Share this project

Done

Share this project

Done
A story-driven CRPG set in the world of Monte Cook's Numenera.  We are deeply appreciative to all of you who made this possible.
A story-driven CRPG set in the world of Monte Cook's Numenera.  We are deeply appreciative to all of you who made this possible.
You can continue to support Torment by visiting our web site.
A story-driven CRPG set in the world of Monte Cook's Numenera. We are deeply appreciative to all of you who made this possible. You can continue to support Torment by visiting our web site.
74,405 backers pledged $4,188,927 to help bring this project to life.

Updated our Journal (26): Decision

212 likes

TL;DR: Combat vote results completed – statistically it was a tie! Torment: Tides of Numenera’s combat (and Crises) will be turn-based combat. We’ll address concerns expressed by Real-Time with Pause fans in our design.

Hello,

Your participation in the combat discussion and vote has been terrific! Almost 20% voted and over 2000 comments were made on our forums alone. That’s twice the turnout I expected, and it’s great to see all of the passion our backers have for the project. I’d like to thank everyone who got involved.

It’s been an exciting vote! The leading system changed a couple times early on and the final tally is: 7,267 TB, 7,052 RTwP and 782 Indifferent. With the vote at 48% to 47%, and with those who voted “indifferent” being more than triple the difference between the TB and RTwP camps, it is essentially a draw.

As we explained in Update 24, we were leaning toward turn-based combat because we believe it’s better suited for the kind of tactical complexity we're looking for through our Crisis system. We believe it’s a stronger fit for bringing narrative elements, including dialogue with NPCs, into hand-crafted combat situations. We have considered the vote, but more important than the vote are the comments (not just in our forums, but on many of the community forums and articles on this topic). Your comments have helped us greatly in understanding why people have the preferences and concerns that they do.

We have decided to go with turn-based combat. Ultimately, there are no losers here. This is all part of the process of making an RPG we are all passionate about and we think you’ll like Torment’s combat even if you voted for RTwP. While we have not been looking forward to disappointing half of our backers, we were happy to find that many of the reasons people gave for disliking TB and preferring RTwP can be addressed through the details of our combat system and encounter design. I’d like to go over some of the more common comments we saw either for RTwP or against TB and explain how we will address them.

Comment #1: Turn-Based combat can be tedious

If one were to take Planescape: Torment and, changing nothing else, switch to TB combat, the result would be miserable for many. You'd be stopped midstride in every Hive back alley to perform the same boring actions on meaningless thugs and zombies.

This isn’t what we’re going to do.

Turn-based combat certainly can be tedious, but that comes down to encounter design. As we stated during the Kickstarter, Torment will have no trash mobs—those hordes of filler battles that require little thought from the player. That type of gameplay is at odds with our emphasis on the story and character development, so each Crisis in Torment will be hand-crafted. It will have narrative relevance and consequences. We'll iterate on them until each one is a quality encounter and provides the experience we seek for that moment in the game.

If any combat situation in Torment were tedious, it wouldn’t be because it's turn-based. It would be because we failed in our goal. And our Crises aren’t just combat. They contain exploration, dialogue, and time-relevant actions and events that can exist outside of combat, like pursuits, environmental puzzles, and application of special skills. You’re going to have to work throughout the game toward your goals, and the Crisis concept is a primary way that we put your intentions to the test.

We understand the importance to you of combat not being tedious. Emphasis on encounter design is important for any CRPG, but for Torment, the bar will be even higher – we believe that through well designed encounters, and extensive gameplay iteration on them, we’ll be able to address the majority of the concerns expressed by those who favored RTwP.

Comment #2: Turn-Based combat can break immersion

"Immersion" is a tricky term that can mean a lot of things, but generally this comment is referring to the jarring sense a player gets when they're walking through a town and suddenly the whole world stops because, say, a feral dog saw them coming down the street.

Again, this isn't what we're going to do. In general, we don’t plan to “surprise” you with a Crisis. Through the design of the areas and the pacing of the game, you’ll know when and where combat is a possibility. The situation will feel tense and in some cases, you will be explicitly initiating the Crisis. This doesn’t mean we won’t ever ambush you, of course, but if we do, it will be very deliberate and not an arbitrary event.

We get that you don’t want to be pulled out of the game in this way and we’ll look for ways to keep you in control and prevent Crises from disrupting the normal flow of the game.

That said, Torment isn’t an action game. Real time doesn’t pass in conversations, for example – you have as much time as you want to decide your choice. And while exploration occurs in real-time, it won’t include twitch elements. All of your decision-making throughout the game will consistently be free from real-time considerations. Torment is a game about thinking and deliberation and will not have any actual time pressure, so turn-based combat will maintain a more consistent feel.

Comment #2a: Turn-Based combat isn’t realistic

A variation of the concern about immersion is that TB gameplay isn’t realistic. In a real battle, you don’t patiently observe while your opponents orderly take turns one at a time.

This is true, but the lack of realism is inherent in most videogame combat and gameplay (again, turn-based conversations come to mind), and RTwP combat isn’t immune to this issue. What we strive for isn’t realism, but creating an immersive experience that allows you to suspend your disbelief. In other words, realism is not at the core of Torment’s party-based combat.

That said, we will strive to make the combats as dynamic and visceral as possible – attacked characters will animate appropriately when struck instead of standing lifelessly, for example, or perhaps having readied actions such as overwatch or interrupts to take actions on the opponent’s turn. We will maintain tension and flow, creating the sense that you are in actual danger and making your tactical and strategic decisions matter.

Comment #3: Controlling the entire party in Turn-Based can be boring

The idea behind this concern is that if only one character in your party is relevant to the combat (e.g., it’s in a narrow passageway or a specific skill/weapon is needed for some aspect of it, etc.) then gameplay gets bogged down. It’s not fun to have to skip most of your characters’ turns, cycling back to the one character who can actually do something.

This problem also comes down to encounter design, and we’ll be paying close attention to this aspect in our specific Crisis designs. Strong support of ranged combat will help, as melee-focused battles can exacerbate this problem. The Numenera rules also help here because skills, while beneficial, generally aren’t required to accomplish specific tasks, and Effort can be expended to give any character a better chance of success at tasks outside their character build. Adam discussed how this works in Update 21 (in the context of dialogue, though it applies to Crisis gameplay as well), but we’ll copy it here again so you don’t have to search for it.

Using skills will be different, too (side note: I say "will," but we're still in pre-production, so any of this can change). Say there's a difficult task you want to attempt—lying to a prison guard or deciphering the text on an ancient puzzle box. Typically, in D&D-style RPGs for example, if you don't have the associated skill, your chances of success are very low, or you might not be able to attempt the task at all. In Numenera, all such tasks are treated the same, and anyone can try them. Training in a related skill or skills will lower the difficulty of the task, but even if you're untrained, you can still apply Effort.

Effort is a concept from the Numenera tabletop game. Essentially you spend points out of the appropriate stat pool (Might, Speed, or Intellect) to lower the difficulty of a task. The idea is, even if you've never been trained in lock picking, a very smart or dexterous character can, with some Effort, increase their chances of cracking a lock.

Your stat pools are renewable with rest. And of course, all of this is balanced. If you're trying to crack a combination lock created by a culture that died out millions of years ago, which requires a combination of smells rather than integers, well . . . you'd have to have a high-level character specialized in the task, who spent all the Intellect they had on Effort, just to make the task possible. That character would still have to roll ridiculously well.

Effort provides more options to customize your character and tackle obstacles. If there's a task you want to attempt—even if it's something normally contrary to your character build—you still have a chance of succeeding if you can use enough Effort. On the other hand, someone who has trained or specialized in that sort of task will have a greater chance of success, and will maintain that edge in similar tasks throughout the game.

Note also that party members can “assist” others in particular skill-based tasks, boosting their chances for success.

In short, we’re fully aware that cycling can be a painful way to play, and that this aspect of gameplay is important to you, and we’ll design the Crises to keep your entire party engaged.

Comment #4: You should implement both RTwP and TB and make it a gameplay option

This solution may sound ideal, but it wouldn’t give anybody what they really want. Area and encounter design needs of the two systems are very different. Designing for both would dilute the quality of the encounters for one or both systems, and most likely require so much time and resources as to impact the rest of the game. In a deep RPG like ours, where combat isn't even the focus, trying to implement two combat systems would lead to an inferior game across the board.

Comment #5: Planescape: Torment had Real-Time with Pause combat, so the new Torment should too

This is a reasonable perspective and valid point of view. Shouldn't we stick with what made the original great?

But is RTwP combat what made Planescape: Torment great? For some of you, the combat may have been an important part of your PST experience, and we hope that you’ll find the combat in Torment: Tides of Numenera to be at least equally enjoyable. But we don't think PST’s combat system was what most players loved about the game.

We believe PST is considered one of the greatest RPGs of all-time, not because its combat was Real-Time w/ Pause, but because of its emphasis on the narrative and on role-playing your character. We explained this in the four pillars we described in the Kickstarter, which are the foundation for Torment: Tides of Numenera:

 1. A Deep, Thematically Satisfying Story
 2. A World Unlike Any Other
 3. A Rich, Personal Narrative
 4. Reactivity, Choice, and Real Consequences

We’re using all four pillars to influence and reinforce our Crisis and combat design. Throughout the campaign, we stressed that we would find an approach for combat that worked well with these pillars. With the approach we have planned – including turn-based combat – we hope to integrate more narrative and more choice and consequence into the combat experience.

Though Planescape: Torment is the starting point for many of our design decisions, Torment: Tides of Numenera was never intended to be a game that, by default, duplicates everything PST did. It is a thematic successor that is inspired by PST, not derivative of it. The themes we are succeeding are the things that made Planescape: Torment a classic – the four pillars and other elements as described in our vision document  – and we don’t see the specific combat system as core to PST’s legacy. We have several of the people from the PST team involved in the project and we hope that you continue to trust that we will deliver the type of CRPG experience you crave.

"The Planescape: Torment experience was never defined by its combat. In Torment: Tides of Numenera, the combat is intended to complement both the narrative systems and the basic gameplay mechanics. It is a challenging decision for the team to make, and I respect and support their decision to choose turn-based."

-- Chris Avellone, Lead Designer of Planescape: Torment; Creative Director at Obsidian Entertainment

Comment #5a: Why all this focus on combat? Planescape: Torment wasn't even about that

This is kind of the opposite sentiment as the previous comment, or rather it's the other side of the same coin. Rest assured that combat is not, and never has been, our primary focus, as you can see in the four pillars above. Torment is very much about the story, the characters, the conversations, and the world, and we are focusing most of our efforts in those areas – it wasn't until six months after the Kickstarter that we even started talking seriously about combat in our updates.

If it feels like we are suddenly focused on combat, it's only because our recent updates have had that focus. In a month or two we'll talk about something else—art creation or story design or exploration gameplay or something—and then it'll feel like we're 100% focused on that.

Moving Forward with You

We're excited about what we have planned, and as you see more of what we’re doing, we think you’ll be excited, too. We’ll be talking about other aspects of the design in the near term, but we’ll certainly be talking more about Crises and combat down the road. We hope that you’ll continue to trust our judgment and dedication to the project and to you. Remember that you’ll have future opportunities to influence the game’s development, including aspects of its combat. We’ll be seeking your feedback in the future and you’ll be able to weigh in on details later to help us hone the experience.

We're grateful that we can solicit your feedback and your input throughout this process. This style of development would never have been possible even five years ago, let alone fifteen. It's encouraging to see your interest and passion in what we're doing. We learn a lot from your comments and posts on these topics, and we come that much closer to creating something great.

We will not take for granted the trust that you placed in us this past spring. We are making this game for you, our backers. When you play Torment, we want you to feel you trusted us wisely. We’re not looking for mass market success – our only metric is your satisfaction, and we are working hard toward that goal every day. Thanks for your support and understanding,

Kevin Saunders
Project Lead

P.S. We have a couple more things to say, but they’re more about our communication and our gratitude, so we’ve put them on tumblr to keep this update focused on combat.

Wesley Hodgson, zmonkey, and 210 more people like this update.

Comments

    1. Creator Siilk on March 30

      Not surprised but still very disappointed. Using inflexible and severely limited turn-based combat, what a perfect way to make the game a big turn-off. Sure, fixes for minor issues of the turn-based combat are covered in this article but the biggest flaw, lack of simultaneous actions, is of course left unaddressed; there is no way around that. And to think that I was actually looking forward to the T:ToN's combat. Now it seems that I will have to endure battles to advance the plot instead of enjoying them.

    2. Creator Clive Howlitzer on March 30

      Awesome news.

    3. Creator Weichang Lai on July 31, 2014

      Arghhhh... I just saw this. Would have voted no.

    4. Creator Ben Wilks on July 30, 2014

      PS:Torment was never about the combat. What made PS:Torment was the dialogue and the story. I'm actually relieved that Torment:ToN will have turn based combat. I very much prefer turn-based tactical combat over RtwP combat and even think that the Bioware Classics like Baldurs Gate and Icewind Dale would have been much better games if they were Turn-Based just like their Gold Box predecessors.

    5. Creator Terry Colligan on April 18, 2014

      I still want the game though, even though I'm disappointed.

    6. Creator Terry Colligan on April 18, 2014

      I agree with those people that feel this is a bait and switch. There shouldn't have been a vote on this simply because this was advertised as basically a spiritual successor to Planescape Torment. Additional not everyone pays attention to the updates once a Kickstarter is funded and doing a vote on this after the Kickstarter is over really upsets me and gives the perception of being sneaky (despite intentions).

    7. Creator Dawn_ on January 1, 2014

      English is just the fifth language i've learned, it isn't my natural tongue at all.
      But more than me butchering it, people even more on the internet tend to not read what others write and just take one sentence out of it and twist it out of its sense.

      You may have a better english than me, but with your response i can tell, you aren't though a better person than i am. Jerk.

    8. Creator Grain of Salt on December 20, 2013

      Delusional seems accurate. Honestly, if you butcher the english language like that each time you post a comment, it is no wonder that they didn't get the full meaning, understated implications and all.

    9. Creator Dawn_ on December 19, 2013

      What i wanted was a Torment² with another story. That's all. Without anything changed in it, combat system included. So, i do feel delusional.

    10. Creator Dawn_ on December 19, 2013

      People backed an idea of Torment which include the Combat system with its failure (that i did say was a failure but you both obviously can't read or don't wanna read others) or not.

      They wanted as I, the same game with another story since it can't be the nameless. But, they didn't want anything else to change including the combat system, on a personnal note i also wanted the same portrait for characters lol.

      So, if you change something in it, it's not the same. It's not what i wish for when they started this KS.

    11. Creator Dawn_ on December 19, 2013

      I wonder were you people learn to read.
      Where did i say that the combat system was what made Torment?
      I did say multiples times in my message that my memories of Torment include the combat system and that without it, well, it isn't completely Torment anymore.

      If you can't read or can't understand what a person say, refrain from commenting.

    12. Creator Thomas Harrison on December 18, 2013

      Shattered dreams? Oh my god. You people can be such melodramatic whiners.

      Its still a spiritual successor to Planescape: Torment. Its got a different combat system.

      I can get being disappointed. Even though they said right from the start things like this weren't decided upon, I can even get feeling a LITTLE betrayed. But holy god, you guys are acting like they just announced its going to be a game about saving the gumdrop kingdom from big meanies.

      Its still Torment. If you really think the combat system was all that made Torment what it was, you clearly weren't playing right.

    13. Creator Lukas Meindl on December 18, 2013

      @Dawn
      My good memories of Planescape Torment are mostly story-related,atmosphere-related or related to some ingenious dialogues. If you liked this game merely for its combat system than that is sad. It feels like the spiritual successor is met by following these other ingredients i mentioned. That said, I found the combat system often confusing and chaotic, unlike in Fallout 1 (and 2) where I had a better feeling for planning combats tactically.

    14. Creator Dawn_ on December 18, 2013

      shattered dreams, we will never have a spiritual sucessor of Torment, but another game name Numenera.

    15. Creator Dawn_ on December 18, 2013

      @Skyleaf

      I backed over a hundred games in a year spend over 10k and since i am sick, if i wasn't i woud have spend way more. But, there is more down than up, honestly.

      But, i didn't mind at all. But, the way InXile mess up with this shit vote.
      Giving people (if that's true) the voice to choose the combat system on a cult game where most people backed from nostalgia. Those people backed for a "spiritual sucessor" as the sentence was spammed a lot by InXile.

      Now you get a complete another game because the combat system change completely the way you play. It's not anymore a "spiritual successor" but only a game using the name of Torment to make more money.

      So, sincerely, i will deeply shut down and maybe completely stop backing things at all.
      And we all know that if they had said it before hand it will be a TB (and i love a TB but for me Torment is a Rtwp. Point. My fond memories of the game are also linked to the combat system) they will have way way less money.

      So to be blunt it's as if someone screw my memory of the game. A game i loved deeply. I understand that the people who wanted TB are happy, but people like myself which cherish the game with it's up and down (because the combat system was a mess that's true but that was a part of it too).

      Those People can't be happy and they feel someone stamp on their favorite game and use its name in order to attract people. I am not angry, i don't feel betrayed. But sad.

    16. Creator Matteo Gismondi on December 15, 2013

      @Chris

      As you might have understood I am not a big fun of TB games. FF is not anymore TB? that's a good news I might try it out then thanks!

      To me the combat is also important. As I said I'll try the game for sure, but I would rather prefer to see this type of "big decisions" taken during the kickstarter. It is very convenient to do if after. If I knew from the beginning that the game would be TB I, and probably some other backers, would not have given money.

      Still as it is too late to get a refund I'll give it a try for sure.

    17. Creator Nameless on December 15, 2013

      @Chris - "Torment is not really about the combat though, and that's the mistake a lot of people are making. It's not Diablo or Icewind Dale, nor is it even Baldur's Gate. Combat is more of a side dish rather than the main course - no one who has ever played Planescape Torment and thinks it's great will point to the combat as one of the things they liked."

      Wow, I like how you have the authority to speak for all Torment fans. Great way to give your arguments weight...

    18. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on December 13, 2013

      @david WL2 has not been released. WL2 beta has. It was an add-on to get the beta.

    19. Creator Chris J Capel on December 13, 2013

      @Matteo Gismondi: "I am very disappointed. The comment 5 says it all, If I back-up a new episode of final fantasy I am expecting TB, if I back-up a new episode of Torment I am expecting RTwP. I'll give it a try as I paid for this game but I am pretty sure that I'll soon get bored. That's a shame I trashed my money, backing for something I didn't expect. I guess that's the risk of backing this type of project."

      Torment is not really about the combat though, and that's the mistake a lot of people are making. It's not Diablo or Icewind Dale, nor is it even Baldur's Gate. Combat is more of a side dish rather than the main course - no one who has ever played Planescape Torment and thinks it's great will point to the combat as one of the things they liked.

      Hopefully though you'll give it a try, since there are different types of turn-based combat in RPGs - give InXile a chance to wow you. If you say a game has "first-person shooting" in it the game could be Call of Duty, Half-Life, Serious Sam, Deus Ex or even Portal, all very different games with different combat. Give InXile constructive criticism when you play the beta (or see it being played), don't just say "I don't like the combat", say specific things you don't like and they may be able to change it. That goes for everyone else complaining too.

      And the final correction - Final Fantasy XV doesn't have turn-based combat, and the series has been moving away from TB combat since XII!

    20. Creator David Bernier on December 13, 2013

      Anyone still not received their WL2 activation keys?

    21. Creator Kitiana on December 13, 2013

      Comment #3 - You guys completely misinterpreted this comment.

      It's not about keeping the whole party engaged. The very fact you have to micromanage every member of the party is what's tedious, it doesn't matter WHAT they have to do.

      I also am annoyed that people keep talking about the depth TB combat has. I don't find Fire Emblem Awakening or Xcom combat particularly challenging tactically. In fact, in TB combat the only times I find it difficult is when it's blatantly unfair (randomly spawning/agroing enemies you couldn't prepare for happening at the very end of your turn).

    22. Creator Matteo Gismondi on December 12, 2013

      Comment #5: Planescape: Torment had Real-Time with Pause combat, so the new Torment should too

      I am very disappointed. The comment 5 says it all, If I back-up a new episode of final fantasy I am expecting TB, if I back-up a new episode of Torment I am expecting RTwP. I'll give it a try as I paid for this game but I am pretty sure that I'll soon get bored. That's a shame I trashed my money, backing for something I didn't expect. I guess that's the risk of backing this type of project.
      Pillars of Eternity is getting better and better and obviously it's RTwP, so I'll have something to play around the end of 2014.

      I wish you the best of luck, and hope you'll be able to change my mind as I deeply hate TB games.

    23. Creator Arvid Granat on December 12, 2013

      Thanks for the update. I was kind of expecting RTwP, which would still have been playable, like in the original Torment. I voted TB, though, and I'm happy that this is what you will be going with.

    24. Creator Silver on December 12, 2013

      @inXile
      Thanks for the update & your take on it all. I voted for RTwP, but I'm used to playing TB games as well. Do I think TB combat will fit T:ToN the best though? Not yet, but I'll give you every chance to prove to me that it does between now and the release date.

    25. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on December 12, 2013

      @barbarian the activation is for the beta site. it's for your feedback.

    26. Creator barbarian_bros on December 12, 2013

      Don't notice my previous comment... its for the WL comments page

    27. Creator barbarian_bros on December 12, 2013

      It's a bit strange : i received an inXile mail to invite me to activate my WL2 account to get the beta... it's strange cos my account is activated since.... the ranger center was online.

    28. Creator Janitor on December 11, 2013

      I'd prefer something like the might and magic series had in 6 and 7. Where you enter turnbased mode if you want to get tacticool with combat. But i hope it will turn out alright, turn-based combat is my usual go to.

    29. Creator adwf on December 11, 2013

      @dungeoncrawl I agree, it's gonna be a PR disaster now. It'll be very hard for fans of RTwP to give it a fair review (myself included), although I will try!

    30. Creator dungeoncrawl on December 11, 2013

      Oh god. It just hit me that, not only do we have to hear these guys whine over TB now.....but also when the game comes out! 'This would have been soooo much better has it been RTwP. See? We TOLD YOU how bad this was gonna be and now its proved out JUST LIKE WE SAID. PS:T was soooooo much better.' Ugh. Shoot me now.

      ps. I voted for RTwP BTW.

    31. Creator Marc Noordzij on December 11, 2013

      I trust inXile to make an enjoyable game. While I voted RTwP, I feel somewhat reassured by Kevin's update and it seems to me they know what they are doing. I'll just have to wait and see how it turns out. At the very least the update assures me they are aware of most of my concerns regarding TB.

      Don't understand what all this ranting and raving is about. It's not a lot of effort to keep it polite, is it?

    32. Creator Corey Butler on December 10, 2013

      Super disappointed by this announcement, at least Eternity will stay true to their promise of sticking to infinity engine type gameplay. I feel somewhat duped.

    33. Creator Skyleaf on December 10, 2013

      PE will be a great game with RTwP combat.

      ToN will be a great game with TB combat.

      I wanted RTwP for ToN but I accept that inXile will do the best they can to produce a great combat with TB.

      I know people are upset but come on...asking for refunds?? calling PE out for using RTwP?? Btw, the combat in their new trailer looks amazing.

      I think by now, we should have all learned about what to expect when putting your money in on a kickstarter project. Every single project I've backed has its ups and downs but I expected as much. If you feel you keep getting the short end of the stick when supporting a project perhaps its time you tell yourself, no more kickstarter investment for me.

    34. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on December 10, 2013

      @Thomas Beekers I think a lot of people feel upset because when they backed they felt like they were in control but now after the vote a portion of players feel they lost control.

      I think only time will heal that wound.

      Also, I hate to ask but seven months of preproduction seems like a tad much. Has production started yet?

    35. Creator undecaf on December 10, 2013

      Dlux said:

      "I am truly relieved how you guys finally figured out that RTwP combat is an inefficient absurdity and unsuitable for a game. It only took about 20 years, but now we finally know. :) If only the guys at Obsidian were as smart as you and also went turn-based on Project Eternity, then this nonsensical RTwP combat system could have finally died. Darn. Hopefully Obsidian will listen to you guys and make Project Eternity 2 a thematic sequel - with turn-based combat of course!"

      Indeed. PE would've looked to become even better than it already does had it been made TB. Really a shame they didn't go that way. Maybe next time. ;)

    36. Creator Shaun Huang on December 10, 2013

      @dlux please... you make me feel bad for voting Turn-Base because i saw how Crisis will clearly fit better with Turn-base.

      Turn base games like XCom are so predictable and boring if not for cheap tricks that didn't come from the Turn-Base system, but add-on that are unrelated to turn-base. Perma-death (ie, this is so easy that you should never die if you're good, else you get heavily punished). Forcing a lower skill cap with a Russian Roulette RNG accuracy system (ie. luck > your plan). Hiding enemies and allowing patrols so you can agro multiple groups if unlucky (since it's turn base, you can't react to patrols by moving back after you see them, so it's purely luck based). These gimmicks can be applied just as easily to real-time systems!!!! When you want to see the value of turn-base system vs real-time, you have to strip out all the gimmicks and look at the core of the system.

      Here are some examples.

      In turn-based, enemies stand still for you to aim your AOE. In RTwP you need to calculate the projectile speed and distance to hit multiple moving targets (and avoid multiple moving allies).

      In turn-based, your victim always wait for you to finish your action from start to finish. It is very rare that actions take more than 1 turn (except as handicap to bosses to make it easier for players). In RTwP, it is usually much easier to implement interrupts, and planning ahead so that your actions will not be interrupted is always a factor to consider.

      The reason why many RTwP games tend to be shallow is because designers dumb them down for accessibility reasons. It is not because of the inadequacy of the format. Look at Dragon Age 2 on Normal vs Nightmare difficulty. In normal difficulty, both of the factors i stated above are nullified because there's no friendly fire and low damage so you always tank-n-spank then simply AOE on tank. Also because enemy damage is so low, you don't need to worry about interrupting them, nor worry about your actions being interrupted. Try beating Dragon Age 2 on Nightmare, it has been nerfed in many patches so anyone should be able to do it as long as they think beyond the basic level of tactics (you hit me, i heal, then i hit you, repeat) and start utilizing the real time system for things like interrupt, constant formation shift, and aiming at moving target (so your front-line doesn't need to take damage to hold your target in place).

      In any case, I'm happy with Torment team's decision because Crisis are not pure tactical combat, but a platform for RP scenarios. Since the core of RP scenarios are dialogue, puzzle, and skill challenges, the best system to choose should be the least costly and simplest one that will not get in the way of implementing interesting ideas. Imagine that Turn-base is a tablet PC, and RTwP is a top-end gaming desktop. One is vastly superior in raw power, but there is a time and place where the other will shine regardless of strength.

    37. Creator Wind_Falcon on December 10, 2013

      I'm just wondering if the voting would have again been a draw if they kept their mouth shut before the vote and didn't say they favor TB...

      Either way, we'll live and see how all of this turns out. It may be a masterpiece after all. It's just infuriating that, after all the excitement I'm sure every backer has had inside them from the moment this Kickstarter went up, it WON'T be the Torment we all wanted and have envisioned since 1999...

    38. Creator Yaniv on December 10, 2013

      @Lastan
      "I don't think the result of the vote classifies as a surprise."
      -
      It's not that important but it is the surprise of less involved backer that get TB game while he expect to get RTwP.

    39. Creator Gene on December 10, 2013

      @dlux Project Eternity is RTWP, but it's a new system being built from the ground up. There are going to be a minority of upset people who fire up Eternity and have a non-vancian magic system, no xp for kills, and systems that feel closer to Dragon Age and modern RPGs, than to the Infinity engine games.

    40. Creator ☆ dlux ☆ on December 10, 2013

      >Thomas Beekers said:
      >"We also always avoided using the term spiritual successor, and have consistently used the
      >term thematic successor and defined front and center what that means to us."
      I like how Inxile obtained the rights to the Torment trademark although it was not really necessary, seeing that the game is only a thematic successor and not a spiritual succcesor. :D

      >Thomas Beekers said:
      >"It should not be particularly hard to believe we were undecided, with a slight lean towards
      >RTwP, and said so from the start."
      I am truly relieved how you guys finally figured out that RTwP combat is an inefficient absurdity and unsuitable for a game. It only took about 20 years, but now we finally know. :) If only the guys at Obsidian were as smart as you and also went turn-based on Project Eternity, then this nonsensical RTwP combat system could have finally died. Darn. Hopefully Obsidian will listen to you guys and make Project Eternity 2 a thematic sequel - with turn-based combat of course!

    41. Creator Lastan, The Penultimate Castoff on December 10, 2013

      @Yaniv, I don't think the result of the vote classifies as a surprise.

    42. Creator Yaniv on December 10, 2013

      @Thomas Beekers
      "We also always avoided using the term spiritual successor, and have consistently used the term thematic successor and defined front and center what that means to us."
      -
      If you like to resort to semantic then you said "a game crafted in the torment tradition". Crafted in the tradition to my understanding is at least strong as spiritual successor.
      -
      BTW: Funnily, you also said "we get to know what you want and you don't get any unpleasant surprises".

    43. Creator J. on December 10, 2013

      I also think we should end the myth of "original PS:T had almsot no combat". Because it is not true. You could not end a LOT of quests without fighting and killing monsters.

      I also thnik that inXile entertainment chose this system because they were more familiar with it and had a similar version already done for Wasteland, but hey, I won't judge until I play.

    44. Creator Nameless on December 10, 2013

      @Lastan - "Anything you say can and will be used against you in the most hostile manner possible."

      Thats funny, coming from you...

    45. Creator Lastan, The Penultimate Castoff on December 10, 2013

      @Thomas, don't bother.
      Some people have made up their minds on the matter and they will not let mere facts stand in their way. Anything you say can and will be used against you in the most hostile manner possible.
      For some reason, some people here view the shift from RTwP to TB as a personal affront - betrayal, even.

    46. Creator Thomas Beekers on December 10, 2013

      Let me repeat in no uncertain terms what Kevin Saunders already said; we did not know during the Kickstarter if this game would be RTwP, or TB, or even the phase-based option was still on the table. During the Kickstarter design was in an earlier stage, as was system testing, heck, think about it, the Numenera systems weren't even finished and out yet. It should not be particularly hard to believe we were undecided, with a slight lean towards RTwP, and said so from the start.

      We also always avoided using the term spiritual successor, and have consistently used the term thematic successor and defined front and center what that means to us.

    47. Creator Kelvin Baillie on December 10, 2013

      @Dawn - I agree with you. I think InXile purposefully kept the combat open and their views on it neutral to the end to get the most money they could. Feels a bit dirty considering this is a Kickstarter and people are giving their own personal money. Would also have preferred if they had decided it from the start so this never came up or at least stated at the beginning it was almost definately gonna be TB.

      @Nathan - If anything so far is to go on, they won't listen unless its the vast vast majority of people who want something.

      As others have said, I do not have any real issue with it being TB (Even if I would prefer RTwP). I just strongly dislike the way in which the decision has come about.

    48. Creator Yaniv on December 10, 2013

      @Gene
      "For the record the devs started development favouring RTWP according to Colin McComb, but the shift to turn-based occurred later on in development as it fit better with some of their narrative focus and pre-production concepts. Don't know his exact words as I'm quoting someone who was paraphrasing him on RPG Codex."

      Well it is matter of trust. I believe that behind the above statement there are financial reasons.

    49. Creator Nathan on December 9, 2013

      Either way this game develops, I'm just excited that I will be a part of the experience. That being said I hope the devs do not listen too much to the people on here and continue the path they were going for.

      I want the story to be amazing!

    50. Creator Adrià Amor on December 9, 2013

      Well maybe Inxile missed the shoot this time but I can understand, and value myself, all the feedback about both combat systems they have gathered from ourselves. Dont need to make any war of this discussion