How much does a battle system effect the game itself?

[StorocnekXx]

Hello everyone and thank you for opening this topic.
I currently stuck at game designing and I somehow have no idea to solve this, unless I'll write and post my thoughts there. So if this is wrong here, or wrong in general, please (re)move this post where it belongs. Thank you very much.


So, what's this topic about?
The title probably says it all, but this is something I really keep asking me on and on:
How much does a battle system effect the game itself and what battle system will catch the players eye?

If I wanted to design a game, I want it to be unique in some way. Not something everyone can pull of, or something people might compare to other works. Having a unique battle system is one of the most important parts for me if playing a game. There are many ways of battle systems, but for the ease of it I want to put them into two major groups:

Turn based system (TBS) - Charakter have their turns, perfom actions, wait until several time has passed, perfom another action and so on.

Action battle system (ABS) - Charakter move freely, act freely, act when they want and what they want.

The thing for me is the following:
If I play a TBS, I feel like I'm less capable of what is happening in the fight. I have only a small amount of possibilities to turn a fight around. I have to plan a strategy and use my actions wisely. If I make a mistake however, I have to wait quite some time to act again, while enemys have time to act, counteract and I have little to none possibility to prevent them doing so. But, however, If I get the hang of it, pull of a good strategy, the battle seems to be to easy. Let's say you found out an enemy is weak to fire - What reason would there to not only use fire-based attacks? Maybe you ran out of Mana or whatever, but that's basically it. If you found out an enemy will use an high-damage spell every third turn, you will protect yourself every third turn. Of course, there are battle systems and games which will prevent that, by changing elemental weaknesses and strategies of enemys, no doubt, but, again, this is just for the ease of it.

If I play an ABS, I feel like I need to react as fast as possible, I feel like I have a lot to care about and a lot to think about - How to dodge the spell? What casting time do my spells have? What positioning do I need? And so on. Thing is, sometimes it's to much, sometimes it's to little. If I figure out, that an enemy is weak to fire, I can continue casting fire-spells, but I still need to hit them, I need to place them and I need to keep in mind that an enemy is probably moving aswell. Same problem with the TBS: If I make a mistake, cast a 3 second-spell into the middle of nowhere, the enemies have a lot of time to counteract.

That's that.

Let's say you want to create your own game and you definatly want to have battles (having no battles in the game is no option in this particular case) - Isn't the battle system one of the most important parts? A huge amount of time passes during battles, they give the feeling of actually being in the game, being part of it and so one. If the battle system sucks, the game itself seems to suck. You get the feeling like "Ehrmehrgehrd, again a boring fight I have to finnish, so that the story can go on". But if the battle system is good and you enjoy fighting, it's more like "Hell, yeah, I managed to pull off a good combo this fight, that's awesome!" and you get the feeling of being somehow "good" at that game, don't you?

For me this is clear: If the battle system is good, I can enjoy the game. If the battle system is might, I probably won't play the game for long.

So as most of us try to create our own games, I really want to know how much it is important for you to have a good battle system and what does it take to be a good one?

Does the battle system has to be something new?

Of course, I love ABS and I love TBS. I even like some shooters. But if I wanted to create my own game, I do not want to use any of this, because it feels like everyone uses them.

For example, let's take Blizz-ABS. It's awesome, I also put it in something I made up. It does what it should do, works fine, and even I am able to set up some battles and new spells with it. But as good as it is - it's just a regular ABS.

Let's take the GTBS from GubiD. It's also awesome. It's also easy to set up, and it also does what it should do. But again - It's just a regular Tactical battle system.

Let's even take the TBS from the XP itself: It offers a fair and common turn based system, which is easy to set up and stuff like that. But - I'm repeating - it's just a regular TBS.

I don't want to make any of these battle systems bad, the opposite is the case, I love those examples, and I love them being used in other games (FF-Tactics for example!), but I just don't like them in my own games.

But here lies the problem: If I wanted to create my own battle systems, I either need to put a LOT of work into eventing - Or learn scripting. I can't script a single bit (which is why I pointed out that even I can adjust BlizzABS), so that's not an option for me. Eventing would be the other deal. I set up an Sideview-Battle-System, but it's only for one Charakter agains a maximum of 3 enemies and is probably utterly boring and every scripted one would be better; that's for sure. I have a lot of Ideas for battle systems I'd like to use, but I just don't have the possibilities to set them up, because I lack the skill.

And that's exactly why I set up this topic. If I can not set up my own battle system, which forces me to use one a lot of people know, which is common, which is known, which is easy to set up and everything else - Will the people say "Oh yeah, that's BlizzABS, I know that", "Well, typical system", "Nothing special", "I don't like playing copied battle systems" OR will people look over it and say "Well, I don't really care about fights, I want to see the story" and so on?

That's really something that bothers me, as I, as stated, can't set up anything on my own in the nearest future, which will make myself happy, so that I am stuck in progressing, because if I don't like playing my own game, because I don't like my battle system, I have no motivation to carry on creating it. (I mean, why would I create something I don't like myself?)

Okay, so, well, that's a lot of text. I try to summarize it:
TL; DR: How important is a unique battle system for you? Would you play a game which uses "typical" systems like "BlizzABS" for the sake of the story/others or would you rather be sad for not having a unique battle system?

Thank you very much for reading this. I just came up with it. It may be full of mistakes, but I just made this up to put my thoughts somewhere. I'd be really glad if someone just writes something like "Aha", so that at least someone is responding. I don't expect anyone to join a discussion, but I really just wanted to drop my thoughts somewhere. Again, thank you for reading.


Greetings,
StorocnekXx

[winkio]

It doesn't necessarily matter how standard or unique your battle system is as long as you implement it well.  Generally, this means having responsive controls, a variety of challenges, and smooth art/animation/sound.

Also as a side note, I don't see how Blizz-ABS is "typical".  I've seen all types of games done with it over the years, including a Zelda-like adventure, a sidescrolling space shooter, a tower defense game, and more.

[R.A.V.S.O]

to be honest here, gameplay and story go both hand in hand....

I've seen and played games where the story was so bad, but the gameplay addictive enough to keep you playing for the sole reason
of the gameplay itself,

and I've also seen (and played) games where even though the gameplay was rather slow, boring and/or repetitive but the story/plot kept
you wanting to see how it ended so much you'd basically swallow your rage against the badly implemented system just to keep going,

the battle system and the plot compliment each other, when one of the fails, the other one attempts to buff it up and vice versa,
not good at making the battle-system of your dreams? try to make it up with a solid plot. Your story and/or plot just can't seem to be
as good as you want it to? if you keep it action packed (at least in the battles) you might make up for possible flaws.

but above all, what I believe to be important between these 2, is the consistency and cooperation of them both, sure you may want to
make a battle system as unique as possible (then again who doesn't?) but I'd also try to have some form of way to keep it consistent,
most unique battle systems tend to have flaws when using them along some conditions inside the game, (like a war chapter, solo sequences, you name it)
basically you'd like to seek that your system can handle changes your plot throws at you,

moving to the Blizz-ABS example.... this is one unique yet consistent system indeed, why?

it's uniqueness comes from the fact that not only can you customize it from a hack-n-slash, to shooter, to action RPG but regardless of form, never loses
it's ability to keep up to your game's needs as long as you're willing to provide the right dynamic changes to the status-quo of the moment.

but regardless of what system you use, the most important piece in making a game is:

Spoiler: ShowHide

YOU 

it is you, as a developer who can determine how a system is implemented, sure a TBS might seem ridiculously slow compared to an ABS,
and the ABS might seems rather overwhelming if you use it poorly, but in the end only you can decide how you boring or addictive your battle system can be
regardless of choice,

after all, those flashy war sequences? the adds during a normal battle? that sensation you get when you're engaging a boss you've been
wanting to kick it's ass for a VERY long time? devs have done them in more than one way regardless of how many "meh" "this battle system is too simple"
"oh look, another boss", and many other stale moments they might have had. therefore so can you.

[Zexion]

Even though it probably is not, I feel that this topic is aimed in my direction. The best advice I could give you: Learn to script. You don't need a whole ton of experience in scripting for it to become immensely useful. Especially if you do go with a side-view system. You could do a lot with events alone and use scripts to make it unique. I feel that you are going through exactly what I was going through for the majority of my time on C-P. I started working on a kh fan game years ago, but it's only recently been progressing well. It's mainly due to learning to script. I decided that I couldn't use the abs that were out there and I needed to either find someone to do it, or do it myself. With the help of this community, I managed to learn a bit of scripting which has helped me in creating things from menus to battle formulas and even that one animation script. It does take time, but it's the only way you can ensure that you will get what you want.

In regards to how important it actually is, my answer would be that it depends. You can obviously make a game without a battle system at all, but for those with it, I feel that it is really important. It is also important to remember that few people actually play rmxp games. Even the most successful ones are only extremely popular amongst indie devs and players. If you want to make a good quality game, then it is important to balance everything which is not limited to the battle system. There is story, graphics, music, controls, and other things that go into a game. If you don't have the time to learn scripting, then just focus on an equal balance because a battle system does not make a game.

Edit: Also, ravso beat me lol

[KK20]

I haven't played a variety of RPGs to really base any kind of opinion on this topic, but I personally choose to favor games with memorable battle systems. When I played Paper Mario, I was intrigued by its simple yet very player-driven design. It was something unfamiliar to the games I played before.

Of course, if Paper Mario was like super emotional and very deep/plot heavy, I'd probably remember the game for that instead of the battle system.

[Neoend]

To spring board from what Zexion said about balance; he's right, especially when you look at the RMXP community and see it plagued by incomplete projects. The thing is, going out of your way to create the battle system of your dreams is all fine and good but you need the discipline to be able to carry it through to the end. It's really easy to get caught up in a vision of what you want it to look like, and then just collapse under the weight of your vision. By balancing, you make compromises but hopefully still have something You can enjoy and also move the enjoyment from battles only and have it spread among your project. I'd say it's better to have a project where you can manage all the relatively average aspects instead of a project with one beautiful system that is tough to manage and other aspects being sacrificed.
It's doable to make something incredible, but it's on you as the maker to put in the work and commitment to make it real.

For people working with limited resources, it's not bad to have a simple battle system. Just execute it well.

[PhoenixFire]

Hmm.. I like this topic, and although I don't script either, I know enough to be able to modify existing scripts. This allows me to use the default TBS, but still make it a little bit unique, by either editing the core script directly, or, adding in scripts to modify it slightly. Although it applies to the whole game in general, it is also a direct concern with any battle system too; ease of use. If I can't figure out how to use a CBS, I won't have much interest in trying to keep playing, regardless of story/plot. Generally, I try 2-3 different possible control configurations, and if none of them work, I usually close out the game.

Other than that, I agree with what's been said already.. 

[Heretic86]

Scripts and Battle Systems are important but do not make a complete game.  Much of it depends on "your style", but first, you have to figure out what "your style" is going to be.

For me, I decided that Story and Battle System go hand in hand.  Some do well to compliment each other, yet other styles benefit from offering contrast.  Thats more of a style choice.

I got sick of Battles of Attrition (who wears who down first) and pretty much hijacked the Front View XRXS Battle System from the author.  That same author wrote a cool looking but complex Side View Battle System, but I didnt like it as much as the simple feel of RMXP's style with added functionality.

One of the things I tried to focus on with the Battle System I worked on was to maintain the functionality of what was familiar while only building on that as a solid foundation.  Eventing Battles is extremely important and many Battle Systems throw eventing right out the window.  Eventing is important because it can be used to simplify battles for players, as well as making strategy necessary for harder battles.  Eventing allows some elements of a story to be told during battle.  Thus, for my style, the Battle System and Story compliment each other.  But above all else, they need to be FUN for players.

People focus so much on the technical aspects of scripting but completely forget that writing is just as much of a skill.  Have you seen the movie "Iron Man"?  Smash hit.  Two sequels.  And it came from an Independent Studio.  Marvel Studio.  Marvel itself used to just be comic books way back in the day, well before video games even existed.  Other Indy Studios pump out some severe shit movies that barely qualifies as watchable.  The difference between the two is NOT the budget, but the writing.  Nifty special effects do not make a good movie.  Star Wars prequels.  Superior techical skills, but to summarize everything wrong with them: Jar Jar Binks.  Other Indy Studios succeed while major studios go under.  The "Saw" series was indy, but had very strong writing, practically nothing for a budget, minimal set design (one major set), but the story had so many intricate plot twists where everything tied together, it became an absolute smash hit.  Iron Man was also a smash hit because people liked the character.

Characters are NOT just a Plot Bridge to get the player from Point A to Point B.  There needs to be intrigue.  Projection.  Players need relationships with each character and different relationships with each of those characters based on the current place in the story.  Does a character betray the party?  Why?  Whats his motivation?  Can the player not like said character, but still relate to why that character does what they do?  Scripts and Clever Eventing can allow a character to betray the party in the middle of a battle.  But the Writing needs to support this as well.

People dont just "pick up" writing scripts.  People that are good at it do it every damn day, the way scripters do it every damn day.  Creating believable characters becomes their craft.  So if youre not interested in learning to script, then learn to Write.  There is pacing involved.  Characters need to grow.  They need their own personal demons to overcome by the end of the story.  The player needs to be intrigued and motivated by the actions of the characters to carry through the tedious parts for something that rewards the player.  Characters are NOT two dimensional.  They need to have their own ever changing dynamic relationships with each other.  That allows the player to project themselves on to at least one of the characters.  Why do so many made for tv scary movies suck?  Can you relate to any of those characters at all, or can you better relate to Tony Stark?  As a Writer, can you make us suprised by something one of your characters does?  Can you make us feel remorse if one of the characters dies?  Can you make us feel angry if a character betrays someone else?  Can you make us feel sympathy for the bad guy?

Challenge yourself.  Try making Mario into a bad guy, not by trying to change the well known Mario stereotype, but by looking at it from a Koopa Troopas point of view.  Thats a suprise and that can only happen with well written dialogue.  Thats our intrigue.  I never thought about it like that.

Games can be about getting from Point A to Point B as fast as possible, but games are evolving to try to tell a story while getting from Point A to Point B.  Why should I even care about Point B when Im perfectly happy to either stay at Point A or turn off the game!  Stories need to both grab and hold our interest.  So without a very solid story, no level of scripting or Battle System is going to be fully entertaining.  Partially entertained, as mentioned, maybe, but fully entertaining, no.