EvilWolf;n9305541 said:
While I completely agree with your first point, your second point isn't exactly true. Take for example a game like Counter-Strike; the game requires a considerable level of both strategy and tactics to excel at it. By extension any FPS with a Search & Destroy or equivalent gamemode would also require the same level of strategy and tactics to succeed in it. While I despise the gamemodes; free-for-all and team-deathmatch also require a level of strategy and tactics as map awareness, knowledge of possible enemy locations, attack methods, weapon loadouts, etc. are crucial in winning any engagement beyond simply spraying and praying.
Well...
“No Battle Plan Survives Contact With the Enemy”
That quote is probably the most importent thing to really consider when your talking about games that take place in realtime (really, in turnbased paused games as well of course... but not to the same level as a realtime type of a game)... yes, you can plan for exactly how you are going to go about a round of Counter-Strike... but chances are, if the opponents are atleast of about equal skill (or if they got lucky), your plan is going to get blown to pieces... at which point you have to revert back down to pure reactionary and trained muscle memory type of stuff. Your not going to suddenly stop in the middle of such a fight when one of your guys goes down and go
"Oh, ok... well... since we are one guy less now we will probably have to... etc, etc, etc"... you can't stop like that in games like that, all you can do is rely on falling back on your base levels of tactics and what not, go with your gut instinct, muscle memory as well if you will, etc.
I will take Suhiiras example here as well, XCOM... and give you a video which perfectly explains what I mean with why turnbased games, or games with pause in them, tends to be more tactically deep then any realtime type of a game.
This is a video from Beaglerush's Twitch page (which section to look at can be found in the paragraph below)... Beaglerush is probably one of the best XCOM players out there, atleast when it comes to people who play on Twitch and Youtube (Beaglerush mostly hangs out in twitch these days though)... but even though that, he is one of a very small number of people who has actually beaten XCOM 1 with the Long War mod installed on Impossible Ironman difficulty (and if you don't know what that actually means... only 1% of all the people who own XCOM 1 on steam has managed to win the game on Impossible difficulty, and that does include both playing with and without the Ironman option on (aka, part of that 1% is where people would be able to savescum their way through the game)...when you then add the Long War mod to it, it becomes even more difficult... because if I do not remember this wrong, Long War's easiest difficulty "normal" is either about the same, or more difficult, then the Impossible difficulty on Vanilla XCOM 1). First of, there is a fair bit of banter going on in the video, but that is just how Beaglerush does things (it is one part of what I like about him though), so try and ignore that if you don't care for it.
Anyway... the particular portion of this long video that I am going to point you towards, starts at about 42 minutes, and ends at about 1h and 33 minuts. Yes, it is about a 50 minutes long segment of just one single mission, but it perfectly shows what I am talking about. Where Beaglerush ends up in a fairly bad situation, and how he manages to work his way out of it with tactics and a deep knowledge about the game, and a little bit of luck as well, etc... and hell, even parts of this tactical deepness starts to happen way befor the mission even starts, where he roughly knows which kind of mission he might get sent on (since the game does tell him what kind of map it is etc), and as such he builds his team, and their equipment, to take that into account, think he spends about 16 minuts on doing that part alone befor the mision starts.
If you don't feel like watching 50+ minutes of that video... then I guess I will try and boil it down to you... basicly, the reason players of a realtime game (like an FPS for example) would potentually manage to win that scenario, that Beaglerush finds him self in, would not be due to deep tactical knowledge and skill... they would potentually win due to their twitch reaction ability, and skill in pointing the crosshairs at the right location in the world to kill the enemies, and some basic levels of tactical knowledge. If they had stopped and tried to essentualy reason and work their way out of it with deep tactical knowledge, like Beaglerush does in XCOM, then they would probably be dead befor they got that far. You just don't have time to take into account every minutia and detail and option of tactical depth once your in action in a realtime game, you have to act, and probably act right now as well, to not get into an even worse situation because you spent to much time on thinking in the realtime game.
It's not like the turnbased and pause and play games are actually more tactically deep... the actual possible tactical depth might be about the same is about the same in all kinds (although, if you add things like attributes and skills and what not, where a dice or a % roll vs the skill dictates the outcome, then it will be a bit more deep, since you would have a lot more to have to consider in how to handle stuff)... it's just that your able to actually utilize the entire available tactical depth a whole lot more in turnbased/pause games, then you would ever be able to in a realtime type of a game... because you don't have time for "fancy" and/or complex maneuvers for the most part in realtime games.
