gaming question

[thedarkproject]

And lo, I've managed to stop being miserable long enough to ask a question, albeit one that will only concern those of you who play computer games of some sort. The rest of you, keep on scrolling...

I'm designing a simple game, which will probably be web-based, and focus around strategy. It'll be in the vein of Civilization, Transport Tycoon, Championship Manager, Theme Park, Sim City, that sort of thing*. I'm still in the brainstorming phase of noting down a thousand potential features before sifting through to find out which ones are good, but I think I have to make one particular choice before continuing too far.

And that choice is... do I make the game fixed length like the first two examples above, where there is a fixed ending point no matter how well you do? There will be a sense of urgency, even if it's long-term, as you're always battling against the clock, or perhaps against an opponent that increases in power until it defeats you. But eventually the game ends and you lose everything you built up, which is not a fun prospect for those who like indefinite play.

Or do I make it ongoing so that you can keep improving, like the latter three examples, even though this may take away any sort of ultimate goal? This lets people stay with their characters that they grow fond of, but gradually increases the difference between the older and the newer players, perhaps discouraging the new ones when they see that they may never catch up with the top players. It also means there will surely come a point where a player has seen everything and leaves through boredom rather than through winning, and maybe that is not good.

I can also envisage some sort of middle ground, sort of inspired by Championship Manager or any other sports game, where a given campaign may come to an end and various scores and resources are reset to zero, but other ones persist to the next campaign, at least in part. Theme Park also had this on a less chronologically fixed basis, where you could sell off your old park and buy a new one which posed a different challenge. But this sort of model is probably harder to balance than either of the two purer alternatives above, as I'd have to decide what can be carried forward and what cannot, risking alienating fans of both styles of gameplay if the choices are poor.

What do you prefer, and why? Opinions please!


(* Actually it'll be more along the lines of Majesty, Carnage Blender, and Quest PBM, but most if not all of you won't have any idea what they're like...)

Comments

[fiendil.livejournal.com]

Some of the Sim City games went for a middle ground: you could go for a mission of building a certain size of city by a given date (or other such goals, like having half a dozen monsters hit a pre built city that you've got to restore to former glory by a set date...), or just build indefinitely. That's not a bad model.

[soldatengrab.livejournal.com]

can you not do both? As in civ etc, set the time of game, and have a sandbox mode, or unlimited turns for those who wish to play eternal.

[theladyskye.livejournal.com]

I like having the option of retaining the characters. Perhaps you could have a dual option where there is a free-form play option, and there is a mission-oriented setting?

[tinker-goth.livejournal.com]

i would personally prefer the indefinite ongoing idea. i am a wow player and i like the fact you can carry on for ages, they keep extending it and you can keep the character you make and in a way get to know.

[lost-in-moose.livejournal.com]

I get the feeling that this is something that comes out of the game you're making isn't it?

Ok sorry no question, opinions. I'd like the indefinite case. Whereby you can keep going and stop when you like. The trouble with games like civ' etc is that eventually you reach the defined limit in other ways. The tech tree runs out. The resources are depleted (maybe if politicians played games they'd understand the environment better...). Or whatever.

The one game that had me hooked for years I think was Frontier (Elite 2) as there was always more planets to visit than you ever could. Though again it had limitation in terms of tech, ships, mission type etc etc.

Yes, indefinite games are the ones I'd go for if I could write them :)