Is ATB Dead?

[felfenix]

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.

How is it outdated?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.

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.

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.