I was reading Swords and Circuitry, and it said that there are six basic types of gamers: the warrior, the critical thinker, the story chaser, the treasure hunter, the navel gazer, and the tourist. The warrior wants to win the game by fighting. The critical thinker wants to 'out-think' the game. The story chaser wants a good story. The treasure hunter wants a lot of stuff. The navel gazer wants their character to be the most powerful, and the tourist wants to explore. So I was wondering about making an RPG that satisfies all these types. For example, if there is a troll guarding a gate, you can either kill the troll with your sword, shoot the chandelier so it drops on the troll's head, persuade the troll, sneak up to the troll and pick-pocket the key, or do a subquest for the troll in which he'll give you the key and extra money and extra stuff. Although I'm sure you can do this in a lot of games (except for shooting the chandelier maybe), the difference is that you would get points for getting past the troll as you would for fighting him. For example, if you fight the troll, you might get +50 XP and +10 combat. If you drop the chandelier on the troll's head, you would get +50 XP and +10 wisdom. If you sneak up to the troll, you would get +50 XP and +10 stealth. If you persuade the troll, you might get +50 XP and +10 charisma. If you do a subquest for the troll, you might get +50 XP and +10 fame. Now I just made up placeholders for the last paragraph because I don't have a battle system thought out or anything. What do you think of my idea? I thought of it because in some other games, if you just stealthily crawl past all the baddies, you don't get anything out of it, whereas if you fight them, you get loads of XP and stuff. So what do you think? edit: I forgot this paragraph: Since your combat score would make you better at combat, your wisdom score would make you better at thinking outside the box, making puzzles more obvious for you (and the puzzles would get progressively harder). Stealth would make you better at sneaking, charisma would make you persuade players better, and fame is a bit like charisma, except for it's harder to get, yet easier to apply. edit: addition: Also, with what Waverider said, maybe the enemies, puzzles, etc. would be harder relative to your certain skill at it. That way, if you spend all your time doing puzzles, but you end up having to fight the big boss, the boss might not be nearly as good at combat as if a level 25370 fighter fought him (but he would still be really hard, and it would be easier to beat him with a puzzle since you are so good at critical thinking). That way, it would be easier for the player to switch aspect of the game. Wait a second, a boss implies that the game is won by fighting. So maybe there should be multiple ways to win the game.

If you can work that many possibilities into as many aspects of the game as possible, you would have an incredible example of replayability by offering many different styles of play.

Most notable is the chance for a character to change their tactics as they tire of the ones they have been using, and even play the whole game all over again with a completely different style.

I can see how it would be so complex, so I would opt for a modern 3D FPS engine. I would want a 3D engine because I don''t think it would be easy to shoot a chandelier down in 2D, and it''s also a lot more fun exploring in Morrowind (3D) than it is in Baldur''s Gate (2D). I would want an FPS engine because they have the worlds that are fully-wreckable, or whatever you call them. Although I don''t think that FPSs are fully-wreckable yet, I''m sure they will be in a few years. The reason I want this is because it would be easier to cater to the critical thinker (think chandelier). I have to think of more ''puzzles'' for the critical thinker.

I think the idea has alot of merit and - if implemented properly (read: thoroughly) - could be an awesome gameplay shtick. The hardest part would probably be implementing it all together, and implementing the whole game like that. Sure, it would be relatively easy to code the troll gaurd, but then again, that''s probably only 5 minutes of gameplay.

I guess you could have a logic such as:

if (actor->killed)   switch (actor->killedby)      case weapon      case worlditem    // chandelier, pig, fallen tree, etc. 

Where you can check for any world item to be used as a killing device. Also, situtations like that need not be hard-coded, as freedom can be restricted based on the level design itself.

All in all - I think it''s a great idea. As far as different types of gamers, I think I would pursuade the troll to relieve his post and visit his favorite skin bar, get him to give me the key by spiking his Quill with date-rape drugs, then get him ousted from the company by reporting unsatisfactory customer treatment. You''d probably have to add a few more player types and traits for that though.

printf( char *MD.LeadG->GetSignature());

Hehe, MdLeadG, you''re last paragraph is really utilizing the idea to the fullest.

I think that the key to this is to make the game open instead of closed, like we''re used to. That still makes it very complex though.

Check out the fallout games, in them you can solve most problems in more then one way.

Take the final boss, in fallout 1:
1)you can kill him through combat.
2)talk him out of evil plan.
3)find and activate a hidden nuclear bomb in his base.

thats just one example but gives XP.

That''s cool. I should check it out.

Anyone?

Fallout, however, is a nifty example, but doesn''t lend itself well to extremist characters. To test, try playing either game with a character maxed out on Luck and Strength, with bottomed-out Intelligence and Charisma. Go ahead, try it.

- It''s a life''s work
-ryan@lecherousjester.com

You could play it with that character you wouldn''t be able to talk to people.. It be more like Grog smash, Grog hit bad people bad people die.