Is ATB Dead?

I was reading this amusing article which brought up the issue about whether a remake of older FF games would ever work beyond a small remake level like the PSP ports of the DS remakes of III + IV because the HD generation would probably not accept the old clunky ATB system that carried FF for six games and other Square projects like Chrono Trigger.

Have RPG battle systems evolved to the point where if you want serious turn based combat you need to play a SRPG? Is the future of the major console JRPG going to be action game style combat with A.I. partners? Will I never get to see defeat cause the enemy wiped out my healer before the ATB gauge is complete, or will gamers have to adjust to sloppy A.I. or not being bale to input the proper "healing combo" commands?

Would a modern large scale remake of VI, VII, Chrono Trigger and other 90s Square gems would just not cut it without the programmers remaking the battle system and customization system to make it easier for modern gaming palette?

If it ain't broke don't fix it? :p

I think the remakes would get away with using ATB.

That article is dumb. Square's been using ATB forever, (even their new games FFXII, and FFXIII include a version of ATB). To think they'd remove it from their most successful game in a remake is a step backwards. Square should worry about the horrible story, music, characters, and world of their newest game, instead of worrying about breaking their old ones.

No need for it to die. If people want constant input, they'll either have the guage fill up faster or they will allow for more characters to be involved in the battles.

If they strip ATB from a game built on ATB, then I won't play it.

If it's too clunky or slow, speed it up! X-2 had the best ATB system ever, and it's a shame they haven't used it since!

Actually, despite the naysayers, XII's form of ATB is built off the X-2 system (it just added the ability to move around and dropped the finicky combo system) which itself is closer to the original FFIV system (though greatly sped up) that predecessors dropped from V onward.

Its true that SE has never truly moved away from ATB but it is apparent with X-2 onward, their has been a serious effort to make the system more like an action game, to the point SE has decided its so fast you're better off having A.I. and pre-programmed commands cause its too much for man. :D

I think the emergence of AI parties is probably the worst thing to happen to RPGs, ever.

So though I am not married to the idea of ATB over other turn based systems I am not a fan of pushing things into the 'real time' direction.

They should make a main-numbered FF game that has AI which can be controlled by other players online or in the same room. That would be awesome. Like an MMO, only... not massive. :p So that way it can still have story focus. Likewise, there could be added benefits to having mutiple players such as different areas or weapons that can only be accessed if players are in different locations at the same time.

Well I don't know what I can say about this now since others have said basically what I was going to say.

I do agree with the spirit of the article, a turn based HD game would be awkward. Could you imagine an isometric SRPG like FFTactics with super detailed HD characters who just stood around an unbelievably rendered battlefield while they waited for you to finish giving orders? It would just seem awkward and a waste of processing power, and I think the article is right about that with ATB.

However, I do think it could be done - if you had insane battle animations with close ups, zoom-outs, rotating cameras giving an awesome cinematic spotlight on every character's actions, allowing the player to have the camera switch back and forth to a standard view everytime they make selections. Actually, that's what FFVII has already done. I think it would make the remake an even more important endeavor - to challenge themselves to build upon the concept they innovated, making battle animations as creative and varied enough to stop a great-looking game from looking awkward with ATB.

Also, AI needs to stop. Immediately. There has to be some way to balance all of this and I really wish a developer would figure it out ASAP. If someone pulled off another XII (i'm sure someone has, I know Dragon Age tried it), I would love it, but I'd much rather prefer a flashier, working, HD ATB. I think it would be a challenge and a good dev should rise to the occasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Actually, despite the naysayers, XII's form of ATB is built off the X-2 system (it just added the ability to move around and dropped the finicky combo system) which itself is closer to the original FFIV system (though greatly sped up) that predecessors dropped from V onward.

---

Would you care to explain what the original FFIV system is that V and on dropped?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Would you care to explain what the original FFIV system is that V and on dropped?

---

I could be wrong, but I think it's that different actions take different times to load in FF IV. Firaga takes longer to cast than Fire, or Bahamut longer than Chocobo, for example. From FF V onwards, every command that was given was carried out immediatly, without load times for the spells. FF XII brought this back, I believe. Or X-2 did, but I never played that, so I don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I do agree with the spirit of the article, a turn based HD game would be awkward. Could you imagine an isometric SRPG like FFTactics with super detailed HD characters who just stood around an unbelievably rendered battlefield while they waited for you to finish giving orders? It would just seem awkward and a waste of processing power, and I think the article is right about that with ATB.

However, I do think it could be done - if you had insane battle animations with close ups, zoom-outs, rotating cameras giving an awesome cinematic spotlight on every character's actions, allowing the player to have the camera switch back and forth to a standard view everytime they make selections. Actually, that's what FFVII has already done. I think it would make the remake an even more important endeavor - to challenge themselves to build upon the concept they innovated, making battle animations as creative and varied enough to stop a great-looking game from looking awkward with ATB.

---

HD realism is stupid and needs to die.

Quote:

---

Also, AI needs to stop. Immediately. There has to be some way to balance all of this and I really wish a developer would figure it out ASAP. If someone pulled off another XII (i'm sure someone has, I know Dragon Age tried it), I would love it, but I'd much rather prefer a flashier, working, HD ATB. I think it would be a challenge and a good dev should rise to the occasion.

---

I doubt very many companies are willing to put the effort into an FFXII-scale game anymore. Dragon Age 1 has some similar systems, but it has absolutely nothing on XII in nearly every category that counts. As far as battles go, its AI tactics are like the homeless man's Gambits.

To be fair, every game these days uses some kind of ATB. If you think about it, an FPS has a certain action time for each thing you do, as does a fighter game such as Street Fighter - and, much like most FF's, in fighter games some fighters are faster to do certain actions than others. I'm sure that with that in mind, whatever we get in the future, it will have some kind of ATB involved. Big spells will always take longer, each character will always have a speed stat, etc.

You don't necessarily have to have units just standing around to to ATB or turn based. In FF12 and FF13 positioning was largely irrelevant for most fights (and complete BS for the ones it was, as you don't have any decent way of controlling it for the party) so I don't see why you can't make something turn based where the party and enemy units are moving around dynamically the whole time. It would be complete window dressing, but to be honest most of the in battle character movement is already superfluous to combat mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony BoB

To be fair, every game these days uses some kind of ATB. If you think about it, an FPS has a certain action time for each thing you do, as does a fighter game such as Street Fighter - and, much like most FF's, in fighter games some fighters are faster to do certain actions than others. I'm sure that with that in mind, whatever we get in the future, it will have some kind of ATB involved. Big spells will always take longer, each character will always have a speed stat, etc.

---

It sounds like you're saying that ATB was invented before ATB was invented.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeloZer0

You don't necessarily have to have units just standing around to to ATB or turn based. In FF12 and FF13 positioning was largely irrelevant for most fights (and complete BS for the ones it was, as you don't have any decent way of controlling it for the party) so I don't see why you can't make something turn based where the party and enemy units are moving around dynamically the whole time. It would be complete window dressing, but to be honest most of the in battle character movement is already superfluous to combat mechanics.

---

Positioning was irrelevant in FF12 & 13? How? I'd say the opposite is true since if all your characters are bunched together then an area affect attack will affect them all, but if they are spread out then it may only hit one or two. In those games I often found myself trying to move my characters into certain positions for strategic advantages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony BoB

To be fair, every game these days uses some kind of ATB. If you think about it, an FPS has a certain action time for each thing you do, as does a fighter game such as Street Fighter - and, much like most FF's, in fighter games some fighters are faster to do certain actions than others. I'm sure that with that in mind, whatever we get in the future, it will have some kind of ATB involved. Big spells will always take longer, each character will always have a speed stat, etc.

---

Eh, but these are twitch games. I see the time factor as being completely different in a real-time action game than a time factor in what is essentially a menu game with pretty graphics.

That's true. But it would be kind of neat to see a mixture of the two. Say, have twitch-related attacks be allowed, but for massive damage over long times, switch to a menu based system. You could set it up per character, so that one character does constant attacks using, for example, fists and whatnot, while another has a completely different system for themselves, requiring a menu choice system with long build-up. When you've selected your choice, flick back to the twitchy character and start attacking, fighter-style, with various combos included. Suddenly, over your head a big attack comes in from your slower but more powerful member. Jump back to them, set up the next attack, jump back, more fast punches. etc. etc. And when you're not controlling a character you've selected for 'twitch system' they do a simple auto-attack, thus allowing for real-time (ie, not 'Wait') ATB of some sort.

I really hate AI controlled characters. Every time it's the default in DQ games I always disable it. I hate that it's necessary in FFXII and FFXIII. Stop trying to be a single player MMO!

I don't think SE would need to change the historic ATB system when remaking these games. It really was a great system. Just make it a bit faster and you're good. I don't think the gaming community has gotten to the point that they won't accept a simple ATB system in an RPG. Bring it back! FFX-2 was such a great version of it. I wish that was in FFXIII.

Yeah, I really enjoyed the X-2 battle system. Mind you, once I got good at Gambits, that was fun too. So XII had some good ideas, just not perfect implementation.

In my personal opinion, it has always seemed to me that the problem people had with ATB wasn't so much ATB itself, but that often, random encounters came with ATB. And people these days seem to see random encounters as the worst crime that a human being can ever comit. Though that's of course not true. Just look at Chrono Trigger.

I always wondered why none of the 'modern' FF games did that when trying to do away with random encounters. In Chrono Trigger, you see an enemy, you run up to it, your characters spread out and ATB starts. No screen transition at all. Why hasn't a single FF done this yet? It's probably the best system that does away with RE and keeps ATB I've seen so far. And I'm sure that if it was done like this, people and reviewers wouldn't make that much of a deal of ATB either, or see it as outdated.

Random encounters never bothered me that much so long as there was some kind of 'enemy away' and 'enemy lure' available. What I really didn't like was having to constantly leave an area so a specific enemy would respawn when I was leveling in "visible enemy" maps.

One major problem with that is you have to design every field area to accommodate a fight sequence. In CT once you entered battle it just kind of treated the entire screen as a flat mat that you were fighting on. In 3D I don't think it would work quite as well.

Part of the problem is lack of direction on random encounter design. In the early days the random encounters were a truly difficult part of the game, grinding your party down as they moved through the dungeon. Now with everything they have added they just seem there to pad out the game's length. No wonder people get upset having to fight them repeatedly.If you want to make ATB more appealing you have to make the random battles contribute something to the game, instead of drawing it out.

Final Fantasy X-2 did a great job of bringing an Active Time Battle system to a newer console. Unfortunately, its quirky story turned off many potential fans to the game.

I was never a fan of ATB anyway, and thought it was overused. I preferred the full turn-based systems of 1, 2, 3, and 10. If not turn-based, then preferably something completely not turn-based, like Kingdom Hearts. 13's battle system doesn't seem all that different from ATB to me.

Chrono Trigger pulled off ATB well, but I don't think any of the FFs did.

I find stricktly turn based system incredibly boring. And yes, FF13 did indeed have a sort of ATB, too bad the AI characters ruined it.

Damn, you guys are some serious haters.

I don't see why we can't move to real time battles really. Games like the Tales series have been doing it for years with relative success.

Why do we have to move an existing quasi turn based franchise to real time? Why can't they just create a new IP of the same high quality, start a new franchise and have both?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jiro

I don't see why we can't move to real time battles really. Games like the Tales series have been doing it for years with relative success.

---

You make it sound like real time is intrinsically, by virtue of what it is in and of itself, better than turn based.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jiro

I don't see why we can't move to real time battles really. Games like the Tales series have been doing it for years with relative success.

---

But "Tales of" games aren't completely in real time, they have walk mode and fight mode.

Real time battles, not seamless battles :p

And I'm not of the opinion that Real time is better than turn based at all, but I think it would better suit the style that RPGs are heading. They're trying to create one style of game while using a battle system that doesn't mesh all that well and it just comes off a little bit meh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jiro

Real time battles, not seamless battles :p

And I'm not of the opinion that Real time is better than turn based at all, but I think it would better suit the style that RPGs are heading. They're trying to create one style of game while using a battle system that doesn't mesh all that well and it just comes off a little bit meh.

---

It might better suit it, but I'm not entirely enthusiastic about the style that RPGs are heading towards, at least on home consoles.

I'm not fond of the direction battle systems are going either with modern games. I quit playing action games predominately for RPGs and its seems ironic that the turn base system has evolved into an action game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

I'm not fond of the direction battle systems are going either with modern games. I quit playing action games predominately for RPGs and its seems ironic that the turn base system has evolved into an action game.

---

Actually, the direction Battle systems are going for is the typically MMORPG-influenced not Action (e.g. Lots of grinding/farming, collecting junk of this and that then put them on sell).

Well, to be fair, RPGs have nearly always adhered to the Grinding is Good mentality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShinGundam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

I'm not fond of the direction battle systems are going either with modern games. I quit playing action games predominately for RPGs and its seems ironic that the turn base system has evolved into an action game.

---

Actually, the direction Battle systems are going for is the typically MMORPG-influenced not Action (e.g. Lots of grinding/farming, collecting junk of this and that then put them on sell).

---

While its true its more of an MMO style, there is also the Tales franchise, and I'm not really fond of the action gameplay of that either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShinGundam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

I'm not fond of the direction battle systems are going either with modern games. I quit playing action games predominately for RPGs and its seems ironic that the turn base system has evolved into an action game.

---

Actually, the direction Battle systems are going for is the typically MMORPG-influenced not Action (e.g. Lots of grinding/farming, collecting junk of this and that then put them on sell).

---

While its true its more of an MMO style, there is also the Tales franchise, and I'm not really fond of the action gameplay of that either.

---

Battle system-wise, I always thought of the "Tales of" games as Brawlers with mainstream RPG elements; it was easier to relate to this description when trying to play it than relate them with "action-rpg" games to me. Still not my kind of combat systems anyway. XD

While I can enjoy a Tales of game just fine, I still prefer either straight up ARPG (Mana, Crystal Chronicles, etc) or JRPG with turn-based battles (DQ). In games that offer the option of having ATB or turning it off, I turn it off, usually.

And I don't understand why people say modern console JRPGs cannot have completely turn based or even ATB battles. Look at DQ VIII, it was modern for it's time on the Ps3 and did a great job with turn based.

With the recent demonstrations of Dragon Quest X, it may unfortunately be the case that all turn base is in fact dead. While it looks like participants take one action every round of combat, you're moving around the battle screen and such. Oh well, there's still handhelds...

Really? Even DQ is going real time? Argh!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

I find stricktly turn based system incredibly boring. And yes, FF13 did indeed have a sort of ATB, too bad the AI characters ruined it.

---

I've never understood that mentality. ATB is basically turn based, but you have to watch a bar fill up between turns, so it actually takes longer. In turn based, you just cut straight to the turn, without any periods of everybody doing nothing, waiting for a bar to fill up. ATB, to me, was the aspects of turn based, combined with the worst aspects of real time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

I've never understood that mentality. ATB is basically turn based, but you have to watch a bar fill up between turns, so it actually takes longer. In turn based, you just cut straight to the turn, without any periods of everybody doing nothing, waiting for a bar to fill up. ATB, to me, was the aspects of turn based, combined with the worst aspects of real time.

---

But... it's Active. If you do nothing, the enemies are gonna keep attacking you until you're dead. That's the big difference between ATB and non-Active.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

With the recent demonstrations of Dragon Quest X, it may unfortunately be the case that all turn base is in fact dead. While it looks like participants take one action every round of combat, you're moving around the battle screen and such. Oh well, there's still handhelds...

---

Er.. no. Your "turn" is based on a specific period of time and I really don't think "you're moving around the battle screen" manually. It looks like they're using the same version they used in DQIX where you select Attack and then it causes your character to run up and attack and run back to starting position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

I find stricktly turn based system incredibly boring. And yes, FF13 did indeed have a sort of ATB, too bad the AI characters ruined it.

---

I've never understood that mentality. ATB is basically turn based, but you have to watch a bar fill up between turns, so it actually takes longer. In turn based, you just cut straight to the turn, without any periods of everybody doing nothing, waiting for a bar to fill up. ATB, to me, was the aspects of turn based, combined with the worst aspects of real time.

---

Only if you're playing on 'Wait'. If you play on the actual 'Active' mode, the battle is always unfolding and you have to make smart decisions on the fly if the pacing ensures a good challenge or you've ran from enough battles to maintain one. Also, if the game incorporates charge times, like FFIV or Tactics, it adds in yet another layer of strategy because when each character does something becomes far more important. Another advantage to ATB is targeting - many games would be worse off if you had to choose your initial targets and simply hope for the best.

One of the brilliant parts about FFVII was the 'Recommended' setting. It paused the bars for the super-lengthy animations, but everything else remained active. It went well with the game's theme of being super cinematic (being the first game to do so) but still having great RPG gameplay.

Overall, it makes everything more intense than traditional turn based, which essentially turns half of the battle into a cut scene, but still has that strategy you simply can't get from real time. I love ATB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

I find stricktly turn based system incredibly boring. And yes, FF13 did indeed have a sort of ATB, too bad the AI characters ruined it.

---

I've never understood that mentality. ATB is basically turn based, but you have to watch a bar fill up between turns, so it actually takes longer. In turn based, you just cut straight to the turn, without any periods of everybody doing nothing, waiting for a bar to fill up. ATB, to me, was the aspects of turn based, combined with the worst aspects of real time.

---

But this is the best aspect of ATB systems, it did allow you to enhance your own pace unlike turn based (beside FFX) by using accessories or increase your speed stats or auto-mated haste and moving from character menu to another seamlessly.

That's true, but another thing that I like about atb was that when you play active mode rather than wait, there's pressure introduced to decide your actions quickly before you fall behind your enemy. You don't get that sort of pressure in a purely turn based system. And since you can usually alter the battle speed I don't see sitting around waiting as being a huge deal. With the speed set appropriately you'll have just enough time to act if you don't get flustered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

That's true, but another thing that I like about atb was that when you play active mode rather than wait, there's pressure introduced to decide your actions quickly before you fall behind your enemy. You don't get that sort of pressure in a purely turn based system. And since you can usually alter the battle speed I don't see sitting around waiting as being a huge deal. With the speed set appropriately you'll have just enough time to act if you don't get flustered.

---

Good point, It is more organic than FF1~3's turn based system.

I find we tend to be somewhat lacking in terminology to describe turn based systems ala FF1-3 and turn based systems where speed determines turn order, ala FFT and FF10. The dialogue seems to get confused, as they are both very different with their own pros and cons. I personally like the speed turn based most of all, but rate the party turn based quite a bit behind atb.

Too true Velo. For the record I was referring to turn based styles like FFI-III when I was talking about regular turn based games in my last post. Stuff like FFT and X where speed plays a role in how often a character gets a turn are brilliant when pulled off half decently. More standard turn based systems without that speed element can be too predictable sometimes if the rest of the gameplay doesn't offer adequate challenge/depth to compensate for not being able to affect turn order. It definitely is strange we don't have a name for those systems though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeloZer0

I find we tend to be somewhat lacking in terminology to describe turn based systems ala FF1-3 and turn based systems where speed determines turn order, ala FFT and FF10. The dialogue seems to get confused, as they are both very different with their own pros and cons. I personally like the speed turn based most of all, but rate the party turn based quite a bit behind atb.

---

I agree! FFX and FFT turn based systems were the best. It allows the speed stat to be a factor other than determining who goes first during the round (which most of the time is random anyway), and also let's spells like haste and slow be a factor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShinGundam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

I find stricktly turn based system incredibly boring. And yes, FF13 did indeed have a sort of ATB, too bad the AI characters ruined it.

---

I've never understood that mentality. ATB is basically turn based, but you have to watch a bar fill up between turns, so it actually takes longer. In turn based, you just cut straight to the turn, without any periods of everybody doing nothing, waiting for a bar to fill up. ATB, to me, was the aspects of turn based, combined with the worst aspects of real time.

---

But this is the best aspect of ATB systems, it did allow you to enhance your own pace unlike turn based (beside FFX) by using accessories or increase your speed stats or auto-mated haste and moving from character menu to another seamlessly.

---

Yeah, but no matter how fast the bar fills up, it can't get faster then having the turns just go instantly one after the other. As for the "realistic pressure" I honestly just prefer a full real-time game (like Versus XIII or KH) for that kind of thing. I thought it was pretty lame in XIII how I couldn't have one of my party members move out of the way, or move away from the rest of the party when targeted with an AOE. The closest thing to ATB that I really like is FFXII's system, as that was seemless and allowed movement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

Yeah, but no matter how fast the bar fills up, it can't get faster then having the turns just go instantly one after the other.

---

You know, I'm not actually convinced it takes longer at all now that I think about it. Yes, you have to wait for a bar to fill, but if you play in active mode, your enemies bars and your other party members bars will fill while you make a selection. So there won't be that much waiting before you get to actually input something, particularly since your characters ATB gauges probably won't sync up all of the time, if ever. Not to mention the bars continue to fill while attack animations and enemy turns play out. So in theory it may not be as fast as something instantly taking it's turn after the last character did, but in practice, much of the waiting happens while selecting actions, watching attacks play out, and during enemy turns. Things you're forced to watch anyway, regardless of whether it's an ATB or turn based system. If the ATB speed is properly tuned to the player you won't notice any wait time at all, while still keeping the pressure to act before you fall behind your opponent which a turn based system can't replicate at all. The only real difference is that since you can see the bar filling you're more aware of how long you have to wait than you'd otherwise be.

Quote:

---

I thought it was pretty lame in XIII how I couldn't have one of my party members move out of the way, or move away from the rest of the party when targeted with an AOE.

---

I'm not really sure why you brought this up when it has nothing to do with the discussion about ATB. AOE spells being stupid in FFXIII has nothing to do with the ATB system, but with the fact that Square are morons when it comes to game design and never noticed that AOE spells are stupid when you can't move your characters on the battlefield. So rather than having some spells hit a single target and others hit all targets, they put in AOE spells that sometimes miss characters, but only if you're lucky enough to have them randomly move far enough from your other characters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

You know, I'm not actually convinced it takes longer at all now that I think about it. Yes, you have to wait for a bar to fill, but if you play in active mode, your enemies bars and your other party members bars will fill while you make a selection. So there won't be that much waiting before you get to actually input something, particularly since your characters ATB gauges probably won't sync up all of the time, if ever. Not to mention the bars continue to fill while attack animations and enemy turns play out. So in theory it may not be as fast as something instantly taking it's turn after the last character did, but in practice, much of the waiting happens while selecting actions, watching attacks play out, and during enemy turns. Things you're forced to watch anyway, regardless of whether it's an ATB or turn based system. If the ATB speed is properly tuned to the player you won't notice any wait time at all, while still keeping the pressure to act before you fall behind your opponent which a turn based system can't replicate at all. The only real difference is that since you can see the bar filling you're more aware of how long you have to wait than you'd otherwise be.

---

Yeah, but let's be real. When have you ever needed to anything remotely tactical in an ATB Final Fantasy? FF10 was the first FF in a LONG time in which you couldn't just spam your strongest attack. If I really want "pressure" I'd want it to be something skill-based. Does anyone really have trouble pressing X when the command window opens up?

Quote:

---

I'm not really sure why you brought this up when it has nothing to do with the discussion about ATB. AOE spells being stupid in FFXIII has nothing to do with the ATB system, but with the fact that Square are morons when it comes to game design and never noticed that AOE spells are stupid when you can't move your characters on the battlefield. So rather than having some spells hit a single target and others hit all targets, they put in AOE spells that sometimes miss characters, but only if you're lucky enough to have them randomly move far enough from your other characters.

---

It's the fact that ATB doesn't do anything but combine the worst aspects of turn-based and active. It has the button mashing simplicity of active games, with the static failings of turn based games. It's not like you even have to react at specific times, to dodge or make an attack. Nope, you just press X when the bar fills up. The can tape down the X button, and the game plays itself.

I find it hypocritical when people bash FF13's system, or KH, but love something like FF7. At least in KH, you have to move around, while doing no more button mashing than you do in most FF games. In FF13, the autobattle cut out the middle man, but if you removed the autobattle, it was just literally ATB. At least you had to be quick with paradigm shifts. 5-starring the last Cieth Stone mission is a lot better at what you claim ATB's benefit is than anything in FF7.

As for FF13's system being poor luck, that's not entirely true. If you had everyone at ranged, and Lightning was being targetted with an AOE, you could have her run into melee range. It's still stupidly limited, and there's no reason to not just have free movement.

I fail to see what benefit ATB has over something like FF12, which still had precious bars filling up, but at least allowed movement and seemless combat (instead of standing there clumped together for an AOE, and being teleported to the battle screen). If you value pressure, then something like KH, or even FF12, achieves that so much better.

However, a game like FF10, which is full turned based, replaces the "can I button mash faster than a computer" from ATB, and allows for more tactical and precise play. ATB really doesn't have anything going for it other than nostalgia. A lot of people, probably yourself, grew up playing ATB JRPGs, and it's natural for people to cling to the familiar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

Yeah, but let's be real. When have you ever needed to anything remotely tactical in an ATB Final Fantasy? FF10 was the first FF in a LONG time in which you couldn't just spam your strongest attack. If I really want "pressure" I'd want it to be something skill-based. Does anyone really have trouble pressing X when the command window opens up?

---

This isn't an argument against ATB though, it's an argument against battle systems that have little depth and player agency: something that is separate from ATB all together. And I would certainly agree with you. It's been quite a while since an FF game required, or at the very least, made it worth using strategies other than mash X to win. FFIV, FFV, and FFIX probably being the only real examples, but even those could be improved. But again, that's not arguing against ATB, it's arguing against something else entirely. There is absolutely no reason that an ATB system can't require more strategy than that, just as there's no reason a turn based game can't either. Ironically, your using the example of FFXII later in your post practically makes that point for me.

Quote:

---

It's the fact that ATB doesn't do anything but combine the worst aspects of turn-based and active. It has the button mashing simplicity of active games, with the static failings of turn based games. It's not like you even have to react at specific times, to dodge or make an attack. Nope, you just press X when the bar fills up. The can tape down the X button, and the game plays itself.

---

Again, ATB does not necessitate button mashing simplicity in a combat system. ATB is nothing more than the system of waiting for a bar, representing your characters turn, to fill before you can take actions, thereby depleting the bar and starting the cycle over again. In essence, it is a system for determining turn order, not the whole battle system (stats, abilities, immunities, etc.) unto itself. All you've done is argue that it has been used in games with some fairly shallow combat in the past. But the same argument can be made for a completely turn based system, real time system, or anything else you can think of. That does not mean that a system which exists separately from the rest of the battle system is itself inherently flawed.

Quote:

---

I fail to see what benefit ATB has over something like FF12, which still had precious bars filling up, but at least allowed movement and seemless combat (instead of standing there clumped together for an AOE, and being teleported to the battle screen). If you value pressure, then something like KH, or even FF12, achieves that so much better.

---

As I said above, FFXII essentially does use the old ATB system for determining turn order. They simply added the aspect of real-time movement on top of it making movement around the battlefield a more key element than it had been before. Like I said, all this example really does is show that when you combine ATB with a battle system filled with valid strategic options and a decent difficulty level, it works very well.

Quote:

---

However, a game like FF10, which is full turned based, replaces the "can I button mash faster than a computer" from ATB, and allows for more tactical and precise play.

---

I just want to touch on your mentioning of FFX as well, because although I like the concept behind the system, it's really not a great battle system overall, and certainly didn't remove the button mash simplicity of previous games, though it did give you plenty of time to think about when you were going to press X to win. It essentially was just a simple, straightforward, and highly transparent game of rock paper scissors. Learn the enemy types and which character is strong against them and you've pretty much got the game figured out. There may be some manipulation of turn order to gain an advantage, but usually only in the tougher boss fights. The majority of battles didn't require more than the occasional switching of a character and pressing the X button a few times.

The battle system had a lot of good ideas going for it, but in the end it was too simplified, and I'd even argue that it was almost too transparent about what everything's weakness was. And once you knew something's weakness you really weren't going to lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

The battle system had a lot of good ideas going for it, but in the end it was too simplified, and I'd even argue that it was almost too transparent about what everything's weakness was. And once you knew something's weakness you really weren't going to lose.

---

The same can really be said of most Final Fantasies. What 10 did, at least, was require a variety of abilities and party member control/switching, as opposed to easily getting away with nothing but "Attack" from beginning to end. Instead of just waiting for a bar to fill up, you could plan tactically around the turns of enemies. A step up from not knowing or caring anything about the enemy, because you can mash attack for the win.

But simplicity is a requirement of ATB, as seen by all the complaints about FF13. People complain about the autobattle... but when you tell them not to use it, to do everything manually, they cry it's a ridiculous request, that it's too hard and complex (lol) to do quick enough (in their opinion).

ATB, on the other hand, offers nothing. In full-real time games you can move around. I didn't mention "watching bars fill up" as a positive of FFXII's battle system, but the seemless combat and movement. Games like Dragon Age improved on FFXII's combat, and removed the silly fill-up bar.

People complain that the ATB of FF4-9 is dead, and it should be dead. It's a battle system that was just a very slow whack-a-mole. You watch a bar fill up, and press X. It was by no means the end-all-be-all of RPG battle systems. The idea of going to some battle screen and waiting for a bar to fill up is beyond dated, and at the time it was in it's prime was still nothing more than an attempt to compensate for limitations.

Other battle systems have places they can go. ATB has nowhere to go except removing what defines it, or adding silly gimmicks like FFXIII's. It's only clung to for the sake of nostalgia by younger FF fans.

Honestly, what is wrong about using base attack as choice for most battles ? IMO, nothing wrong with that it is still a valid choice. It is not like using any kind of other elements like support magic, better equipment, standard magic, summons , limit breaks, status effects requires the player to sit down and make a complex series of charts to understand how it works, it is their to make you play more efficiently not to stress you. The only reason people choose not to is either out of sheer stubbornness or i didn't use it in X game so I refuse to give them a chance in Y game.

@Felfenix
Do you think people who like ATB of FF4-9 want tension from every encounter? Most of time they like it because it is more relaxing, simple and easy to get into it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

But simplicity is a requirement of ATB, as seen by all the complaints about FF13. People complain about the autobattle... but when you tell them not to use it, to do everything manually, they cry it's a ridiculous request, that it's too hard and complex (lol) to do quick enough (in their opinion).

---

The complaints around not using auto-battle in FFXIII stem from the fact that auto-battle makes the optimal choices 99% of the time making manually entering commands pointless and little more than a way to make work for oneself, and the battle system itself is so bloody fast that actually entering the commands quickly enough to not get slaughtered is beyond the capabilities of the average player. Hell, I have some damn fast reflexes and it was pushing it for me when I tried it. It had nothing to do with complexity since FFXIII is about as simple as FF's come in terms of battle systems. The closest thing to a meaningful choice you'll actually make in battle is recognizing which Paradigms you need to switch to.

Quote:

---

ATB, on the other hand, offers nothing.

---

You've yet to offer any evidence or examples to back this up. It's easy to say that many FF's require you to just mash attack, but there are exceptions such as FF5, and it's not really a criticism of ATB anyway. ATB is simply a semi real-time method for determining turn order. It is not the combat system as a whole, nor does it require simplicity or any other absurd notion you've attributed to it. There's nothing preventing an ATB system from requiring more than mashing the X-button to win, or including movement and positioning in a battle.

Quote:

---

In full-real time games you can move around. I didn't mention "watching bars fill up" as a positive of FFXII's battle system, but the seemless combat and movement.

---

No you didn't mention the ATB as a positive in FFXII, but you have maintained quite a few times that ATB requires simplicity, or leads to battles being a button mashing affair with no depth whatsoever. FFXII being one of the deeper, more complex, and legitimately challenging JRPG's of the last decade kind of runs counter to that argument though.

Quote:

---

Other battle systems have places they can go. ATB has nowhere to go except removing what defines it, or adding silly gimmicks like FFXIII's. It's only clung to for the sake of nostalgia by younger FF fans.

---

Again, ATB is nothing more than a method for determining turn order in a turn based game. To say it has nowhere to go is foolish as it implies that every possible battle system you could build around it has been done. FFXII proved you can do more with it than anyone had seen before by integrating it into a seamless battle system with real time movement, opening up new strategic options on top of the games ability systems. I disagree that there is absolutely nothing more that can be done with it, particularly when ATB offer the sort of time pressure it does when balanced well, as well as the opportunity to work in strategies based on manipulating turn order.

Honestly, it seems as though all of your arguments come down to saying ATB sucks while blaming it for balance issues which are separate from the ATB system itself. Once again, it's a method for determining turn order, and if you tune the battle speed correctly, you will not spend a lot of time sitting and waiting. If you did, then there are two explanations: either you're much faster than the average player and the developers didn't want to put off new players by making things too fast and overwhelming, or the speed wasn't balanced properly. Neither is a problem inherent in using ATB. Issues of balance such as being able to spam attack to win aren't even caused by a game using ATB. How you determine turn order is not going to determine how simple a game is by itself, especially when a pure turn based or real time system can easily suffer the exact same problems. You have to look at battle systems as a whole in games with issues to determine the cause, and I can't think of any game in the FF series which is broken and over simplified because of ATB. Such a thing doesn't exist.

But the ATB held back FF12's battle system. As I mention, Dragon Age did what FF12 did far better. If you think FF12's battle system was "one of the deeper, more complex, and legitimately challenging" battle systems, then I want to know what you shallow, simple, and easy. ATB is an entirely outdated mechanic, and it should be dead. It's well on it's way. You've yet to make any case whatsoever for it's necessity or usefulness, beyond clinging to nostalgia. What benefit is there for a system like ATB over something like Dragon Age's battle system, or FF10's, or KHs? ATB simply underperforms in every area you mention. You're the one trying to argue for why it shouldn't die.

@ShinGundam

You really thought FF10 or Kingdom Hearts offered tension in every encounter and were hard battle systems to get into?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

What benefit is there for a system like ATB over something like Dragon Age's battle system, or FF10's, or KHs?

---

The benefit of ATB is that it offers some of the strategy allowed by a turn based system while still retaining some of the urgency of a real time based system. It's just like a half way on the scale between turn based and real time. Individual mileage may vary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

But the ATB held back FF12's battle system. As I mention, Dragon Age did what FF12 did far better.

---

I haven't played Dragon Age so explain to me how ATB held back FFXII's battle system. This is what I'm getting at: so far you haven't made a legitimate argument for why ATB is flawed or outdated. The best you've come up with is that it's slow and you wait for a bar to fill up, only the latter is strictly true as the former is an issue of balance, not an inherent design flaw. ATB can just as easily be very quick as was seen in FFXIII. So where is you're argument here?

Quote:

---

If you think FF12's battle system was "one of the deeper, more complex, and legitimately challenging" battle systems, then I want to know what you shallow, simple, and easy.

---

You aren't even making an argument here, let alone one against ATB. Again, explain how ATB detracts from a game like FFXII. I can't ery well do any more to respond to your arguments if you aren't even making any. For the record, I would consider a shallow, simple and easy battle system one where you can spam one attack every time your turn comes up in almost any fight in the game and win. I wouldn't say that description fits with FFXII considering even many of the regular enemies could conceivably kill you if you weren't on the ball, and the harder fights outright required a lot more choices than simply spamming attack to win.

Quote:

---

ATB is an entirely outdated mechanic, and it should be dead.

---

How is it outdated? You still haven't explained this. The closest you've come is to say that it was a result of compensating for limitations, but you didn't even explain in what way. And you seem to be completely neglecting the fact that full turn based systems essentially evolved out of the same sort of limitations. You couldn't easily have multiple players acting at the same time in a pen & paper RPG without things getting confusing so people used turn based systems. If ATB is so reprehensible because of how it evolved out of turn based systems as an intermediate step between turn based and real time, then turn based systems should be just as reprehensible by your standards. Yet you praise FFX which is itself essentially a turn based version of an ATB system on wait mode (since you can manipulate character speed, and by extension, turn order without the time pressure from an ATB system).

Quote:

---

You've yet to make any case whatsoever for it's necessity or usefulness, beyond clinging to nostalgia.

---

I've already explained the usefulness of ATB. It introduces some of the time based pressure of a real time system to force a player not to spend too long considering every action, while also introducing the strategic possibilities that accompany a system which allows you to manipulate character speeds and turn order. You've yet to address these points, let alone refute them. You simply keep repeating that the system is dated and dying and that nostalgia is the only reason anyone likes it. The latter is the closest thing to an actual argument but I can assure you is not the case with me, and still doesn't refute the points I've made or do anything to explain how ATB detracts from games.

If you can't come up with any actual examples of games where combat was ruined by ATB and explain how it's because of a problem inherent in the ATB system and not simply an issue of poor balance, then there's no point in continuing this conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

So where is you're argument here?

---

You're arguing that FF13 is an example of how modern ATB can work. That implies that FF13's battle system is considered a success. People like the OP seem to dislike FF13's battle system to the point of not considering it ATB.

What battle system would you advocate? FF13's battle system? FF12's? FF4's? You seem to jump around and try to classify anything and everything as ATB, and an example of why ATB works, but you have to explain howso.

If the discussion is ATB in the current realm of RPGs, and you're ignorant of current RPGs, then it's like trying to have a discussion about a book with someone who's never read one.

The flaw in the design is that what defines ATB is entirely irrelevant. Even a game like Fallout 3 allows for real time or more turn-based hybrid.

Quote:

---

How is it outdated? You still haven't explained this. The closest you've come is to say that it was a result of compensating for limitations, but you didn't even explain in what way. And you seem to be completely neglecting the fact that full turn based systems essentially evolved out of the same sort of limitations. You couldn't easily have multiple players acting at the same time in a pen & paper RPG without things getting confusing so people used turn based systems. If ATB is so reprehensible because of how it evolved out of turn based systems as an intermediate step between turn based and real time, then turn based systems should be just as reprehensible by your standards. Yet you praise FFX which is itself essentially a turn based version of an ATB system on wait mode (since you can manipulate character speed, and by extension, turn order without the time pressure from an ATB system).

---

You seem to stretch anything to be considered "ATB", from FF12 to even FF10, which is entirely turn-based. What isn't ATB to you? Would you consider WoW ATB, because the Rogue class is dependent on it's ATB-looking energy bar filling up, or Diablo and Elder Scrolls to be ATB because of their stamina bars?

What DO you consider ATB? The OP, and the topic of the thread, considers ATB to be battle systems like FF4. You control all party members, there's no AI, there is a battle screen, there's no movement, you select commands from a menu, and all actions are dependent on waiting for a bar to fill up.

There's no reason to wait for a bar to fill up. All it does is draw out the time for actions to take effect, and delay when you can make a decision.

FFX, a full turn based game, allows for immediately decisions and infinite deliberation. You don't wait for a bar to fill up before each turn, then wait for a bar to fill up before the action you chose takes effect. No matter how fast the bar may be, you've yet to say any point for having it. To allow for pressure?

Dragon Age allows for full control of a party without the use of the AI (it's actually preferred you turn all AIs off, on the max difficult, and manually control everything). There's movement, which increases tactical play. There's no battle screen, allowing for a smoother and more consistent game. You can play either via menus or hotkeys. All of this without any sort of ATB.

NWN works on D&D rules. Completely turn-based rules. However, it can be played and adjusted to be a full real-time game, like an action game, or played just like D&D, fully turn-based. You can essentially choose to play D&D speed chess style, if you please.

Quote:

---

I've already explained the usefulness of ATB. It introduces some of the time based pressure of a real time system to force a player not to spend too long considering every action, while also introducing the strategic possibilities that accompany a system which allows you to manipulate character speeds and turn order.

---

How does it introduce any strategic elements? What does ATB offer in strategy that alternatives don't already offer or excel better at?

As for pure "party-based turn-based real-time hybrids", there's battle systems like NWN, KOTOR, and Dragon Age, which allow you to adjust the system to a point where it feels like a full turn based game with full control over every party member and action, or an action game where you only control the main character.

By no means though does ATB inherently offer any strategy or tactical play. Why should ATB be used over any other combat system? What makes it superior? That it's the only thing you know about? That's simply arguing it's the best because you're ignorant of anything else.

Even if ATB were the only real-time/turn-based hybrid, does it's merits still justify it being used over a full turn-based system or a full action-based system?

In ATB, when you slow down the bars, you're simply adding wait time for no reason whatsoever. If you speed the bars up to their max speed, you still have turns determined by waiting on a bar to fill up - why even bother having the bars? If you want pressure on menu based combat, play Kingdom Hearts. ATB is half-assed on both the turn based and real time fronts.

You tediously wait on bars, just to navigate or ignore clunky menus, with few options. It's a terrible substitute for a strategy based system as it lacks depth without breaking (people complaining it's too hard, or the gameplay needing to be dumbed down to compensate for player reaction time being lower than a computer's) or needing to automated.

It's a poor substitute for action games, as it has poor control and options. It lacks depth on both fronts, and adds in elements, like a separate battle screen and waiting for bars to fill up, which are entirely unnecessary for what it's trying to do. ATB has an incredibly limited appeal in comparison to alternatives.

Quote:

---

You aren't even making an argument here, let alone one against ATB. Again, explain how ATB detracts from a game like FFXII. I can't ery well do any more to respond to your arguments if you aren't even making any.

If you can't come up with any actual examples of games where combat was ruined by ATB and explain how it's because of a problem inherent in the ATB system and not simply an issue of poor balance, then there's no point in continuing this conversation.

---

I don't have the intent to argue, like you apparently do. I wonder why you'd try to engage in discussion on the merits of something if you're emotionally tied to a subject that you can't actual discuss it without getting overly defensive. Maybe you should calm down.

You're obviously quite attached to ATB, to the point of not being able to discuss any flaws or comprehend why we aren't still playing games like FF4. Then again, I'm sure you'd "argue" that 8-bit graphics aren't out of date with just as much venom and vitriol.

I'm simply offering commentary that there are systems already out there which achieve the same benefits you claim exist with ATB. The discussion is on the merits of ATB in modern Triple A gaming. ATB is obsolete, though IMO it was never even adequate compared to competition at the time. Even SE has realized it's inadequate now especially.

Man, why the crusade at ATB? It's a mechanic that is different from real time and turn-based systems. It sometimes works, sometimes it doesn't. But just cause it's different and you don't like it doesn't mean it deserves to be murdered, yeesh! :roll2 I think each mechanic has its own merits and should all be appreciated for what they do best, not try to all be the same, cause apparently "pure" mechanics are the only right answer (getting kinda a fascist vibe there... j/k. Please don't kill me...). It's like the whole rant (that I'm tired of) that jRPGs should be more like WRPGS, because they're inherently flawed, too wordy and suck. Guys, diversity is the most beautiful thing in this world! Just because you think the genre or mechanic is superior, doesn't mean the other deserves to be hanged. People are different and like different stuff! Deal with it and stop being so serious! Video games are fun! :jess: (this makes me think of all the ideological rants about video games that I cringe at, but I guess that's off topic...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

You've yet to make any case whatsoever for it's necessity or usefulness, beyond clinging to nostalgia.

---

Are you sure about that?

I'm not sure why you're so angry about this battle system. Del, Velo, Vivi, ShinGundam and I have all pointed out a lot of cool things about ATB, but I think at the end of the day, all of us have just had a lot of fun playing awesome games with this system. Why should it "die"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

You're arguing that FF13 is an example of how modern ATB can work.

---

I never said that. Learn to read things more carefully. I actually hate FFXIII's battle system because it's a terrible system. But it isn't terrible because of ATB.

You major complaint against ATB was the wait time. I refuted this repeatedly by pointing out that how long you wait (or if you wait at all) is decided by the battle speed, and used the fairly fast pace of FFXIII as an example of that. You've yet to address this point and seem intent on not responding to it so I can only assume you have no argument.

Quote:

---

What battle system would you advocate? FF13's battle system? FF12's? FF4's? You seem to jump around and try to classify anything and everything as ATB, and an example of why ATB works, but you have to explain howso.

---

I've already made my case for why ATB allows for different strategic decisions due to player ability to manipulate time and ATB speed within a game. Again, you haven't addressed this. You ask for me to explain why I think ATB works instead as though I hadn't made an argument, but ignoring my arguments doesn't prove your point. It only makes your position look weak and poorly thought out.

As to me trying to "jump around and try to classify anything and everything as ATB," that's not the case at all. I pointed out early on in this discussion that ATB is nothing but a system for determining turn order in FF games. And it's one that's been used by every FF since FFIV with the exception of FFX (not sure about FFXI as I haven't played it).

Quote:

---

If the discussion is ATB in the current realm of RPGs, and you're ignorant of current RPGs, then it's like trying to have a discussion about a book with someone who's never read one.

---

I'm a pretty smart guy, and I spend a lot of time thinking about game design and deconstructing game mechanics, so I'm fine with you explaining the mechanics in Dragon Age to me and why you think they were better than ATB. I think I'd be able to understand well enough without having to go rent it.

Quote:

---

The flaw in the design is that what defines ATB is entirely irrelevant.

---

You still haven't explained why ATB is flawed, and how it makes it irrelevant. Nor have you offered evidence that any such flaw is inherent in the system. Simply saying it's flawed doesn't make it true. You need to back up your claim. Instead you dance around it without ever really saying anything, just as you never really address the strengths ATB has as listed by myself and other posters.

Quote:

---

You seem to stretch anything to be considered "ATB", from FF12 to even FF10, which is entirely turn-based. What isn't ATB to you?

---

This isn't the case at all, simply because FFXII actually does use ATB, and I never said FFX uses an ATB system. What I did say with regard to FFX though is that the turn based system it uses is functionally no different from ATB on wait mode, since you can still manipulate turn order. The only difference is that there's no real time element and therefore no time pressure (a lot like an ATB system on wait mode)

Quote:

---

Would you consider WoW ATB, because the Rogue class is dependent on it's ATB-looking energy bar filling up, or Diablo and Elder Scrolls to be ATB because of their stamina bars?

---

I haven't played Diablo or WoW, but the Elder scrolls is most definitely a real time game. Yes there's a stamina bar, but it determines how effective your attacks are and how long you can sprint, it does not determine when you or your enemy can attack since you could attack even when it's practically empty.

Quote:

---

What DO you consider ATB?

---

I've already answered this. Repeatedly in fact. I even answered it in this post if you were paying attention.

Quote:

---

There's no reason to wait for a bar to fill up. All it does is draw out the time for actions to take effect, and delay when you can make a decision.

---

Again, if battle speed is set properly then this ceases to be an issue.

Quote:

---

FFX, a full turn based game, allows for immediately decisions and infinite deliberation. You don't wait for a bar to fill up before each turn, then wait for a bar to fill up before the action you chose takes effect. No matter how fast the bar may be, you've yet to say any point for having it. To allow for pressure?

---

To allow for pressure and the manipulation of turn order. Yes, the latter can be done with a turn based system, but you've yet to state why that makes ATB outdated, especially when a pure turn based system can't pressure the player like ATB. Also, I find it funny that you still maintain I haven't said what the point is in having ATB, yet you go back to restate part of my argument in the next sentence. Is my point really not getting through to you?

Quote:

---

Dragon Age allows for full control of a party without the use of the AI (it's actually preferred you turn all AIs off, on the max difficult, and manually control everything). There's movement, which increases tactical play. There's no battle screen, allowing for a smoother and more consistent game. You can play either via menus or hotkeys. All of this without any sort of ATB.

NWN works on D&D rules. Completely turn-based rules. However, it can be played and adjusted to be a full real-time game, like an action game, or played just like D&D, fully turn-based. You can essentially choose to play D&D speed chess style, if you please.

---

So explain why these are inherently and objectively better than ATB. Because I'm not even arguing that ATb is better than anything (that would be subjective and by extension fairly silly). I'm arguing that ATB offers a different play style that is different from the other two, has strategic potential, and is no less valid as a result.

Quote:

---

How does it introduce any strategic elements? What does ATB offer in strategy that alternatives don't already offer or excel better at?

---

I never said there aren't alternatives, but you've yet to explain why they're inherently better. ATB results in a completely different style of gameplay, and feel than pure turn based or real time systems. For that alone I don't think it's outdated or useless.

Quote:

---

By no means though does ATB inherently offer any strategy or tactical play. Why should ATB be used over any other combat system? What makes it superior?

---

I never said it's superior. I said it's an alternative, and it does offer strategic potential within a battle system, and a different feel than alternatives. Don't put words in my mouth.

Quote:

---

That it's the only thing you know about? That's simply arguing it's the best because you're ignorant of anything else.

---

Don't assume that because I haven't played Dragon Age that I'm unfamiliar with anything else. It's more than a little insulting, and is a weak attempt to try and undermine my argument without ever having to address it and back up your position.

Quote:

---

Even if ATB were the only real-time/turn-based hybrid, does it's merits still justify it being used over a full turn-based system or a full action-based system?

---

If a developer wants to create a turn based system that offers some of the time pressure you get in a real time system, and the strategic possibilities of being able to manipulate turn order then it is an option, yes. Again, you seem stuck on the idea that I'm saying ATB is better than alternatives. I'm not. Nor is it worse. It is a tool, and one which can be used to help create the gameplay style a developer wants for their game.

Quote:

---

In ATB, when you slow down the bars, you're simply adding wait time for no reason whatsoever.

---

It's not for no reason if a player is new to RPG's, or isn't as fast as you or me at navigating menus.

Quote:

---

If you speed the bars up to their max speed, you still have turns determined by waiting on a bar to fill up - why even bother having the bars? If you want pressure on menu based combat, play Kingdom Hearts.

---

Kingdom Hearts plays nothing like any game which uses ATB. Why would the developer use the Kingdom Hearts system if they want the sort of feel and pacing ATB can offer?

Quote:

---

It's a terrible substitute for a strategy based system as it lacks depth without breaking (people complaining it's too hard, or the gameplay needing to be dumbed down to compensate for player reaction time being lower than a computer's) or needing to automated.

---

You've yet to explain how it lacks depth.

Quote:

---

It's a poor substitute for action games, as it has poor control and options.

---

Again, I don't know why you bother replying if you're not going to back up your arguments. How is control in a game using ATB objectively worse than in a turn based system? What are these poor options you're talking about? I would like to have an actual discussion with you about this topic, but it's difficult when you don't actually back up your claims.

Quote:

---

ATB has an incredibly limited appeal in comparison to alternatives.

---

This comment is meaningless. There's no way you can actually back it up with evidence. It's nothing but your subjective opinion based on your dislike of ATB.

Quote:

---

I don't have the intent to argue, like you apparently do. I wonder why you'd try to engage in discussion on the merits of something if you're emotionally tied to a subject that you can't actual discuss it without getting overly defensive. Maybe you should calm down.

You're obviously quite attached to ATB, to the point of not being able to discuss any flaws or comprehend why we aren't still playing games like FF4. Then again, I'm sure you'd "argue" that 8-bit graphics aren't out of date with just as much venom and vitriol.

---

I can assure you I'm perfectly calm. I'm also not getting defensive, or emotionally tied to the subject and any venom and vitriol is imagined on your part. Here's the funny thing in all of this: I've played enough games with ATB over the years that I'm quite sick of it at this point. I don't hold any sort of attachment to it, and have been enjoying games using other systems more over the last several years, but that doesn't mean that it's flawed. It means I played a lot of games using the same system and needed a change from it. Of course I also played a lot of other styles of games over the last 20 years of my playing games, which explains why I also got tired of purely turn based systems, and a lot of other game styles.

But just because I played so many games using a particular mechanic that I got tired of it, doesn't mean I don't recognize the value of said mechanic in the right situations, or when the developer has a particular goal in mind. Nor does it mean that the mechanic is inherently flawed. Which is why when I see someone such as yourself arguing that a mechanic which I do perceive to have value in the right circumstances arguing that it's dead and outdated, I like to engage that person in a discussion about it. I've laid out my side of the discussion, including what I define ATB to be. I've also used examples to demonstrate it. But you've refused to actually engage in the discussion by directly addressing the points I've made.

If you don't want to have an actual in depth discussion on this subject then so be it. But just realize that when you are having an actual thought out, reasoned discussion on something, at some point you have to actually address the other person's points. And them asking you to do that, or to defend your claims is not someone getting defensive. If you can't do those things then you can't have a legitimate discussion. All you end up with is at least one person doing the equivalent of saying they're right and the other person is wrong, simply because they say so.

Your "point" that ATB is useful because it's a system that allows for pressure and manipulation of turn order is about as good as saying ATB is a necessity for having menus. There are alternatives that do the same, better, because they allow for more flexibility and variety of play without needing to be dumbed down to compensate for players getting overwhelmed. As I mentioned, you're clearly ignorant that it's possible in other battle systems as well.

If you don't understand because you have no idea what you're talking about beyond your experience with Square Enix games, then it's like arguing with a wall. ATB is an outdated, repetitive, and clunky mechanic, with limited gameplay options and versatility in comparison to the competition, and unnecessary steps in between.

It's like I'm trying to talk with someone who keeps saying "But how are 8-bit graphics outdated!?" and has never played anything but Nintendo. Though it's pretty clear this is pointless as you'll drone on repetitively (even if you dont know anything about other games mentioned in the conversation).

Again, as for the topic: Is ATB dead? Yes. Will we see future Triple A main titles that work like FF7, with no NPCs, no movement, menu based combat, battle screens, and turns determined by bars? Probably not. Then again, I don't think the FF franchises will last much longer, as it hasn't been taken seriously in a long time either, beyond being a marketing title slapped on to sell games based on nostalgia.

You know what? I'm with Vivi. Even though I have no sentiment for the ATB, you're just hating it for the hell of it, it seems. You really once again failed to give any sort of argument for why it should die, just comparing it to 8-bit graphics (while actually, you should be comparing turn-based systems with that). Why all the hate? It's like your not liking alone is enough for it to die. This discussion is pointless since you just decided to cover your ears and not give any credible evidence from your point of view to support the fact that ATB is dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felfenix

There are alternatives that do the same, better, because they allow for more flexibility and variety of play without needing to be dumbed down to compensate for players getting overwhelmed. As I mentioned, you're clearly ignorant that it's possible in other battle systems as well....

...If you don't understand because you have no idea what you're talking about beyond your experience with Square Enix games,...

---

This would have been a good time to outline in detail systems that confer the all of the advantages of ATB without the drawbacks you have listed. If you consider someone ignorant in an area it is usually more effective to try and educate them than to try and chastise them for being ignorant. I, like Vivi, have no idea what other systems you are referencing other than real time and turn based. Should you elaborate in detail perhaps we could have a constructive debate about game systems rater than our impression of each others mindset.

Other than that I fail to see how either of us can have any constructive posts from this point on.

Does anyone else think this guy is being a dick? I think he's being a dick.

My favorite part of this debate was when they were arguing about which battle system constitutes as simply pressing buttons. Um, this is a video game, the whole thing is pressing buttons!

Yeah, that was particularly lol-worthy. Especially since you can get away with just button mashing in almost of these games in most of the battles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

My favorite part of this debate was when they were arguing about which battle system constitutes as simply pressing buttons. Um, this is a video game, the whole thing is pressing buttons!

---

This is obviously why Kinect is the future.

I prefer the Power Glove.

I'm just surprised to see page long posts and neither Iceglow or myself are involved. :nibbles:

Usually you just beat everyone else too it.

I'm not going to lie, I was disappointed when I saw you had the latest post in this thread and it turned out to only be a line long. :p

>>> Dead? Isnt FF13 ATB too?..:luca:

Yes, yes it is. They just cranked the speed WAY up on it.

...and broke its spirit...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeloZer0

Yes, yes it is. They just cranked the speed WAY up on it.

---

Not sure about the speed but what i know the whole thing was truly "Active".

Quote:

---

...and broke My spirit...

---

Fixed for you. ;(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShinGundam

Quote:

---

...and broke My spirit...

---

Fixed for you. ;(

---

No, the announcement of FFXIII-2 broke my spirit ;)

Though more seriously, I do feel that XIII's ATB system has been sped up to the point where its lost touch with the entire premise of what ATB is suppose to be. Making tactical decisions with a selection of skills, in a semi-real time battle. In 1991, with FFIV, I controlling the flow of battle and making decisions while the computer did all the tedious background work like raising my stats when I leveled. Nearly 20 years later, the computer is now making all the decisions in battles, and now I'm the one manually controlling the linear growth of my characters. :D

So what I am getting is that this is less about SE's decline as a game maker and more about the impending rise of the machines?

^ yeah and all the robots they send to exterminate humans will be lightnings and snows!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Though more seriously, I do feel that XIII's ATB system has been sped up to the point where its lost touch with the entire premise of what ATB is suppose to be. Making tactical decisions with a selection of skills, in a semi-real time battle. In 1991, with FFIV, I controlling the flow of battle and making decisions while the computer did all the tedious background work like raising my stats when I leveled. Nearly 20 years later, the computer is now making all the decisions in battles, and now I'm the one manually controlling the linear growth of my characters. :D

---

That is very depressing, mostly because it's true :(