Should a game provide an objective challenge for players to test themselves against, or should a game deliberately even out the differences between players so that all are satisfied? (Assume that both things are easy to do.) I''m thinking of why I never play games like chess or starcraft - I either always win or always loose, depending on my opponent. If the game compensated for the player of lesser ability, would these games suddenly be fun again? What about other types of games, and single-player games?

Well we''ve gotten as far as realising that we should allow the players to be able to configure the controls for a game. I guess a lot of what you''re talking about comes down to what the game designer had in mind for the player. What i would ask is - when does configuration over step the line of what the designer planned.

Eco Terrorist - a name given to people who work in favor of the environment. Very interesting yes?

Perhaps you could let the player control how he wants to play,
for exemple :
- does he prefer challenging or easy,
- does he wants tactical or stategical aspects developed
- opponents can be more or less defensive, neutral or offensive
- are resources easily available or not
- is life costy
- ... ideas ?

perhaps you can have several profiles predefined.