In connection with Muddyboots' post on the Best TBS game ever, I was wondering...
What features do you look for in a TBS game? What features would you like to see that haven't been done yet, to your satisfaction? What kind of TBS game would make you drool if you heard someone was making it?
I'm thinking 4X Turn Based Strategy (Civ) as opposed to Squad Based Tactical Strategy (X-Com) btw.
What features do you look for in a TBS game?
Moderators: The Preacher, $iljanus, Zaxxon
-
Orgull
- Posts: 2410
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 2:41 pm
- Location: Somewhere South of Midnight
-
KiloOhm
- Posts: 2380
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:07 pm
- Location: MA
Things I look for:
#1) Customization of your "stuff" - whether that be cities, soldier's gear, etc..
#2) RPG-like growth (character development, skills, etc..).
#3) Small scale - Begining of Civ with 2-4 cities: Great ; End of Civ with 20-30 cities: Hell
#4) Personality - JA2 soldiers, SMAC factions, etc..
#5) Randomization and / or multiple victory paths: Civ random maps, JA2 soldier placement / various squads, etc..
Things I would like to see (more of):
#1) Better implimentation of RT to TBS transition ala JA2 / Fallout to speed up the combat.
#2) more games with personalties (like JA2)
#3) Unpredictale AI that is competent: Gal Civ probably is the best example of a non impossible AI that didn't feel like a bunch of algorithms (not that it was perfect...)
#5) Good scripted events: (Yes I realize this is counter to #4) There seems to be some sort of aversion to "scripting" a TBS but I've had loads of fun in scripted FPS's (CoD, HL2, etc...). Random is nice for much of the game but it is nice to have contrived scenarios thrown in there (maybe with a few random elements to keep you guessing)
#6) Better implimentations of Vehicle - Foot transition. I have yet to see a TBS game that let's you use vehicles / foot soldiers at a small scale (squad level) done well. Autoduel (not a TBS I know...) let you get out of your vehicle and run for it. If someone would enhance that it would be great (get out of your jeep, pull out your RPG to take out a tank and then jump back in).
#7) More mod support.
Best examples of near perfect TBS's for me: JA2, Silent Storm, Fallout (not Tactics who's combat system was seriously flawed)
JA2 would have to get my nod for all time great.
#1) Customization of your "stuff" - whether that be cities, soldier's gear, etc..
#2) RPG-like growth (character development, skills, etc..).
#3) Small scale - Begining of Civ with 2-4 cities: Great ; End of Civ with 20-30 cities: Hell
#4) Personality - JA2 soldiers, SMAC factions, etc..
#5) Randomization and / or multiple victory paths: Civ random maps, JA2 soldier placement / various squads, etc..
Things I would like to see (more of):
#1) Better implimentation of RT to TBS transition ala JA2 / Fallout to speed up the combat.
#2) more games with personalties (like JA2)
#3) Unpredictale AI that is competent: Gal Civ probably is the best example of a non impossible AI that didn't feel like a bunch of algorithms (not that it was perfect...)
#5) Good scripted events: (Yes I realize this is counter to #4) There seems to be some sort of aversion to "scripting" a TBS but I've had loads of fun in scripted FPS's (CoD, HL2, etc...). Random is nice for much of the game but it is nice to have contrived scenarios thrown in there (maybe with a few random elements to keep you guessing)
#6) Better implimentations of Vehicle - Foot transition. I have yet to see a TBS game that let's you use vehicles / foot soldiers at a small scale (squad level) done well. Autoduel (not a TBS I know...) let you get out of your vehicle and run for it. If someone would enhance that it would be great (get out of your jeep, pull out your RPG to take out a tank and then jump back in).
#7) More mod support.
Best examples of near perfect TBS's for me: JA2, Silent Storm, Fallout (not Tactics who's combat system was seriously flawed)
JA2 would have to get my nod for all time great.
-
Daehawk
- Posts: 66379
- Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am
I think MOO 1 was just about perfect and better than MOO 2 because it was simpler. I think having a fun engrossing game that stays simple to control and get info from is the key. In MOO1 I could use a slider to build a number of missile bases on my planet. In MOO2 it was too in depth with me having to pick and choose each building to place in a colony after I had a few going. I subscribe to the old KISS tactic of making games..Keep It Simple Stupid.
-
Orgull
- Posts: 2410
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 2:41 pm
- Location: Somewhere South of Midnight
Thanks so far.
Kilo I agree with you totally on points #1 and #3. I wish the unit design workshop from SMAC would get used again in a 4x game. I also hate the endgame of most 4x TBS games. The only game series I recall that had a fun endgame was the Heroes of Might & Magic series, where during the final moments, you had a massively overpowered hero storming around the map grabbing all the heavily guarded artifacts. 8)
Daehawk you are so right about keeping it simple. My favorite games, in any genre, have always been the ones that tried to follow the principle "Easy to learn, hard to master".
Kilo I agree with you totally on points #1 and #3. I wish the unit design workshop from SMAC would get used again in a 4x game. I also hate the endgame of most 4x TBS games. The only game series I recall that had a fun endgame was the Heroes of Might & Magic series, where during the final moments, you had a massively overpowered hero storming around the map grabbing all the heavily guarded artifacts. 8)
Daehawk you are so right about keeping it simple. My favorite games, in any genre, have always been the ones that tried to follow the principle "Easy to learn, hard to master".
-
KiloOhm
- Posts: 2380
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:07 pm
- Location: MA
Yeah in HOMMIV instead of getting "lot's of stuff all over" it behooved you to get a big mass of "lot's of stuff" so there really was no additional micromanagement.Orgull wrote:Thanks so far.
Kilo I agree with you totally on points #1 and #3. I wish the unit design workshop from SMAC would get used again in a 4x game. I also hate the endgame of most 4x TBS games. The only game series I recall that had a fun endgame was the Heroes of Might & Magic series, where during the final moments, you had a massively overpowered hero storming around the map grabbing all the heavily guarded artifacts. 8)
Daehawk you are so right about keeping it simple. My favorite games, in any genre, have always been the ones that tried to follow the principle "Easy to learn, hard to master".
-
Orgull
- Posts: 2410
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 2:41 pm
- Location: Somewhere South of Midnight
Hey The Meal, are you seriously considering starting a game dev studio?
The reason why I ask, and why I created this post in the first place, was because I'm trying to get back into programming. I thought I'd try making a modest little TBS game since I could do most of it without media, just using placeholders. The idea being an intermediate programming challenge to help me get my skills back up to speed. I'd love to try my hand at writing some AI routines too, but I need an engine up and running first.
I also wanted to see what some of my "I could have done that better" ideas actually play like when implemented.
The reason why I ask, and why I created this post in the first place, was because I'm trying to get back into programming. I thought I'd try making a modest little TBS game since I could do most of it without media, just using placeholders. The idea being an intermediate programming challenge to help me get my skills back up to speed. I'd love to try my hand at writing some AI routines too, but I need an engine up and running first.
I also wanted to see what some of my "I could have done that better" ideas actually play like when implemented.
-
Peacedog
- Posts: 13148
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:11 pm
- Location: Despair, level 5
- Contact:
-
The Meal
- Posts: 28192
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
- Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
PD's got it right. The game development studio is my lottery-dream (we've all got them, right?). And PD's also on staff, so play nice with him.Peacedog wrote:You'd best wait until after he wins the lottery to ask that question.The reason why I ask, and why I created this post in the first place, was because I'm trying to get back into programming.
Best of luck with your project, though. Sounds fun.
~Neal
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
-
Peacedog
- Posts: 13148
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:11 pm
- Location: Despair, level 5
- Contact:
I wouldn't work with your group intellectual deficients if they were the last people on the planet. I have a PH. . .PD's got it right. The game development studio is my lottery-dream (we've all got them, right?). And PD's also on staff, so play nice with him.
Wait, where was I? I think I blacked out.
-
The Meal
- Posts: 28192
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
- Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
You, sir, just became Doctor Dog. WATCH OUT FOR THAT COKE MACHINE!!!Peacedog wrote:I wouldn't work with your group intellectual deficients if they were the last people on the planet. I have a PH. . .PD's got it right. The game development studio is my lottery-dream (we've all got them, right?). And PD's also on staff, so play nice with him.
Wait, where was I? I think I blacked out.
~Neal
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
-
Peacedog
- Posts: 13148
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:11 pm
- Location: Despair, level 5
- Contact:
-
ChrisGwinn
- Posts: 10396
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:23 pm
- Location: Rake Trinket
- Contact:
Does TBS even have any original properties? Other than The Real Gilligan's Island, which I don't think would be a good game. I suppose I'd like to be able to customize my castaways if you were making a game like that.
-
dbt1949
- Posts: 26002
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:34 am
- Location: Spiro Oklahoma
-
Peacedog
- Posts: 13148
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:11 pm
- Location: Despair, level 5
- Contact:
Where possible, don't make me have to dig through screens to do something. Civ 4 appears to be trying to cut some of that out, it will be interesting to see how that goes. I don't mind some sort of pop with a specific use - but I want it accessed from a button on the main UI, right there in front of the map.
-
Kraken
- Posts: 45811
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
- Location: The Hub of the Universe
- Contact:
Epic scale. I like long games that develop slowly and reward long-term strategy. I also like exploration -- starting with a single unit in an unknown world and pushing back the darkness. Bonus points for huge maps that let you develop in isolation for a significant time.
Replayability. That mostly means a lot of variation from one game to the next (random map generation is huge). Unpredictability is the watchword here. It also requires AI that is not obviously stupid or blatantly cheating. Bonus points for a good scoring system and high score board.
Choices. You should want to do more than you can actually do. I don't like games where you can build/research everything. And having a single path to victory is the biggest mistake there is. Bonus points for a good diplomatic model.
Progression. As time goes on, your capabilities change and improve. Bonus points for a realistic (but easy to understand) economic system.
Steady rewards. That one-more-turn feeling comes when you are never more than a couple of turns from a new capability, a new unit, a completed building...whatever -- the important thing is to keep giving the player a little something every few turns.
Good interface. Highly complex games generate a lot of information. The game should be playable on a superficial level from a single screen, with as much feedback and control as possible right on the main playing field. More advanced info should be available for those who want to drill down to it. It has to be presented cleanly and without overwhelming me. Bonus points for good contextual help.
That about covers it.
Replayability. That mostly means a lot of variation from one game to the next (random map generation is huge). Unpredictability is the watchword here. It also requires AI that is not obviously stupid or blatantly cheating. Bonus points for a good scoring system and high score board.
Choices. You should want to do more than you can actually do. I don't like games where you can build/research everything. And having a single path to victory is the biggest mistake there is. Bonus points for a good diplomatic model.
Progression. As time goes on, your capabilities change and improve. Bonus points for a realistic (but easy to understand) economic system.
Steady rewards. That one-more-turn feeling comes when you are never more than a couple of turns from a new capability, a new unit, a completed building...whatever -- the important thing is to keep giving the player a little something every few turns.
Good interface. Highly complex games generate a lot of information. The game should be playable on a superficial level from a single screen, with as much feedback and control as possible right on the main playing field. More advanced info should be available for those who want to drill down to it. It has to be presented cleanly and without overwhelming me. Bonus points for good contextual help.
That about covers it.
-
Orgull
- Posts: 2410
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 2:41 pm
- Location: Somewhere South of Midnight
Thanks for reminding me about that. My favorite part of MOO2 was that you could only research certain techs in each tree. You had to make real "guns or butter" choices. I think that's why I still play MOO2 after all these years.Ironrod wrote: Choices. You should want to do more than you can actually do. I don't like games where you can build/research everything. And having a single path to victory is the biggest mistake there is.
Thanks for all the great ideas guys, keep 'em coming!
-
dbemont
- Posts: 858
- Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 9:55 pm
1) Competititiveness -- When you know you have an insurmountable lead, the game needs to be over very soon... and, until then, there needs to be some variable which could reverse the situation
2) Avoidance of the "one sure path to victory" -- in Civ I it was the pyramids leading to early democracy, for example.
3) One way to avoid the problem described in #2 is to have true variablility from game to game. MOO I was on the right track by randomizing which techs you ever were offered.
4) Atmosphere -- And this is not the same as bleeding edge graphics. Masters of Magic definitely had it, especially with its Myrror world. (Honestly, I think a lot of people who worship that game have forgotten all the bugs and design problems. The game is a legend largely due its atmosphere.)
5) Depth -- I know this goes against others' desire for simplicity, but I like a lot of resources, a lot of techs, a lot of attributes. Take OOTP, for example -- players complain about not being able to quantify the effects of things like clutch hitting, fielding range, outfield arm, and so on, but I think that that is what makes the game so popular in the long run, that the number of variables far exceeds the brain's ability to reduce it all to a simple formula and proceed knowing the wisest decision has been made.
6) Above all, AI. A lot of games out there the last 10 years would have been classics, but lack of AI undid them. I really don't have much use for a TBS game that only plays well in multiplayer.
2) Avoidance of the "one sure path to victory" -- in Civ I it was the pyramids leading to early democracy, for example.
3) One way to avoid the problem described in #2 is to have true variablility from game to game. MOO I was on the right track by randomizing which techs you ever were offered.
4) Atmosphere -- And this is not the same as bleeding edge graphics. Masters of Magic definitely had it, especially with its Myrror world. (Honestly, I think a lot of people who worship that game have forgotten all the bugs and design problems. The game is a legend largely due its atmosphere.)
5) Depth -- I know this goes against others' desire for simplicity, but I like a lot of resources, a lot of techs, a lot of attributes. Take OOTP, for example -- players complain about not being able to quantify the effects of things like clutch hitting, fielding range, outfield arm, and so on, but I think that that is what makes the game so popular in the long run, that the number of variables far exceeds the brain's ability to reduce it all to a simple formula and proceed knowing the wisest decision has been made.
6) Above all, AI. A lot of games out there the last 10 years would have been classics, but lack of AI undid them. I really don't have much use for a TBS game that only plays well in multiplayer.