quote: Original post by MadKeithV

Strange as it may seem, I tend to agree with Lubb here. In most CRPGs, there is a distinct lack of a game. It''s a world simulation with some story elements, and generally it isn''t even all that fun to play. I remember getting Ultima8, and hating the interface, but slugging through it to see "what would come next." When I found a cheat to see the end-game animation, I never touched the game again. That was ALL the incentive the game had to keep me going.

May I suggest that either you were the wrong target audience (I don''t think so, but maybe) or the "simulation elements" weren''t deep enough and framed around a game.

For it to be a game, I think any simulation element has to have a series of challenging decisions.

Take exploration. If exploration simply reveals new art, then that gets old really quick. But if there''s a feedback system, with some kind of challenge, and it intensifies (greater risk for greater reward) then I think this might attack the problem.

Oh, and no cheat codes...


--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote: Original post by Wavinator

You sound like what I call a "finisher." You play games to get them over with. Sure you have fun doing it, but your goal is to beat a game and move on to the next. For you, "40 hours of gameplay" and "consummable product" became accepted development goals. You probably want mostly sequential levels, tight mission objectives, and clear right / wrong, success / fail conditions. You want to know where you stand. In game terms, you want to be told what to do, because "play" for you is meeting a successive series of challenges leading to an end goal. Am I right?

For a lot of people this is a good thing. It allows you to see yourself getting better and have a sense of direction. That was one of the reasons I dropped Baldur''s Gate. I didn''t have a sense that my characters where getting anywhere. It''s also the reason why I liked the Zelda games. It gently prods you onwards but still giving you enough freedom to explore other areas first.

quote:
I''m an escapist. When I play a game, I want the kind of feeling I get from good fiction, especially (for me) science fiction: That "sense of wonder." I want to be taken to a place I''ve never seen before, and step into shoes that I''d never be allowed to fill.

For the escapist I suggest staying with fiction. There is no greater escape then that of your own imagination .

quote:
It''s the reason I don''t need a goal, or (for me) a storyline.
I just need a world that''s consistent and functional enough to make me believe I''m there. This is getting harder and harder as expectations of detail rise, which is one reason the gaming world has been cursed (IMO) by one damned find the keycard, mission-based level game after another!

You are not looking for a game. You are looking for a digital community. A place where you can define your own position in the world to become. The only way to do this is massive multilplayer and ditch the game, otherwise the community would become stale.

quote:
You''re wrong (in my case, anyway). I want a game world that is professionally crafted: Well drawn characters, consistent world fiction, lush and fascinating history.

Again its not the game that is interesting it is the world itself and how others interact.

quote:
I want to be kept occupied while I MAKE MY OWN PATH through the game world. I DO NOT-- let me repeat... wasn''t loud enough... _I_ _DO_ _NOT_ want to be told where to go, or what to do. (Call it an authority thing... )

For any sort of story or plot then this idea will work. Even in real life this idea doesn''t work. Maybe instead of being told what to do maybe you could be suggested what would be good to do .

quote:
Many games of old that you probably haven''t played did this, by the way... Pirates!, Elite, Escape Velocity, Starflight, Privateer... so it''s not impossible, it''s just harder than your typical level based game...

Elite was great, but after a while I reached a point where I was really doing anything new and so I lost interested. The same goes with Privateer, I found that I was doing the same stuff over and over.

A massive multiplayer Elite would be cool.



-------------
Andrew

quote: Original post by acraig

For a lot of people this is a good thing. It allows you to see yourself getting better and have a sense of direction. That was one of the reasons I dropped Baldur's Gate. I didn't have a sense that my characters where getting anywhere. It's also the reason why I liked the Zelda games. It gently prods you onwards but still giving you enough freedom to explore other areas first.

Yup, for some people this is good. For others (like me) it's lame. Of course, it really is a matter of degrees. In Starflight I *liked* that there were hints of ways to go via an in game message board with rumors and news. I also liked this at the beginning when I was learning to play Civilization ("Our might is wanting! We should build Chariots and conquer the world!!!!!")

But once I'm past the hand holding phase, I like to strike my own course. I don't think this is incompatible with a sense of progress, however.

quote:
For the escapist I suggest staying with fiction. There is no greater escape then that of your own imagination .

Grrrrrrrrrrr!!!!! No!

Ficton is too dull because it's too static. I want an environment that can respond. Fiction can not.

quote:
You are not looking for a game. You are looking for a digital community.

No, I'm a fan of games like X-Com, Civilization, Pirates!, Elite, and Starflight. These games were emphatically NOT digital communities. Rather, they were games that trusted the player to figure things out.

Arghh... Okay, I'm starting to make level games sound like coddling. I admit that I feel this often, that a level is trying to coddle me. But this is NOT to say that players who want directed play are somehow inferior to players who want free-form play. It's simply a style difference.

I'm miffed by the fact that we free-form folk are getting left in the cold as level-based game after game comes out, though.

quote:
Again its not the game that is interesting it is the world itself and how others interact.

Hmmm... both these are true. It's not either or. I REALLY want concrete, scalable gameplay. But I want it in a kick a$$ environment.

quote:
...wavinator...
I want to be kept occupied while I MAKE MY OWN PATH through the game world. I DO NOT-- let me repeat... wasn't loud enough... _I_ _DO_ _NOT_ want to be told where to go, or what to do. (Call it an authority thing... )

...acraig...
Even in real life this idea doesn't work.

Hence why I play games.

quote:
Maybe instead of being told what to do maybe you could be suggested what would be good to do .

And if I refuse?

Maybe it's an old school vs. new school game design philosophy thing. People who didn't play Elite or Starflight or any other open ended game have NO CLUE how on Earth such an idea could be implemented.

It's easy. Set the challenges in the world, then let the player find them. Put pressure on them to do so. Give them repeatable, scalable gameplay that they can go back to when stuck.

Example? A space trading game with space combat and exploration. Exploration is risky and costly, but rewarding. Combat in it's various forms (piracy, bounties, mercenary work) get harder and more challenging the further out you go (and the longer you play?). Trading has the same constraints.

The player chooses what to do. The player chooses where to go. Economic pressure (maintence, docking fees, whatever) put pressure on the player to DO SOMETHING, but the game doesn't make them choose what.

quote:
Elite was great, but after a while I reached a point where I was really doing anything new and so I lost interested. The same goes with Privateer, I found that I was doing the same stuff over and over.

Ahhhhhh.... the curse of the open ended game: Closure. Totally agreed. I'm tackling this!!! I think I'm going to kill you after a certain amount of time, or make you retire. Then you get a eulogy summarizing your feats (or lack thereof).

Pirates! did this, and I think it might work well. 'Course, there might be an option to continue, maybe as your son or something...

quote:
A massive multiplayer Elite would be cool.

I'm not a MM player, but I still would like to see this.

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Edited by - Wavinator on November 21, 2000 6:00:29 PM

-----The problem with most computer games is that while you can easily imagine a computer version of most any board game, many computer games cannot effectively be re-created as board or table games. This leads me to believe that the game design of most computer games is not very impressive, and limited experience has shown this to be true, and not just in the case of RPG''s. - Lubb

Which is why the Computer Games industry is still considered Young by all standards (or at leats MY standards ). Once it matures, I think we can get games that are worthy of playing, but I think the main benefit we get out of board games is the interaction with OTHER PEOPLE. It will be a long time (if ever) before computers can simulate a believable human opponent. Anyway... I think I have ranted enough about the AI of today

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

quote: Original post by Lubb

-----The problem with most computer games is that while you can easily imagine a computer version of most any board game, many computer games cannot effectively be re-created as board or table games. This leads me to believe that the game design of most computer games is not very impressive, and limited experience has shown this to be true, and not just in the case of RPG''s. - Lubb

This I find very confusing. Setting aside the fact that I can easily see Starcraft, Fallout or Alpha Centauri as a board game, I must ask...

why ON EARTH is this your criteria?????

I can''t imagine skateboarding, or race car driving, or paintball as a board game either. Given they can not be effecitvely re-created as a board game, does this mean they are automatically not very impressive?????

Most confused I am...


--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote: Original post by Wavinator

Example? A space trading game with space combat and exploration. Exploration is risky and costly, but rewarding. Combat in it''s various forms (piracy, bounties, mercenary work) get harder and more challenging the further out you go (and the longer you play?). Trading has the same constraints.

The player chooses what to do. The player chooses where to go. Economic pressure (maintence, docking fees, whatever) put pressure on the player to DO SOMETHING, but the game doesn''t make them choose what.

Have you tried Space Merchant? It''s a turn-based mulitplayer web based game. It has all the things you mention here. Right now I am in a nice trading vessel and helping to finance my alliance. It''s a nice diversion during the day .




----------
Andrew

quote:

Example? A space trading game with space combat and exploration. Exploration is risky and costly, but rewarding. Combat in it''s various forms (piracy, bounties, mercenary work) get harder and more challenging the further out you go (and the longer you play?). Trading has the same constraints.

The player chooses what to do. The player chooses where to go. Economic pressure (maintence, docking fees, whatever) put pressure on the player to DO SOMETHING, but the game doesn''t make them choose what.

wait until we finish our game... it''s exactly what you''re after.



No More Clones!
Stop The Madness!

quote: Original post by aegrimonia

wait until we finish our game... it''s exactly what you''re after.

Hah! You wait until I finish MY game!

Good to see someone else is in to the same type of game!!! The steady march of level games may go on and on, but at least folks like you and acraig give me hope!

Can''t wait to play it! I''ll have to check out Space Merchant too, thx acraig!



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote: why ON EARTH is this your criteria????? - Wav

Well, I said many games, not all.
~
The reason is because if a computer game can''t be recreated as a board game, that means it''s challenge is entirely in physical coordination. Most non-electronic games aren''t based on physical coordination. Yes, there''s a couple, like the old Operation game and Jenga? or Penga? the one where you stack the blocks up and then take turns pulling blocks out until it falls, but there''s even some logic there so that''s not totally based on physical coordination. A 12-yr-old might find guiding a snowboarder down a mountain entertaining, but most "adult" games have nothing to do with physical coordination, and an adult is probably the one who paid for the 12-yr-old''s videogame habit.
~
What I am interested in are games that can be effectively played as a board game, and yet can be converted to a computer game that makes use of one of the computer''s abilities I mentioned earlier. The game should have some mental aspect to it -- there should be some logic required to do well at it, rather than just "learning the path" through the (computer) game. - Lubb