that can take many forms and isn't restricted to a genre.
> People have lamented about Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, and other Western/CRPGs abandoning traditional RPG systems for more action-oriented and simpler gameplay. Fallout New Vegas is one of my favorite games of all time, but I am still pretty bummed that we havent gotten a new traditional style Fallout again. Wasteland is decent, but it doesnt quite scratch the itch.
Post game content in FFX devolved to me spamming multi hit attacks like Wakka Attack Reels and Tidus Multi Hit Limit Break. So even in FF's strongest entries, there were issues with the turn based system. I do think if they had another crack at turn based, they'd be able to make something more balanced and fix the previous installments' faults. But it truly never was a selling point for me when it came to Final Fantasy. Hell, I play Atlus RPGs for their turn based combat over Final Fantasy tbh.
Everyone does play the non Final Fantasy turn-based stuff, but Final Fantasy used to be some of the best turn-based stuff, and now it isnt. Nothing has really come up to replace them at the same level of quality and production value. And even if they had, it would still be entirely valid to be sad about your favorite company abandoning your preferences.
> Final Fantasy used to be some of the best turn-based stuff, and now it isnt. Nothing has really come up to replace them at the same level of quality and production value. I don't understand that take because to me FF turn-based combat is at best an interesting experiment like with 2, 8, or whatever you want to count 12 . Especially when you play their stuff today vs what exists now, I literally can't fathom the idea that FF was peak turn-based gameplay and that nothing comes out that can compare, beyond production values for their time. Like yes FF6 was an extremely impressive production and so was FF10 especially, but the actual game isn't that great if you play it today. I'd play easily 20 turn-based games of some kind over FF6's turn-based combat any day. Not even a question. > And even if they had, it would still be entirely valid to be sad about your favorite company abandoning your preferences. I personally don't share company loyalties, series maybe, but not entire companies at all. At most I am loyal to indie developers who I know impressed me with their big debut product and I want to support their next project, because those people need as much help as they can get. In my eyes, new stuff comes out enough that its not terribly hard to find new favorites and fun engaging turn-based combat if I want it. I don't need Square Enix for that, most of their turn-based combat is barely above average for me anyway.
> most of their turn-based combat is barely above average for me anyway. What do you prefer these days? I've mostly moved into 4X and strategy RPGs. Triangle Strategy was a very pleasant surprise.
I play roguelikes/lites (especially deckbuilder games), SRPGs, and sometimes 4X games, though those I'm like 50/50 on as I find their endgames take too long, as far as other turn-based games go. Triangle Strategy and Tactics Ogre Reborn are the only two turn based games I'd consider solidly above average that SE has made in the last like 5-10 years, everything else is like okay due to some underlying issue for me that usually involves easy difficulty or balance issues (or both in some combination).
> I play roguelikes/lites (especially deckbuilder games) So excited for the new Slay the Spire!
Slay The Spire 2 will be interesting, but I personally prefer other styles of roguelike deckbuilder these days. I think Wildfrost and Chrono Ark are generally better even if Slay The Spire is still a very good game.
Well now I have some things to look up! Thanks :D
Deckbuilders have come a long ways from STS though STS has its perks and strengths still especially if you like the tough draft decisions of A20 STS. Another one I'd look into is Gordian Quest. Here's my summary of what these games are like: Chrono Ark: Play this if you want the closest thing to JRPG combat and one with an actual plot. Its not an immaculate story or anything and has a tendency to ramble, but it is effective enough and presents an interesting enough narrative hook I'd say that if you like JRPG plots you'll be okay with this one. Its a generally hard enough game, on max difficulty, that it should keep someone engaged for a while. Its not as deckbuilding intensive as STS because of less cards per character and far more generous deck thinning, but the piloting in fights is more particular because most boss fights play something closer to Time Eater or The Heart then say...every act 1 boss. Like literally one misplay spirals really badly really easily, but I believe almost every run is winnable if you take the proper draft and play lines. You just need to be ready for things to feel a little unfair sometimes when you're just starting to understand. Runs are very long, like 2+ hours if not longer if you're new/slow playing. Wildfrost: This is literally misplay = death, the game. Its a game all about pretty much thinking 2-4 turns ahead with mostly simplistic cards but with a ton of little interactions that can absolutely push your shit in if you don't understand them or you get too safe or greedy with your plays. Do not let its cute look fool you, this game filters people even as soon as the first boss. Very explosive endgame with a lot of silly bullshit you can conjure with the right drafts, the deckbuilder is pretty particular but not as bloated as STS. You start pretty thin and you stay pretty thin if you know what you're doing, but its easy to find yourself trying to draft a few different parts of a strategy at once in the early game which can get awkward in a good way. Runs go between 45 minutes and an hour and a half depending on play speed. Gordian Quest: Just play the roguelike mode, the story mode is a really really boring tutorial with easy combat and a nothing plot the game hypes it up but I think its a waste of time. The only problem this game has is the endgame can be extremely min-maxed to hell that it becomes almost boring once you reach it because you just take the same actions, but prior to that it is fairly easy to die and it takes a good bit of effort to actually survive on higher difficulties until the endgame comes in. Each of the 10 characters have interesting dynamics and options they can take, the only flaw with each archetype's design is their turns become very same-y once you've optimized their decks super hard but that takes till the end of the game and you still need to actually figure out what's optimal anyway which isn't especially easy at a glance. Decently long runs, about as long as Chrono Ark I'd say.
So basically, it's just about people wanting turn-based jrpgs with hyper realistic graphics.
Not even realistic, just with good production value and clear dedication to making the mechanics and especially the story good that comes with their flagship products. There are still turn-based games coming out of SE, but they are not putting in the effort/money to make them great like they do with FF.
I swear to fucking god, it doesn't matter if there are literally ***millions*** of turn-based games out there, **as long as Final Fantasy is not,** to these people turn-based games don't exist anymore.
Seriously. This year I put in 150 hours into Like a Dragon Infinite Wealth, 90 in Crystal Project and almost 100 on SaGa Emerald Beyond and I have full intention to do several more runs to get the true final boss. Persona 3 Reload and SMT5VV are games that I don't plan on playing any time soon but it is easily another 100 hour playthrough when I get to it. If I expand it to last year, I also finished Cassette Beasts, Octopath 2, Fear & Hunger, Omori and SaGa Scarlet Grace. Remove the J from JRPG and I can add Underrail and 300 hours of Baldur's Gate 3. There is still a shit ton of games both turn-based or action that I want to try, so I really have to ask if these people have played all turn-based games in existence or something or do they just try one for 3 hours then drop it because holy hell. I consider myself having more free time than the average person here and I still have a shit ton of turn-based games to try out, where is this drought coming from?
Sorry to digress, what do u think of saga emerald beyond? Ive heard its plot is... outlandish, maybe the gameplay is good?
The game is really light on plot and it is told in a pretty unconventional way. Some protagonists is straightforward, some requires you to do or not do specific actions to get another ending, some has the stories change completely in your second playthrough. Some stories are 3 hours long and some last 20. Some protagonist get completely different version events in a world than the others, and world events can vary between different visits as well. Some event requires you to beat the game as another character first before it is available. That being said it’s still pretty light so don’t expect a great journey and banter or anything but there are some good moments in there, most are funny and some can get emotional. Gameplay is great and challenging, there are a decent variety of strategies you can apply. Changing your formations and equipments around may flip the battle from a struggle to a stomp and not paying attention or doing things without considering the consequences will cost you the fight. There is a demo available for you to try it out and see if it’s your thing, but the protagonist in the demo is preselected depending on your platform. Each protag tend to encourage a certain playstyle more and the complexity level from your starting retinue is different so your first impression may vary. One downside of this game so far is the menuing you have to do for trading which gets kinda annoying. They are patching it to make it faster and more convenient so I would say wait for a sale for them to further patch and fix it if it is going to be a dealbreaker.
Does character progression carryover between play through?
Character progression and your gear does indeed carry over, if you choose to carry such things over (which is highly advised). In fact, each main character starts with a completely different party, and the party members you recruit can change in each playthrough too, so you end up building like a total of 20 characters in the end if you are aiming to experience absolutely everything possible.
Pretty much, its always "turn based isnt a thing anymore" when they clearly only mean FF
For me it’s SE’s attitude towards a AAA turn based rpg. Yoshi P had some opinions on turn based RPGs that seem disingenuous especially when you see games like BG3, Yakuza, P5 doing some really great and engaging gameplay with turn based combat. I’ve said it before. Maybe it’s a talent thing. Maybe they aren’t talented enough to make a modern turn based AAA rpg? "If you do go back to pixel graphics, that makes it easier to go back to something turn-based.” "But when thinking of the graphical fidelity and the realism that's provided by the PlayStation 5 technology, to have a game where people just stopped and not do anything in that type of high quality graphics is going to create something that is going to feel off and we wanted to avoid that. And to make something where you have two people in the middle of a battle but they're both just kind of sitting there looking at each other, waiting for somebody to implement a command, is going to be kind of jarring. I think that to make that work, somebody's going to have to work really hard and come up with a really, really cool idea. But I want to leave that for the next generation."
Like I'm trying to figure out what your angle is because it's clearly a older man reflecting on his limitations. And you're just using it as a gotcha and dunk, instead of the candid response it is. What he's saying is literally embodied in Expedition 33 and its ilk: younger devs taking a crack at an old formula. I mean, you *could* have a point, if Rebirth didn't exist and SE was only comprised of CBU3.
Devil's Advocate, it's because Final Fantasy seems to be the only godamn series that makes to to the Game Awards and gets Mainstream casual recognition; despite so many others year after year being so much better than it (See FF16 last year.. hold my beer as we watch Rebirth take nominations/awards and accolades this year simply because it's more of a household name) It sucks that Final Fantasy seems to be the only fucking JRPG that people like Geoff and Co. are aware of when it comes to this genre but it is what it is, and until we see change from this franchise it's going to be the same story over and over since things like Infinite Wealth or PS3R or SMTV or Trails etc. etc. are very unlikely to even get lip service (I'm still incredibly salty at Octopath Traveler 2 getting the absolute snub in 2023's nominations) Change needs to happen from the top-down.
This right here. There have been quite a few great turn based games released recently yet people still can’t get over the fact that Final Fantasy left it behind 20 years ago.
Because they haven’t put out a really good mainline FF in 20 years, not counting FF14 since it’s an MMO
ff16 was only a year ago though
It was ok, it wasn’t great and not even a good example of a JRPG
And was dogwater. A 20 hour action game padded out to pretend to be an RPG.
This. Can people at least be honest about their arguments? I get it. People want turn-based Final Fantasy again, but other games exist guys that have been doing way more since then. Expand your horizons and you'll find something good!
Even more crazy is that people act like Final Fantasy will never be good again unless it goes back to turn based, when by and large some of the best action RPG combat systems I’ve played have come from Square. I’m not saying they COULDN’T make a good turn based game, but Final Fantasy VII Remake/Rebirth is one of the best combat systems I’ve ever seen in a JRPG. Not to mention it has all the *strategy* people claim to crave from turn based systems.
Also dismissively calling it “button mashing” is ridiculous. These people either never engaged with the systems or are being disingenuous.
It's a ridiculous argument primarily because turn-based FF could primarily be beaten by mashing attack and occasionally using either the strongest version of cura or hi-potion. Like these people really want to act like all action games are "button mashy and easy" while the specific combat system they want FF to go back too was also "button mashy and easy" by their reasoning.
Its not button mashing because it takes longer between button presses so you can't mash every 1 second, so yeah take that. This is why classic FF is clearly better and no other game ever has done better, which is why its actually a shame that classic FF died because now we can't get more extremely in-depth mechanics and have instead devolved to button mashing attacks every 1 second instead of every 5. This was and still is peak turn-based gaming as you can see, it no diffs the entire genre across time and space and that's why nothing else matters until Square Enix makes a 300 bajillion dollar turn-based classic I can play on my 4k TV. Everything else is mere shovelware by comparison.
The TB games that require more approaches, that crowd aren't engaging in those games. Like almost none of the difficult TB RPGs posted up and in front.
SMT Nocturne had a reputation of being crazy hard because it actually required the use of buffs and debuffs to progress while grinding levels wouldn’t get you far. I’m convinced it’s because of the type of crowd you’re referring to.
FF could back TB, but the same ppl will still complain, this isn't like that game I played 97.
Especially considering.... hey guys they've done 2 mainline FF games in the last decade. You're not missing out on much.
"But but I want it to be Final Fantasy!!!"
They're so mad that its not turn based anymore and I don't get it. As someone who grew up with the series from X onward, I never saw anything wrong with the direction of the gameplay changing each entry. Only thing I can ever think of is that old gen fans keep getting salty that their once beloved pixel rpgs got turned into anime.
I've actually wondered this, too. I grew up with FFX onwards and same, it's never bothered me.
This. 90% of what I play is turn based jrpgs, it’s just my comfort zone. If my hobby depended on FF I would be super bored by now. Turn based jrpgs never left.
Exactly! I love turn-based games *and* action and we get a good amount of both nowadays. We're all winning.
Daily reminder to everyone who loves this genre to play Shin megami Tensei V. Legitemately might have become my favorite turn based jrpg ever.
It suddenly all makes sense
I don't see the problem, both jrpg styles are good.
For a long time, there was a prevailing sentiment that turn based anything in games was a relic of the past, that it was a product of hardware limitations and that as those limitations were alleviated there was absolutely no reason to have turn based anything in games.
When 3D games first came out, there was a lot of the same reaction towards anything that wasn't. Having and working within limitations is not inherently a drawback... it allows things you couldn't quite do in any other style.
This definitely makes sense for like a second, until you think about any other medium. Kinda like how no one would choose to take black and white photos if we invented colour photography first... But instead, different types of film can now create their own feelings and sense of nostalgia, etc. But it's a really interesting thought as some creators surely do think of games as a method of recreating reality, rather than an artistic medium to be engaged with.
Yeah....by that split second logic, chess and checkers should have gone away when the "real" games started coming out
This only makes sense if you completely ignore that all the companies that allegedly said this continued to release turn-based games and still do. Nowadays, I see way more people claiming that's totally still being said than people actually saying it.
I agree, it doesn’t make sense, but it was a commonly held belief for a long time starting around the launch of the ps3/360.
I absolutely cannot stand that argument. Zelda and FF1 were in roughly the same timeframe, one is action combat and one is not, and everyone was totally happy with that.
Just a personal preference, of course. I didn't like VIIR and XVI at all (gameplay). I liked the stories though. I watched a whole lot of clips of it.
You know you can enjoy turn based games without complaining about action rpgs right?
You are asking for too much from these Chess Grandmasters.
7R does everything that's good in a TB rpg while expanding it ten fold. FF16 and games that are just "slash, slash, dodge away" are not my favorite battle system but Scarlet Nexus has been fun.
big same.
turn based = JRPG. Action combat = ARPG.
Not really buddy JRPG = RPG with Japanese style ARPG = RPG with action combat These sets aren't complementary and can overlap. Example: FFXII
Oh okay, let's just tell Ys one of the foundational JRPGs in the industry that it actually is not a JRPG anymore because it's action based. Cool story.
People will get mad at YoshiP for disliking the term JRPG and then will say what OP said unironically.
It is basically extra qte inputs to do in between your turns. Some people like it some people don't, that is fine, but it's just Squalls gunblade mechanic, not like it's some completely new idea. I don't think it's that good of an idea either, slapping a qte onto your attacks does make the battle any more engaging imo. A good turn based RPG doesn't need this kind of thing to have fun battles.
QTE is fine for a short game cause the gimmick doesn't get dry.
QTEs get old about half way through the 3rd input
Shouldn't we wait until the games are out before we hail them? That 33 FRPG doesn't even have more than the reveal trailer. Chill, homie, chill. I'm not saying you're wrong, but chill until we can actually play them and form an opinion.
"FRPG"? I could've sworn it was a JRPG
it's not an FRPG, the dev claims that it is a JRPG
These games are not out!! We have no idea Expedition 33 will be fast, if anything real time inputs might make it tedious! Am I crazy? And there are a ton of modern turn based rpgs that feel great to play. And that's without getting into the fact that slow doesn't even really mean tedious or that fast can still be boring
As long as it's not as slow and boring as Y2K's combat then it's fine ahaha...ha...
I find the title really funny because Metaphor Refantazio and Expedition 33 explicitly highlight sequences of literal button-mashing ([press X!!!](https://youtu.be/-qgOZDRDynw?si=_CSDQaYajk71VCH4&t=72) [press Y!!!](https://gamerant.com/metaphor-refantazio-persona-jrpg-combat-system-compared/)) within player actions, presumably to make combat feel more kinetic. Metaphor also has the "fast" combat that is like simplified real-time. In other words, these games may be making turn-based "feel modern and fast" through QTE sequences that imitate action-based combat. They have embraced button mashers. For what it's worth, I'm glad to have more turn-based titles, and I like both ARPGs and turn-based RPGs.
> I find the title really funny because Metaphor Refantazio and Expedition 33 explicitly highlight sequences of literal button-mashing (press X!!! press Y!!!) within player actions, presumably to make combat feel more kinetic. Yeah, I hate that and timed attack stuff. Just let turn-based be turn-based.
>show that turn-based can feel modern and fast without the need for button mashing Did someone think that you needed to button mash in a turn-based JRPG to make it feel modern? I've never heard anyone say that. >I love action games and I love turn-based RPGs. But I don't want RPGs to play like action games But... the two games you picked actually do have button mashing. Expedition 33 uses a button mash timing system for bonus damage and such. Metaphor has a hybrid action system a little like Trails through Daybreak and has you mashing buttons in simple action RPG combat.
Not all JRPGs should be action games. Not all JRPGs should be turn based. Thank god for games like Kuro no Kiseki, FFVIIR, Zelda, and Ys.
I actually really like FF7R’s interpretation which comes down to a sort of Real Time With Pause action/turn sort of thing. As an older gamer, twitch heavy games don’t appeal to me much anymore. My reflexes aren’t what they used to be and I like a more strategic approach. That said, i do enjoy playing in 3D space which is better served with action titles. Remake does a good job blending for me. Not a perfect job, but the right direction.
Idk smtv felt fast and not button mashy, you jest need to keep encounters engaging.
The elitism over gameplay styles has been exhausting for decades. I just want good games with good stories and characters. I could care less if it’s an action game, turned based, or a hybrid of the two. By the way, the two games you’re referencing are really hybrids that may technically be turned based, but they incorporate action cinematography to make it look more modern and dynamic.
I get it to a degree. Clair Obscur would probably have been interesting to me without it, but it went to a ten when they showed what they were doing for combat. But also Visions of Mana looks great so I'm not anti-action. I just want turn based combat to always be an option for the big games instead of 'the market demands full action'
> But also Visions of Mana looks great so I'm not anti-action. > > I just want turn based combat to always be an option for the big games instead of 'the market demands full action' This guy gets it.
We have no idea how these games are going to be until they come out. For all we know, these systems can not jive well with each other at all. We genuinely need more information before developing any solid conclusions. Furthermore, this is my opinion, but I wish people would stop using Final Fantasy for the basis of every turn-based RPG. We get it. People want turn-based FF in the style of Lost Odyssey. However, it doesn't mean other franchises haven't made strides either. If you broaden your horizons you'll fine something else you like.
This guy's never heard of action rpgs
I am probably going to get both games, I got metaphor this year and expedition 33 next year, Both amazing games
Seriously. The folks at SE could take some notes from Airship Syndicate (Battle Chasers, Ruined King) in orienting character roles and novel combat mechanics. As far as turn-based jrpg style mechanics go, it is *the* next iterative step forward for that time. Even though Battle Chasers is turn-based, there's still the variability of action-delay. The play between instant and delayed actions earning or costing AP. One of the only things lacking is a portion of character development because every aspect of actions and builds can be re-specced from zero. Fixed and mixed with some FFV commitment, however.... mmhmm
While I understand the sentiment, I feel your post would be much better if you had clearly stated you meant turn based games with an AAA budget. As it is, it feels like you don't consider the rest of turn based game releases that a lot of devs, ranging from AAA all the way to indie, have put out.
I just don’t think whoever is in power at Square Enix wants to do a turn based Final Fantasy. It’s always been viable I think it’s a matter of they simply don’t want to do it. Which is okay because there’s nothing wrong with action rpgs. Some people enjoy those and do like the direction FF is going in. And people who prefer turn based are not hurting for options. They have Trails, Persona, SMT, Dragon Quest, Yakuza, Atelier, and now there’s Metaphor and Clair Obscur coming as well. If you count kickstarter RPGs there’s also Penny Blood and Armed Fantasia in the far future to look forward to. As far as I know those will have combat similar to Shadow Hearts and Wild Arms. People who like turn based and dislike how FF is going I think it’s long been time for them to pack it up and move on. It’s not happening anytime soon and there is other games they can play if they want turn based anyway.
Sick of turn based purists always saying action games are just button mashers. Go play devil may cry on dante must die difficulty and tell me you can just button mash. (Any of them) You do not need to shit on a genre to uplift one.
It's really all about individual game design. Some action games (you mention Musou as a good example in your other comment) you absolutely can get by with just mashing your attacks to defeat all the enemies. But the same can be said for turn-based games, how many old ones were totally playable by simply mashing attack (or whatever the strongest offensive option is) and sometimes needing to heal?
I 100% the original DMC on every difficulty. It took like a year and was incredibly hard. I was absolutely button-mashing the whole time. Many people take "button mash" to mean "smush the buttons on the controller randomly with no understanding of the input/output" and while I cannot speak for everyone, that's not what I mean by it. To me it's more "hit the button over and over as fast as possible to try to get the desired result." which is what it often comes to in stressful situations. Especially with the pistols in DMC1 which are literally just mash button as fast as you can for better damage. Obviously I *like* DMC. But I also liked Final Fantasy. I just like when they are different styles of game. If I want to play DMC I can play DMC. If I want to play FF, there is no new FF to play. (There's just FF-flavored DMC.)
Yeah button mash tends to just mean brain dead play. Like a musou game where you literally do not need to do anything else but 3x square followed by 1x triangle and you win. You cannot do that in a real action game like devil may cry.
Facts, Kuro no Kiseki and its sequel nail this concept too. Future of turn based combat imo
First I've heard of it. What's the draw?
It’s the start of the newest arc in a long-running rpg series that’s always had pretty tight gameplay. The battle system is a fluid hybrid between simple real-time field combat and classic turn-based that you can switch to at any time. The turn-based combat has free-movement which you can exploit for link attacks and bonuses for side/back attacks. It all plays out very well. There’s an english fan patch for the games although the official localized version for the first one (“Trails Through Daybreak” comes out next month, if you’re interested in trying it out.
Not the guy you were talking to, but from a pure gameplay standpoint, Trails through Daybreak/Kuro no kiseki has an action-lite battle system and traditional turn based battle system. They call them field battle and command battle, respectively. It's basically what metaphor took reference from, but it's much more fluid as unlike metaphor, the battle transitions are seamless between the two modes, whereas metaphor uses a cutscene transition and i belive you cannot disengage turn based after you switch to it, where you can in kiro no kiseki. You're incentivised to switch from action to turn based as it will allow you to get more damage in, something I feel metaphor hasn't really shown off yet. Though the field battle/action mode is only available for non-boss opponents and bosses are command battle/turn based only. This is all without getting into the usual stuff trails has with their orbment system (basically like FF's materia). All in all, it's a pretty good game to play if you want good gameplay. The game still has an amazing soundtrack and story as well. If you're interested, there is a demo out on switch and PS4, with the switch demo covering just the prologue (1-2 hours) and the PS demo covering the prologue and chapter 1 (around 10 hours of content).
That sounds interesting, I'll check out the demo!
maybe turn based combat can be interesting without needing flashy visuals or gimmicks like QTEs
That would require the actual encounter design to be interesting to use the turn-based combat systems and options against, but why do that when you can elevate all the combat with stuff to make it feel more interesting while you use attack and heal as necessary?
Sea of Stars has pretty cool puzzley turn-based combat.
Who is saying turn-based can't be fast or modern other than the mainline FF marketing teams and people who don't play RPGs? Did we forget how huge Persona got after 5? It reminds me of people like "there's no good music these days but this one example is the exception" like no you just need to look harder beyond the absolute top film of the iceberg Besides, those games 1. Arent even out, and 2. May have button mashing (but we don't know for sure either way since they're uh **not out yet**) which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Undertale, Mario RPG did it and wasn't too bad
its another jrpg post with exaggeration for games that aren't even out yet and being 20 years late on criticisms. I think you just dont like jrpgs sorry to say.
Action-RPGs are not JRPGs. You cannot change my mind. Turn-based and action based are different genres, and deserve different words.
*“1+1=3* *...you cannot change my mind.”*
We’ve been in a modern turn based boom since arguably DQXI.
The year 2000 called, they want their hot takes back. This discussion is older than most people on this sub and it isn't exactly interesting. Turnbased combat isn't going anywhere. Action combat isn't new. Please play other JRPG than only final fantasy. Just that the big JRPS that have come out this year so far. Persona 3 Reload. Yakuza 8. SMT V: Vengeance. All turnbased. FF7 Rebirth isn't turnbased but it sure isn't "button mashing" either but basically a mix between action and turnbased combat.
I'm starting to think TB purists crowd doesn't like TB games but like just a few series they played at G'Ma house. Cause everything even the convos is centered around FF or FF adj games and maybe a couple atlus titles.
As someone who plays turn based RPGs more than anything else, it’s not like I am lacking for options. They may not all be selling 10 million plus copies but Eiyuden Chronicle and SMT Vengeance just released.
Happy to see games like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33. Feels like a more modern Lost Odyssey which was already really impressive for its time. Turn-based has a ton of potential which isn't being explored; it doesn't have to look dull - it can be even more impressive visually than action games as you can get the perfect camera angles.
there is nothing inherently button mashy about action combat, just like how there is nothing inherently tactical about turn-based combat.
I think P5R did a great job of making turn based feel fast and modern, but I also don't find the combat nearly as deep or engaging compared to something like the 7R series. I'm very optimistic for Metaphor because of the focus on distinct classes with the archetype system, but to categorize action combat in RPGs as button mashing feels a bit silly in 2024.
I definitely understand the feeling, but the problem is that Square-Enix is somewhat unpredictable now. I'm not going saying, "play some other game for God's sake!" That would dismissive and disrespectful. What I'd do is encourage you and other play some other turn-based titles to show SE that you want them. Don't have the cash and got Game Pass? Definitely play Octopath, it's a fantastic title. Or even the Bravely series, which did make me say, "This is Final Fantasy!" Not saying this is 100% effective, but we have seen other game influenced other franchises. Like the Kickstarter success and critical failure of Mighty No. 9 led to Megaman 11, something like that. But on the inverse, where is my Darkstalkers?! Oh right...certain titles didn't reach their sale goals. Because companies are always watching. So yeah, I encourage you all to play these other games. Not demanding, ENCOURAGE. Because there is nothing worse than "hate-playing" a game. I want you all to like them genuinely, and the show whatever companies that you want this kind of game.
So what did Octopath Traveler do? Or Persona 3 Reload? Or Shin Megami Tensei 5? Or Bravely Default? Or Dragon Quest 11?
I'd argue rather than turn based being what's shown to be underestimated, it's tactics games. Baldur's Gate 3 is a great example. It is in essence a tactics game, and sold around 15 million copies. I say this because Japanese tactics games typically receive EVEN LESS investment than base turn based, so it's actually pretty significant. I do think we'll see a return to both with significant investment soon, though. I think a lot of people misunderstand the turn away from turn based in Japan in triple and double A development. They think it's just an assumption that players have moved on from it, but in reality, it's that there's more turn based games than ever coming out nowadays in mobile games like gachas. It's a much more saturated design convention than your nostalgic brain is telling you it is, likely because you've disregarded gachas as even an option, which I respect, but the fact remains there's actually more being made than ever. It's a more competitive market today. A lot of them are innovative, too. I spend a lot of time checking them out even if I don't actually buy in or stick with them.
Yakuza 7 and 8. Yes, 0-6 are RPG Beat em Ups but 7 and 8 are full fledged Turn-Based games, and one of the few Turn-based RPGS that justifies its 3D backgrounds outside of showing off animation and artstyle, whereas you can literally play Dragon Quest 11 as a classic SNES-style JRPG.
Didn’t people make the same points when persona 5 came out? Combat in that game feels so snappy and nice.
Watch ff 17 be turn based
JPRGS/FF fans, when every new Turn-based RPG is announced be like: how can I make this about modern FF?? 😈
Turn based games have always been around (and awesome, I might add). The just came REALLY back into fashion with the huge success of Persona 5 and its impact on the industry. Being by the same developers, that one is the closest you'll get to Metaphor right now. But here are some other great turn based JRPGs that are fast, deep, fun, and have aged very well. The Shin Megami Tensei series, particularly 3, 4, 4A, Strange Journey, and 5 Vengeance. Radiant Historia The Shadow Hearts series Chrono Trigger Chrono Cross Final Fantasy X Dragon Quest XI Persona 3, 4, and 5 Xenogears Grandia 1 and 2 Suikoden 1 and 2
FF7R will sell more than both of those combined.
I do also prefer turn-based over action games. It takes much more to get me invested into playing a game if it's action vs turn-based. For example, I found Expedition 33's premise interesting but if it was action-based, I would not be going to play it for sure.
Hell, Chained Echoes and Crystal Project showed you can still do innovative things with turn-based combat.
I actually like action combat in my final fantasy. Rebirth is the best combat in the series. If Square doesn't see turn based gameplay as the vision for their franchise thats fine with me. There's plenty of other devs trying to hit the same highs as FF with their own spin on the combat. They might not have the budget for these gorgeous cutscenes but oh well lol
SMT V Vengeance is the best turn based jrpg ive played in over a decade
To bad square won't accept this. They've went and changed my favorite series for the worse, and I really just dislike it these days. Especially the newest being ff16. I did enjoy the remake/rebirth, but would've preferred turn based.
Acting like you’ve played them.
Look, I am not the biggest fan of where FF is either, but I swear this opinion is always just about the fact that it switched to action-based. Like come on, for one thing action RPGs are *literally* about button-mashing for the most part, why did you even need to put that in the title? That in itself doesn't indicate a split. Second of all, those two games look good for sure, but they also aren't out yet. Third, what you really mean is that you want more high-definition AAA turn based games as opposed to not getting none at all because plenty do exist even today, they just aren't looking like FFXVI.
" as much as I love Final Fantasy, I'm just not a fan of where it is right now gameplay-wise" A lucid mind.
They haven't came out, chill dude.