The paradigm shift in RPGs

[tropicalavera]

Actually - a quick aside.

It's worth remembering that turn based combat had been ridiculed and lampooned well before this 'paradigm shift' you're suggesting. Look at things like Progress Quest! And I mean?? Have you PLAYED Moon: Remix RPG Adventure??? They are throwing punches in that opening.

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

Actually - a quick aside.

It's worth remembering that turn based combat had been ridiculed and lampooned well before this 'paradigm shift' you're suggesting. Look at things like Progress Quest! And I mean?? Have you PLAYED Moon: Remix RPG Adventure??? They are throwing punches in that opening.

There was plenty of mocking of the genre even back in the 90's. If anything, turn based games are much more popular now that they were back in the 90's on average. Aside from that huge outlier that is FF7.

 

[Tonberry]

Just a quick post to say that I think it's really a matter of scale. You'll notice that lots and lots of smaller budget RPGs (especially those in the indie scene: Deltarune and Omori por ejemplo) continue to use turn-based combat without anyone raising an eyebrow. But you have to appreciate that as budgets balloon, and get unfathomably big, publisher's need a bigger return on investment and as such aim to appeal to a wider demographic. And I'm sorry to tell you this - but that can include switching to a real-time action combat system. I've no doubt they've done the focus testing.

I will NOT delve in deep into the real issue of the continued path away from abstraction seen across the board in videogames and will instead invite you to simply read Mark J.P. Wolf's piece 'Abstraction in the Video Game' and use some critical thinking to draw connections to the move towards real-time action combat.

You're definitely correct in that it's a matter of scale. But I still want to emphasize that, for probably the first time in 20 years, we're getting gigantic blockbuster hits that are not only traditional turn-based experiences (from both Japan and the rest of the world), but traditional turn-based games that end up garnering endless amounts of global critical acclaim and massive commercial success.

And since the "Hollywoodification" of games happened between those two eras, I doubt large-scale turn-based games are going to die down. In fact, I'm relatively certain that we'll just end up seeing more. Which I'm all for of course because variety is the spice of life, and one of the worst parts about the AAA mainstream games industry has been the samey look and feel of so many properties.

 

[tropicalavera]

There was plenty of mocking of the genre even back in the 90's.

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

View attachment 12048

Oh ok gotcha. I wasn't familiar with that particular game. But there was a lot of mocking in North American gamer media about JRPGs and Final Fantasy. Especially G4TV.

 

[rexfenix]

Oh ok gotcha. I wasn't familiar with that particular game. But there was a lot of mocking in North American gamer media about JRPGs and Final Fantasy. Especially G4TV.

It wasn't just JRPGs. Those guys hated Japanese games in general.

 

[RageBurner]

Another thing I'd wish they'd stop doing with modern turn-based JRPGs is using that garish "HD 2D" Octopath Traveler art style. I remember being disgusted with those visuals when I first saw them in the promotional material for that game, and I think they've actually gotten worse with time. (They oblierated the art of the Live-a-Live remake, that's for effing sure.)

Thank the almighty macarroni! someone gets me!

2DHD makes me froth uncontrollably with rage and cause wanton destruction, such an ugly, unfathomable violation of pixel art. Let's not forget the ridiculous overuse of bloom and other effects that have nothing to do with pixel art, too.

 

[AI_Apex_Predator]

Thank the almighty macarroni! someone gets me!

2DHD makes me froth uncontrollably with rage and cause wanton destruction, such an ugly, unfathomable violation of pixel art. Let's not forget the ridiculous overuse of bloom and other effects that have nothing to do with pixel art, too.

and with me, I own a CRT. I just wished I could have the game unfiltered and connect it to my BVM.

I'll admit though, that new DQ3 looked pretty good in comparison to Octopath.

 

[RageBurner]

and with me, I own a CRT. I just wished I could have the game unfiltered and connect it to my BVM.

I'll admit though, that new DQ3 looked pretty good in comparison to Octopath.

DQ3 did it right, IMO, it's the first of this kind to look even remotely good. They need to go back and redo the others like this.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Because gamers (in the broad sense) became impatient.

It's noticeable when ARPG slowly became the standard above turn based.

Sure, turn based gameplay was from limitations (the actual fight are in real time in-universe) yet it allowed strategies.

We already saw some more action in Tales of and the ATB bar in Square's games on 16-bits RPG as well as seeing enemies on the field instead of random battles surprising you.

 

[AI_Apex_Predator]

I think the best path for JRPGs is not to look forward, but to look back. Theres so many great titles that have been slept on, and that haven't been translated.

Hobbyists will be able to use Ai to assist with translations. This will be able to cut the work down, and we will be seeing more as time goes on.

Im excited to see more JRPG translations come out of PC-FX, OG Xbox, Dreamcast, PC Engine, and Saturn. Now I just have to find more time to play them when they come out.

 

[UnDubious]

Just because there are a lot of games doesn't mean they aren't throwbacks. If you look at the SNES, that's the System that Gave us the ATB system on a whopping 4 games, the Linear Battle System for Tales of Phantasia, and whatever the Star Ocean battle system was called. Even blobbers had been moving towards real time implementations of their systems since Dungeon Master. Throwback is not a bad term, but even back then, Dragon Quest was playing up the "Traditional RPG elements" . I mean, even on the NES, you had Chronicle of Radia Wars, Ys, River City Ranson, Dungeon Magic, and other such action and real time RPGs innovating the landscape.

Not calling them bad games, but even at the time, tradittonal RPGs with turn based mechanics were throwbacks to a previous era, and also weren't super popular at the time in the west, which is why we got Mystic Quest instead of FInal Fantasy 5. The Japanese companies thought westerners were too stupid to figure out their games.

If the majority of games within a genre are a certain way, then that certain way is by definition the current norm and obviously not a throwback. There are dozens and dozens of RPGs with turn-based battles on the SNES, including many of the highest-sellers. There are not nearly as many with hybrid systems like the ATB - which is essentially just a twist on turn-based and not an action system - nor are there as many actual action RPGs. Tales came towards the end of the 16-bit era and its battle system was such an exception that it was known primarily for it.

The SNES is literally THE era of traditional Japanese RPGs.

 

[SkunkyBeaumont]

If the majority of games within a genre are a certain way, then that certain way is by definition the current norm and obviously not a throwback. There are dozens and dozens of RPGs with turn-based battles on the SNES, including many of the highest-sellers. There are not nearly as many with hybrid systems like the ATB - which is essentially just a twist on turn-based and not an action system - nor are there as many actual action RPGs. Tales came towards the end of the 16-bit era and its battle system was such an exception that it was known primarily for it.

The SNES is literally THE era of traditional Japanese RPGs.

The literal first RPG on the SNES was Drakken.... a real time RPG with first person exploration. Final Fantasy 4 would also come out before an actual turn based RPG. I mean, I remember the SNES library, I owned one at the time. :)

 

[UnDubious]

Drakken is a port of a Western computer RPG, completely irrelevant. The first Super Famicom RPG was GDLeen, which is turn-based. Which is also irrelevant, as the argument of which RPG was first is just changing the subject.
And ATB is just a type of turn based. You're still entering commands through the same menus when your turn comes, it's essentially the same except you have to wait for your turn to come.

 

[Somnia]

Aside from Final fantasy 7, what other remakes has this happened to? Persona 3, Super Mario RPG, Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door and Romancing SaGa 2 maintained their battle systems albeit with some changes/improvements. Not as recent but the Dragon Quest 7 and 8 remakes on 3DS kept their battle systems too.

As far as remasters, obviously none of them had their turn based combat ripped out since they're merely the original game with some quality of life improvements and potentially some visual updates.

It is certainly true that we have very few AAA RPGs with turn based combat compared to back in the day but we also just get far fewer AAA RPGs period. Atlus is still truckin along with their turn based games and while there is still a chance that Dragon Quest XII ends up being an action game, as it stands that is still a AAA turn based RPG. With middle market and indie stuff, you still have a fair few turn based options but that's a given.

I have long thought the whole "The industry has given up on turn based combat" sentiment was a bit hyperbolic. Plenty of turn based games release every year if you're really looking.

THAT SAID I do wish we got some smaller scale Final Fantasy games with turn based combat. I disagree with the sentiment that a mainline game couldn't sell with turn based (assuming that's the reason) but there's little reason they couldn't give us a spin-off title of some kind that featured turn-based battles and a return to the old job system or something. Atelier also ditching turn based combat is a bit sad though I at least have damn near 15 turn based games in the franchise so I can't say there isn't a ton of content there.

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

Aside from Final fantasy 7, what other remakes has this happened to? Persona 3, Super Mario RPG, Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door and Romancing SaGa 2 maintained their battle systems albeit with some changes/improvements. Not as recent but the Dragon Quest 7 and 8 remakes on 3DS kept their battle systems too.

As far as remasters, obviously none of them had their turn based combat ripped out since they're merely the original game with some quality of life improvements and potentially some visual updates.

It is certainly true that we have very few AAA RPGs with turn based combat compared to back in the day but we also just get far fewer AAA RPGs period. Atlus is still truckin along with their turn based games and while there is still a chance that Dragon Quest XII ends up being an action game, as it stands that is still a AAA turn based RPG. With middle market and indie stuff, you still have a fair few turn based options but that's a given.

I have long thought the whole "The industry has given up on turn based combat" sentiment was a bit hyperbolic. Plenty of turn based games release every year if you're really looking.

THAT SAID I do wish we got some smaller scale Final Fantasy games with turn based combat. I disagree with the sentiment that a mainline game couldn't sell with turn based (assuming that's the reason) but there's little reason they couldn't give us a spin-off title of some kind that featured turn-based battles and a return to the old job system or something. Atelier also ditching turn based combat is a bit sad though I at least have damn near 15 turn based games in the franchise so I can't say there isn't a ton of content there.

Plus Rebirth didn't sell that hot, I don't think it ever hit the 3 million mark. Hopefully that indicates to Square Enix that action isn't the end all be all, but their executives aren't the brightest bunch.

 

[Somnia]

Plus Rebirth didn't sell that hot, I don't think it ever hit the 3 million mark. Hopefully that indicates to Square Enix that action isn't the end all be all, but their executives aren't the brightest bunch.

It's a complicated situation because both FF16 and Rebirth suffered from exclusivity on consoles with a smaller userbase at the time of release. By the time Remake released on PS4 that system had sold 100m units, whereas the PS5 had about 55-60m. Rebirth is also a sequel in a trilogy and while many companies will expect a sequel to maintain or outperform its predecessor (assuming the original was well received) it is not at all the norm nor is it remotely guaranteed that sequels will have a perfect retention rate. This is even truer when we consider that Rebirth was a generational leap. There are plenty of users that may have swapped from PS4 to PC or despite having a PS5 wanted to wait for the inevitable PC port.

FF16 suffered from many of the same things above albeit with roughly 10-20m less PS5s in homes in 2023. Its predecessor in FF15 was also multiplatform and had probably the most expansive and expensive marketing campaign in industry history helping push it to the sales heights it reached. It was also marred in various controversies not just for having such a massive action focus but for its setting, perceived lack of production values and other such things.

It is undeniable that the games underperformed according to Square Enix's expectations, but they haven't given any sales data for us to have any concrete numbers to compare and contrast. It is impossible to know how the sales compare to Remake, what SE's expectations even were to begin with and what those sales look like a year later. Rebirth also comes out on PC in 10 days and is actually gonna be on Steam day 1 instead of suffering from Epic exclusivity so who knows how it'll do.

Bottom line is of all the things to lay at the feet of poor sales, being action games isn't really near the top of the list. Besides, if we really wanna be pedantic we can talk about how FF's last truly turn based mainline game was FF10 and how by certain definitions the Active-Time-Battle games don't even count as true turn based combat systems.

 

[SkunkyBeaumont]

Drakken is a port of a Western computer RPG, completely irrelevant. The first Super Famicom RPG was GDLeen, which is turn-based. Which is also irrelevant, as the argument of which RPG was first is just changing the subject.
And ATB is just a type of turn based. You're still entering commands through the same menus when your turn comes, it's essentially the same except you have to wait for your turn to come.

Not if you set it to real time there, by setting it to active, it's no longer turn based. It's so easy you can try it at home.

If set to active, battles happen In real time. There is no pause to decide. Try again next time!
Also, Drakken was a port made by a Japanese company, being a real time RPG that PREDATEs the SNES hurts your argument more then it helps it, since people had already been moving away from turn based system because people at the time thought they we're old and boring, hence the pejorative "Dragon Quest/Warrior" clone. You also can't cherry pick your evidence.

Remembering the Super NES's first RPG

So close, chronologically speaking, to Final Fantasy II... yet so far away.

retronauts.com

GDleen is irrelevent to the conversation unless you're Japanese, and like mediocre games that were obsolete before they were even released, cause that's a Dragon Quest clone, a game that didn't sell well in America cause it was released Years too late. First one we saw was Drakken, which also sucked, but was worlds ahead of a DQ clone.

In Europe, you had even less RPGs. You didn't even get FInal Fantasy 4, you got Mystic Quest.

 

[Somnia]

Not if you set it to real time there, by setting it to active, it's no longer turn based. It's so easy you can try it at home.

View attachment 12302
If set to active, battles happen In real time. There is no pause to decide. Try again next time!

I think we just have to accept that when people say turn based they mean "menu based game where enemies and allies stand on different sides of the field" and not JUST games that are literally turn based. I wish people would just say "menu based combat" but it isn't a big deal either way, I suppose.

 

[SkunkyBeaumont]

I think we just have to accept that when people say turn based they mean "menu based game where enemies and allies stand on different sides of the field" and not JUST games that are literally turn based. I wish people would just say "menu based combat" but it isn't a big deal either way, I suppose.

Thank you!

 

[Yousef]

There was plenty of mocking of the genre even back in the 90's. If anything, turn based games are much more popular now that they were back in the 90's on average. Aside from that huge outlier that is FF7.

Yes ?
“Popular Game was mocked on release” is not a good argument. Not every video game in existence was popular in its release, and this false perception that people had zero standards in the 90s and 80s is somewhat silly. Even all-time classics had its detractors and people who were “meh” on it upon release. Positive retrospective lookbacks only stand out now because of how the internet works now. Old games get more appreciation now (which can be healthy for discussion!).

I’m not fully caught up with the thread so I’ll throw another “turn based is awesome” comment and go back to reading what I missed.

 

[dropsmegamega]

 

[UnDubious]

bad faith nonsense

I know how ATBs work, I beat all those games. They're not "action" in any meaningful sense. Even if they were, there's like 4 of them out of over 100 RPGs on the console. RPGs released in Japan are relevant because this conversation is about a trend in Japanese RPGs in the first place. Most RPGs released in Japan in the early and mid '90s were turn-based because that was still what was popular at the time, Western sales didn't matter too much yet as the genre was not big on consoles in the West, and your examples are outliers. But this is a waste of time, there is not one bit of good faith in you.

 

[Strategist's icon Strategist Strategist]

I know how ATBs work, I beat all those games. They're not "action" in any meaningful sense. Even if they were, there's like 4 of them out of over 100 RPGs on the console. RPGs released in Japan are relevant because this conversation is about a trend in Japanese RPGs in the first place. Most RPGs released in Japan in the early and mid '90s were turn-based because that was still what was popular at the time, Western sales didn't matter too much yet as the genre was not big on consoles in the West, and your examples are outliers. But this is a waste of time, there is not one bit of good faith in you.

Also, the game allows you to opt out completely of the ATB system by setting "Wait" as one of the options.

 

[Yousef]

Also, the game allows you to opt out completely of the ATB system by setting "Wait" as one of the options.

Yes!

I know how ATBs work, I beat all those games. They're not "action" in any meaningful sense. Even if they were, there's like 4 of them out of over 100 RPGs on the console. RPGs released in Japan are relevant because this conversation is about a trend in Japanese RPGs in the first place. Most RPGs released in Japan in the early and mid '90s were turn-based because that was still what was popular at the time, Western sales didn't matter too much yet as the genre was not big on consoles in the West, and your examples are outliers. But this is a waste of time, there is not one bit of good faith in you.

I played them all. Including some of the silly ones. Can confirm this.