Maklak said,

Some of the best games, like Morrowind, were basically fantasy world simulators. Sure, there was the main quest, but it wasn’t in my face all the time, unlike in say, Bioware games. I enjoy simulation and exploration more than I enjoy combat (which is good in moderate amounts, but it becomes a chore and filler fast).

I’d like to see something that’s essentially an RPG with strong economic elements. Well, less impersonal than Eve Online, but different regions should have different prices to the point where it is possible to make profit as a merchant. Bonus points for seasonal changes and price and demand (so it is possible to buy flour in autumn, then sell it in early spring for profit). Extra bonus points for economy actually influencing people’s lives, so that food shortages cause starvation and unrest.

Logistics should also play a big part. There should be a way to get a cart, pack mules, non-combat followers, and set up camps, but it takes more food ans stuff to upkeep a group than a lone traveller. Sid Meiner’s Pirates was a bit like that, but the combat it had was too hard for me. In DnD I’m actually tempted to take a horse so I don’t have to walk, a cart to carry equipment for the expedition (and expeditions take a lot of supplies) and do smart things, like using tame animals to explore dungeons and check for traps. Also, have some guard dogs and hirelings (they cost like 3sp/day). Sadly, GMs tend to hate this kind of creativity and want to just get on with their story, keep things balanced, not ruin their campaign and stuff like that.

I got bored by mass murder simulators where you kill thousands of enemies, 80% of which have a few coins and 10% of which have one piece of equipment that you can salvage (and usually something random, not the weapons and armour they’re using). Then you upgrade your own equipment to the next of about 10 tiers and sell the rest for about 5-10% of what it would cost to buy. It is just too unreal, unfair and unlike where money really comes from (production and distribution of goods and services). I realise this kind of economy is necessary in a game where you basically go on a killing rampage and steal people’s stuff, but it isn’t working for me.

DnD is a big offender here. It says that unskilled labour is 1 sp/day, skilled 3 dp/day and highly skilled 1 dp/day, yet it has rules for PCs making 10*lvl gp/day for taking various jobs in cities. Heck, a land owner gets maybe 5k gp/year and a king maybe 5M gp/year, but with all of this in mind a caster will charge some ludicrous price for a spell, simple alchemist’s items cost 50 gp (that’s right, this is two months worth of income for said alchemist), simple items, like bandoliers and pouches cost 5 gp per piece of decent quality. The DnD economy is so broken and so player-centric that it’s a big turnoff for me and don’t even get me started on the loathsome wealth per level.

As much as I like sandbox simulator RPGs, one problem with them is lack of direction. When I can do almost anything, I often don’t know what to do. And the story approach to RPGs works in that it keeps me slogging through combat on easy mode just to know what’s next. Heh, come to think of it, some woman who wrote stories for RPGs said she wouldn’t mind a “autoresolve combat” button, like in Betrayar at Krondor and was scolded and possibly fired for it.

As for DnD, my favourite books are some adventure modules and the rare books on GMing. I’ve seen one describing how to create a fantasy word, including how weather and geology work in our world (and doing a better job at explaining it than a school thextbook). There was also a book on cities, how they form, that they usually have at least one abundant resource, how various factions form from economic interest and how they struggle. There were even some numbers for corruption, security, commerce and so on.

So I wonder. Adequate simulation does take some genius, but is it really harder than hiring like a 100 people to make pretty graphics and quests, while completely neglecting multiple aspects of realism?

Anon said,

> Some of the best games, like Morrowind, were basically fantasy world simulators.

True. They are what I like to call “databases with 3D rendering and an action ruleset”. Just take a look at the construction set and you see what I mean.
This of course gives you lots of flexibility and people have proven so by making total conversions.

But this flexibility indeed needs direction as there is not much value in being able to take each and every spoon from the table and sell it for 1 gp…

So the usual triggers are used to advance the main plot or sidequests:
– Reaching a certain location on the map
– Handling items (taking or using them)
– Killing NPCs or leading them to a certain location
– Game time triggers
etc.

Of course you can make it more complex by connecting those (having a certain item when in a certain location) but the basic triggers are almost always the same.

In the Thief games, for example, every item can be made into a key or a lock. So simply “using” item 1 on item 2 can result in an action.

The real creativity is what the designers do with the triggers and if the result is fun for the gamer.

But sometimes you don’t even need triggers: My enjoyment from the Elder Scroll’s series comes mostly from the world exploration and the “microstories” I can find there.
What they do is put stuff into the world and let the player create the “story” in his head.
A famous example is finding the corpse of a wizard and some levitation or flying spells/potions beside him. Seems like he tested his spell/potion, took off but the effect lasted only a short time! So better keep that in mind when taking the potions…

Another example would be a blood smear and round scratchmarks on the floor next to a cupboard. This would indicate that the cupboard works as a secret door and that somebody was either killed next to or dragged through it. Whatever the case: This cupboard is suspicious enough to be examined…

If you manage to open the cupboard/secret door the game then may (or may not) trigger something behind it or advance the plot/quest.

It needs perhaps a certain mindset to have fun with this and ignore the main plot of the game for a moment but that is exactly what happens when I play such an immersive title.

I also tend to comb a specific location very thoroughly before I advance in the plot. I try to speak with every NPC, find hidden stuff etc.
In some games this can result in too many sidequests (like the first city you visit in Baldur’s Gate II, for example) so there is a downside to it.

A last point I want to make: Game physics.
The more advanced games become the more game physics are added to games. Some of those are only used for effect (explosions or rag-doll bodies for example), while others enhance the immersion by letting the player construct small bridges or towers to reach another location.

Sometimes, the effect wasn’t even expected by the designers! Warren Spector once told a story about Deus Ex where he discovered that players had used sticky mines to climb a wall! Normally you stick one of them onto a wall to damage a robot that passes by it but the system was so flexible that the players exploited this feature for their own purposes. Of course they had to be quick as the mines also explode when the player is in their vicinity too long…

Hmmm… must play Deus Ex again! 😉

> Heh, come to think of it, some woman who wrote stories for RPGs said she wouldn’t mind a “autoresolve combat” button, like in Betrayar at Krondor and was scolded and possibly fired for it.

Some gamers can be quite nasty and also surprisingly conservative. Yet, everybody demands new stuff at the same time!

As a non-commercial game designer I thankfully don’t have to care too much about them… 😉