The paradigm shift in RPGs

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Maybe some sort of ATB hybrid with Press Turn system elements like exploiting a weakness halves your wait for next turn?

I forgot about this one but SMT's Press Turn is also a great way to make Turn based interesting.

 

[CG4R12I4N]

Arc Rise Fantasia is honestly one of the most innovative battle system I've ever played in any turn based RPGs, and I'm miffed there aren't any others that copied this game since its release.

It has everything I want to be improved in ancient traditional JRPGs: shared action points between player and enemy, boss battles are literally hard as sin in general yet also tactically fair and not being a boring damage sponge endurance, they also can be made a bit easier by overleveling grinding mob encounters if you don't mind the timewasting as well.

Grandia series have already raised expectations for turn based RPGs, but Arc Rise Fantasia is when I placed my standards way higher because it's just THAT good a game.

 

[Sir Auriel of Lionel]

I would like to bring more bad news.

Square Enix team behind JRPG gems like Octopath Traveler is trading turn-based combat for Zelda-like action with The Adventures of Elliot in hopes of reaching "a new audience"

"As the HD-2D series has expanded and evolved, we’ve gradually shifted genres"

www.gamesradar.com

While at least it's not part of the Octopath directly so people don't jump ship at the combat change I think it's also the same Sqeenix fear showing again of needing to expand than just realizing they've already reached everyone that could be interested in their works and just focusing on pushing out for the core audience in micro doses in between than bake and pile on money for a few years of one big project that doesn't meet your sales demands.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

I would like to bring more bad news.

Square Enix team behind JRPG gems like Octopath Traveler is trading turn-based combat for Zelda-like action with The Adventures of Elliot in hopes of reaching "a new audience"

"As the HD-2D series has expanded and evolved, we’ve gradually shifted genres"

www.gamesradar.com

While at least it's not part of the Octopath directly so people don't jump ship at the combat change I think it's also the same Sqeenix fear showing again of needing to expand than just realizing they've already reached everyone that could be interested in their works and just focusing on pushing out for the core audience in micro doses in between than bake and pile on money for a few years of one big project that doesn't meet your sales demands.

I would say that I like the versatility of the HD2D engine with Turn based, Strategy and now Action RPG.

Who knows, maybe it is possible to even try different genres like a platformer, a shooter or even a fighting game since Square tackled some of them back in the 90's.

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

I would like to bring more bad news.

Square Enix team behind JRPG gems like Octopath Traveler is trading turn-based combat for Zelda-like action with The Adventures of Elliot in hopes of reaching "a new audience"

"As the HD-2D series has expanded and evolved, we’ve gradually shifted genres"

www.gamesradar.com

While at least it's not part of the Octopath directly so people don't jump ship at the combat change I think it's also the same Sqeenix fear showing again of needing to expand than just realizing they've already reached everyone that could be interested in their works and just focusing on pushing out for the core audience in micro doses in between than bake and pile on money for a few years of one big project that doesn't meet your sales demands.

Its going to fail to meet expectations like every Squenix project. They fail to understand their company is filled with out of touch boomers and they don't know how to appeal to the modern generation. They think its just a matter of switching combat mechanics. They should be happy they have fans, embrace their niche and budget accordingly. But no, unfettered greed must rule.

 

[UnDubious]

Square has made action RPGs going back to Final Fantasy Adventure in 1991, them making one now isn't "unfettered greed" and all this other dramatic stuff.
My main issue with it is combat looks a little too slow and "heavy" for me. Coincidentally or not, the Mana series never had great combat either.

 

[Jayonnaise6105 Jayonnaise6105]

I love Kingdom Hearts, but it does feel like most modern Square RPGs play like it.

 

[Sir Auriel of Lionel]

I honestly would like a return to Chrono Trigger style, the only reason Mana tripped me up was the secpial moves and weapon switching menu flipping. I think most of modern Square has tried to stay from random encounters and I'm glad they do.

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

Square has made action RPGs going back to Final Fantasy Adventure in 1991, them making one now isn't "unfettered greed" and all this other dramatic stuff.
My main issue with it is combat looks a little too slow and "heavy" for me. Coincidentally or not, the Mana series never had great combat either.

Unfettered greed is selling 3 million copies for most of your titles and thinking it isn't enough. Most companies would be thrilled with that level of fandom. Then we have the suckers on this board carrying the water for these corrupt companies and repeating their talking points about how action is phasing out turn based or action is the evolutionary next step or such nonsense. Action gameplay is a style, turn based is another. Both can be done poorly or well. And there are hybrid approaches.

 

[Iracunda]

Now I feel like a bad person for thinking to myself that I prefer not to have turn based combat. Maybe its because the games that really hooked me were the character action and fighting games of the world. (No I'm not good at either.) Idk

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

Now I feel like a bad person for thinking to myself that I prefer not to have turn based combat. Maybe its because the games that really hooked me were the character action and fighting games of the world. (No I'm not good at either.) Idk

Its not an uncommon take, but there's always the option to play whatever you enjoy and let other people enjoy their turn based games. But game companies listen to people like you and get misled into thinking they'll get more sales if they change their series to action. In most cases, they don't because they end up pissing off the traditional fan base.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Now I feel like a bad person for thinking to myself that I prefer not to have turn based combat. Maybe its because the games that really hooked me were the character action and fighting games of the world. (No I'm not good at either.) Idk

Aside from Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, SMT and perhaps Pokémon as well I'm not big in turn based combat unless there's a great strategic system in it.

 

[UnDubious]

Unfettered greed is selling 3 million copies for most of your titles and thinking it isn't enough. Most companies would be thrilled with that level of fandom. Then we have the suckers on this board carrying the water for these corrupt companies and repeating their talking points about how action is phasing out turn based or action is the evolutionary next step or such nonsense. Action gameplay is a style, turn based is another. Both can be done poorly or well. And there are hybrid approaches.

3 million copies isn't enough if your budget is overly high and you're losing money, or if you're beholden to shareholders you can't satisfy. I don't know the economics of Square enough to know if that's the case. Who are "the suckers on this board carrying water"? Is it me? Because I pointed out they've made action RPGs before and there's nothing wrong with them making more? How dramatic.
I agree turn-based is a different style, both are fine, bla bla bla.

 

[DrunkGecko]

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

3 million copies isn't enough if your budget is overly high and you're losing money, or if you're beholden to shareholders you can't satisfy. I don't know the economics of Square enough to know if that's the case. Who are "the suckers on this board carrying water"? Is it me? Because I pointed out they've made action RPGs before and there's nothing wrong with them making more? How dramatic.
I agree turn-based is a different style, both are fine, bla bla bla.

Not necessarily you, but anyone saying that action is an evolution over turn based, etc.

Some amount of turn based is required when managing a party based game, unless, there are AI controlled party members. However, a lot of people don't like it when their characters are controlled by AI so it is an imperfect solution. There will always be turn based games even if it is only a few franchises but the perception of many is that they shouldn't exist.

 

[GardeniaSky's icon GardeniaSky GardeniaSky]

Clair Obscur just came out of nowhere and proved you can have AAA quality be turn based.

Will the rest of the industry take note? Probably not.

I'm also tired of button mashy 'action' games. I love me some turn based.

 

[dropsmegamega]

Clair Obscur just came out of nowhere and proved you can have AAA quality be turn based.

Will the rest of the industry take note? Probably not.

I'm also tired of button mashy 'action' games. I love me some turn based.

Honestly I hope the industry doesn't take note. Clair is a game primarly focused on QTE-like mechanics "press Button at right time", not strategical combat and is definitely not what a lot of turn based fans are looking for, its more like yet another attempt at making turn based games appeal the action crowd in which action elements are introduced, of course, as an ""evolution"", which is literally the same mentality that square enix has been following. Baldur's Gate 3 seems the only modern example of AAA turn based.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Honestly I hope the industry doesn't take note. Clair is a game primarly focused on QTE-like mechanics "press Button at right time", not strategical combat and is definitely not what a lot of turn based fans are looking for, its more like yet another attempt at making turn based games appeal the action crowd in which action elements are introduced, of course, as an ""evolution"", which is literally the same mentality that square enix has been following. Baldur's Gate 3 seems the only modern example of AAA turn based.

They have basically copied Mario RPG's system...

While I enjoy dynamism in them I don't think that this should be mandatory for every turn based games.

 

[GardeniaSky's icon GardeniaSky GardeniaSky]

Honestly I hope the industry doesn't take note. Clair is a game primarly focused on QTE-like mechanics "press Button at right time", not strategical combat and is definitely not what a lot of turn based fans are looking for, its more like yet another attempt at making turn based games appeal the action crowd in which action elements are introduced, of course, as an ""evolution"", which is literally the same mentality that square enix has been following. Baldur's Gate 3 seems the only modern example of AAA turn based.

I really enjoyed the combat. Granted, I only played on Normal. I plan on doing a hard playthrough at some point with actual builds and stuff. I'm a huge fan of turn-based RPGs and found it to scratch that itch in a very nice way. Granted, it's not for everyone, and that's fine. It was clearly a labor of love and I aim to support that in the game industry.

Baldur's Gate 3 was exceptional. Larian deserves all of the support and praise for making a truly turn-based RPG in the modern market. Same with Owlcat for their Pathfinder games.

 

[UnDubious]

Not necessarily you, but anyone saying that action is an evolution over turn based, etc.

Some amount of turn based is required when managing a party based game, unless, there are AI controlled party members. However, a lot of people don't like it when their characters are controlled by AI so it is an imperfect solution. There will always be turn based games even if it is only a few franchises but the perception of many is that they shouldn't exist.

Agreed, I'm not a fan. Old-school action RPGs (8, 16, and typically 32-bit eras) where usually always solo so you don't have that problem, but the party dynamic of turn-based RPGs is part of the appeal if the characters are likeable at all. Another solution is having just one character participate in battle despite traveling in a group, and you can switch between a few characters... it feels a little weird though. So there is no perfect way to reconcile all those things that I know of.

 

[Chronicler Chimera]

I'm not a fan of typical line part set up turn-based RPGs but I adore SRPGs like fire emblem, also the Pokemon Mystery dungeon games. (recently got into Shiren as well after having that itch longing to be scratched for too long.) That said blobbers like Etrian Odyssey and Stranger of Sword City still are a fun time for me. Monster tamer style games do that as well since I love finding and using favorites for as long as I can. However due to me not enjoying typical party line up turn-based RPGs also means I have to be honest and say I likely haven't played many good ones so am not the best judge with them. I gave FFIX a try when I had gamepass for a while, but couldn't finish it. I was somewhat enjoying it but it was working against me with the times I was playing it and the overworld music at the time being too peaceful. However if I had to put one turnbased rpg series I wish I saw more of its Fossil Fighters. I love the first and second game, the only two games I acknowledge in the series, and I wish we get another that further improves on the support system and maybe balances it out more. The % based buffs and debuffs can be manipulated in the players favor to easily throw together a team of vivosaurs you never use in combat and just cleaned their fossils to beat post game fights without too much issue. I guess I'll just say that as someone who more so leans to action games I agree the issue isn't the gameplay itself its the need for bombastic marketing and flashiness. A lot of what I enjoy most from these games are outside the combat loop (exploration, unique items, team building, getting unlucky and stepping on a trap) and then they all come together to make the combat more enjoyable. Problem is how do you effectively market that to someone who isn't already aware and knows they like it. Its too complex and hard to convey in the quick trailers unlike "Look at the giant boss attacking! Now PARRY! [insert frame rate and visual comprehension destroying partical effects, slowdown and the crunchyest deflection sound you'll ever hear this week, maybe even giant PARRY words on the screen] into an equally as flashy counter attack." which a fish could understand where the selling point is. An well people who aren't already invested won't sit down and hear a good explaination of mechanics. The time major showings give also isn't enough especially if it isn't a major game that will be given extra time beyond a trailer. Well I guess the silver lining is if a genuinely good turn based game comes out today it will do good enough to thrive but not so far as to become mainstream, where it loses itself like everything that becomes too popular.

 

[shadowcat]

I don't know why turn based is such a turn off for people now. I've heard the argument that it is "antiquated design", but I tend to disagree. For example, look at the fighting game genre, when was the last real innovation in that, Dead or Alive 2 with it's interact-able stage design, and that was what, 1999? But alas, people still go nuts for a genre that every new system just equates to longer combos, it's smoke and mirrors at best. Turn-based RPG games innovated more in the 90s than the fighting genre has in it's entire existence, with different combat systems such as ATB, timed attack presses a la Super Mario RPG, Grandia's turn timer bar, the RTS-meets-Auto Battler of Ogre Battle, Legend of Legaia's directional input based combat to discover new moves, spawning a whole subgenre of tactical turn based RPGS such as Fire Emblem or Langrisser.

As other commenters have said, many other genres don't get the flack that RPG games do, but have had about the same if not more stagnation. What is it really turning people off then? Is it not flashy and visceral as games like Devil May Cry or Ninja Gaiden? Is it because of long dialoge sequences that can feel more like reading a novella than playing a video game at times? Who knows, but even if the industry is shifting away from turn-based combat, we always have the classics, and Dragon Quest will probably never change, thankfully.

 

[TacoMeister]

Dragon Quest will probably never change, thankfully.

Please, don't jinx it!

Clair Obscur just came out of nowhere and proved you can have AAA quality be turn based.

Will the rest of the industry take note? Probably not.

I'm also tired of button mashy 'action' games. I love me some turn based.

I liked the gameplay but unfortunately I just couldn't get into the story.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Who knows, but even if the industry is shifting away from turn-based combat, we always have the classics, and Dragon Quest will probably never change, thankfully.

DQ IX was shown as a multiplayer focused action RPG game in the first trailer in 2006 and thankfully they backtracked on that.

I don't mind the idea but keep those for spin-offs. Mystery Dungeon started as a DQ spin-off after all.

Post automatically merged: Aug 12, 2025

I liked the gameplay but unfortunately I just couldn't get into the story.

I dislike the pathos kind of story to make people cry over character.

Japanese devs do that much more naturally.

 

[CG4R12I4N]

People who complained about Expedition 33 are always people who haven't played it, got baited by the negative reviews and/or scared that their old fave RPGs are taken by its hype.

Anyway, nigs in a row format is still the most tried and true JRPG formula since DQ and SMT and I can't see it going away anytime soon, or even changing much in the first place. The paradigm never shifted much. All Expedition 33 did was merely evoking that nostalgia in millenial gen who grew up in what you could call the best gaming experience yet.