Gaming Which Is the Best RPG Battle-system?

[sophic]

well the game that i think has the most uniqe systom is legend of dragoon its bad you have to try to match your box with the screens box and if you do you get to attack and the box gets smaller every time and the smaller it go's the harder you hit and all that it's a realy funny game you guys should play it but this game i love how you fight like that.

[color=indigo]Can you try and improve your post quality, please? That was very hard to read and understand, the only puncutation in sight being the period at the end. Having easy to underand posts is a rule here, and I think this post isn't quite up to the level it needs to be. - Desbreko[/color]

[Guest model-iv]

I'll stick with Chrono Trigger and Tales of Phantasia (Japanese ver). Chrono was awesome, but ToP's control scheme and real-time combat was lots of fun.

[size=1][color=blue]Maybe you could go into a bit more detail...what about Tales of Phantasia's control scheme and real-time combat made the battle system so fun? - Shinmaru[/size][/color]

[armana]

Well, I know most people would say that it isn't a true RPG, but I'd have to say Mario & Luigi for GBA has the best battle system I've played.

I like the idea of being able to control how powerful your attack will be by using different button combinations. And, the deeper you get into the adventure, the more combos you learn. I find that, with most turn-based RPGs, I tire of the battle system after a few hours of play, but the battle system in M&L was the complete opposite. I guess that by adding the button pressing, there was an extra layer of strategy, and this in turn gave me extra reason to continue deeper into the game.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is my first post on Otaku Boards.

[eleanor]

[color=firebrick] I just want to state and ask something here- Why do so many people worship the Final Fantasy battle system?

Seriously...when I started playing I was bored out of my [i]mind[/i]. It reminds me of those battle fought in the Revolutionary War: Americans shoot, Britains shoot, Americans shoot, Britains shoot. I realize why they did that, but I see no reason as to putting it into a video game. O_o. Why the heck is it so popular...? Is Final Fantasy X-2 like that, too? Well, whatever. I'm no video game master, but the only 'system' I will enjoy is when you can attack at your will. *shrugs* The first video game I played was Zelda, so I thought most popular games would have that style. *cringes at glares*[/color]

[RioLaskand]

I think that the Chrono Trigger was a good one because it didn't require a completely different graphical engine, and you could be in and out of battles quickly and painlessly. It was fast-paced, and just fun. Also, the Kingdom Hearts battle system was good one because of the real-time idea with the menu options that added a bit of a tweak to the system.

[Zidargh]

[QUOTE=maladjusted][color=firebrick] I just want to state and ask something here- Why do so many people worship the Final Fantasy battle system?

Seriously...when I started playing I was bored out of my [i]mind[/i]. It reminds me of those battle fought in the Revolutionary War: Americans shoot, Britains shoot, Americans shoot, Britains shoot. I realize why they did that, but I see no reason as to putting it into a video game. O_o. Why the heck is it so popular...? Is Final Fantasy X-2 like that, too? Well, whatever. I'm no video game master, but the only 'system' I will enjoy is when you can attack at your will. *shrugs* The first video game I played was Zelda, so I thought most popular games would have that style. *cringes at glares*[/color][/QUOTE]
Nobody 'worships' the Final Fantasy battle system, and yes I can understand that many practically obsess about Final Fantasy to the point where it's pathetic but Final Fantasy's very early stages and we're talking about 1987 was a huge hit. Back then it was the most innovating system in the world. And in answer to your question, no, Final Fantasy X-2 is not like that. Everything occurs in real time and the enemies do not wait for you to make decisions. Everyone attacks at a very fast rate once an action is selected and timing is very important as you can stop an enemy in their tracks.

Never use the revolutionary war as an example, heh. There's a fine line between Turn-Based battle and rules of war. -_-

[RioLaskand]

Oh CRAP! I completely forgot about the Star Ocean battle system! One of the best of all time! In real time regularly, but when you are changing spells and such you get a bit of a breather. I love that system. Sandwiching a ridiculously powered boss with Bunny Shoes in Star Ocean the Second Story is the most fun I have had with a boss fight ever

[Desbreko]

[QUOTE=maladjusted][color=firebrick] I just want to state and ask something here- Why do so many people worship the Final Fantasy battle system?

Seriously...when I started playing I was bored out of my [i]mind[/i]. It reminds me of those battle fought in the Revolutionary War: Americans shoot, Britains shoot, Americans shoot, Britains shoot. I realize why they did that, but I see no reason as to putting it into a video game. O_o. Why the heck is it so popular...? Is Final Fantasy X-2 like that, too? Well, whatever. I'm no video game master, but the only 'system' I will enjoy is when you can attack at your will. *shrugs* The first video game I played was Zelda, so I thought most popular games would have that style. *cringes at glares*[/color][/QUOTE]
[color=indigo]I think the people that worship the FF games' battle systems are the ones that haven't played many, if any, other RPGs. I mean, sure, some of the games' magic systems are really good, but the actual combat has been the same from FFIV to FFIX--the classic ATB system. Only recently has the series started to get innovative in the area of battle systems. And while I will admit the basic ATB system can be fun, it's gotten old after so many games using it.

From reading your second paragraph there, I think you'd like FF Crystal Chronicles on the GCN. It's an action RPG, so all combat is in real time, including magic. The only real downside I saw when I played FFCC was that you need at least two people playing to make it fun--one player isn't all that great. Also, you need GBAs for each person playing in multiplayer, but the connectivity is well used.

Like I said, the combat is all in real time, so to attack you actually have to run up and hit the enemy with your weapon. In the same way, you can dodge enemy attacks by moving back. In addition to your normal attacks, you can also hold in the button to charge up for a Focus Attacks. Once charged, a cursor appears on the ground which you can move to the point where you want to attack, and when you let up the button you'll lunge forward (or shoot, depending on the weapon) and attack at that point with a strong blow. Ganging up on monsters can be a lot of fun when you have one character distracting it while the others stand off a bit to use Focus Attacks.

The magic system is also well suited to the real time nature of the combat. To use magic you have to pick up and equip Magicite stones in each level, but once you have the stone, you can use it as many times as you want during the course of the level. (You loose all Magicite at the end of each level). This means you never have to worry about running out of MP, but like focus attacks, you have casting time before you can use the spell, and also like Focus Attacks you use a cursor to select where you want to cast the spell. You can also combine spells by having two or more people cast a spell on the same spot at the same time.

From what I've played so far, I think that FFCC is going to turn out to be my favorite out of the action RPGs that I've played. The fast paced combat is lots of fun, and really requires you to work together with the other players. Combining a Fire and Thunder spell to make a Gravity spell with which to pull a flying enemy down to the ground where you can double team it with your weapons is awesome.[/color]

[kizu]

[B][COLOR=Teal] Hmm, this may take some thought. Out of the games I have played some of my favorite RPGs are Golden Sun, Paper Mario, and FF:CC. Now for the fun part depicting what I enjoy about those battle systems.

Golden Sun- The dijin (sp) aspect was grand. The first few days when I got it I was lost. After a bit it grew on me. I get in the habbit of getting all my dijin in set mode, and then as soon as a battle starts I could just summon. :D:D

Papar Mario- I guess that the concept of rpg and Mario was new to me. (I was sheltered :P) I never really figured out why, but that game was just so enjoyable to me. I never bought it, so I borrowed it from a friend a lot. I had it over 3 months at one time. I played it thought countless times :D.

FF:CC- I haven't really had time to play this too indept. I have about 7 hours on my game. The battle system reminds me a lot of the Zelda games. That may just be the heart system though. I am really starting to like how you can have the moopoogle (SP) that carries the chalice around drop it and charge up a spell. :D I love how you can charge up an attack out of the site of an enemy and get your little friend to chare up a spell and supe up your attack.

Desbreko, can I assume that you have played FF:CC's multiplayer function? Right now I am waiting for one of my friends to buy a GBA GC link cable. I lost my link cable, but just found it today :D. I know what you mean about the solo game. I enjoy playing it, but I have spent like the last 3 hours of my game just going back through dungeons over and over to collect all the powerups. I suggest that you don't do that, I lost most of my modivation to play. So I am just waiting to get a "second wind"[/COLOR][/B]

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Yeah, I've only played multi-player with my friend, and I probably won't ever play single-player unless I borrow the game from him some time. But like I said, from what he's told me and what I've read, I don't think I'll be missing much. Again, from what I've read, it sounds like the only real differences between multi- and single-player mode is that you don't have the Moogle to carry the Chalice and you can't fuse your own spells. (Excepting, of course, there being more people playing with you--but that's obvious).

I wouldn't say FFCC's battle system is like Zelda, though, other than it being real time combat. Zelda, at least the 3D games, focus a lot more on dedicated swordplay, since that's your main weapon. FFCC has several different types of weapons, and only two ways to use them: A normal swing or a Focus Attack. Zelda has various different swings and attacks, plus the targeting system. Even the heart-based life meter is different. In FFCC, each heart just drains of its color as you take damage, as opposed to be divided into halves or quarters.

But if you haven't gotten to play mutli-player yet, I think you're really going to enjoy the game a lot more when you do play it with other people. Instead of being on your own and just having a Moogle follow you with the Chalice, you have to stay together with the it and have someone carry it, and also work together fighting enemies and combining spells.[/color]

[cmac24]

i agree with squall in that grandia 2 (ps2) has one of the best battle systems. its a lot different than alot of the stuff floating around. I like Chrono Trigger's also. It never changes to a battle screen so the game went a lot faster and smoother.

[Guest Kataryu]

I have to say that the free/active fight mode is the best. It's a lot more involved, and takes a whole lot of skill to do. Not that I don't like the passive system, like they have in Final Fantisy and Golden Sun, but the sort of fighting that you do in Zelda, .hack, and Kingdom Hearts is much more enjoyable.

[Gelgoog Pilot]

For some reason I love the turn based battles of Final Fantasy tactics, Tactics Advance, and Disgea (sp?) Just something about have Godly characters fighting, and without any way of stopping it watching them get slaughtered on the field. Then of course you have to frantically try and get a white mage to bring them back to life before they are gone for good. lol I lost more worthless theives that way....... :rolleyes:

[Sandy]

I have to TOTALLY disagree with you, Gelgoog! I bought FFTA not so long ago, and MAN was it a disappointment! Aside from the naïve storyline and shallow characters ("Bohoo, my hair is white in reality, and I can't return to my homeworld because of that!"), I've almost ripped all my beautiful shiny hair off when trying to tolerate the battles. The battles were:
1) way too easy - I beated the final boss in less than ten minutes without no problem whatsoever
2) freakingly frustrating - who enjoys watching battles with every second attack misses?! And not just your attacks, but the enemies' attacks as well!!!
3) oddly unbalanced: sometimes I got like seven people battling one boss, and sometimes I had three people against seven enemies - and they all had to be defeated!

It's the game designers luck I'm a sucker for graphics - and all those races and jobs were neat! ;) But major disappointment anyhow...


I haven't had much experience in RPGs outside the FF-series, but I agree that Grandia 2's salvation was its battle system. Otherwise it was way too short and easy (first time I got a Game Over was losing in the third last boss battle), but the battle system itself was really fun! The way the characters moved to the different sides of the battle-field, and how you could prevent the enemy from making its next move. The special abilities were great, too, although due to the shortness of the game, I couldn't get them all (it would have meant I'd have to go through the same areas and battle the same monsters over and over again...Gah!). Well, that game is in the past now, and I can remember with false warmth... :smirk:

Dessie was right about the fact that usually those who adore the FF-series' battle system haven't had experience with other RPGs much. I fall in to that category, but actually I don't play games for the battles - I get my pleasure in them from the other sections. ;)

[Zidargh]

Well take Dragon Warrior VII for example, I'm only about 2 hours into the game but I've just experienced my first battle in it, and I found it terrible. The battle system is in a first person view and not only this, the enemies hardly budge, just the odd inch when they attack you, with no animation of the playable characters whatsoever. However, this game appears to have a strong storyline with plenty of twists in it so I look forward to getting further into the game.

I also have to agree with Desbreko with his point about people with lack of experience with other RPG's so people wouldn't have anything to compare the battle system to, however, RPG's can be split into different categories because of their battle systems so it's a love-hate system really.

[kizu]

[B][COLOR=Teal]Desbreko I guess that was quite naive comparing the two of them. Basicly all they have in common is that they are real time. FF:CC isn't very advance in the terms of swordplay at all. I have yet to attack a monster and then pull my shield out quick enough to block a hit. I guess that I was merely comparing the appearance of the games.

I also realized a game that should be on the top of my list. Skies of Arcadia, Legends. I just love that game so much. The strategy that you have to undergo to conserve your SP. The ship battles were splendid, despite taking half an hour to get through 2 rounds. The animations were great, until you had to watch them over and over every attack. My game on Skies is over 50 hours, and I have finished no more than half of the side quest (I have stopped playing the side quest too :laugh: ).[/COLOR][/B]

[Semjaza]

[quote name='Zidargh']Well take Dragon Warrior VII for example, I'm only about 2 hours into the game but I've just experienced my first battle in it, and I found it terrible. The battle system is in a first person view and not only this, the enemies hardly budge, just the odd inch when they attack you, with no animation of the playable characters whatsoever. However, this game appears to have a strong storyline with plenty of twists in it so I look forward to getting further into the game.[/quote]

That's how battles in every Dragon Warrior game ever are. They're always first person and it's simply just another way to do things. I personally find nothing wrong with it and in many cases, I prefer it. The first battle is with a small pack of slime, so obviously it won't be exciting. You don't have access to any powers, magic, good weapons or anything else.

Also, the animation in that game for the battles is pretty damn amazing. Yes, they only move when they're attacking (the alternative is what? jumping up and down constantly or doing some breathing animation? eh -- we're also talking about hundreds of 2D animated monsters, with animation up there with a Street Fighter game when they do attack, it's a bit much to ask heh))... but it's incredibly fluid and each monster has a couple different animations for each attack. Perhaps it's not the best at first, but it definitely improves. Some of the monster designs are amazingly good.

As for the system, it depends on what you like. In the end, it's not really much different than most other RPGs because you're just stuck picking from a menu. You have to keep in mind that DW7 is EXTREMELY traditional. It's trying to appeal to long time fans of the series and not really trying to gain any new ones... especially with its pretty "eh" graphics in basically everything but the monsters lol.

Dragon Quest/Warrior 8 looks to improve all of these issues though. The battles are even in 3rd person, which should make people happy. I think the first person battles are what people complain about most.

[Zidargh]

[QUOTE=Semjaza Azazel]

Dragon Quest/Warrior 8 looks to improve all of these issues though. The battles are even in 3rd person, which should make people happy. I think the first person battles are what people complain about most.[/QUOTE]

I look forward to that then, I'll have to import it. I must take back what I said though, I am around four hours into the game now and the battles seem to be more appealings, especially now that I've learned a couple of spells and skills, I just want to level up to the max so I can kick some buttocks.

You pretty much covered what I was going to take back, heh.

[Desbreko]

[QUOTE=Sage]I have to TOTALLY disagree with you, Gelgoog! I bought FFTA not so long ago, and MAN was it a disappointment! Aside from the naïve storyline and shallow characters ("Bohoo, my hair is white in reality, and I can't return to my homeworld because of that!"), I've almost ripped all my beautiful shiny hair off when trying to tolerate the battles. The battles were:
1) way too easy - I beated the final boss in less than ten minutes without no problem whatsoever
2) freakingly frustrating - who enjoys watching battles with every second attack misses?! And not just your attacks, but the enemies' attacks as well!!!
3) oddly unbalanced: sometimes I got like seven people battling one boss, and sometimes I had three people against seven enemies - and they all had to be defeated![/QUOTE]
[color=indigo]Heh, I have to disagree with you on this one. For me, the battles were what made the game, and kept me playing for over 160 hours. (Or maybe it was just my obsessive need to complete every mission). The storyline was boring and annoying, and I often found myself reading the dialogue just so I'd know it for future reference.... But the battles, those kept me playing for hours on end.

Personally, I thought most of the battles were pretty evenly matched. Usually you're fighting the same number or one less characters than you have that are one or two levels higher than you, so until you start getting the really cool abilities you're not much, if any, stronger than your opponents. And then you have some missions where you're fighting characters that are several levels higher than you; those can get downright nasty if you're not careful. (Read: Be very liberal with the healing spells and be careful where you move -- getting cut off from your white mage sucks big time).

One question I have to ask about the easyness of battles is, "Were you using a small group of characters for all the fighting, or did you have a full clan of characters that you were using regularly?" I imagine if you only have about eight or ten characters that you're using for all the fighting, you could breeze through the main missions without much trouble. Try spreading out the battles between a full clan of 24, however, and suddenly your characters aren't going up levels or learning abilities nearly as fast. This makes blowing through the game quickly a lot harder, but on the plus side, you get a lot more diversity that really pays off in the long run. And if you want to try and complete the more advanced sidequest missions, you're going to need a large group of diversified characters. Some of those level 8 missions are downright brutal if you don't have the right kind of characters/abilities.

And about missing with every other attack...that sounds just a [i]bit[/i] exaggerated, unless you were always trying to attack enemies from the front or something. For me, the average hit% from the front, at least for the first couple dozen hours of the game, seemed to be about 50%; from the side, 75%; from the back, 90%. I wasn't missing all that often if I was attacking from the side or back, but if you attack from the front, you can't really expect to hit more than about half the time. And it even tells you the hit% for every attack before you actually enter the command, so you can judge whether or not it's worth the risk of missing.

Personally, I really liked FFTA's battle system, and I've been itching to get my hands on the original FF Tactics (if I can find it anywhere) ever since I played FFTA. Oh yeah, and if anyone wants to read more of what I think about FFTA, you can find a [url=http://www.slownerveaction.org/1up/games/gba/ffta.html][u]review[/u][/url] of it, written by me, on Semjaza's 1-Up Gaming site.[/color]

[PWNED]

I prefer the battle system for the suikoden games. They are based as an old-school rpg battle. Party of up to Six versus a party of up to six, character with highest speed goes first, high technique stats counter attacks easily, up to three magic runes per person, enemys can flee, be teleported away, killed automatically, their weapons be rusted, sleep,petrified, silenced, resurected ot to mention Unites and combinded spells.

It is far better than the final fantasy 8 battle system because of

1)the draw system(I don't wanna spend an hour just trying to get 99 Ultimas).

2)SOME OF THE BOSSES WERE WAY TOO SIMPLE. (fOR EXAMPLE: the fight against Seifer at the end of disc 3, if you have Odin)

[Zidargh]

[QUOTE=Daermon_Nashabe]I prefer the battle system for the suikoden games. They are based as an old-school rpg battle. Party of up to Six versus a party of up to six, character with highest speed goes first, high technique stats counter attacks easily, up to three magic runes per person, enemys can flee, be teleported away, killed automatically, their weapons be rusted, sleep,petrified, silenced, resurected ot to mention Unites and combinded spells.

It is far better than the final fantasy 8 battle system because of

1)the draw system(I don't wanna spend an hour just trying to get 99 Ultimas).

2)SOME OF THE BOSSES WERE WAY TOO SIMPLE. (fOR EXAMPLE: the fight against Seifer at the end of disc 3, if you have Odin)[/QUOTE]
Another FF8 basher, sure it wasn't the best RPG out there, but I still certainly enjoyed it, as I did with pretty much every Final Fantasy game.

I do recall FF7 having some simple battle systems, especially if you got the Knights of the Round summon, then you simply are invincible if you immediately summon that. It almost instantly kills [spoiler]Sephiroth[/spoiler], and I mean, that's just an example. So simplicity can be good at times.

[PWNED]

[QUOTE=Zidargh]Another FF8 basher, sure it wasn't the best RPG out there, but I still certainly enjoyed it, as I did with pretty much every Final Fantasy game.

I do recall FF7 having some simple battle systems, especially if you got the Knights of the Round summon, then you simply are invincible if you immediately summon that. It almost instantly kills [spoiler]Sephiroth[/spoiler], and I mean, that's just an example. So simplicity can be good at times.[/QUOTE]

Well sorry but you at least need a challenging boss battle in an rpg from time to time.
Because for example: the battle against Abodimation (Sorry If i misspelt) in Suikoden 2. You only have two guys that are strong against undead and you are constantly healing Freed Y and Nanami. You have to gauge your spells and hold onto the powerful spells like Charm Arrow and Battle Oath. THis opposed to FF8's boss fight against the two gargoyle creatures from the end of disc 1 or the battle against the Rock bird in Grandia.

another example is the battle agianst the beast rune in Suikoden 2. the creature has two heads the right head using magic and the left using physical attacks( Both of these are immune to combined spells), the rune in conjunction with the heads does an extremly powerful spell against the whole party.The left leg gives random status to your party, the right leg resureccts fallen parts of the beast rune. So this fight is nowhere near simple, as a matter of fact It is nearly too complex for some people.

[OlgaTheDwarf]

Maniac Mansion for the nes (or computer if you were lucky). What other point and click RPG has ever given you the round about option of "complete and utter MELTDOWN" as the only real form of attack you have.

Other than that, my personal favourite is Final Fantasy 5. During battle, it's your average turn-based atack system. Personaly, I like the simple, as long as it still offers some sort of meat in the package. As for this game, the "meat" was it's job system, in which you got to completely control what type of fighters your characters would be. The job system added an incredible amount of depth to the system, while the simplistic element of actually fighting made me want to play it over ang over again.

The job system is also featured in FF-Tactics. But, Tactics also had very complex (and in my opinion, quite boring) fights. That is my oppinion, I know quite a few people who will disagree.

[PWNED]

Wait I have forgotten two of the greatest rpgs of all time, Eye of the Beholder and Baldurs Gate. These two have refined D&D rules, These are usually confusing but you eventually don't notcie how complex the rules and just have fun. And no matter what anyone says nothing will beat the Neverwinter Nights battle system.

[James]

[color=#707875]I think it's probably a good idea to point out that many of these games have different approaches for a reason. A game like Neverwinter Nights is obviously different to a game like Final Fantasy, for a variety of reasons.

In the same way, I wouldn't even begin to compare Final Fantasy to Zelda.

Whether you appreciate the turn-based system, or the real-time system, it must be acknowledged that both have their individual strengths.

Final Fantasy's system allows for a level of depth and tactical ability that just isn't involved in Zelda. You're spending more time worrying about statistics and strategy, than the physical action of moving your character around and swinging a sword.

Whereas obviously, Zelda aims to be the more intuitive game (and the game that puts you more directly into the action), by virtue of the way the player interacts with the character. So both games are very different in all sorts of ways. Which one is better will mostly come down to personal taste, because I'd be inclined to suggest that both games are actually in different genres. I wouldn't classify Zelda as an RPG, even though it has RPG elements.[/color]