Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: jdjtcagle on March 01, 2004, 06:14:10 pm
-
FREESPACE games of course, but (other than that)?:)
What would be your FAV Space-Sims?
Mine other than freespace would be Tachyon and X2
-
Starfox :nervous:
-
Universal Combat :shaking::nervous:
-
Independence War 2.
-
Homeplanet. There may be more but I can't think of any at the moment.
-
Starlancer.
-
elite (http://www.users.waitrose.com/~elitearc2/elite/archive/b1022001.zip) :D
-
I-War original... eh, I guess Starfox qualifies too.
-
Hey Starlancer is free..."downloading"
-
Other than FS... hmmm... :)
Hellbender. :D
-
Originally posted by jdjtcagle
Hey Starlancer is free..."downloading"
where!?!
url please:D
-
Here (http://www.game-revolution.com/download/pc/strategy/starlancer.htm)
-
You might mention that that's the trial. ;) Starlancer full version is cheap, but not free just yet.
-
What??...
man thats screwd up the only place it says trail is the exe at the download link:hopping:
now thats misleading
-
Anyway back on topic I forgot to mention Homeworld2 "not free":D BTW what happen to Devil's_hitman and his mod for homeworld?
-
And all of those shivan ships he made
-
Just reading the forums over there he says that it's only him and one other person working on it!! He needs some help
Wonder why he hasn't come here to ask for it yet:confused:http://www.dendezyn.net/afforum/viewforum.php?f=13 (http://www.dendezyn.net/afforum/viewforum.php?f=13)
-
I don' t know. I think its a toss up between Independence War 2 (for the superior engine) or Wing Commander (the whole thing) for the superior story line.
-
Frontier: Elite 2
Nothing can ever match that game for me, barring a full sequel (First Encounters doesn't count)
-
other... sims?
:wtf:
-
The Darkening. The plot was so-so, but the game itself rocked.
-
:nod:
Tachyon's pretty damn good, as well.
-
X-Wing or Tie Fighter :D
-
Starlancer, even with all of it's faults it still is a very entertaining game.
-
PSI 5 Trading Company.
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
other... sims?
:wtf:
i with bob on this one
-
TIE Fighter, Collector's CD-ROM 1st version (the one with imusics).
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
other... sims?
:wtf:
Couldn't agree more, pal. :)
But looking through my game collection, the list would definitely have Starlancer, Starfox and X2 there. Of course, the Complete X-Wing series factors in as well.
*Throws the **** at the fan* I find Wing Commander overrated........:nervous: :shaking: *Runs and hides*
-
Warhead (http://www.angusm.demon.co.uk/AGDB/DBM1/Warh2.html) , the game that came before I-War.
-
I would have to say Tie Fighter. That game rocked.
-
WC1. Still remember swaping the disks by hand to play one mission.
Everything else followed.
(Notice in my sig that I love Freespace, too!)
-
TIE Fighter. Few things beat that.
-
Hellbender.
I played the demo that came on the windows 95 or was it 98 CD. I had it down to a science. Though I never could find the game. :(
I'd have to say Hardwar.
-
I-war 1
Tachyon
and the holiest of holy grails:
FREESPACE 2!!!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by jdjtcagle
FREESPACE games of course, but (other than that)?:)
What would be your FAV Space-Sims?
Mine other than freespace would be Tachyon and X2
Do I have to answer such a stupid question?
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Warhead (http://www.angusm.demon.co.uk/AGDB/DBM1/Warh2.html) , the game that came before I-War.
That actually sounds pretty damned good.
-
I keep pimping it cause it's brilliant :D The only problem is the hassle involved in setting up an Amiga or Atari ST emulator to play it.
I've been know to unpack my old A500 just to play it :)
-
Someone should try to build an up to date engine that can handle that. :D
-
" Personally I wish that docking was automatic as it is possible to screw
up after a successful mission and smash into solbase at 1000mph. However
it does give you a lot of training in flying the ship."
now that reminds me of something...
"Instead of firing off flares or
chaff you have to frantically target the enemy missile, wait until it
closes to under 2km and fire your MDC at it. This adds a lot to the game
especially when dealing with pseudostellar missiles which can destroy
anything within 5km."
what's wrong in that sentence? :p
Anyway, I gotta admit it does sound cool ( and the physic engine doesn't sound too complicated to set up, it's like a 3D Asteroid :p.
-
yeah. If I had some more skills, I'd try to code that. :D
-
The game looks very primative (well it is over 15 years old!) but for sheer gameplay it is one of the best I've played :) Had I-war been a little easier to mod I might have made a conversion myself :)
As for the pseudostellar missiles you're okay as long as they don't actually impact your hull. Before that your MDC vapourises the missile before it can detonate :)
-
X2 and Darkspace
-
Damn, I forgot about terminal velocity. That kicked arse, too.... there shareware-free-bit was huge......
-
yeah, it went up to that Deathstar-like level :)
-
Could probably do a TV clone with freespace, nowadays. Provided you could cram a full level in with HT&L.... might need to have fogigng for that, tho.
Still, i've always wanted to make an old-style mod, just you, a fighter and several thousand gunpoints against hundreds of enemies.......
-
Originally posted by Woolie Wool
Do I have to answer such a stupid question?
YES!!!:p :D
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Could probably do a TV clone with freespace, nowadays. Provided you could cram a full level in with HT&L.... might need to have fogigng for that, tho.
Still, i've always wanted to make an old-style mod, just you, a fighter and several thousand gunpoints against hundreds of enemies.......
Me too :)
And if I could add an orbiter or two to the player' ship, would be even better :p
-
Originally posted by Nico
Me too :)
And if I could add an orbiter or two to the player' ship, would be even better :p
That would indeed kick arse.
Shame you can;t jury rig anything with the support ship/s.
-
Lets see:
WC3 (heart of the Tiger ) played on Panasonic 3DO... Starring Mark Hamil and Ginger Lynn (she can do my loadouts anytime! ;7 )
Star Trek Academy (definately cheeseville today, but back then was teh shiznit)
Klingon Academy (Chang from St6 is your instructor how cool is that?) Much better game and still relevant for starship combat.
that and FS2 is all I love for SPACE COMBAT sims...
-
Elite, birthplace of the 3D Radar :D That really was a cool game even if it looks fecking old now ;)
I must admit 01010, you are the first person who I have EVER heard saying they enjoyed the Elite sequels! I used to get fed up with 'too' real physics, which made the game, for me, a chore to play, and constant crashes :(
-
Originally posted by Star Dragon
Klingon Academy (Chang from St6 is your instructor how cool is that?) Much better game and still relevant for starship combat.
Oooh yeah. I'd forgotten about that. Pwned, so it did.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
I must admit 01010, you are the first person who I have EVER heard saying they enjoyed the Elite sequels! I used to get fed up with 'too' real physics, which made the game, for me, a chore to play, and constant crashes :(
Never played elite but I quite liked Frontier. I think I managed to make it to the rank of dangerous or deadly before I gave up :)
-
IW2, Freelancer.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Elite, birthplace of the 3D Radar :D That really was a cool game even if it looks fecking old now ;)
I must admit 01010, you are the first person who I have EVER heard saying they enjoyed the Elite sequels! I used to get fed up with 'too' real physics, which made the game, for me, a chore to play, and constant crashes :(
I loved Frontier to death, it was just the sheer open endedness of the game, the fact that I could go wherever the hell I liked and do what I liked really appeals to me still, that's why I love games like GTA3 and Vice City too.
-
Open ended design is sooo groovy. Shame its never ever been done.
Once the story is out of the way, its like someone rips away the facade and reveals that the whole thing is just repetitive crap over and over and over and... well you get the idea.
-
If you love open ended games, you should play Universal Combat (http://www.gamespy.com/games/5222.shtml) . :nervous:
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Open ended design is sooo groovy. Shame its never ever been done.
Once the story is out of the way, its like someone rips away the facade and reveals that the whole thing is just repetitive crap over and over and over and... well you get the idea.
Well, yeah - but until we get a story-telling AI that can run-games on the fly, that's the way it'll be.
Of course, something like GTA is good because the gameplay is so well balanced - even the mundane stuff is fun. And any sports-game as well (PES, Championship Manager, etc) sort of applies, because there's no story needed atall there - that's why it's the purest form of gameplay.
-
FS2
Rogue Squadron
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Well, yeah - but until we get a story-telling AI that can run-games on the fly, that's the way it'll be.
That'll never happen. That's why I detest MMORPGs and games like Morrowind. They go against the nature of storytelling (which is the essence of all games complex games*)
*complex game: a game where the goal is not a simple contest. sports games are 'simple' games, because the goal is a simple contest. An RPG is a complex game, because it consists of a series of contests that are tied together in a that hinges on factors outside the contests.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
That'll never happen. That's why I detest MMORPGs and games like Morrowind. They go against the nature of storytelling (which is the essence of all games complex games*)
*complex game: a game where the goal is not a simple contest. sports games are 'simple' games, because the goal is a simple contest. An RPG is a complex game, because it consists of a series of contests that are tied together in a that hinges on factors outside the contests.
Wouldn't Championship Manager count as a complex game, then?
-
I'm not sure what CM is, but I'm going to guess its a game where you manage a sports team through a series of seasons in an attempt to get the best stats or a championship of some sort.
If that is correct, no, CM is not a complex game. It is a simple game, because the goal is based directly on the outcomes of simple contests.
Contrast this to an RPG, where its possible to "win" the game, even if you "lose" at the contests. The story (an element that is not directly related to the contests) determines if you 'win' or not. In a complex game, you will always win if the story dictates. It is impossible to lose. The story is crafted in such a way that you will always win in the end. Likewise, the story can dictate that you lose the game in the end (think FS2: that's a losing situation no matter how you looks a it!). In a simple game (like a sports game), at the end of the game, you win or lose based on the outcome of the individual contests.
-
The original Descent. Like, the one with the really old graphics and was for Macintosh. I still play that.
But Freespace 2 is the only REAL Sim out there, RIGHT?!
-
Originally posted by mikhael
I'm not sure what CM is, but I'm going to guess its a game where you manage a sports team through a series of seasons in an attempt to get the best stats or a championship of some sort.
If that is correct, no, CM is not a complex game. It is a simple game, because the goal is based directly on the outcomes of simple contests.
Contrast this to an RPG, where its possible to "win" the game, even if you "lose" at the contests. The story (an element that is not directly related to the contests) determines if you 'win' or not. In a complex game, you will always win if the story dictates. It is impossible to lose. The story is crafted in such a way that you will always win in the end. Likewise, the story can dictate that you lose the game in the end (think FS2: that's a losing situation no matter how you looks a it!). In a simple game (like a sports game), at the end of the game, you win or lose based on the outcome of the individual contests.
Yep.... but, um, does the story have to be defined by the game or the user?
i.e. the reason i used ChampMan as an example is because it's one where you can define your own goals and aims, and thus the story you aim towards....I reckon it's a perfect example of non-linearity, because you have no fixed direction, but your actions still have a lasting and defined impact.
-
EV: O was actually a fairly close approximation of an open-ended game- the plot was really more a few different strings of missions that could lead in different directions, with lots of stuff that didn't follow any one "plotline" and the ability to switch to another side if you really wanted to (enough to, say, turn around and kill a hundred of your old allies' ships, all while magnanimously ignoring the fact that the guys you wanted to work for were shooting at you). It wasn't perfect, and a lot of the plot freedom had to do with the utter simplicity of the game itself (it's a lot easier to let you do anything the game engine will allow when that mostly consists of shooting and trading), but it worked.
-
XWA
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Yep.... but, um, does the story have to be defined by the game or the user?
i.e. the reason i used ChampMan as an example is because it's one where you can define your own goals and aims, and thus the story you aim towards....I reckon it's a perfect example of non-linearity, because you have no fixed direction, but your actions still have a lasting and defined impact.
The question you have to ask is "is the goal of Championship Manager to have the winningest team?". If so, then it is a simple game, because that goal is just an aggregation of all the contests that lead up to it. In a complex game, the goal is disconnected from the contests that lead up to it. That's why an RPG cannot be 'lost'. Your success in the game (IE the satisfactory completion of the total game) does not hinge on any of the contests that lead up to it.
It doesn't matter. Its just my insane ramblings, anyway.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
That'll never happen. That's why I detest MMORPGs and games like Morrowind. They go against the nature of storytelling (which is the essence of all games complex games*)
Meh, Morrowind has a main plot, just like any RPG. And mmorpg like WoW will have gamemasters to create complicated stories. A mmorpg like that is much closer to the pen and paper one than any other, if you ask me.
-
Morrowind has a main plot, just like Freelancer does. I could swear, however, that it continues on after the main plot is over. Thus the main plot is just another thing to do within the engine. Its not the point of the engine.
WoW will be a different thing entirely, though. You're absolutely right about that. It'll suffer from a different set of equally ugly issues though (how do you write a story so that every one of the thousands of players feel like they're special, like they matter?)
-
They're part of something big, that's what's so cool, not just being an annonymous player doing the same plot as a thousand other players alone in front of their screen. Ever played a mmorpg? The fact that you're not the only pne struggling is what is so thrilling about it. Since when you buy a game, you do the plot, and the others do it to - solo, I mean -, why not gathering everybody and play that same plot together. In the end, you become important ( if you stand out ), in a solo rpg, no matter how well you do, nobody'll know about it. Your name can become important in a mmorpg, but that's up to you to make it so that it happens. THAT is real RPG.
So, the pb is that it goes on after the end on moorowind and co? so if they just stopped the game after the end of the plot, that would be better?
Well, to me, the plot is over, if you can go on, it's just to be able to mess around w/o having to worry about consequences. I take that as a bonus to the main plot, not the other way around ( I was about to say "just like Iwar2", but, actually, I wonder which one is the bonus :p ).
-
First of all, yeah, I have played MMORPGs. I hate them.
You are wrong: as a player, in a MMORPG, you can never become important. You can go and do the same cookie cutter quests over and over again, with people or alone. you might even become popular. But can you actually change the world? No. You're locked into the story that the game's controllers create. If you want to go assassinate the king of the continent and take his place, you can't--unless the game controllers put that in. You're subject to their whims. Its just like every other MUD ever made--except its got pretty graphics.
As to your second point:
When a game doesn't end with its plot, the plot is reduced to just a sub task within the contest of the game. Sure, its a bonus, but the game world becomes static (or more accurately meta-static). It doesn't really change. Sure, you can accumulate more loot, or gain massive experience, but at no point does any of it matter. There's no purpose to it. NOTE: I am not saying this is automatically not fun. For some people it is. I said that it goes against the nature of storytelling.
-
I'm not gonna argue anymore, why am I not even surprised you hate MMORPGs?
Tell me, itho, in your regular RPG, hell, even in a paper RPG, can you deciode to go and kill the king to take his place on a whim? Of course not, unless the game master/ game designer decides so. You're giving flaws to mmorpgs that they share with 100% ( yes, ****ing 100%, NOT A SINGLE DARN EXCEPTION ) of the games out there :doubt:
Oh, take Iwar2 and remove the freeform mod. The game looses a lots of its value, all of a sudden, isn't it?
-
What can I say? I don't like certain styles of games. There's a few exceptions usually (I hate most FPS games, but I like Shock2 and Deus Ex and Thief and the Jedi Knight games, for example. I hate RTS games in general, but StarCraft is okay). With MMORPGs however, and the MUDs that came before them, I haven't found any I like yet. They all lack the critical 'make a difference' factor.
Actually, no, Venom. In a pen and paper RPG, I can make that attempt. The GM will adjust for my decision to go do something bizarre. I'll probably fail, but I can make the attempt. And if I succeed, the game world changes because of it. My participation makes a difference in that game world. Contrast that with a MMORPG. I probably can't even get to the place where the ruler supposedly lives. It might not even exist in the world. Let's assume it does and I can get to the king guy and speak to him. Chance are that I can't harm him. Lord British in Ultima Online is invulnerable (except that one time during the beta)! I can't kill him and take his place. Most games don't even give you the option to attack friendly NPCs. Further: even if you COULD kill him, he'd just respawn. Your actions will have amounted to absolutely nothing. The game doesn't adjust to the player's actions on the macroscopic scale.
And I am drawing a distinction between closed and open games, Venom. A pen and paper RPG is open ended. Morrowind is open ended. Iwar2 is openended.
In an open ended game that is not built around the players (IE, any open ended game that is NOT a pen-and-paper RPG, basically), after the story ends, the players are irrellevant. They can do nothing to affect the world. All they can do is perform hollow actions that amount to nothing. In Freelancer, can you decide to wipe out the Blood Dragons? Nope. They just keep respawning. Can you starve a planet by interdicting all the incoming shipping? Nope. no matter how many ships you intercept, that planet thrives.
FinalFantasy9 is not open ended. The characters have a direct impact on the story (They can't help but have an impact. its designed around them). The game ends when the story ends. There's never any time during which the characters are irrellevant. You are of course limited to the story, but you are involved in that story.
If you don't see the distinction I'm making, then I'm doing a poor job explaining myself. It doesn't matter: its just my insane ramblings on the philosophy of games. Its not like its important.
As for Iwar2: I've never played the freeform mod. I start the game over and play from scratch. I have yet to fire up Freelancer since I finished the story line. Once the story goal is complete, there's really nothing left for me to do and I lose interest.
-
mmorpg are not open ended, they're open started :p
Well, I guess it's just a question of taste, but I enjoy a lot running around with friends in some environment, beating some quest, hunting monsters, or hell, just wandering around finding cool sceneries ( I did that a lot in Entropia - oh, yeah, entropia has elections and stuff like that, and you have poll pods in every city - a different poll each week - asking the players how they want the world to evolve. I suppose that's still not enough for you, tho ) with a bunch of friends, rather than beating the Machiavelous Master of Dark Evilness once more in solo, thanks to the Sword of Righteous Fire of the Ancient Gods I just found while slaying the Red Dragon of Doomed Doom With Blazing Eyes That Frightens. Yeepee, I'd have stoped the Machiavelous [blablabla] from summoning the Mean God of Death Uppon the World ( he does that so often, now it's part of his name ).
Yes, I have much fun making up that kind of names.
Oh, and don't tell me you wouldn't like playing your Iwar2 games with some friend online ( not the crappy multi dogfights, the solo part, but in multi ).
...
In fact, I suspect you'll tell me you wouldn't.
-
The idea of polling pods is interesting but doesn't completely address the issue. The player cannot do the unexpected. The way MUST be prepared ahead of time. There is no real time adjustment to the player.
Only pen and paper GM (or maybe a very good NWN GM) can do what I'm talking about. Only in those cases does the story surround and respond to the players. In that MMORPG you still can't decide to assassinate the king or steal his crown or whatever, unless the administration changes the game to do so by providing another static quest. Again: it has zero impact.
Compare that to a pen and paper game where you sneak in, swipe the crown and get away. You've got the crown, the king doesn't, and he'll move heaven and earth to find you and get it back. Now the story becomes about you trying to keep a step ahead of the people chasing you. YOU. One person in the entire game world. No one else. Your situation is unique.
-
Originally posted by Nico
Oh, and don't tell me you wouldn't like playing your Iwar2 games with some friend online ( not the crappy multi dogfights, the solo part, but in multi ).
...
In fact, I suspect you'll tell me you wouldn't.
You must have missed my post in another thread.
Some of the best times I've had with a game was in Starlancer, playing co-op online with three friends. I'd kill to be able to play an Iwar2 campaign that was designed around co-op play. That would be awesome.
Take careful note: I said 'campaign'. Last I checked, around here, a campaign means a series of missions that comprise a story, with a distinct beginning and a distinct ending.
I have no interest in co-op free-roam. That'd just suck. I can see it now:
Mik: "Hey Venom, Phreak, you wanna go hang out around the Blackeye L-Point and ventilate some Marauders?"
Venom: "Dude, we did that yesterday. This repetitive pirating is getting old."
Phreak: "You know, we could go assault a Navy station..."
Mik: "Man, what good's that? We can't blow up the station and they'll just keep spawning new waves of ships. What's the point?"
(apologies to Phreak and Venom. They're just the first two Iwar2 players that come to mind)
See what I mean? Co-op play in a campaign is meaningful and interesting. Co-op play without a point is NOT meaningful and is boring.
-
I get your point, but what I mean is that not being able to do that doesn't mean that mmorpg are crap or anything. but blah I'm rambling, as I said, I like as much playing some "worthless" adventure with a handful of friends as beating yet another of your usual RPG plots all alone.
edit: your second post was not taken into account, wasn't there when I pushed the reply button :p ( darn lag, that's internet for sure :D )
edit2: isn't it possible to play freelancer campaign in coop?
mmh, starlancer, I never tried... bah, nobody's playing it anymore, anyway, no need reinstalling it.
-
That's understandable, Venom. I like to play Pod Racer on a LAN with my friends. That's groovy. But that's not what I was initially talking about. I was saying what I don't like about MMORPGs, not that they're all crap and you shouldn't play them.
If I'm just going to play a game with some friends, its not going to be an MMORPG. Its going to be a fighting game tournament, or Mario Party, or Pod Racer. The 'simple' games I was talking about before.
-
Originally posted by Nico
mmh, starlancer, I never tried... bah, nobody's playing it anymore, anyway, no need reinstalling it.
That's a shame. Just imagine it: having wingmen who know how to fly, understand tactics and know how to cover your ass.
WINGMEN WHO DON'T SUCK.
Man. What more can a pilot ask for?
-
ah well, I like them all.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
That's a shame. Just imagine it: having wingmen who know how to fly, understand tactics and know how to cover your ass.
WINGMEN WHO DON'T SUCK.
Man. What more can a pilot ask for?
Actually having someone to play that wingmen who doesn't suck? :p
-
Originally posted by mikhael
The question you have to ask is "is the goal of Championship Manager to have the winningest team?". If so, then it is a simple game, because that goal is just an aggregation of all the contests that lead up to it. In a complex game, the goal is disconnected from the contests that lead up to it. That's why an RPG cannot be 'lost'. Your success in the game (IE the satisfactory completion of the total game) does not hinge on any of the contests that lead up to it.
It doesn't matter. Its just my insane ramblings, anyway.
I'm not sure why a game is more 'complex' if the preceeding 'contests' have no relevance? Surely that makes it simple?
At least in something like ChampMan, every action has a consequence - players get pissed off when you sub them after 30 minutes or dump them in the reserves (and develop grudges against you, other players or teams), or the opposite (you win their respect), clubs suffer financial problems from overspending or pull themselves into the black thorugh profit, etc.
In terms of depth and lasting consequences, there's very little offhand that I can compare it to. Think of an MMORG where you can do pretty much everything within the game context.
-
Originally posted by HotSnoJ
I played the demo that came on the windows 95 or was it 98 CD. I had it down to a science. Though I never could find the game. :(
Neither. I actually found it quite fun too... damn hard, I wish I could have saved my game... :nervous:
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
I'm not sure why a game is more 'complex' if the preceeding 'contests' have no relevance? Surely that makes it simple?
At least in something like ChampMan, every action has a consequence - players get pissed off when you sub them after 30 minutes or dump them in the reserves (and develop grudges against you, other players or teams), or the opposite (you win their respect), clubs suffer financial problems from overspending or pull themselves into the black thorugh profit, etc.
In terms of depth and lasting consequences, there's very little offhand that I can compare it to. Think of an MMORG where you can do pretty much everything within the game context.
excepted that thing is not a game, I call it Visual Excel :p
-
Originally posted by Nico
excepted that thing is not a game, I call it Visual Excel :p
:p back.
Anyways, it is a game, cos I just bloody wrote one of the things for another sport.
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
I'm not sure why a game is more 'complex' if the preceeding 'contests' have no relevance? Surely that makes it simple?
What I'm talking about Aldo, is a basic underlying feature of the game. The details of the game do not matter at all here.
The win condition of the game is not dependent on the contests within the game. There is no deterministic connection between winning the contests and winning the game. To that end, something else must be brought in to determine whether or not the player 'wins' the game, since we cannot use the tally of successful contests as a guage. In an RPG, for example, or a a space combat sim, we know that by the end of the game, the player will have won every single fight. If they didn't, they replay the fight until they do, creating an unending chain of victories until the end of the game. Another dimension must be added to the gameplay to make the determination of victory. In the case of Freespace2, you win every contest all the way to the end of the game (you satisfactorily fulfill all the mission goals), but the Shivans claim victory and blow up Capella. The story is the added dimension that determines the whether or not the game has been 'won'.
In a simple game, if you win the contests, you win the game. There is nothing simpler than that. Its a straight tally. In a game like Championship manager, your tally is having 'the most successful team'. In Sim City, its having 'the most successful city'. In a sports game, its 'winning the championship'. Because one doesn't need to add something to determine the successful outcome of the game, these games are 'simple'.
In terms of depth and lasting consequences, there's very little offhand that I can compare it to. Think of an MMORG where you can do pretty much everything within the game context.
You can do anything you want within the game's boundaries, but you cannot do anything unexpected or world changing--unless all the other players can do the same thing. The quests respawn, so everyone gets a crack at killing the king. You don't get to do anything novel or unique. You can't push in unexpected directions.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Ah...I thought you were alluding to the design as being in someway simpler, not the base gameplay-typey-story-thing.
(vocabulary failed me:))
Originally posted by mikhael
You can do anything you want within the game's boundaries, but you cannot do anything unexpected or world changing--unless all the other players can do the same thing. The quests respawn, so everyone gets a crack at killing the king. You don't get to do anything novel or unique. You can't push in unexpected directions.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'unexpected directions'? Insofar as I've experienced (and this is still a ChampMan reference), there aren't really any clearly defined boundaries beyond the fact that you have to manage a football team.
What i mean is that in an MMOG, there are things you can do, but which have no lasting impact (i.e. the respawning). In ChampMan, it's the opposite - no situation can be duplicated (at least, not easily), and every action has a constant & lasting consequence. i.e. every action is (game)world changing in some way.
I think maybe there are 3 definitions to look at here;
- story based (complex) games
- tally based games (simple)
- user-determined goal-based games
The latter, which i'm alluding to, is basically giving the user the ability to do anything, and observe the consequences, within the context of the gameworld. i.e. the user determines if they win.
for example, in champMan I - for example - win the European Cup. But I set my goal as winning the league, and building a first team with no foreigners and all under 25 years old. And if I do that, then the next season is to introduce extra youngsters from the youth team, etc. And if I get bored, then take up an international job or change clubs....etc.
That sort of thing..... i.e. if non-linear games can't currently enforce a storyline, let the user make their own. the game doesn't have to enforce it, just give the user the ability to meet it.
In the case of ChampMan, this is possible - albeit partially because the world it's set in (i.e. the gameworld and all it's states) is less complex than a non-linear world in another type of game.
Er, what was this all about again?
-
If I had a joystick .... X-wing Alliance and X-wing vs. TIE Fighter.
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
...
Actually, aldo, I agree with you most all the way through what you said.
For what its worth, Will Wright, the guy that created SimCity and created the 'management' genre, had something to say on the matter. He said that he didn't consider things like SimCity and SimEarth to be games. He called them 'sandboxes' and classified them as 'software toys', rather than games. Championship manager seems to fall into that category too.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Actually, aldo, I agree with you most all the way through what you said.
For what its worth, Will Wright, the guy that created SimCity and created the 'management' genre, had something to say on the matter. He said that he didn't consider things like SimCity and SimEarth to be games. He called them 'sandboxes' and classified them as 'software toys', rather than games. Championship manager seems to fall into that category too.
So, um, that was a pseudo-debate where nobody actually disagreed but just talked at cross purposes?
Cool :D
I've always liked the concept of software toys, as an aside. Possibly because they allow the most scope to impose your own will on the game & what happens, rather than either forcing you down a storyline or sandboxing you (the simple games analogy).