Turn-Based Combat Didn’t Need Saving From Clair Obscur: Expedition 33
Added 2025-05-15 20:00:07 +0000 UTCClair Obscur: Expedition 33 is an incredible game. But contrary to what some folks might be saying, it isn’t here to save turn-based combat, if only because turn-based combat didn’t need saving.
Comments
For me it's kinda straight forward: E33 looks like Bloodbourne and so people that always think of 'turnbased rpg' as an anime fest felt it was ok to try this one but haven't actually played any others for a couple of decades and so have no idea about the nuances and leaps forward the genre has made. So all of this is incredibly fresh and exciting to them, even if for fans of the genre it's just a very good refinement of some things that we've seen before. I'm not saying E33 isn't exceptional but when people first described it to me as 'I enjoy it because it has action commands' my first thought was 'so like Thousand Year Door a couple of decades ago?'.
Tim Wilson
2025-05-18 10:19:38 +0000 UTCJust taking up two points from you: 1) How about "real world aesthetics" - also as a contrast to "realistic" graphics in the sense of "photorealistic" (contrasting with what's apparently your meaning of "non-fantasy/not exaggerated")? And 2) As Marty pointed out, these games are usually time sinks. I wonder if we're aware of the waves in which people like to spend more or less time in video games (or even, more broadly, non-news media), leaving aside the obvious outlyer of the pandemic time. Or in other words: I sure won't take the time for this kind of game these days - but others might be willing to just about now more than ever. Or maybe not, my point is: maybe we don't know and are therefore regularly surprised.
JR
2025-05-16 21:49:21 +0000 UTCI am seeing people in the Youtube comments saying that they don't like turn based RPGs but liked Expedition 33 because of its action commands so we can't just dismiss the reality that the action commands are doing some heavy lifting for most people. It's possible that most people would still have picked this game up without them but I can't imagine that it would've appealed to those who outright dislike turn based games. However I think the larger draw of E33, why people latched on so quickly, is the look of it. I'm of the opinion that E33's "realistic" graphics (we really need a term for this sort of thing that isn't just realistic) drew in a larger crowd than a JRPG of a different look. Metaphor:Refantazio is a similarly high profile JRPG with big names and a big publisher but with an anime aesthetic and it didn't sell nearly as well. Heck, Persona 5 sold 1.5 million copies within the time it took E33 to sell 3 million. It'd be remiss to attribute that solely to the graphics, but not having action commands probably contributed to that as well. I also think it's fair to assert that while Final Fantasy wasn't the only turn based series for years, it was the most high profile around the world. And the various reps of Square Enix, or at least higher ups at the company, saying that "Americans don't like turn based RPGs" and the like then publicly shifting their high profile releases towards more action-based combat systems did damage to its image, if nothing else. Turn based games still released regularly but the biggest name that made them basically disowned the genre and tried to break into a more popular (at the time) genre. Square Enix also still releases them but those aren't the games that make them money anymore, now they're busy with the FF7 remakes and Kingdom Hearts. We don't even know what Dragon Quest XII is going to look like, all they've told us is that they want to make it more "mature" for however much info that gives us. Now, given the current turn based market, SE isn't even the best at that anymore, Atlus holds the crown. SE left the table and Atlus is sitting at their place, eating its dinner. But despite all of that, I can't in good conscience blame them for thinking that we didn't want turn based games for a while. Between the failures of Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon on the Xbox, the shift of most big name developers to a more "realistic" graphical style, and the public ridicule of JRPGs during the late 00s-early 10s from indie developers and big name game journalists *cough cough X-Play cough cough* I'd want to pivot away too. But it would also be remiss to say that we've long since abandoned that stance since then and SE still seems embarrassed by their turn based past. They're still committed to disavowing the genre despite its success even from their own studios and appealing to a crowd that has better alternatives for their efforts. Even after all this time, and I can't imagine FFXV's development hell was so brutal that all of their projects were put on hold just to shove it out the door. Turn based is doing better than it has in years now thanks to the skilled efforts of many other developers. But SE will probably continue to insist that it's dead despite everything and there's nothing more damaging to something's reputation than the negative opinion of the entity that used to champion it EDIT: That's not to say that I think SE should go back to making FF games turn based, I don't really care about FF. But I'd really like some higher priority placed on their smaller titles like Triangle Strategy. A sequel would be sick as hell. I just don't want them saying it's dead and using that to justify treating their lower budget titles worse. But they're probably going to, they keep releasing public statements doubling down on their NFT projects so who knows what they're gonna do next
Ryallen
2025-05-15 20:35:28 +0000 UTC
