You are the only person I've heard from that likes third person.

I like third person as well.
Actually I constantly switch from first person to third person, depending on the situation. When traveling, I'm always at third person, looking at the environment around me while traveling forward, something I can't do in first person.
When in combat, it's a mix of both. In interiors, I prefer first person since the camera can sometime be very messy.

Exactly it wouldn't sell if those games were like that. Van Burean for example, turned based new engine better graphics and look how far that got.

Of course! How could we forget about Van Buren, the game which sent Interplay from making recorded profits to near bankruptcy! If Interplay was smart, they would have been pumping out sequels to Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, that game was massively successful with it's mainstream approach.

Exactly what? I don't get your point here. Of course TES5 or FO3 wouldn't sell well if they had graphics exactly like their 1990s predecessors, but no one ever seriously suggested that they do.



Van Buren was canceled before it could sell. Meanwhile, they decided to develop instead Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, which sold the ambarassing number of 17,000 copies. And which certainly wasn't turn-based. What do Interplay's inept management's decisions have to do with how well turn-based games sell? Or do you consider the failure of FOBOS proof that real-time games don't sell?

And FYI, Van Buren had both turn-based and real-time combat.

You should really put some sarcasm brackets on that.

Well fallout 3 did a better job at that.



No I really don't consider FOBOS proof that real-time games sell better but fallout 3 probably wouldn't have been successful if it was turn based. What I'm argueing is that there would be more turn based games if turn based games were the norm. You think bioshock or F.E.A.R. or borderlands would be such a hit and a game that everyone would play if it was turn based. Like I've said if turn based games flourished the market there would be more turn based games. I just don't see that many turn-based games sold any more so I don't see them as money makers like fallout 3 or Bioshock and other games that are successful.

With as big of a marketing budget as Bethesda's, a well-done turn-based Fallout 3 would likely be pretty successful too. Even if not so much in the US then certainly worldwide.

And you are still to make a coherent argument, since your claims that turn-based games don't sell or that people wouldn't pay 60 bucks for chess are laughable.



It probably wouldn't, but mostly because Bethesda has no experience with turn-based games, so they would probably not make a good one.



These are not sequels to established turn-based franchises. Do you think an FPS set in the Final Fantasy world would sell as well as Final Fantasy XIII?



You don't see Final Fantasy as a money maker? Or Dragon Quest, the latest installment of which sold 2 million in just 2 days? What is your definition of a money maker, then?

Well, to be fair, the past two Final Fantasy games were real time MMOs, though FFXII was a singleplayer MMO. Granted, they both had turn-based mechanics for initiative but they were as real-time as the NWN games.

FFXIII is not an MMO and sold 2 million units so far in Japan alone.

This new one is gonna be turn based. Apparently people didn't like it as a real time game.
:/

Oh, didn't realize that it had been released yet (it's not for PC so I didn't follow it much). I was talking about FFXI and FFXII (which was a singleplayer MMO, gameplay wise). FFXIII is turnbased.


FFXII was mediocre at best but that didn't stop reviewers from hailing it as the second coming (like they do with all big name games) and selling well. That said, FFXIV is a MMO to replace FFXI.

With as big of a marketing budget as Bethesda's, a well-done turn-based Fallout 3 would likely be pretty successful too. Even if not so much in the US then certainly worldwide.

And you are still to make a coherent argument, since your claims that turn-based games don't sell or that people wouldn't pay 60 bucks for chess are laughable.

-I really don't see how chess and soccer has to do anything with video games. Comparing soccer to chess is the same as comparing turn-based to fallout 3 styled game isn't a very good metaphor.

It probably wouldn't, but mostly because Bethesda has no experience with turn-based games, so they would probably not make a good one.

-I'm sure they could have and would have made a turn based game but why would they? If Bethseda would have thought "Well gee if we made this game turn-based and it would us make millions" I'm sure they would have, but nope they wanted to make something that sold and flourished.

These are not sequels to established turn-based franchises. Do you think an FPS set in the Final Fantasy world would sell as well as Final Fantasy XIII?

-I actually think that would be a cool idea, Oh wasn't there that final fantasy MMO that was like that?

You don't see Final Fantasy as a money maker?
-Yeah its a money maker and popular and thats why they've made like 20 of them, if it wasn't popular and a majority of gamers didn't like it, it would have died off.



What exactly are you arguing? So far you've only proved that you want to disprove and disagree with everything I write. I've made my point turn-based games don't appeal to the majority of gamers and if fallout 3 was turn-based I doubt they would have got a game of the year. Sure dragon age got game of the year but turn-based was optional, most new games with turn-based in it have the ability to turn it off. A full out turn-based game without the ability to turn off the turn base system doesn't appeal to mainstream gamers if it did there would be more turn-based only games sold and fallout 3 would probably have been a turn-based game if turn-based was popular and sold well. What is there to argue against that? Theres more real-time games than turn based games being sold these days? And why is there more real-time games than turn-based games because game companies make cash. Sure there are popular turn-based games out there, and some are still being sold but the majority of games being made are real-time for a reason. I never implied that turne-based games aren't being sold its that a minority of games are turn-based and the majority games aren't turned based. If you like turn-based games fine so be it, I like turn-based games too I don't hate them I'm not anti-turn based but all I'm saying is that fallout:NV is not going to be turn based because its based off fallout 3, and when fallout 3 was coming out there was that same dead-end argument about it not being turn-based, and guess what Bethseda didn't make it turn-based and it was for a good reason because they wanted to make money and people complained that it was made for the mainstream gamer and that it was all hype.

My vote is for Bethesda style. The originals are great games, but I am a Bethfan at my heart.

That turn-based games, specifically RPGs, are in no way obsolete and that they do sell.



I just want to disprove silly bull[censored]. It's just a coincidence that this is what most of your "arguments" consist of so far (e.g. claiming that what we want is a new game based on FO1 engine or claiming that people wouldn't pay $60 for chess, that no turn-based games are money makers)



Chess is turn-based, soccer is real-time. And there are plenty of both soccer and chess video games.



So you're saying that the majority of gamers like it, and yet you say that...



And taking all kinds of games into account is yet another strawman argument, since it's obvious that FPS games are not going to be turn-based. If you took only RPG sales, and worldwide ones, not just ones in the US, you'd see that real-time is not really any more popular than turn-based in this genre.



Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest are not mainstream games, with millions of sold copies?



Yes, the good reason being that they prefer to make the same kind of games they've always made and aren't fond of turn-based games themselves. Not that turn-based RPGs don't sell at all.



I know that FNV is not going to be turn-based. Never said that it was.

Pop Cap games has the most financially successful game design model and they make and sell casual games (basically flash games).

Fallout 4 should be a Facebook game, they have the most mainstream appeal.

That turn-based games, specifically RPGs, are in no way obsolete and that they do sell.

-Okay so they aren't obsolete MY BAD! OMFG I agree with you or are you going to argue the fact I agree with you.

Chess is turn-based, soccer is real-time. And there are plenty of both soccer and chess video games.
-Does chess and soccer take place after a nuclear war and have anything to do with fallout other than the fact that in fallout 2 there was character named Bishop?


So you're saying that the majority of gamers like it, and yet you say that...
-That was a typo I just corrected it.


And taking all kinds of games into account is yet another strawman argument, since it's obvious that FPS games are not going to be turn-based. If you took only RPG sales, and worldwide ones, not just ones in the US, you'd see that real-time is not really any more popular than turn-based in this genre.
- I'm not arguing just RPG games I'm arguing every type of video game in general. I'm sure you have a nice big chart of video game sales that prove that, I base my argument off the fact I just went to the video game store and noticed that majority of the games on the shelves aren't turn-based.


Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest are not mainstream games, with millions of sold copies?
-I never said they weren't mainstream and never argued that they don't sell million of copies. How many games out there are like them though? Mario Sonic, Sports games, Bioshock Series, FEAR, GTA series, Bordlands, Zelda, Call of Duty series, Battlefield series, majority of games are like those and are not turn-based. Whats your conclusion as to why there are more real-time games than turn-based games on the shelves?


Yes, the good reason being that they prefer to make the same kind of games they've always made and aren't fond of turn-based games themselves. Not that turn-based RPGs don't sell at all.
-Turn-based games sell, but there aren't as many out there compared to real time games. Can you actually name more than 5 games that are on the shelves that are in the video game stores that aren't used and are turn-based?

So your saying my argument is flawed because I say there are more real-time games than turn-based because they are popular and are in the majority and make cash?


Fallout:NV is not going to be turn-based because they want to appeal the mainstream gamers and many people don't like that well too bad fallout:NV is not going to be isometric turn-based game because Bethseda makes more money that way simple as that any other logic than that is communism and deserves to get nuke in face from Liberty Prime. Haha thats humor... okay it wasn't that funny.

Well, I'm arguing just RPGs now. Of course there are many genres where turn-based is not a viable option, and of course Fallout is an RPG, so let's focus on this very genre.



As I said, there's no point in comparing FPS games or GTA to RPGs in that regard, no more than comparing chess to soccer. Are there more real-time RPGs that sell millions of copies than turn-based RPGs that do?



Sure. But shelves in American, European and Japanese stores can be vastly different.



How many times do I have to list all of your arguments that I have refuted?



Fallout: NV is not going to be turn-based and isometric because Bethesda is the publisher, and they are not fond of turn-based games, and Obsidian couldn't possibly add a turn-based mode in the timeframe they have.

Not all genres work well in turn-based but most genres that can be turn-based can also be real time.
Final Fantasy XIII
Glory of Heracles
Sands of Destruction
Spectral Force Genesis
Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story

There's a lot more on Japanese shelves at the moment, but these are 5 recent releases in the US.

That only proves that developers have some kind of infantuation with RT and aren't making TB games.

Which is funny, considering that there's been no RT game yet that can dward Jagged Alliance 2 v.1.13's tactical depth and complexity.

Okay the winner is James L. Farmer Jr.

FO3 is perfectly fine the way it is.

That has, Turn-Based games are great too, and those like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_IV http://www.kings-bounty.com/eng/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroes_of_Might_and_Magic and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Temple_of_Elemental_Evil_(video_game) are some of my most favorite games evarz. Oh, and not to mention http://zoome.jp/violet/diary/184 YEAH BABY!!!

ITS BETTER A FPS STYLE, AND PRESS THE RIGHT STICK AND RUN, WOW!

Wow.