Pick up and play or In depth?

In the last few years gaming has been making a change into the mainstream and as such has simplified.
Games a shorter faster and have a more gentle learning curve.
This is I believe is a double edged sword.
We get more gamers which means more games and more money in the industry.
On the other hand we have less involving,less original and almost mass produced games where the industry will find 1 formula and work it till it doesn't work any more instead of developing new ideas.

I'm biased on this one being a lifelong gamer and am a big fan of Fighting Games,RPGs and RTS' meaning I put a lot of time into games and enjoy a bit of complexity to my games.
I believe there should be the goal of improving your skill at a game and playing it for days rather than play it and shelf it.

I'm curious on where you guys stand on this as well.

This also in part is involved with modding and my mod in part.
In Lone Wolf I have endeavoured to add in more things to play with and learn.
14 factions,hundreds of new units and stuff will take time to learn
I have opted to go for the in depth angle.

I'm curious to see if that is what you guys want from mods,or perhaps a more streamlined gameplay or just a basic extension on the current formula by adding a faction.

I believe that it doesn't matter how complicated a game is, so long as the player is adequately prepared by the game in order to deal with it. Also, complexity for the sake of complexity, as seems to be the case for a lot of RPGs these days is a complete waste of everyone's time.

Also, more content is not more complex - it's just more content

Can't we have both? Things that are easy to learn, but difficult to master? Chess, for example, it takes 5 minutes to learn the moves of the pieces and how you play it, but years and years of practice to really master.

I love chess.

...
I have opted to go for the in depth angle.
...

Thanks.

It sure would be interesting with some more strategic possibilities in the gameplay ... like in chess. As the name of the category implies: [Real Time] Strategy.

On chess:

Although the two games are very different, it is possibly to make some basic parallels between them. Like for BfMe1, just imagine the following: the pieces being all what moves (i.e officers and pawns equals heros and units) and the chessboard itself being the map (all immobile, that's including primarily the buildplots, and to some extent chokepoints, waypoints, pathing etc.) - in BfMe1 the buildplots may roughly be compared to the squares of the chessboard.

In such a comparison (skipping all the details and arguments), in my opinion chess easily outmatches BfMe in terms of strategic complexity and choices.

[Well, it's twenty years since I last played chess, and never made it further than being an average player, though I sometimes did play 'blind', as much as three games simultaneously ... but being a very beautiful game you don't easily forget the basic mode of gameplay)

Now, as soon as you've learned the very basic of chess (how the different pieces are moving, and how they interact like in simple tactical combinations), then you proceed to learning all the strategical aspects of the games (and that takes years) ... things like "control of the centrum", "open lines" (and diagonals), "space" (for flexible relocation of your forces) or "preponderance in terrain", "conquering of the 8th row" ... like that; in short: MAP CONTROL.

The 'map's importance become even more accentuated as one gradually improves one's skills in chess; like analyzing many moves ahead or especially when playing 'blind', you'll have to make a mental projection of the 'map' (chessboard including pieces) as a matrix of dynamic strategic possibilities, like "areas of control", "patterns of threat levels" related to certain points, possibilities of "expansion" etc., making the mental mapping of the single pieces only the most important in the case of forced combinations - again the most important being map control, and the ways to achieve this.

If this comparison between chess and BfMe holds true, then I would say that for BfMe1 'Map Design' [bigger maps, better exploitation of the buildplot system] would be the single most important element in achieving some of the strategic finesse that chess has.

[Sorry, I couldn't resist this one ... it may be just some nonsense, but Allathar's post triggered something in the insane part of my mind ]

Edited by Námo, 08 April 2010 - 09:08 AM.

Pssst, Chess is more of a tactical game, and less of a strategy game (although element of strategy do of course exist). It's easier to draw parallels with RTT games such as World in Conflict, where position and orientation of individual pieces plays a predominant role in the outcome of the game and there's far less concentration of management of background resources and production.

... Chess is more of a tactical game, and less of a strategy game (although element of strategy do of course exist). ...

Well, I certainly disagree with that statement ... having played chess for thirty years, at club-level and sometimes doing tournaments as well, I could easily prove my points.

But let it be ... the interesting point in this topic is (in my opinion) the strategy and tactics of the BfMe games, and how those aspects might be improved, to give a more "in depth" gaming experience ... my reference to chess was just to give a small input on that subject.

I would say that for BfMe1 'Map Design' [bigger maps, better exploitation of the buildplot system] would be the single most important element in achieving strategic finesse

Damn straight That's why i love mapping.

Also, more content is not more complex - it's just more content

Definitely. The best games (e.g. chess) are often the simplest in content, yet complex in play. Eventually, you reach a point where "new" content is only unique on a superficial level, but is really just a copy-paste of existing units/powers/factions Creating new content, doesn't alter gameplay as much as you would initially think, as you'll eventually realise that you're just using the same tactics for slightly different units.

I think the most successful mods combine new units, powers and maps, with a completely new faction structure. I'd say mods like the Dwarf Holds succeed more in that way, because the completely unique game structure forces new and exciting strategy, and a fresh perspective on a classic game

(woohoo! 200th post )

IMHO, for BfME gameplay to gain any significant need for both tactical and strategic finesse, you'd need to make a fair few serious changes to how the game works.

I think the most successful mods combine new units, powers and maps, with a completely new faction structure. ...

Why not [variations of] buildings ... or [variations of] buildplots?


Sorry if the following proposals are naive, I never really got time for doing some serious modding, but would it not be possible to make some more variation in the buildplot-system, something along these lines:

Instead of using only the *Faction*BuildingFoundation and *Faction*BaseDefenceFoundation for Camps and Outposts, defining some *Faction*CampBuildingFoundation and *Faction*OutpostBuildingFoundation (or whatever you would call them), i.e. making it possible to make some differentiation in which structures it's possible to build in Castles, Camps or Outposts.

Not that these should have complete different sets of buildings, but making different commandsets possible for those buildplots, e.g. Siege Workshops only build outside the Castle, or whatever. Taken one step further, making say a *Structure* [for inside the Castle] and a childobject Outer*Structure* for the same structure [build at Campplots or Outposts] and then with some variations by leveling up, and possible variations in commandset.

This probably would not make a big change in terms of strategy/tactics unless paired with modifications of a lot of other parameters, but I believe it would give some interesting possibilities with respect to development of the gameplay ...

... and maybe some very interesting maps, with some new challenges for the mappers?

Edited by Námo, 13 February 2011 - 10:33 AM.

Not that these should have complete different sets of buildings, but making different commandsets possible for those buildplots, e.g. Siege Workshops only build outside the Castle, or whatever.

I did that with my mod just yesterday

Interesting.

... I put a lot of time into games and enjoy a bit of complexity ...

Do you play chess, too?

I learned a little and use to play some with my old flatmate.

But for my main complexity fix I play Fighting games.
Tekken and Virtua Fighter mostly.

You mean games I just hit every button avaliable like crazy?

Those games are awesome. I played Tekken 2 yesterday. The bear is awesome.

This topic I think still belongs in Green Dragon it's only half related to BFME.

Then why don't you move it back

I'm quite lazy
Will do later.