Flash of Steel header image 1

Giving History to Historical Settings

May 4th, 2013 by Troy Goodfellow · Design

It’s a weird thing, but the feature I am most excited about in the upcoming Civilization V: Brave New World is a relatively minor mechanic designed to plug in to the much larger changes.

It’s Archaelogy. Yes, always excited about new civilizations, since I love writing about that sort of thing, and really, the archaeology system seems to be another culture growth tool – it can allow you to find Great Works you can stick in your museums to increase the new Tourism resource.

But the developers have also said that archaeology will be, in some way and some cases, connected to things that had happened previously in the game. Maybe there was a battle there. Maybe it was an ancient ruin that a scout discovered centuries earlier, or the base of a barbarian tribe. In short, archaeology will connect the actions of the early game and late game in a novel way. The history within the game can be recognized.

A lot of us play in historical sandboxes because we are interested in the great events of the past. A good strategy game can give you the feeling that you are replaying or rewriting history. But it’s very rare to find a game that tracks this history and reminds you of it in game. You win a major battle against your enemies and once it is over, there is no record or remembrance of it. A great king rules for half a century and the only thing he leaves behind is a name and accumulated prestige points. Over time, experienced strategy gamers become subconsciously sensitive to this sort of thing and remember the great moments that stand out, but the map and the world are often devoid of any recognition that there is a past.

Like the Civ expansion’s archaeology, one of my favorite things about Rome: Total War is very small – in fact, it’s meaningless from a gameplay perspective: major battle sites are marked on the map. They aren’t prominent, and you could miss them, but if two large armies fight, then crossed swords mark that place for the rest of the game as the location where Scipii beat Carthage in 267 BC. It doesn’t change how you play the game or win the game, but it is a constant reminder that your experience is building a new history.

The mostly average colonization game Conquest of the New World tried to build this sort of historical sensibility by letting your explorers name the major geographical features they discovered. This was a novel feature at the time, and, of course, I tried to give grand and sensible names the first few times before using the default selection or naming waterfalls after my friends. I am sure that if teenagers played this game, there were many Mount Ballz out there, as well. Ultimately it didn’t build a lot of history, but in a game where there was a lot of waiting around, each new discovery by itself led to a “Hurrah, you found it, you can name it” moment that reminded you that your settlement was doing things no one in that world had done before.

And you could always tell which things you named, so there was a proprietary feeling to acquiring them. Why shouldn’t you have dibs on the Ed River? The history of the game could shape how you viewed the division of the map as much as the strategic situation did. We are not rational creatures.

I think about this on the day that I will be traveling to Sweden to assist Paradox with a Europa Universalis IV event – few developers are as immersed in history as Paradox is, and every EU game now concludes with a computer generated account of what each ruler accomplished in their reign over the centuries – I do love these simple summaries. But in game…great generals or advisors come and go at the whim of the player. Great victories only matter for the war, and there are no monuments. Victorian explorers do not become prestige generating celebrities.

Civ always had its Wonders, but I sometimes wish that every time I beat Montezuma or if a caravel discovered another continent the game would give me a chance to mark it. I wish that Dominions III would mark sites of major battles with skulls or something (probably dependent on the race). As we play through strategy games, writing our own histories, it would be nice to see that history we write recognized, even if in only minor cosmetic ways.

So kudos to Firaxis for this archaeology thing. It is an active search for the history of the game (which is usually better than passive) and can remind the player of accomplishments centuries ago, whether your own or your rivals. In a long term strategy game, we do a lot of great things we can hardly ever remember.

→ 8 CommentsTags:

So Where Do You Start?

April 26th, 2013 by Troy Goodfellow · Design, Me

I get a lot of email from people that want to play strategy games – that are attracted to particular strategy games because they like the subject matter or because they listen to our podcast and everything sounds so amazing that they have to get into this system cracking nutbar hobby of ours.

It’s one reason I recorded myself playing a teaching game of Crusader Kings 2 that ended up getting deleted because I had the settings wrong somehow. (I promise I’ll do another one later.) And, though I am hesitant to keep giving the same advice to people that want to know how to become games journalists or podcasters or PR people (like I knew a damn thing when I started any of those), I will never tire of giving people advice on how to get into strategy games.

An acquaintance recently asked me if he should just jump into Victoria 2 or start with a simpler Paradox game. Since he was really interested in the Victorian Age and the Paradox grand strategy titles are all quite distinct from each other despite any similarity in appearance, the answer was easy: If you want to play these games, you just play them. Start with Victoria and come back to me with any questions.

Yes, sometimes I think we make too much about difficult any of this really is. A grown up that is patient can figure out pretty much any reflex=independent game that has transparent inputs and a decent UI.

The harder thing to find is time. Time to learn new things. This is one of my great barriers in learning new strategy games. I used to be able to just sample anything for five to ten hours at a time before deciding whether I would make the commitment (Knights of Honor no, World in Conflict yes), and time is the great enemy of adults. Let’s face it, Netflix makes it very easy for me to pretend I am being productive by catching up on Parks & Rec.

And don’t get me started on board games.

For a strategy game designer, this must pose a serious problem. You need to hook players early enough for them to commit to seeing more of the game, but all the best strategy games BUILD towards something. Yes, Civilization is great because it starts asking you to make important choices immediately. But Imperialism is great in spite of the fact you can really do nothing but look for resources for the first dozen or so turns. Master of Orion is the Civ model of exploration and building from the start, Starflight is a brilliant but slow moving trading sim gussied up like an adventure game. If old X-Com came out today would we have even noticed its genius? The new XCom has a tutorial with tension and casualties.

That opening hook…

So many of the best games out there are slow burns, including some of my comfort games like Europa Universalis; yeah you can do a lot immediately if you play France, but what if you are Denmark? And I played many more slow-burning games when I was a) paid to do so, and b) my work and play schedule were more flexible than they are now.

This is my challenge in getting more people into strategy games. I play fewer than I have in the past, and the ones I do play I can only say a few things about because, if they are not clients, I don’t have the base of experience of other recent titles for a good comparison. I am not as great a guide as I used to be. So I can’t justify the slow burns or “Just wait” since the base of comparison is fading.

Now a part of me would rather stick to Netflix and start a Tumblr about historical movies and go into why they are almost all terrible, and maybe I will do that someday. I also need to get this video thing straightened out, go back to my collaborative work that’s been put aside and if I had enough money to do nothing for a year, I’d stop and write a book while catching up on all that I’ve missed lately.

But I have a platform and people will keep asking me about where to begin in learning strategy games in general or whether they should dip a toe into a certain title in particular. And I will keep giving advice. I am the evangelist that never knocks on your door. Have to spread the word.

→ 8 CommentsTags:

Crusader Kings II Stream Tonight

April 12th, 2013 by Troy Goodfellow · Me, Paradox

While I fight with posts that are much longer than the number of people that will read them, I do want to keep one promise which is that I would stream a learning game of Crusader Kings II for people that are curious but afraid.

So tonight, for three hours starting at 8:00 PM Eastern Time, I will use the Irish opening on my Twitch channel: http://twitch.tv/troygoodfellow. If you already know how to play, and play well, you won’t learn much watching me. If you want to get the basics down, stop by and we’ll see what happens (CK2 can lead to random endings…).

I’ll answer questions as best I can, and it will be only me on the audio, unless someone wants to come on with me and ask leading questions.

I will link to the archived video once I am finished.

And here is the video: http://www.twitch.tv/troygoodfellow/b/390088638

EDIT: And just like that I forget to save it forever and it is gone. I will try to do one again shortly and be more careful about it. If anyone downloaded it or archived it…

→ 6 CommentsTags:

A Few Words on Omerta

April 1st, 2013 by Troy Goodfellow · Business Sim, Haemimont

Haemimont’s Omerta isn’t a game that will be going down as one of the triumphs of 2013, and I don’t think anyone expected it to be. A light, Prohibition-era gang sim with tactical combat elements, it is a new title from the Bulgarian studio best known for its excellent reboot of the Tropico series.

I’ve written about Tropico before, and we’ve dedicated podcasts to the game, so it’s clear that Haemimont is a studio that makes interesting things that are worth talking about. Tropico 4 is an excellent light city-builder, just as were Tropico 3 and Grand Ages: Rome. And since Tropico 5 is inevitable, you can expect them to refine that formula just a little bit more.

But Omerta

For the unfamiliar people out there, a quick summary. In Omerta you play a gang leader who must take over Atlantic City block by block and street by street. You assemble a team of rogues, complete missions, get money, fight a battle or two per block and then you move on and up the food chain to bigger battles and bigger gangs.

I’ve had a lot of conversations about Omerta with a lot of my friends on the media side, and it’s a game that seems to confound a lot of people. Greg Tito at The Escapist called it “the best crappy game you’ll ever play” in a pithy opening sentence that doesn’t quite match my own feelings but sums up a wide consensus. As I’ve talked about Omerta, the running theme from a lot of people, and one that I have sympathy for, is the idea that the game was easy to get sucked into even as nothing worked the way it was supposed to, and you had no real pleasure in still going.

Now, a lot of Omerta’s problems for me are interface things. You can’t tell at a glance what type of building you are running on that street corner, instead of just looking at a spinning icon telling you that you own it. Seriously, the interface will tell you if an independent or rival building is club or a speakeasy, but not your own. There’s no reason I can think why you have to move off the main screen to a map to place and fill orders for new supplies. There’s no timer to tell me when my henchmen are coming back from missions. You pile up “heat” from police awareness with a very quiet star counter in the lower right when the screen should flash or something – this is sort of important information.

But some of the biggest UI stuff has been addressed and Haemimont is continuing to support and improve the game. And, like my friends, I find it compelling in a weird sort of way. Probably because I can see how close this game was being quite good, even if “great” was never in the offing.

One common criticism of the Tropico games under Haemimont is that they are too easy, and there’s something to this. These aren’t simulations, but time fillers, and pretty literally at that. How far you progress in the campaign is entirely rooted in how quickly you can figure out the tricks to a map. But, you will stumble upon the “solution” and it takes a lot to bring El Presidente down (has anyone – ever – lost an election?) and you can coast forward quickly or slowly but, ever certainly, forward. If you can avoid a financial death spiral mid-map, it’s a matter of waiting. Things were made a bit too easy in the Modern expansion to Tropico 4, but the core conceit of the game remained. It is a forgiving city builder where you lay foundations, unlock new goodies, hire workers and sell cargo.

And this works for that game and that setting. Tropico may be about building an education/immigration train to keep high end businesses staffed and farms productive, but it is also, unapologetically, a cartoon. It’s meant to be chewed through as you face new challenges, but no new challenge that is especially onerous. People are building cities in the sun and raising llamas. (Grand Ages: Rome was a little more challenging, and it, like many traditional city builders, was about supply chains and space. It was never terribly difficult, but very well done.)

Despite the weirdness of an early mission to clear the Klan out of a neighborhood and the movie cliche dialog, Omerta never feels light. The sepia tones, brutal tactical battles where you beat people with bats and the general themes of running an organized crime ring mean that it is expected that things should run a little harder, be more provocative, be more challenging. And yet, like Tropico, Omerta is largely concerned with just building things and waiting until the money rolls in. If you can keep your expenses down (not hard when you have complete control at all times of who is working in your crew and getting paid), then you sit and wait. And wait.

Where El Presidente was the only power in Tropico, though, Omerta constantly reminds you that there are other crime bosses, and you run into them from time to time for missions. But they do nothing. They are inert. They don’t expand their empires, don’t react when you move in next door, they are plot points for a story that ends up having no tension.

No tension ultimately means that the choices Omerta gives you have no real meaning. I am pretty far along and have never had to upgrade or change weapons for the battles. Who I have in my crew is determined largely by which voice cues are least irritating. Businesses and police/political corruption are chosen not for their strategic utility but based on what is new, what the long term goal might be and whether I want the quick cash.

The worst thing is that you can see immediately how this would transform a tepid series of business sim missions into what it’s really pitched as – a game about territorial control and intimidation. We talk a lot about the union between theme and mechanics, and though they are never in lockstep, a theme about life and death battles for the streets should build into something other than slightly longer or more difficult cash generating systems.

Then you get to the tactical battles which scale in difficulty in a weird way. You don’t really need to upgrade your weapons to win them because so much is about the odds and whittling down enemy hitpoints. This isn’t XCOM, so expecting that level of fine polish isn’t really fair. But the move from a wait-and-grow model of the business sim to a sometimes brutal and random death is shocking in a way that the permadeath of your favorite sniper isn’t; it’s a different game altogether and the rules don’t quite fit. But that’s another post, one about tactical subgames and how they fit, etc.

I honestly think that somewhere in Omerta there is a credible and challenging period world, a game version of Boardwalk Empires. And given that Haemimont made its name with not-great but interesting RTSes like Tzar and Celtic Kings, there is a corporate legacy of doing things in games that aren’t always friendly to the player.

Now don’t get me wrong. There is not only space for “easy” strategy games, there is a need for them. Tropico let’s you coast, but it’s more fun to see how you can anticipate problems and expand towards things you know you will need. Tropico is colorful and fun and also teaches some very important strategy game concepts while it’s amusing you. Omerta isn’t that though; its setting needs an opposition, needs new ways to see the map, needs to impose urgency in decision making so that you aren’t just building what you need RIGHT NOW, but are pushing towards a more long term goal.

And then we can start working on the line-of-sight rules in the tactical game.

→ 2 CommentsTags:

Three Moves Ahead Episodes 209: Desktop to Tabletop

March 13th, 2013 by Troy Goodfellow · Me, Podcast, Three Moves Ahead

ThreeMovesAhead

I’m mostly only going to post about new podcast episodes when I have something to add to the conversation or when the show provokes new thoughts, since most of you can probably find the updates when you need them over on the official page. If there is a way to RSS it, I have no idea. But you can add it to your Google reader thing. Or whatever you use now that Google reader is being shut down.

Anyway, this week, Bruce and I welcome Paul Rohrbaugh of High Flying Dice games. HFD Games is a desktop publisher of wargames, and he sells a lot of them for a very modest price. I will probably pick up a bunch of them because you can’t have enough games about obscure battles.

It was a neat conversation and had me thinking a lot about people in this independent type of business. I’m not sure what sort of money Paul makes from HFD, especially since he has artists and designers to pay, but it’s great that he can supplement or make a good chunk of income from something that gives a lot of entertainment and joy. He has a product, he has an audience and the fact that people that buy a few of his games generally come back to buy many more is a great sign that Paul is onto something.

But a lot of independent and small contractors have not been able to find a way to turn something that has an audience into income, mostly because so much has moved online to where the money is really not there. [Read more →]

→ 4 CommentsTags:

Heirs to Peter, Corrupters of Plans: The Pope as Game Mechanic

March 6th, 2013 by Troy Goodfellow · Creative Assembly, Design, Paradox, Religion, Retro

I did not expect to wake up a couple of weeks ago to the news that Pope Benedict XVI had announced his abdication. As of last week, His Holiness retired to a monastery and the cardinals now begin convening to choose his successor. There hasn’t been a voluntary abdication since the 13th century, and the last Pope to leave alive did so almost 400 years ago.

So my Twitter feed was filled with the usual lame and boring and predictable jokes while my news sites talked about what this meant for the Church. I don’t know any Catholics who are not lapsed or very irregular in their attendance, so I couldn’t ask what a living ex-Pope means to them. I understand it is probably ecclesiastically complicated.

And now the Cardinals and Archbishops gather in Rome to choose a Pope, a leader for the Catholic Church after decades of scandal, a declining church in Europe and the continual conflict between Secular Humanism and Divine Revelation. From the perspective of many observers, a lot of this comes down to “So what does the Pope do, exactly?”

Well, if you play historical strategy games, then the Pope is there to make your life a little more complicated. He is a prize to be fought over, a lover to woo, or a dispensary of tasks. So let’s take this historic moment to look at the Pope and Papacy in some strategy titles.

It’s worth nothing that though the Papacy remains an important position with moral force well into the 21st century, these are not issues that strategy games set in the modern world deal with easily. Sure, the second half of the last century saw Second Vatican transforming how the Church was to be understood, the debate over Liberation Theology in the developing world and the vigorous mind and body of John Paul II standing against Soviet tyranny (and in some ways against modernity itself) but you won’t see many games about the modern era that take the Pope seriously as a player. The 19th century saw Napoleon strong arm Pope Pius VII into a coronation, and saw the Vatican opposed to the national unity movement in Italy, further marginalizing the Throne of Peter.

So strategy games with the Pope as a major actor are going to be Medieval and Renaissance themed. This is when the Papacy was at its height, when it could force Emperors to bow before it and not the other way around. [Read more →]

→ 9 CommentsTags: