CrimsonRyu17 wrote:O RLY? You're forgetting that you basically have to use the X button all the time in Turn-based. It's like a mouse, "pick this, pick this, pick this." NOW who's mashing the X button?
Try mashing the X button in Dragon Quest VIII and you won't make it through the first dungeon alive. :p Compare this to oh, say, Star Ocean, where mashing the X button got me through half of the game.
Then it turned into "Mash the L1 button repeatedly."
In turn-based you have to take time to, y'know, THINK. Can your healer pull off a healing spell before the enemy's turn comes up? What if he can't? How much damage can the enemy approximately do? Is it wiser to cast a healing spell when you don't really need it in hopes that it will go after the monster's turn this round, or do you take a chance and cast it next round and hope you don't die? Is the enemy going to cast a spell, or is it going to use a physical attack? Should I buff my characters with protective spells or is it wiser to try and take him down quickly?
Compare this with an action RPG. Mash X! You're not mashing X fast enough! Is he hitting you? Mash X faster! Mash it harder! Keep mashing! Mash it down!
And hey, who wants to have the enemy practically stand there in front of you with a huge "HIT ME" sign as you pick the "carefully coordinated strategy" for your next move?
So you're insulting turn-based games for a TECHNOLOGICAL NECESSITY? You know, in early games on the NES or Atari, we didn't HAVE a million processors and 450 Gigahertz video cards to have enemies with realistic movement and the like. Thus, it was necessary to have enemies standing still to avoid the system breaking.
You see, video game designers thought that people would have this thing called IMAGINATION. I'm sure you wouldn't know what that is, being a trigger-happy psycho who just HAS to keep pressing that X button like it was your life support. See, the implication was, "These people are running around and dodging and parrying as if they were fighting in real time, but since the system can't handle that, you'll just have to have them do that in your mind."
When systems became more advanced, it was simply traditional to still portray turn-based RPGs this way, because it was the roots of the genre.
Also I'd like to point out an RPG can still be turn-based and have characters running around. Wild Arms 3 is a good example of this, where the characters still move instead of just standing around. But it's still turn-based.
I used to care about that but then I was missing out on some great titles just because it wasn't turn based but like you
See, I understand, but here's my thing. If I'm not having fun playing the game, it's not worth it. Games are primarily meant to be fun. I can accept a game with a terrible story if it has fantastic gameplay. A good example is Super Mario Bros. Absolutely hideous story. Gameplay that is unbelievable. I love that game. Compare that to Vagrant Story. Vagrant Story had a fantastic storyline. Very well done. I hated the combat system. I wanted to find out what happened next in the story, but it felt like a chore to get there. I just wasn't having fun. I can't put up with gameplay I hate for a story I like, but I'm more than willing to put up with a story I hate for gameplay I like.
To anyone else who reads this post: Please note that Crimmy and I are good friends and we are just jabbing at each other. Do not take my words as angry or the like. We're just messing around. :p
I actually do like turn based games for the most part... I just can't seem to get into some of them that people seem to love... but that is me. I feel like it is a huge waste of time, as they feel so similar, but that is only my opinion, and it is biased since I like real time quite a bit. 
I'm playing Lost Odyssey and the Final Fantasy games here and there.
