The Videogame Battle System Trinity

From my experiences in videogames, there are 3 different kinds of battle systems. There may be more, and if you want to correct me, that is what the comments section is for. But I can basically round up all the gaming battle systems into one of three catigories:

• Turn-based
• Tactical, or
• Hack-and-slash

I'll start off with my favorite. Hack-and-slash! I love games in where you can charge right into a battle and deal massive damage. Also, jumping, running, slashing, shooting, etc makes these kinds of games highly action packed, and makes them incredibly fun and adrenaline pumping. Games like Zelda, Castlevania, and Devil-May-Cry, fit into this category. I love these games because you are constantly in movement, you don't just sit there and wait for the next move. There is always somewhere to go, and some enemy to try new maneuvers on. 

I guess the downside to this is that if you blindly just hack and slash without any method, you could just kill yourself numerous times and make you want to toss the controller away. 

Next is Turn-based, this is a system I was raised on. Final Fantasy, Atelier Iris, and Breath of Fire, all incorporate a turn-based battle system. It is be highly repetitive after awhile, to the point where you just press the same button over and over to beat the battle quicker. Once you have gone into 1 battle, you have basically been in them all, but the wide array on badguys and skills are what keeps you pushing through the game. Not a bad system in my opinion, but not for people who enjoy more active gaming. 

Now to the greatest demise in gaming (in my opinion), the Tactical Combat System. Any Advance War-esque game where you can only proceed in combat via a select number of squares, is just frustrating for me to play. Games like Eternal Poison, Agarest War Zero, Phantom Brave, etc, fall into this category. The fact that I have to spend the first 4 turns just getting to the enemy in the battle field automatically turns me away from this battle style. 

It's very slow, very repetitive, and usually comes with the most idiotic of battle rules (Eternal Poison gives you a game over if you run out of MP, other games give you a certain number of turns to finish the battle before game over). It's like they tried to make a board game and turn it into a videogame, and I think that is dumb. It may just be my bias, but I really don't see a redeeming factor in tactical battle systems. It's good for for certain people who enjoy them, but it has gotten to the point where I just start refusing to play games outright if they have this battle system.

But that is just my opinion, I am sure there are people out there who enjoy it, and I'd like to hear reasons why down in the comments section.

FAQ

What about FPS's and Fighting games?

FPS games like Call of Duty, fighting games like Skull Girls and Mortal Combat, and other games which require high amounts of action falls into the Hack-and-Slash category. The weapon of choice may be different, but the result and way it goes about is still the same. (Basically any game where one can button mash could be considered a hack-and-slash)