I'm confused on this. With the way speed goes on in ATB based games if feels more real time to me even the order is on turns. Depending on how fast you are your enemy won't be getting a turn before the critical beatdown. What do you think?
I'm confused on this. With the way speed goes on in ATB based games if feels more real time to me even the order is on turns. Depending on how fast you are your enemy won't be getting a turn before the critical beatdown. What do you think?
There's a few games, IX and VI I think, that feel like turn based because you basically input all your commands while watching animations, so it feels more like FFI did. AT needs fast and responsive combat, which I think VII and V nailed.
When that happens, ATI feels like it's own thing, something only video games could pull off, iterating on their tabletop source material.
Ahh I see. Yeah it did do it pretty well ,almost to the point it felt like real time. But you got point there. But my friend basically said it's more like timed turn based combat where turns are timed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
The terminology describing these differences is really bad. ATB is still turn-based in my opinion. Namely, you still are taking turns to perform actions. The ordering of the turns is just determined slightly differently.
The main difference with FF10 for example was simply that when it's your turn, it pauses time so you don't have to rush. Well people seem to ignore the fact that in FF9, time continues while you're deciding which action out of the main list but pauses if you go into the magic or item menus. So if you really need time to consider a strategy, that's an easy workarond. The main distinction for me is whether you can control your character's movement in real time or not. And whether that movement affects the way battles play out.
I think the ordering of turns was dependent on the speed stat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy