I have now read various suggestions that various systems should be beyond the control of the player. If this continues, the player becomes a spectator.
- 26
- 20
- 4
- 4
Should the game be out of the player's control?
- Thread starter Stein14
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
I have now read various suggestions that various systems should be beyond the control of the player. If this continues, the player becomes a spectator.
Dude, come on. You know that's not what the discussion is about. People aren't arguing for the player to become a spectator, but they're arguing about the extent of the player's direct control. Personally, I prefer nudging things in the direction I want it to go over having the absolute power to do whatever I want (unless I'm playing a planned economy).
- 16
- 15
- 3
I agree with the point being made, but this is just getting repetitive now
- 1
It's actually quite important discussion, direct vs indirect player agency.
To give more neutral, but related example to current discussion about capis AI, we have development system in eu4, quite core and fundamental to the game. It's gameplay design is "player presses button, development rises, resource spent. There are some rules when player can't increase development.". Is it engaging to use for you? Some mods, like old (before population) meiou locked manual development and changed it to "development changes on it's own, you can unlock and activate policies that encourage development growth in specific areas, like centers of trade." Which of these system makes eu4 game more engaging and fun for you, fellow forumites?
To give more neutral, but related example to current discussion about capis AI, we have development system in eu4, quite core and fundamental to the game. It's gameplay design is "player presses button, development rises, resource spent. There are some rules when player can't increase development.". Is it engaging to use for you? Some mods, like old (before population) meiou locked manual development and changed it to "development changes on it's own, you can unlock and activate policies that encourage development growth in specific areas, like centers of trade." Which of these system makes eu4 game more engaging and fun for you, fellow forumites?
I, for example, had much more fun in second approach, like some other people who enjoy and install mods that make dev growth more organic in one or another way and haven't lost any fun just because it's not me directly, who activates "increase dev" effect.
- 4
Considering the amount of timelapse videos on YouTube, i would say it can be extremely popular.
- 1
Not necessarily a bad idea. Expectation management for example would be a lot easier if Paradox never distributes the ability to play the game to the playerbase and hence no-one's too high expectations are ever definitely let down.
As an alternate money making scheme Paradox could sell subscriptions to read AARs based on the game.
As an alternate money making scheme Paradox could sell subscriptions to read AARs based on the game.
- 4
They was not even funny to begin with and was made with clear trolling intention. But now it's widespread like disease, what make it even worse.
- 5
- 3
I don't like to throw this term around, but its getting a bit "toxic".
- 1
Actually, it should be a bit exaggerated that by now almost everything should be outside the control of the player. By now I wish I hadn't posted it.
Players should not be able to choose which buildings are constructed under Planned Economy.
I've been pretty excited about Victoria 3 overall, but one feature that really concerns me is the ahistorical ability of the player to decide which industries get constructed under a planned economy. In real life, Lenin would not be personally...
Currently 46 laughs, the emojis have spoken.
- 1
- 1
The player should be able to steer the ship of state, with all the maneuverability of the Exxon Valdez.
some systems should be in the players control.
some systems shouldnt be in the players control.
it's interesting to discuss which systems should be which. Making ad absurdum falacies is not.
some systems shouldnt be in the players control.
it's interesting to discuss which systems should be which. Making ad absurdum falacies is not.
- 14
- 1
- Status