The Art of Game Design vs. Tycoon games

Discuss game development design and post your game ideas

Post » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:07 pm

Just finished the Art of Game Design by Jesse Schell and i loved it. I would like your thoughts on how you see it applying to Tycoon/Management Sim type games. I find it very difficult to apply many of the principles (lenses) to this type of game. Games like Sim City, Patrician, Tropico, Capitalism 2, Civilization etc., often don't have a very clearly defined end goal, don't really feature a meaningful story, have very complex game mechanics and seem to fly in the face of many of the books teachings about what makes a game fun for players. Yet, I love playing them and I know I am not alone. Indeed, some of them sell very well. What is your take on that? What would you change about these games to make them seem like more fun and less like work?
B
9
S
3
G
2
Posts: 13
Reputation: 1,601

Post » Fri Jul 22, 2016 1:27 am

I'm not familiar with that book but some thoughts stuck out when reading your post:
Civilization definitely has an end goal. Yes, there are several different options for victory but it is definite.
A lot of the other games you listed I have not played but know the type. I have played SimCity and other tycoon games and the "not clearly defined end goal" is probably a huge draw for most. Meaning you are free to pursue the goal of your choice. I remember starting cities in SimCity thinking "this time I want to build a city like this". So yes they do not have a story and some do not have an ending. But they are not about resolution but creation. You get to create a city or a civilization. At the end of a story game it is the same for all players (same ending). But at any point in a creation game you can show a friend and say "look at what I built".

Complex game mechanics:
From what I've heard about game mechanics the key is to introduce at an appropriate rate. So yes those games may have complex mechanics that a newbie would be lost if jumping into someone's saved game. But the way most of those games are started slowly introduce the mechanics. Think of any of those you mentioned. I would guess you usually start with nothing but a few resources. You are really only given one option to get started (build a power plant first. Use your settler to found your first settlement). The next elements of the gameplay are not allowed until you get to a certain point. Although from a players perspective that point may seem arbitrary I'm sure it was chosen by the developers as the point where you can be sure the player has grasped the previous mechanics.

Interesting post. I'm sorry I am not familiar with the book. If you would like to mention some of the other taking points of the book I will gladly give my thoughts or respond to any questions on my comments.
ImageImageImage
B
44
S
26
G
11
Posts: 520
Reputation: 10,506

Post » Fri Jul 22, 2016 2:25 am

badmoodtaylor wrote:Interesting post. I'm sorry I am not familiar with the book. If you would like to mention some of the other taking points of the book I will gladly give my thoughts or respond to any questions on my comments.


Thanks for your input. I invite you to download the free companion app to the book on the Google Play or the App store. It has all of the important principles arranged in some sort of card deck.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... nses&hl=en
https://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/art-gam ... 31319?mt=8
B
9
S
3
G
2
Posts: 13
Reputation: 1,601

Post » Fri Jul 22, 2016 3:04 am

Thanks and I will try to remember to take a look.

But I will doubt I will read it all then remember to come back to this post, so that is why I left it open for conversation if you wanted to bring up another point.
ImageImageImage
B
44
S
26
G
11
Posts: 520
Reputation: 10,506

Post » Fri Jul 22, 2016 11:10 am

No problem, here are a few that I find are generally not very well implemented or not at all in most Tycoon/Management Sim (Patrician, Sim City, Tropico, Capitalism, etc.) type games:

- Lens 4: Surprise: is your game filled with interesting surprises?
- Lens 11 & 12 : Theme and Resonance: Your game should be built around a unifying resonant theme, that touch players deeply.
- Lens 21& 38: Flow and challenge: does my game provide a steady stream of gradually increasing and varied challenges.
- Lens 29: Secrets: Hiding some information from the player makes things interesting.
- Lens 32: Goals: Does the game have a well defined end goal and short and long term goals?
- Lens 42: Head and Hands: Does the game provide a good mix of mental and physical challenges? Are there places where the player can relax their brain, and just play the game without thinking? Can I give the player a choice; either succeed by exercising a high level of dexterity, or by finding a strategy that works with a minimum of physical skill? If "1" means all physical, and "10" means all mental, what number would my game get?
- Lens 43 - 45: Competition and Cooperation.
- Lens 46: Rewards: Are they varied in their type and frequence? Are players excited about them? Do they understand them? Are they related to one another?
- Lens 47: Punishment: Punishment make games more meaningful but them must be fair and well balanded with rewards.
Lens 48: Simplicity and Complexity: Is there a way for elements of innate complexity to be turned into emergent complexity instead?
Lens 57: Pyramids: can I have a hierarchy of ever more challenging puzzle elements, gradually leading to a final challenge?

That's enough for now, I will add more as the discussion unfolds.
B
9
S
3
G
2
Posts: 13
Reputation: 1,601

Post » Sat Jul 23, 2016 3:53 pm

neoflash1979 wrote:Just finished the Art of Game Design by Jesse Schell and i loved it. I would like your thoughts on how you see it applying to Tycoon/Management Sim type games. I find it very difficult to apply many of the principles (lenses) to this type of game. Games like Sim City, Patrician, Tropico, Capitalism 2, Civilization etc., often don't have a very clearly defined end goal, don't really feature a meaningful story, have very complex game mechanics and seem to fly in the face of many of the books teachings about what makes a game fun for players. Yet, I love playing them and I know I am not alone. Indeed, some of them sell very well. What is your take on that? What would you change about these games to make them seem like more fun and less like work?


We are in the process of building a civilization-like game. The primary motivators that these types of games access is ego, community, and control. In my experience, ego and control are the two big ones though. The fastest way to piss someone off is to tell them that they have no choice.
https://www.ravenheart.ca/home
I don't check the forums much anymore, but I will receive an email for PMs.

"Someone once told me I bite off more than I can chew...

I told them I would rather choke on greatness than nibble on mediocrity."
B
23
S
6
G
1
Posts: 1,419
Reputation: 4,857

Post » Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:52 pm

I think that the success of those games, is in giving the player a chance to make their own stories. Tropico gives a clear setting, with plenty of ambiance. Civ allows the player to lead a nation with enough options to make every play through feel distinct. Minecraft lets the player do one thing so well, that they will make sprawling cities all you have to do is give the players the tools, and they'll come up with the stories.
B
12
S
3
Posts: 30
Reputation: 842

Post » Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:48 pm

RhettBlood wrote:I think that the success of those games, is in giving the player a chance to make their own stories. Tropico gives a clear setting, with plenty of ambiance. Civ allows the player to lead a nation with enough options to make every play through feel distinct. Minecraft lets the player do one thing so well, that they will make sprawling cities all you have to do is give the players the tools, and they'll come up with the stories.


The author seems to make the same argument in the chapters of the book that deal with the linear property of a strong directed story vs. the open world concept and the replayability factor. It's interesting that the way you described those games make them sound more like game toolboxes rather than actual games. The same way a sandbox is not really a game but kids make their own games inside of them. I guess it is mostly a question of control; does the player control the experience or does the game designer.

I think the real challenge is to strike a balance between the two. For the player, control for control's sake doesn't necessarily equal fun. I noticed one thing with this type of game and my way of playing them: I often don't finish a game. Why? At some point mid to late game there is no excitement left. No uncertainty. I know I built a lean, mean, (killing/money making) machine and there is nothing the CPU players can do to change the outcome of the game, yet I still have many turns or minutes/hours of play to actually see this through and all I get for drudging through the rest of the game is a lame ass "you won" kind of screen or animation that I have already seen a dozen times on previous playthroughs. I'd like your thoughts on that. Is it also what you (or others) experience when playing this type of game? Can you think of good ways to fix this without breaking the game (taking away too much control from the player)?
B
9
S
3
G
2
Posts: 13
Reputation: 1,601

Post » Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:25 pm

I wouldn't necessarily describe them as tool boxes myself, I just think there's more then one aspect of gaming, and that sometimes you can be relaxed on the story aspect, if you have something else (such as building, or exploration) to take its place. By focusing on those mechanics you can leave the story to a quick intro, and outro, with other more ambiguous bits sprinkled around the game, all while leaving how they fit together up to the player. Don't starve is a good example of that.

As for games getting boring in the middle, there are tons of ways to improve that, from simply giving the play a new and interesting way of shooting the enemies, to a setting change. I think the game that is best at offering ways of keeping it fresh would be fallout 4. If you're getting bored of the main plot, there are hundreds of side quest available, all with their own story arcs. Getting tired of the same part of Boston, pick a direction and go exploring. Wish there was a giant, cyber-punk-esqu, leveled city in the middle of the wasteland, build it. Just want to shoot waves of bad guys, walk for a minute in any direction. That is a game that knows how to keep it fresh.
B
12
S
3
Posts: 30
Reputation: 842

Post » Thu Jul 28, 2016 7:00 pm

RhettBlood wrote: As for games getting boring in the middle, there are tons of ways to improve that, from simply giving the play a new and interesting way of shooting the enemies, to a setting change. I think the game that is best at offering ways of keeping it fresh would be fallout 4. If you're getting bored of the main plot, there are hundreds of side quest available, all with their own story arcs. Getting tired of the same part of Boston, pick a direction and go exploring. Wish there was a giant, cyber-punk-esqu, leveled city in the middle of the wasteland, build it. Just want to shoot waves of bad guys, walk for a minute in any direction. That is a game that knows how to keep it fresh.


Interesting. How would you implement this in a game like Sim City or Capitalism or any kind of business/management sim ?
B
9
S
3
G
2
Posts: 13
Reputation: 1,601

Next

Return to Game Development, Design & Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests