What was the first "real-time out of combat, turn-based in combat" isometric RPG?

[Infinitron]

Today's turn-based isometric RPGs usually aren't really fully turn-based. They're hybrids - turn-based in combat, real-time outside of combat. This is an underrated innovation that people now take for granted. More important than RTwPness of combat, IMO.

In retrospect, I think if these RPGs had more time to develop before the Infinity Engine games hit, turn-based combat might have never have gone away. The interval between purely turn-based and purely real-time was too short. You had Fallout in 1997, but that was very rudimentary and then the Infinity Engine took over a year later. We had to wait for the entire tactical RPG genre to die out before Divinity: Original Sin was able establish the supremacy of the real-time/turn-based hybrid model.

But what about the games that came before Fallout? Was there anything that could have potentially jumpstarted this process earlier?

 

[Cross]

But what about the games that came before Fallout? Was there anything that could have potentially jumpstarted this process earlier?

Ultima 6? The Dark Sun games? Jagged Alliance 2? The Temple of Elemental Evil?

It's quite pointless to speculate about the trends of 90's cRPGs because there were so few developers left making games in the genre that it was impossible for those trends to be established in the first place. You'll notice that despite the enormous commercial success of Baldur's Gate, nobody made RTwP RPGs either, except for Black Isle for the practical reason that being Bioware's publisher meant they could reuse the Infinity Engine.

 

[Infinitron]

Ultima VI was pure turn-based, JA2 and TToEE are post-Fallout.

Beyond the speculation about the evolution of the genre, I am genuinely interested in knowing who did this before Fallout.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Today's turn-based isometric RPGs usually aren't really fully turn-based. They're hybrids - turn-based in combat, real-time out of combat. This is an underrated innovation that people now take for granted. More important than RTwPness of combat, IMO.

In retrospect, I think if these RPGs had more time to develop before the Infinity Engine games hit, turn-based combat might have never have gone away. The interval between purely turn-based and purely real-time was too short. You had Fallout in 1997, but that was very rudimentary and then the Infinity Engine took over a year later. We had to wait for the entire tactical RPG genre to die out before Divinity: Original Sin was able establish the supremacy of the real-time/turn-based hybrid model.

But what about the games that came before Fallout? Was there anything that could have potentially jumpstarted this process earlier?

Um, the Infinity Engine games don't have turn based combat. Sure, time is MEASURED in turns, but it moves along if you don't pause. It's nothing like Fallout (or Arcanum if you turn it on).

 

[Zarniwoop]

Sorry, Arkenim lol.

 

[agris]

Today's turn-based isometric RPGs usually aren't really fully turn-based. They're hybrids - turn-based in combat, real-time outside of combat. This is an underrated innovation that people now take for granted. More important than RTwPness of combat, IMO.

In retrospect, I think if these RPGs had more time to develop before the Infinity Engine games hit, turn-based combat might have never have gone away. The interval between purely turn-based and purely real-time was too short. You had Fallout in 1997, but that was very rudimentary and then the Infinity Engine took over a year later. We had to wait for the entire tactical RPG genre to die out before Divinity: Original Sin was able establish the supremacy of the real-time/turn-based hybrid model.

But what about the games that came before Fallout? Was there anything that could have potentially jumpstarted this process earlier?

Is this in regards to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turns...tially_or_optionally_turn-based_and_real-time ?

 

[Infinitron]

Today's turn-based isometric RPGs usually aren't really fully turn-based. They're hybrids - turn-based in combat, real-time outside of combat. This is an underrated innovation that people now take for granted. More important than RTwPness of combat, IMO.

In retrospect, I think if these RPGs had more time to develop before the Infinity Engine games hit, turn-based combat might have never have gone away. The interval between purely turn-based and purely real-time was too short. You had Fallout in 1997, but that was very rudimentary and then the Infinity Engine took over a year later. We had to wait for the entire tactical RPG genre to die out before Divinity: Original Sin was able establish the supremacy of the real-time/turn-based hybrid model.

But what about the games that came before Fallout? Was there anything that could have potentially jumpstarted this process earlier?

Is this in regards to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turns...tially_or_optionally_turn-based_and_real-time ?

Not sure what you're referring to. In regards to that Wikipedia article? No.

Anyway, it looks like SSI's Dark Sun games technically fit the bill, although they appear to have been extremely static outside of combat so you'd rarely see any real-time movement other than your own. It took developers time to get this right.

 

[agris]

Infinitron I thought you were trying to update or fact check that article with "the first game to do this was..".

 

[Roguey]

Anyway, it looks like SSI's Dark Sun games technically fit the bill, although they appear to have been extremely static outside of combat so you'd rarely see any real-time movement other than your own. It took developers time to get this right.

The opening of the first one had some time-based aspects, e.g. if you took too long to get to the arena when you were called they'd assume you were trying to escape and attack you.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Faery Tale Adventure 2: Halls of the Dead released in 1997 and had real-time movement outside of combat with the game shifting to turn-based when entering combat. It's also the best-looking isometric-perspective RPG ever made.

Thanks for pointing out another way in which Bioware ruined CRPGs.

 

[V_K]

In retrospect, I think if these RPGs had more time to develop before the Infinity Engine games hit, turn-based combat might have never have gone away.

It's a very Interplay-centric view. On the one hand, you had RTwP games way before BG of FO. On the other hand, the demise of turn-based had a lot more to do with Diablo than with BG. While RTwP games were hugely popular in late 90s, past 2000 Bioware was almost the only studio doing them, everyone else went full action.

 

[Infinitron]

Faery Tale Adventure 2: Halls of the Dead released in 1997 and had real-time movement outside of combat with the game shifting to turn-based when entering combat. It's also the best-looking isometric-perspective RPG ever made.

https://youtu.be/mTzcS-8ebxk?t=1140

Doesn't appear to be turn-based.

 

[V_K]

FTA2 is an interesting case. Technically, it's RTwP. But when you're in combat, the game autopauses each time your character has nothing to do, and you can't unpause it without giving a new order. So for all practical intents and purposes it plays like turn-based with simultaneous turns. It's still not very tactical, since you can only control one of your characters in combat.

 

[Infinitron]

It also looks like the developers were huge Ultima VIII: Pagan fanboys.

 

[V_K]

Not really, the only thing the two have in common is that sprites have black outlines.

 

[mihai]

What about Albion? Released 1995 and had actually three modes - 2d realtime, 3d realtime, 2d tactical combat. I always wondered why some of the exploration was 2d and some 3d..

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

I think it's about time someone mention Spiderweb (I'm pretty sure Infinitron will refuse to).

Exile (1995) had a very fast paced overworld travel where all your team was represented by just one Avatar which darted around at hyper speed (though still technically turn-based, it felt real-time), which, when battle started, sprung your party of six onto the battle field and combat was much slower and fully turn based.

When he upgraded the graphics for the remake Avernum 1 (2000), it was now more properly isometric and involved a lot of instances where you'd jump from a more real timey feel overworld into a set-area turn-based combat arena.

When you think about it, that's what the Might and Magics (1986-) did, have you wander about in hyper-speed (even though it was kinda-turn-based) overworld travel and then zoom you into a different screen for properly turn-based combat.

As V_K says:

the demise of turn-based had a lot more to do with Diablo than with BG.

And the Infinity Engine games were funded via an expectation to grab some of the Diablo hype, hence they tried to mimic the permanent real-time action, even though they also tried to maintain traditional turn systems. But, traditionally, pretty much all the cRPGs you care to mention will have some element of change to time and movement depending on if you are in or out of combat.

 

[Infinitron]

Not really interested in turn-based that feels real-time.

The tell - NPCs that move around in the world independently of you: https://youtu.be/gyTN1_hryFA?t=350

In some of the old tile-based games, if you waited long enough, the game might pass your turn automatically and monsters on the map would move, but that's not true real-time.

 

[Roguey]

Exile (1995) had a very fast paced overworld travel where all your team was represented by just one Avatar which darted around at hyper speed (though still technically turn-based, it felt real-time),

That tedious step by step movement certainly didn't feel real time to me.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

FTA2 is an interesting case. Technically, it's RTwP. But when you're in combat, the game autopauses each time your character has nothing to do, and you can't unpause it without giving a new order. So for all practical intents and purposes it plays like turn-based with simultaneous turns. It's still not very tactical, since you can only control one of your characters in combat.

During combat, it was possible to change which of the three Brothers you controlled , but you would still only control one Brother in each combat round. I think that was one of the three main failings of the game; they should have given the player control of all three characters, and then in recognition of the fact that this would result in combats lasting longer, they should have reduced the frequency of combat while increasing the rewards (loot, skill advancement).

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

Not really interested in turn-based that feels real-time.

The tell - NPCs that move around in the world independently of you: https://youtu.be/gyTN1_hryFA?t=350

In some of the old tile-based games, if you waited long enough, the game might pass your turn automatically and monsters on the map would move, but that's not true real-time.

For CRPGs, Dark Sun, but honestly this real-time movement turn-based combat mix would describe most of the JRPGs made in the ‘80s and early ‘90s. Are we not counting Dragon Quest or Final Fantasy? Does it have to be real-time to turn-based on the same map?

 

[Jason Liang]

Interesting, I thought you meant rpgs with outside of combat "timers."

Sid Meier's Pirates! for example, has an environment that changes in real time and a clock that keeps running (although it did not have tb combat). Any game that can put you into tb combat while you remain idle should count.

Obviously we have several examples of older adventure games with real time clock systems.

Maybe something like Sorcerian? I've been archiving some of the older VG&CE issues and that's a game that comes up.

What about Defender of the Crown? Or MegaTraveller? I sort of feel like it would be a space rpg rather than fantasy. OTOH there's also some older LotR computer games like War in Middle Earth, etc...

Regardless, I'm sure there's something WAY before Dark Sun.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

For CRPGs, Dark Sun, but honestly this real-time movement turn-based combat mix would describe most of the JRPGs made in the ‘80s and early ‘90s. Are we not counting Dragon Quest or Final Fantasy? Does it have to be real-time to turn-based on the same map?

Final Fantasy had step-based movement, a separate combat screen from the dungeon/overworld exploration screen, and enemies that (with a few exceptions) did not appear on the exploration screen. The FF series was more or less the same in these regards as Pool of Radiance and the other Gold Box games.

 

[Hyperion]

Super Mario RPG.

 

[Luckmann]

The word you're really looking for is "Continuous Turn-Based" (CTB), probably. Afaik, all the early "real-time outside of combat, turn-based in combat" games were really just simulating "real-time" by having the turns continue whether you moved or not.

This is different from what D:OS/2 does, for example, because it's actually never truly turn-based, it just simulates a turn-based environment for the purpose of combat - outside of the combat bubble, the game is still fully real-time. You're just mechanically forced to adhere to a turn-based structure for the purpose of combat resolution.

What gets to me is that there's still no game that have managed to pull off the apparently genius idea of having turn-based combat but still allow you to fucking pause during real-time so you can do set-ups; no, you just have to sorta stumble into combat like a buffoon and then try to resolve the resulting cluster-fuck in a vacuum. It was an issue in Fallout: Tactics, and was especially irritating in Wasteland 2 because it pretended to be a tactical combat system, but it's still a thing in D:OS1, D:OS:EE and D:OS2. Such a simple fucking thing to do, too.