How do YOU play the game?

[Maltrease]

Another peaceful thread is born...

I certainly fall within the middle of these categories. I don't think one is really any better than the other but they do certainly conflict if they play each other.

I think a better sandcastle analogy would be that the "gamer" figures out the multiple small rocks all thrown together are much more effective than a single rock. Or perhaps a better use of the flatter rocks is to use them as makeshift shovels and tunnel beneath the enemies castle.

Stomping on the castle directly is leaving the confines of the game. Carrying your analogy to dominions would have the "gamer" hacking the game to directly remove rival players. Or sabotaging their computer so they can not fight back. Since the ultimage goal is to be the "Only god remaining".

[ June 04, 2004, 16:12: Message edited by: Maltrease ]

[PvK]

It's definitely not a matter of two distinct categories. I'm not sure it's even a spectrum between two poles. More like, players have a different degree of interest in each type of play.

Personally, I'm more interested in what you called the "sandbox" aspect, but I also enjoy the balance issues and friendly competition.

I very much enjoy playing leisurely single-player games, where I only resort to hunting for the most effective techniques when I'm about to get wiped out, and otherwise follow the careers of my warriors, try to keep them alive, explore things I haven't tried before, and so on. Tons of fun to be had there, for "sandbox" players.

I also very much like playing PBEM games against other players, with only partial in-character roleplaying aspects.

I even get tempted to want to play games such as Asynja versus munchkin-wannabes trying to exploit what they think are the latest "abusive" tricks.

PvK

[PvK]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
...
The sandboxers also would have a focus of wanting all nations to balance against all nations, while the sandboxers would be more willing to accept a rock/paper/scissors mode of balance. Very interesting.

I think you got that mixed up. Sandbox = thematic roleplayer = don't care much about balance = does not particularly want to balance all nations = more likely to be bored by rock/paper/scissors. I think you meant "gamers", from the original post context. (Though, I don't really think those terms exactly mean what the original post suggested they do, in general.)

PvK

[PrinzMegaherz]

Stomping on the castle directly is leaving the confines of the game. Carrying your analogy to dominions would have the "gamer" hacking the game to directly remove rival players. Or sabotaging their computer so they can not fight back. Since the ultimage goal is to be the "Only god remaining".

My sample was not meant to be perfect. Indeed I do not see the gamer as the bad guy. I think gamers have much fun playing against other gamers, as well as sandboxers have fun against sandboxers. But they dont mix very well.

But of course, noone here is truly black or white.

[ June 04, 2004, 17:03: Message edited by: PrinzMegaherz ]

[littlemute]

Originally posted by Kaljamaha:
Some years ago, on a Civ related forum, someone (sorry, I have zero recollection of said person) said that strategy gamers can be divided into two categories: gamers and sandbox people.

I'm a sandbox at first, then a gamer after a month or so. I was in a fantasy cream dream with warcraft 3 and thought the unit designs were just awesome, now I don't care if they are little chits on a hexboard as long as my Night Elves beat you again and again and again in the most efficient manner possible saying GG after 5 minutes.

King of Fighters, Last Blade, Samurai Shodown, Shadowfist all the same, loved the fluff (what if the Korean Team was joined by Yagami rather than Kim! Would they revert to crime again?) but then it's the 9-hit cross-up combos buffered into super despiration moves that thrill me.

It's when the fluff sucks (CIV, Age of Empires) that I can't get into the game enough to enjoy the mechanics.

[Wauthan]

If sandbox players are thematic roleplayers then I'm the fourth kid in Prince Megahertz example. The one hiding behind a rock out of fear that his carefully decorated sandcastle might get ruined by hurled rocks and stomping feet.

For some reason I have very little drive to actually win games. I just want to create something I find interesting and see if it works. If it's really competitive I tend to go for the quickest win possible just to get back to empire building. I think I'm running about 22 mods on Dominions now for the sole purpose that I want the game to reflect my vision on how the factions ougtho behave. If they ever make a Civilization spinoff from this game consider one copy sold already.

It's greatly annoying that noone seems to be interested in creating the ultimate game for a player like me. It would be something like a Dominions/Master of magic/Alpha Centauri hybrid. But the future seems to be all realtime 3D hackfest were the fastest and most focused tactics win all the time.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Wauthan:
It's greatly annoying that noone seems to be interested in creating the ultimate game for a player like me. It would be something like a Dominions/Master of magic/Alpha Centauri hybrid.

Well, such a game would be sadistically massive, and playable only in single-player, as most multiplayer folks can't stomach that kind of enormous slog. As such, the AI had better be pretty awesome, and this ain't easy to do, as computers, by their nature, are inherently stupid.

But the future seems to be all realtime 3D hackfest were the fastest and most focused tactics win all the time.

Hmm. I wouldn't go so far as to say THAT. I wouldn't exactly say that the "fastest" tactics win all the time, either: My tactics are widely regarded as being a slow, grinding, slogfest. Although certainly focus is important: It's kind of hard to win a game if you're stumbling around aimlessly with no plan or objective beyond "look at the pretty lights". Depending on the game settings and general aggressiveness level and crowding, it's certainly possible to maintain and hold an empire of reasonable size just kinda plodding along trying to stay alive into the end game, though: Inevitably, however, a lack of any plan will not bring you to ultimate victory, no matter what the game is: Any game where somebody can win without an objective or plan is one which requires absolutely no skills and is functionally indistinguishable from playing Rock, Paper, Scissors over the Internet.