OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games

[Randallw]

Just going out the door and I'll post later but I noticed you mention eye controlling the computer. I recently read an article about a password system that reads your eye, not just to verify your ID (and we know how that worked in Demolition man) but you move your eye in a few directions as a password, so to speak.

Back: I found this video on a hologram system today

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF1vF...%2Findex%2Ephp

There's also the table top system Microsoft is making.

Along with the eye control thing I mentioned they are also making bionic control feasible. That might be useful to control things. The thing is that you can increase the number of palyers and the number of systems but past a certain point it slows down the game. I believe we are already at a fair level. Any more and you will have long periods between turns waiting for everyone to do their turn, and with many more systems it'll be longer before you meet anyone and longer for things to develop as empires expand until they conflict with others.

[Tnarg]

Wow, I guess I might take back my thoughts on Hologram technology. Pretty impressive demonstration.

[Yef]

Damn, I would really love an strategy game that lets you do everything. Imagine Rome Total War, with real cities and towns of the period, every little tribe, and the player being capable of controlling as much or as little of the game as he wanted to, from First person combat to grand strategy.
In a game like Space Empires, I would love to let the AI control the game, and dive in and take operational command of the little colonial war going on against an sneaky race of pre-space flight creatures that inhabited a planet in the outskirts of my empire before my 100 000 civilian colonists setted up shop. And then go back and resume control of the empire's rule. Or maybe take control of a scout ship and explore the next star system. The posibilities are limitless.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

You can. Just put everything else under minister control.

[Fyron]

Narf:
Not really; there isn't very much to do on an individual planet...

[dogscoff]

Firstly, you'll be looking at massively multiplayer. Purpose-built strategy MMOGs will happen, but the really interesting ones will be the ones where you are giving orders to real people, not computer agents. Of course, this means that for every person who wants to play the game as a general, there will have to be a couple hundred other players willing to take on the role of footsoldier/ pilot/ tank commander/ whatever and follow orders. That's just fine though, those numbers are probably fairly representative of the sales of strategy games vs FPS/ flight sims etc. This means that a game won't be classed as a MMOrole plyer or MMOshooter any more, it will just be a game world with different roles and different gaming experiences within it.

We're already seeing things like this emerge on some of the MMORPGs. Thousands of people converge on servers to carry out huge battles. For the bulk of these plyers the gaming is strictly FPS-type action, but there are leaders who act as generals and direct the combat. I suppose this counts more as tactical than strategic, but there's no reason why these games and conflicts shouldn't extend to the strategic level in future.

Also, VR seems to be making a bit of a comeback. That could be really atmospheric, imagine commanding a battlefield in VR, viewing progress from a hilltop or swooping over your units to see how the action is going, issuing orders as you go.

However the one thing I think will take off hugely is voice control. Serious gamers already use VOIP systems alongside their games to communicate with other players, it's only a matter of time before someone starts coding virtual players (bots) that respond to voice commands. Of course the technical obstacle is not so much the voice recognition but reliable machine-parsing of natural language. People have been working on this for years, with varying levels of success. However gaming systems now have the spare storage and processing power available for this kind of trickery, and I think games will be the arena where it actually happens. They will be crude at first, but you know how technology snowballs, especially when it has money behind it. Maybe one day we'll hit the point where you aren't sure whether that guy on your team is human or AI. Again, this technology will be driven by the FPS experience (since that's where most of the gamers are) but once developped it will soon slosh over into strategy.

Just imagine SE if you could issue natural language commands to fleet commanders, ship captains and planetary governors:

"Governor, I need you to emergency build weapons platforms to defend against a seeker-biased opponent until sixth fleet arrives. Then you can go back to normal production."

"Commander, that wounded battlecruiser is in one of these three systems. Your mission is to hunt it down. If any of its null-space weapons are still intact, try to capture it. If not, blow it away. Be careful."

"Governor James, commandeer any transports that come into your system and start moving your oxy-breathing population to the Buratis system."

"Captain Gruk, I want you to catch up with Maelstrom fleet and resupply it. Avoid enemy-controlled systems unless you can get fleet protection. Our Krill allies may be travelling through the Primadara system shortly, so maybe you could ride with them."

"Commander, sit your fleet on that warp point and attack any Phong ships that try to warp through, but allow the Jraenar to pass. If any Cue Cappa warp through, tell them to turn around and go back but don't fire on them unless they disobey you or attack you. Don't engage any fleet that significantly outnumbers you."

[Tnarg]

dogscoff said:
Firstly, you'll be looking at massively multiplayer. Purpose-built strategy MMOGs will happen, but the really interesting ones will be the ones where you are giving orders to real people, not computer agents. Of course, this means that for every person who wants to play the game as a general, there will have to be a couple hundred other players willing to take on the role of footsoldier/ pilot/ tank commander/ whatever and follow orders. That's just fine though, those numbers are probably fairly representative of the sales of strategy games vs FPS/ flight sims etc. This means that a game won't be classed as a MMOrole plyer or MMOshooter any more, it will just be a game world with different roles and different gaming experiences within it.
"

I think that this would be an interesting approach to a Real Time Grand Strategy game. As you start out as your tiny insignificant planet empire in a realm of millions of planets and thousand of Empires it would pretty much be a single person game in the beggining, easy to control. As you expand, other players (if they do not want to start their own empire and wish to take on certain tasks) can opt to join your game and take charge of certain tasks, jurisdictions ie, Director of the Orange Sector of the Gorkon Federation on the outer fringes of the 10 system Federation. This person would then be in control of everything that takes place in those 3 outer fringe systems. This person could opt to have subordinates as well. Of course the overal director of the Gorkon Federation (Original player) has his/her say and guides this other player, or they get the boot. For the first person shooter aspect, players can logon and play as a mercenaries for your empire, if they are doing a smashing good job, they can be offered permant membership to your empire and gain rank and prestige, ask the player for specific research, more forces, ect. If one wants to logon into your empire and do the "Sim City" micromanage thing, kudos, perhaps they can be hired to clean up some mired and redundant cities, make them more efficient, turn them into gems that stand out and gain recognition in the galaxy.

Basically as you empire grows and grows and instead of having AI's to manage all of your various aspects you can post job openings for real people Within your empire one could even try to oust another person in charge, just like corrupt politics in the real world. Or if the original player finally decides to retire after a successful 4 year run at it, he/she could turn it over to the 2nd in charge.

One would not need to worry about not always being online, because you could possibly have dozens of other people assisting the running of your empire at any given time that could make command decisions in your absence and provide a sitrep when you return.

[Artaud]

dogscoff said:...However the one thing I think will take off hugely is voice control. Serious gamers already use VOIP systems alongside their games to communicate with other players, it's only a matter of time before someone starts coding virtual players (bots) that respond to voice commands. Of course the technical obstacle is not so much the voice recognition but reliable machine-parsing of natural language. People have been working on this for years, with varying levels of success. However gaming systems now have the spare storage and processing power available for this kind of trickery, and I think games will be the arena where it actually happens. They will be crude at first, but you know how technology snowballs, especially when it has money behind it. Maybe one day we'll hit the point where you aren't sure whether that guy on your team is human or AI. Again, this technology will be driven by the FPS experience (since that's where most of the gamers are) but once developped it will soon slosh over into strategy.

Just imagine SE if you could issue natural language commands to fleet commanders, ship captains and planetary governors...

I hope we don't go this route. For people who stutter, like me, such games will be a nightmare to play. I simply won't bother with a game that causes me the same degree of stress that daily life does.

But I realize that those of us who stutter are a very tiny minority. What everybody else wants will become the norm.

I'll just stop buying games.