Let’s Game It Out always has good vids. Basically all of his videos are bangers, even if it’s about a game I wouldn’t otherwise enjoy/watch something about.
One limitation that games like Civ suffer from is that diplomacy is ultimately pretty shallow because there can only be one winner, so even when you’re building alliances or trading relationships it is generally to gain some temporary benefit until you are in a position to defeat your partner later on (whether militarily, scientifically, etc).
What I would love to see is a multiplayer game like Civ but where each player has independent win conditions (so that a game could have multiple winners, or no winners). The condition could even just be to attain a certain level of happiness or wealth. And if you achieve that then you win even if other nations are bigger or stronger, and conversely if you don’t achieve it you lose even if you are the last nation standing. So decisions to go to war, or focus on technological development, or build alliances or trading relationships, etc, are driven by the wants and needs of your own people and not just a need to dominate others.
I think I’d like that if there was a single winner as well. Something like to win you need to complete two objectives, one public and one secret. So other players can still work against you but they dont know what you’re trying to do.
even when you’re building alliances or trading relationships it is generally to gain some temporary benefit until you are in a position to defeat your partner later on (whether militarily, scientifically, etc).
This is exactly what made me gravitate away from Civ games and more towards Paradox strategy, where the AI actually behaves more like a real country would do instead of a player trying to win a game.
An MMO where is truly feels like player versus environment and not another pawn versus environment. Stop having 300 people deliver the one lost ring to the same npc for days at a time. I think one way to do it is to provide a general prompt to GPT models and have them generate a few hundred similar but different quests that get assigned per player. But also keep track of these generated differences to weave a story. Make there be more npcs than players.
I hear ya, I hate when games have too much story. The stories are never any good and usually outright eye-rollingly bad. I particularly hate when they do “…”
Legend of Zelda, the very first one. Yoshi’s Island. FIFA.
Mount and Blade 2: Bannerlord. There is a small background storyline that you can choose to follow, or completely ignore. When I play, I create a story in my head.
I amassed a huge amount of gold and then wasn’t sure what to do. The story said I had to find some guy but I kept just chasing him around the map and could never catch him.
There’s mostly only some really funny voice over during the missions. EDF6 is already there but the developer always takes his time to translate the game into English.
I like exploration and generally mucking around in a MMO; this is why I like base GW2 instead of the expansions (which had me dying a lot). If I wanted a challenge, I'd do WoW raids or play a Souls-like.
Personally, I couldn’t get through the main and faction stories because of that. I liked the stories well enough, but getting through them was so tedious because I couldn’t even use all my skills. I don’t know how end game is, I have one max lvl character with a bunch of cp, but I rarely play an mmo for end game content.
If they had like a difficulty slider for the open world content, that would be enough to make me return, but I don’t want to shut down my brain while leveling, that’s not fun at all!
bin.pol.social
Aktywne