Timekeeping in games

A debate has emerged between fans of real-time strategy and turn-based strategy (and related genres) based on the merits of the real-time and turn-based systems. Various reasons are cited when arguing the merits of each. Arguments in favor of turn-based systems include:

• Players are able to plan their moves to a greater degree given the extra time available to them.
• Games are more fair due to a lack of reliance upon player reflexes.
• Game designers are able to offer more tactical options to the player.
• It is more realistic to control multiple units intelligently using this system.
• It is easier to keep track of what the enemy is doing since the player can see every move as it happens (not taking into account fog of war).
• Turn-based games can have better artificial intelligence, as they are able to rely upon a greater amount of computer processing power.

Arguments in favor of real-time systems include:

• Real-time games are more realistic. In real warfare, all armies can move simultaneously, as in RTSs. Armies taking turns, as in TBSs, is unrealistic.
• Sitting around and waiting for turns to end is boring.
• Thinking (and acting) quickly is part of the strategy and provides an additional element of challenge.
• Real-time systems add to players' sense of immersion, are exciting and can produce a rush of adrenaline.
• Turn-based systems originally existed out of necessity due to hardware restrictions, not due to any added elements of realism.
• Turn-based games are difficult to master due to their complexity (i.e., the number of minutiae they simulate).

A response by game designers

Various adaptations of the real-time and turn-based systems have been implemented to address the various shortcomings of the respective systems. These include:

Timed turns

Timed turns appear in many turn-based games, and are designed to resolve the issue of one player waiting an inordinate amount of time for the other to complete his or her turn. For instance, in Chess, the use of stop clocks is common. Tick-based games are another example of games where turns are restricted in some way by a real-time clock.

Simultaneously-executed turns

Simultaneously-executed turns (also called "phase-based" or "We-Go") address the issue of turn-based games taking too long, as well as the issue of normal turns not being realistic due to their sequential (e.g., "I-Go-You-Go") nature.

Partially turn-based

Many other games that are not generally real-time retain the notion of real-time play during specific sequences. This is in order to speed up portions of the game where players would otherwise have to slog through actions that were unnecessarily made turn-based. Notably, the role-playing computer games Fallout and Silent Storm are turn-based during the combat phase, and real-time throughout the remainder of the game. Some games have been criticized for omitting this feature.

Real-time with pause

"Real-time with pause" (also called "pausable real-time" or "active pause system") to some degree addresses the latency issues found in real-time games. In real-time games with an active pause system, players are able to pause the game and issue orders without having prospective actions be made obsolete by the rapid passage of time. Also, this resolves issues players may encounter where orders must be given to multiple units at the same instant (normally an impossibility in real-time games (unless the very same order is issued to all the units, in which case they can simply be band-boxed)).

None of these remedies are perfect. They usually retain some of the issues of the original systems, and often introduce new issues that were not present before. However, they do show some ingenuity on the part of game designers at addressing common complaints among gamers.

See also

• Real-time tactics
• Turn-based tactics
• Computer role-playing game
• Console role-playing game