|
Clarste posted:I agree, it seems like they're just forcing themselves to be less creative. Nah, fantasy/sci-fi is a lame copout to go for novelty over actual game design.
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
Falcorum posted:And that's precisely why Civ players universaly consider SMAC to be the worst Civ game. SMAC is not actually a very good game, it just has nice quotes. It's like civ2 but even more broken.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2019 11:55
|
|
|
Electro-Boogie Jack posted:what the gently caress civ4 is a much much better game for a variety of reasons the factions are all lame anyway, they're all just literally 'vague ideology man'
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2019 13:03
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:Through The Ages begs to differ Through the ages is probably the best game on this topic, yeah. Civ4 is probably the second best. Perestroika posted:I'm gonna have to disagree on this part, at least to a degree. In principle, I ought to love games like EL or Stellaris, but in practice I always ended up dropping ongoing games mostly on the basis of the presentation (or lack thereof). Most of the fun in a 4x is seeing your empire grow and evolve, but in there you didn't really see that happening outside of some numbers getting bigger and the borders moving about. To be fair, that's as much an issue of the space setting as it is of those games specifically, but it is an issue nonethelss. One thing that surprises me about civ games and other 4x games is that they keep trying to legislate down the quantity of cities to control rather than figuring out a game mechanic that lets an empire get and feel big, by, say, having everything be right there on the map. The worst aspect of cities/planets in 4x games is the need to go into a separate screen to manage them. Imperialism, in that regard, has not been surpassed in 25 years.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
Victory Position posted:as much as I hate stacks, Civ 4 pretty much still remains best in class in a lot of ways Having played it recently, I don't think civ4's combat is actually that bad. It could be more complex, but in general i'd rather see civ combat get more in line with other systems in the game rather than more complex.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
deep dish peat moss posted:I'm super disappointed to see Amplitude going for a historically accurate setting. I'm a huge fan of theirs but might end up skipping this because I'm sick of playing games about history. World building is what they're best at so this feels like Michael Jordan retiring from basketball. World building is lame and sci-fi/fantasy is a massive crutch.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
Aerdan posted:Two factors, only one of which actually applies here: Sometimes it's good to make in-game decisions other than 'do i want this game to be harder or easier'.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2020 15:07
|
|
|
Mokotow posted:The only way forward for strategy game AI is machine learning - there’s only so much you can code in through decision trees. Consequently, only a few devs are in a position to do this, as it’s kinda tricky to hire this kind of specialist into strategy game dev. I've not been that impressed with the results of machine learning, especially in the context of games as complex as Civ.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2020 12:28
|
|
|
Mokotow posted:The wiki article on AI machine training in games is actually an interesting read. Seems like AI can be trained fairly well for strategy games, but with limitations - e.i. a particular hero set in DOTA against another particular set, or protos vs protos on a particular map. Once you start introducing variation, the training time goes up into thousands of years - though, tbf, you can achieve 130 years of gameplay in a day with a server farm, so it’s all relative. Yeah, the number of potential parameters at the beginning of a game, nation combos, map types, map RNG, etc. make it very very hard to do AIs in this regard. Starcraft 2 is a much much easier problem space by comparison. ate poo poo on live tv posted:That works for many games, and many games should adopt that kind of system. However in a Symmetric Start game that idea is pretty frustrating to a player because like you said, you just give the AI so many bonuses that the game systems don't matter. This is me, too, but I don't really think humankind is going for this. I like games that pick a lane and stick with it and, yeah, make something comprehensible by an AI and go- Through the Ages has a pretty decent AI for example, but that comes at a cost.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2020 23:30
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:You could have the AI system respond in meaningful ways to the actions the player takes (more than the AI's choices) by matching results with expectations directly. Abstract away more of the mechanics. One of the big problems with having all these interlocked systems is that when you want to, say, hit an AI's "breadbasket" or something and starve them, you've already won anyway if you can do it- knocking out nodes in the happiness/culture/trade system of an opponent fucks them all sorts of ways so you just take whatever city and you win. It's one of those big problems with 4x games and their bag of management features trying to be more like Paradox games. Through the Ages is the best 4x game by a longshot.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
u brexit ukip it posted:I wish a Civ-like game would go beyond the present era and have one future time period. The old Call to Power games, for all their faults, did this well until you built an AI wonder that then rebelled and took over half your cities Call To Power II also had a lawyer unit for stealing money from opposing cities. It was insanely 90s. I'm kinda shocked firaxis never went to public works, it seems way more elegant than worker units but i guess they didn't want to introduce a hammer tax system.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
Honestly my main thought is how meaningful late game UUs will be. I really don't care about the historical specifics(I do think the modern supercarrier is more iconic than the F-35 but i also think this game might not even really do carriers much justice- when you have a big spread of history, some things fall by the wayside mechanically).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2021 13:20
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Designers don't have to ubderstand that. The AI will figure it out You do actually have to have an understanding of what good outcomes are to make machine learning approaches work- also, pretty much all of our current machine learning success stories are much, much less complex games than any 4x title.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2021 10:48
|
|
|
Staltran posted:SC II only has 6 matchups though, and IIRC there are separate ML AIs for each one. Yep. SC II is also just a less complex, shorter game than any 4x game, really.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2021 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
victrix posted:remember when rts games were big and there was always a subset of players that just wanted to build a huge base and got extremely angry if you rushed them? same energy oh, definitely, there's a significant subset of people who play 4x games as a weird version of simcity where they just want to 'play tall' and not get interfered with by people who play more optimally than themselves
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2021 16:06
|
|