Why Turn-Based RPGs Should Never Die

You've grown up with Final Fantasy, Breath of Fire, Grandia and countless other traditional JPRGs which make use of that tried and tested you hit, I hit turn based combat mechanic. You've wandered the vast expanse of numerous identikit dungeons wincing ever so slightly each time your screen swirls or explodes into yet another random battle. You've become irritable, nay, irate as your party is wiped by a boss who seems so powerful you think it must be one of those 'this boss is meant to kill me' moments, at least until the screen goes black, melancholy music kicks in and before it's even had the chance to fade in, you know the screen's going to read: 'GAME OVER'.

Yet, you load from your last save point.

You slog through the dungeon all over again, you whizz through the random battles, you find the super boss repellant item which makes that uber-boss a total doddle, you rejoice in your perseverance and you rinse, wash and repeat for 60 hours until the game is finished.

Sound familiar? If so, you are a true JRPG fan and you're part of dying breed. Search enthusiast forums and you're bound to find plenty of fans who are calling time on turn-based combat as a pre-historic gaming convention comparable to men-only voting or slavery in terms of it having no place in modern society. But I really don't understand why. Turn-based combat to me has had as much innovation over the years as shooting things in the face has, you just have to know where to look.

Rewind to 1997. On November 17th, European gamers were falling over themselves to buy a game called Final Fantasy VII. To date, according to VGchartz, FFVII has shifted 2.7 million units in Europe and a staggering 9.37 million worldwide making it the most successful turn-based JRPG of all time.

I remember I was still at school when FFVII launched and going over to a friends house to watch him play it. I was blown away by the graphics and what I pieced together of the story. Immediately afterwards, a Playstation went on my Christmas list along with this game. It literally couldn't come soon enough. A lot of my friends also bought into the hype, shelling out £44.99 in order to be a part of what was being lauded by some critics as 'one of the most important games of all time.'

It was amongst these friends I encountered my first turn-based combat naysayers and retrospectively it makes me think FFVII may also have been one of the most traded in/returned games of all time (though I can't really back that up)!

"It's boring innit? You hit them, they hit you, there's no skill. I took it back to the shop" - This was back in the days of Game's 10-day no quibble money back guarantee...

"Why do I have to randomly fight shit? It doesn't make any sense and all you do is press X to win"

"Why has Cloud got stupid hair?"

"Tifa has massive tits."

I'd try to reassure them that it was about the story, that the turn-based combat was deep and tactical if they'd just give it the chance and that the anatomically unlikely appearance of Tifa was keeping in line with the Japanese aesthetic (it's possible at 16, I worded this slightly differently). For the most part though, kids in my year weren't interested. They would rather shoot things in the face and how could I argue with that. I however, fell hard and fast for the JRPG and never looked back.

This disdain for turn-based combat has reared it's ugly head many times over the past 13 years with criticisms levelled at this tried and tested JRPG convention that I've never been able to understand. I don't like FPSs (in truth, I'm just not very good at them!) but I can understand why millions of people rushed out to buy Black Ops and would never pour scorn on that game for not only being incredibly similar to Modern Warfare 2, but to my inexperienced FPS eyes, being incredibly similar to every other military shooter. I'm sure Battlefield: Bad Company and the new Medal of Honor do slightly different things to Black Ops but ultimately they're all about shooting the enemy and arguing with 13-year-olds online. Right? No. People undoubtedly enjoy these games because of the way a tried a tested formula has been tweaked and implemented to produce an enjoyable gaming experience. It's the same for JRPGs and turn based combat, you just have to know where to look.

There's a post on Destructoid ( http://www.destructoid.com/... - actually one of the more well-rounded criticisms of turn-based combat from a self-confessed JRPG fan) where the author cites the unrealistic nature of turn-based combat as his main reason for hating it. He talks about it being unrealistic to stand there and wait for someone to hit you only for your attacker to stand idly and wait for you to hit him back. He's got a point I guess, but I don't play games for the realism. I definitely don't play JRPGs for the realism.

The silver age

We're now settling into the midlife of the current console generation. Each generation seems to go slightly longer than the last as hz increase exponentially. Interactive gameplay has been the name of the game for the tail end of the last decade. Sony and microsoft were left far behind in the sales race compared to Nintendo’s wii.

To make up for this both companies intend to keep their current consoles on the market for an optimistic ten years. Which leaves much unsaid for overlap of the next console, which as the ps2 has shown us can be quite considerable, or as with the original xbox quite short.

I expect we’ll see all three companies expand heavily on the area’s they have recently been heading. Nintendo will most likely announce a new console the soonest. They have the most money to put into development, and also their console is the least powerful being left behind as people upgrade their televisions slowly but surely. While they could easily ride out game sales on the wii for a number of years the smart move would be to try and ride the hype of it at the end. If they announced or released in a year and a half or so with a reasonably priced console as powerful as their present competition they would be in a good spot for close to a decade. They would of course have to top the standard motion gimick. I have no speculation except hearsay and options they may have as to what they may do. I doubt it will be based on the technology they presently use, but will be motion based in someway. Or possibly something outlandish like reading your mind.

Microsoft will likely announce a decent amount of time after nintendo, as kinect is supposed to be seen as a new console. We probably won’t see anything from them for three or more years. What will be interesting is the next version of their console, I expect an integrated evolved version of the kinects motion parts. A refined high fps hd depth sensing camera, probably with other abilities, maybe a completely redesigned controller to work along with it. The intervening years will see the motion interface concept they presently dabble in come to fruition. It’ll be what everybody imagined when they first heard of Natal.

Lastly Sony can be expected to lean heavily on the longevity of their consoles and continue optimization of the playstation platform. In four or quite possibly five years sony will again declare that the next generation starts when they say so. Sony has been quite public about what options their considering. Obviously they are into 3D, accelerometers, cameras, compass’, gyroscopes, and enhanced reality. They also file a great many strange patents, and show off futuristic tech demo’s at events. Magnetic sensors, sonar, ps3’s playing hologram pong, multiple consoles running as one and more. Theirs really no telling what they’ll put into their next machine, likely many if not all of the options they have available. A great many processors, whatever the competition has, plus whatever they were already working on before they noticed the other guy s had something cool and assimilated it into the playstation collective.

Thinking about PS4

Before reading, I'd like to clarify that I do not know anything confirmed about the next playstation. By the way, you are probably going to see the letters P and S a whole lot. Also, if you don't want to read the post explaining things, summed up points are available at the bottom for those who TL;DR.

Ok, ever since news of a new Nintendo console broke out, I couldn't help but think about the next Playstation, the PS4. And from that resulted a list of what I'd like to see and expect in the next playstation, which needless to say, would be called the PS4.

-First off, backward compatibility with ps3 products. Not just PS3 games but of course PS3 controllers like the DualShock3, Sixaxis and PS Move (and NGP). Why? Well, of course for the pretty awesome PS3 exclusives BUT also to save cash. If the PS4 was backward compatible with PS3 controllers, gamers would be able to have enough cashola to buy games and not waste it on new controllers. Another being that loads of PS3 owners would be pissed seeing as their costly products wont be usable.

-Next that would probably be coming with the PS4 is a new digital format. Why? Well, the ps1's format was CDs, ps2's being DVDs and finally, ps3's with the well known Blu Ray. The common factor to all playstations throughout the years is that each Sony gaming console always differed itself. So, probably we'll be seeing a new digital format for the PS4.

-What I would also like to see in the PS4 is the PS3's current features but slightly improved. The XMB or Xross Media Bar should stay, seeing as most owners are already accustomed to the user interface. The feature to turn on/off the ps3 with the controller obviously should be available. An upgraded PS browser would also be nice to have, the current one is pretty...okay. PSN would most probably be free or fanboys will howl.

-Finally, what is probably the most obvious and wanted by any PS loyalists are new exclusives. Yes, the current exclusives are pretty awesome to play and own but new IPs are always good to have, especially if they are PS exclusives. I do have to admit I'd like to see some PS games to continue on,like Sly Cooper 4, Little Big Planet 3, Killzone 4 and the most sought after Kingdom Hearts 3, if it hasn't been released by then.

With that, I hope that most of the things I listed down in the post turn true someday. And if they do...I called it! Thanks for taking your time to read this and if you have anything to share or comment or criticise, please do.

TL;DR points:
-Backward Compatibility with PS3 stuff
-A new digital format, like Hologram Discs or sumfink
-Slightly upgraded XMB, better PS3 internet browser, on/off feature without touching the playstation, free PSN
-New exclusives and continuations to games such as SC, KZ, LBP and KH.
-This wasn't mentioned above but a non-cuboid shape playstation would be nice.

Does Microsoft Risk Losing Core Gamers?

Rumours circulating the gaming community today have stated Microsoft plans ten new IP's to be announced at this forthcoming E3, for Kinect. You can read where the rumour originated from here: http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

Now, while this news may excite some people there seems to be a quiet underbelly of frustration boiling in the Xbox community and are at logger heads with those who are firmly behind Kinect. I see a problem here and one that can be nailed down to how well Microsoft can conduct a balancing act.

Nintendo have been very successful with the Wii, attracting people who for the most part, have not really invested any time into a games console beforehand with games such as Wii Fit, EA Sports Active and family designed mini game packages such as Wii Sports and Wii Play designed to bring in such a audience. Microsoft saw how much Nintendo was rolling around in cash and wanted a piece of the action. Kinect was born.

The Xbox has been seen by many as a core gamers console, the Halo's, Call of Duty's, Gears of War, Mass Effect's and so forth so to turn that around and bring in a family type audience along with the core is a strategy that takes careful planning and clever strategy. So far the plan seems to be working with excellent sales numbers for both the Xbox 360 itself and the Kinect add on. So what's the problem?

The traditional high quality exclusives seem to be getting more and more anorexic as time passes. For major retail releases exclusive to the 360 we have Gears of War 3, Forza 4, X-Com and a possible 2011 release for Codename: Kingdoms (which is now strongly rumoured to be a Kinect title). While these games could possibly end being of a high quality, the line up is weak compared to the competition. It's all about justifying the reason to invest time and money into the box while during that time there is a chance you may think you could of spent that money elsewhere. This is what I see on gaming forums at the moment.

While I have no doubt the Xbox 360 is a excellent console, I feel this E3 is a massive one for them considering new hardware is on the horizon i.e Nintendo's Project Cafe. It's all well and good saying 360 still offers the Call of Duty's, Battlefield's and Mass Effect's but these games are on other systems also and at the end of the day it's about feeling justified in the investment you have made, if you see the same games on other systems plus a large exclusive library to go with it, you may be tempted to trade in and start over and this is where I think Microsoft should try harder, offer a stronger traditional controller line up exclusive to the platform alongside the Kinect line up.

Reading the reactions to the rumour above has been interesting, some have shown frustration, some unhappy and some quite pleased. Of course it's "rumour" at the moment and nothing is set in stone but if this turned out to be the case and no traditional high quality controller games were announced then it would be interesting to see if the frustration and unhappy population grow stronger, especially if Nintendo go forth with their rumoured strategy in developing a more powerful, core based console.