Sid Meier’s 10 rules for game design

last 15 minutes.

It seems to me like this one is the hardest for long strategy games to do well in. Most of the games that I've played, the last 10-15 minutes are a foregone conclusion.

Successfully updated karma reason!

yeah you have to adjust the slipperslope it a way that it not too steep in the beginning or at almost equal skill levels and make it steeper and steeper lategame and with big skill gaps.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I like also another of the "Sid" rules that Soren Johnson gave in his blog:

- One good game is better than two great ones.

(http://www.designer-notes.com/?p=119). The explanations for the rules are pretty interesting too.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This is another good one from the link in the previous post:

The Player Should Have the Fun, not the Designer or the Computer

People pushing for a 'more realistic' social model in Elemental should read this:

... during the development of Civilization 4, we experimented with government types that gave significant productivity bonuses but also took away the player’s ability to pick which technologies were researched, what buildings were constructed, and which units were trained, relying instead on a hidden, internal model to simulate what the county’s people would choose on their own. The algorithms were, of course, very fun to construct and interesting to discuss outside of the game. The players, however, felt left behind - the computer was having all the fun - so we cut the feature.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Pretty sharp list that, relevent to more than game design. Number ten is definately the most important for me, though seven is a close second.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It seems to me like this one is the hardest for long strategy games to do well in. Most of the games that I've played, the last 10-15 minutes are a foregone conclusion.

Last 15 miutes a forgone conclusion, I just finished a Galactic Civ where the last half the game was a forgon conclution, I can't think of many that past the 1/3rd mark there have been 'natural' changes of who's winning (not caused by game changing random event.)

Successfully updated karma reason!

8

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting ,

quoting post

Make it ‘Epic’!

I find this a bit vague.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thus, in Sid’s words, the player must “always be the star.” As designers, we need to be the player’s greatest advocate during a game’s development, always considering carefully how design decisions affect both the player’s agency in the world and his understanding of the underlying mechanics.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It seems to me like this one is the hardest for long strategy games to do well in. Most of the games that I've played, the last 10-15 minutes are a foregone conclusion.

Last 15 miutes a forgone conclusion, I just finished a Galactic Civ where the last half the game was a forgon conclution, I can't think of many that past the 1/3rd mark there have been 'natural' changes of who's winning (not caused by game changing random event.)

In advanced civilization, the boardgame (the ancient one, not the one from sid meier civilization) you got really awful events once you got some cities. The more cities, the more chances you get things like rebellion, flood, piracy, civil war (that one was nasty).

the game should be like "I don't create more cities/do more research/do dungeoning because i want but because I NEED it".

Players should be struggling for survival. I always like in civ4 when barbarians are really really active. And the armageddon counter in fall from heaven 2 is a really nice idea.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting vieuxchat,

reply 10

It seems to me like this one is the hardest for long strategy games to do well in. Most of the games that I've played, the last 10-15 minutes are a foregone conclusion.

Last 15 miutes a forgone conclusion, I just finished a Galactic Civ where the last half the game was a forgon conclution, I can't think of many that past the 1/3rd mark there have been 'natural' changes of who's winning (not caused by game changing random event.)

In advanced civilization, the boardgame (the ancient one, not the one from sid meier civilization) you got really awful events once you got some cities. The more cities, the more chances you get things like rebellion, flood, piracy, civil war (that one was nasty).

the game should be like "I don't create more cities/do more research/do dungeoning because i want but because I NEED it".

Players should be struggling for survival. I always like in civ4 when barbarians are really really active. And the armageddon counter in fall from heaven 2 is a really nice idea.

Try the Revolutions mod by Jdog... it is fantastic when a significant portion of your empire rises in bloody rebellion, and you put it down and lay waste to the cities and land just in time for your neighbor to take advantage of your weakness... and then another part of your empire rises in rebellion!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yep civil war is a must ^___^

BUT ! I'd like to see more things about a living world. For instance, when a city is spreading too much, it begins attracting strange creatures (and youhave a quest to get rid of that swarm of ugly things), or undead creatures begins roaming the mand. Or if you're a bad bad bad boy then some nature creatures will hunt you to stop making earth suffering.

If you're too good then some bad bad bad creatures will bring a touch of chaos in your so beautiful kingdom (and that would be a goo dreason to split your empire in two and give some kind of independance to some of your cities "Oh oh .. some undead near Kraxafax ? Well, well, well, let them being independant, they'll pay me to be protected *evil laugh*)

Or places that have seen too much battles will spawn magical creatures that can't be hit with mundane weapons.

Places where too much magic has been done and the earth is slowly dividing itself.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I am currently reading "the art of game design" and I can see a lot of similar concepts that were in the book.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Teucrian,

reply 1

It seems to me like this one is the hardest for long strategy games to do well in. Most of the games that I've played, the last 10-15 minutes are a foregone conclusion.

You are thinking about the last 15 minutes of the entire game. Consider the last 15 minutes of each play session.

Good results:

Man, I have GOT to go to BED.
That was pretty fun, I wonder what I could do better
Hmm, I need to convince my friends to play multiplayer with me.

Bad Results:

What... why did that happen? ARgh! (Ragequit)
That's It?
Why am I still playing this?
I wonder what the resell value of this game is...

Successfully updated karma reason!

I will say this about Sid and his "10 rules" -

The rules themselves may be correct, probably are,

but in my not so humble opinion, Sid Meyer, Peter Molyneaux, and Will Wright, all made some absolutely amazing games. Then they started realizing how great they were and started writing "the 10 commandments of game design" or in other ways became addicted to self-admiration, and frankly, their game design and creativity went right in the toilet. It was like instead of jsut doing what they knew how to do and enjoying it, they engraved their ideas in stone with the finger of god (their own finger in their opinion) and then became so concerned about following their own rule set of how to create a great game, that they lost the magic.

I'm sure that opinion will draw some fire.

I also think that StarDock's greatest game is ahead of them - I hope EWOM sets a high water mark in the industry.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Denryu,

reply 15

I will say this about Sid and his "10 rules" -
The rules themselves may be correct, probably are, but in my not so humble opinion, Sid Meyer, Peter Molyneaux, and Will Wright, all made some absolutely amazing games. Then they started realizing how great they were and started writing "the 10 commandments of game design" or in other ways became addicted to self-admiration, and frankly, their game design and creativity went right in the toilet. It was like instead of jsut doing what they knew how to do and enjoying it, they engraved their ideas in stone with the finger of god (their own finger in their opinion) and then became so concerned about following their own rule set of how to create a great game, that they lost the magic.

And how did you come to that conclusion?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Hmm, the one time I played a game like this that stayed tough through to the endgame was actually a mod of Medieval 2:Total War (Can't remember the mod name right now)

In this mod, the bigger your kingdom grew, the harder it was to maintain loyalty in your outer provinces, and the more upkeep you needed to maintain it. When your domain became very large, it became dangerous to allow anyone but your most trusted generals to lead a large army, or else they might easily turn on you.

In essence, the realities of controlling a huge empire became apparent, and your kingdom at the endgame was more than merely a very large version of what you started the game with.

Successfully updated karma reason!

9. Most important part of the game is the first and last 15 minutes.

I disagree with the latter half of this pretty strongly, actually (in the context of the TBS genre, anyway). Now, the very beginning of the game is definitely one of the most important parts because otherwise starting a new game becomes much less appealing. The very beginning of the game should be pure fun - most games, in my experience, get this right.

The very end of the game will always be a foregone conclusion. The climax of a TBS game is never right at the end of a match - the climax comes before the end and generally determines how the game will end. The climax is the most important part of a game (at least as important as the beginning, for me) and the trick is to make it last as long as possible. You want the climax to start early and end late, but the very very end of the game is not so important, imo.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Too bad Sid didn't think to apply some of those commandments to Civ4.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting lwarmonger,

reply 11

Try the Revolutions mod by Jdog... it is fantastic when a significant portion of your empire rises in bloody rebellion, and you put it down and lay waste to the cities and land just in time for your neighbor to take advantage of your weakness... and then another part of your empire rises in rebellion!

That's sound both cool and horrifying.

Quoting Kefka 101,

reply 17

Hmm, the one time I played a game like this that stayed tough through to the endgame was actually a mod of Medieval 2:Total War (Can't remember the mod name right now)

In this mod, the bigger your kingdom grew, the harder it was to maintain loyalty in your outer provinces, and the more upkeep you needed to maintain it. When your domain became very large, it became dangerous to allow anyone but your most trusted generals to lead a large army, or else they might easily turn on you.

In essence, the realities of controlling a huge empire became apparent, and your kingdom at the endgame was more than merely a very large version of what you started the game with.

I would love to see something like that implemented as a pre-game "allow/disallow" option for sandbox mode. It sounds like it could get frustrating on a more casual game, but could still be great to have for the more serious run.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Rise. Of. Nations.

Did them all.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Tkins,

reply 21

Rise. Of. Nations.

Did them all.

So true ... No other rts was as good as it. Even Rise of legends.

Successfully updated karma reason!

"Do research after the game is done. Tap into the player’s brain."

In a similiar vein, sort of, I guess, this makes me think of Post-Mortem Reports. This is one thing I feel most Dev's do not do enough of.

Nothing provides more insight into the Dev process than a properly written, heartfelt Post-Mortem of a game.

If you have never read one, search the Weeb, they exisit and they can be very enlightening. Especially for a game you played and liked, or disliked.

Damn! Now I have to go look some up.

Successfully updated karma reason!

psychoak

Join Date 07/2007

+225

The very end of the game will always be a foregone conclusion. The climax of a TBS game is never right at the end of a match - the climax comes before the end and generally determines how the game will end. The climax is the most important part of a game (at least as important as the beginning, for me) and the trick is to make it last as long as possible. You want the climax to start early and end late, but the very very end of the game is not so important, imo.

Channeler death ending the age fixes this problem. When you have an avatar to lose the game on, you don't have to wind down to the bitter end, in either direction. You lose in that deciding battle, or you win.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Agreed, what Elemetal should avoid is having an end game like Civ where any half decent player would agree you have won, only you have to sit out turn after turn of tedious combat in order to actually have the game acknowledge it. It would be awesome if this game had a mechanism to prevent the game from going into that stage where you have to battle it out although nothin can stop you any more.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sid Meier&rsquo;s 10 rules for game design

Sid Meier’s 10 rules for game design

Sid Meier’s 10 rules for game design