The GM's Creed Applied To Games

quote:

---

Original post by Wavinator

The Game Environment
How much should the player have to do to find action? Is it up to the player to find the conflict (greater weight on the environment) or up to the conflict to find the player (less weight on environment, but more out of place encounters)?

---

If I had my way, it would be up to the player to find conflict most of the time. I am an advocate of player choice, and we all know w/ choice comes responsibility. In this case, it's responsibility to find the adventure.

Very great ideas on how to use AI for our own interests. We'd be working with the computer's short-comings instead of against them.

---

Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
What a plight we who try to make a story-based game have...writers of conventional media have words, we have but binary numbers


Edited by - Nazrix on February 17, 2001 11:43:05 AM

Wow, it eventually allowed me to reply. Umm, what i going to say hmmm. Oh yeah i copied someones quote, lets see.

quote:

---

by Wavinator
This does open up a philosophical question, btw: How much should the player have to do to find action? Is it up to the player to find the conflict (greater weight on the environment) or up to the conflict to find the player (less weight on environment, but more out of place encounters)?

---

Just in case you''ve forgotten the logical perspective on all of this. It would seem that any beast or animal encounter would revolve around environment(incl time of day, month of year, etc). Then you would work out if the animal or monster is likey to be in a teritory a certain times of the year. It''s very easy to chart.



A designer doesnt need to know everything about code, they just have to have an appreciation for its limitations and how those limitations affect features they may wish to include in their design. - Drew

I love that idea. I think that random encounter tables are still with us primarily because of the limitations with computers in the past. It always takes someone to come along and make use of new capabilities to accomplish something truly innovative. Static encounter tables are just the easiest way to model reality in some situations. But a truly good game designer is not content to simply use the same old solution, simply because it is good enough.

While your idea is a great step in the right direction, I would like to make some suggestions. First, changing the encounters based on character strengths/weaknesses is a great idea. But it is easy to interrupt the "suspension of disbelief" if taken too far. It is important to ensure that even the dynamic tables conform to a strict sense of reality, whatever that reality is.

Also, I would suggest modeling the behavior of entire groups of creatures. In the original Dungeon Masters'' Guide, Gary Gygax gives a good example of how an orc tribe''s behavior should change in relation to attacks on their village.

For example, the first time the village is attacked, after a long period of peace, the residents will be wholly unprepared. Few, if any, of the inhabitants are likely to be standing guard. Reaction to the attack will be slow and disorganized. Panic is likely at first.

If the village is attacked the following week, response will be more swift, and resistance is likely to be better organized.

If the village is attacked repeatedly, the village will be increasingly better prepared. Guards will be posted and vigilant. A clear warning system will be devised. Traps are likely to be prepared, and a clear strategy will be followed.

If the attacks stop for a long period of time, vigilance will die down. Some traps will be removed, or fall into disrepair. Yet others, like pit traps, may remain for a long time.

Clearly, modeling such a complex set of reactions is more work, but your posting indicates that you are not the type of game designer to settle for what is easiest, yet inferior. And this system is not necessarily all that difficult. A simple "battle readiness" variable is a simple way to keep track of this. Another small array containing which particular traps or strategies are used is another detail.

Using your space adventure scenario, this could be applied to the behavior of individual ships and crews. Damage sustained, crew type lost (engineering, helm, etc.,) and similar details would have a tremendous impact on the strategy they employ. A heavily damaged ship will flee, if possible, for example.

I don''t know whether this has been helpful, or whether this is something that you have already considered. Certainly you know the value of those late-night gaming sessions with nothing but a few friends, some dice, and a whole lot of imagination flying around!

Good luck with your project. It already sounds like you''ve got the soul of a great designer. I hope you will let us know how it goes.

-Jonathon

Hmmm... This all sounds kind of familiar. A good idea, I might stress, and something, if implemented well, could go a long way.

Now, where did I hear about this idea...

quote:

---

Original post by bishop_pass
Now, where did I hear about this idea...

---

Did you come up w/ a similar idea before? Sorry, I honestly don''t remember. Perhaps, you should use the "Wavinator Format" and accent things w/ bold and italics...It seems to get more attention

---

Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
What a plight we who try to make a story-based game have...writers of conventional media have words, we have but binary numbers

This system can apply to "natural seeming puzzles/obstacles" in other words things and situations which can be encountered in the (game) world, ie. a boulder blocking a cave, a troll with an appetite for goats, {ummm.. invent some good ones...}.

These shouldn''t be "puzzles" as in single-solution encounters.. (ie. find troll to roll boulder from cave), but multiple solution things which keep the world dynamic and fun. Ie. Dynamite the cave? Roll the boulder at an enemy? etc.

Thus the system can help to make the world environment more interesting.

quote:

---

Original post by Nazrix

Did you come up w/ a similar idea before? Sorry, I honestly don''t remember. Perhaps, you should use the "Wavinator Format" and accent things w/ bold and italics...It seems to get more attention

---

Yes, Nazrix, I will admit my posts seem to lack the ''style'' and ''presentation like'' feel of Wavinator''s. But we all know he is a hot rodding angel when it comes to stylish and effective discussion here.

Regaarding Dynamic plotting, yes, I did post a similar topic a while back. I even like to fancy that my contributions have had some small influence on Wavinator''s prolific design ideas.

What about an "Atmosphere/Mood table" which would determine the "tone" of the game etc.. ie. sad, humorous, gory, disturbing etc.

QUOTE Wavinator "are dynamically changing encounter tables ".

So what would be the feedback mechanisms to control these gameplay / atmosphere etc. tables?

Having the player pray for safe journeys in temples? (Less encounters).

???Game Would need to compensate for experience not earned / money not gained via combat.

Hey, Ketchaval! I like the idea of a mood table. Would there be an interface for the player to configure this option? Perhaps the mood could be set at the start of any game session. (Hmm, I think I''d like to tear someone''s face off today. Better set that aggression counter to MAX!)

I think some developers have come close to this idea by providing several characters to choose from. Each character follows a slightly different storyline. But I think that your idea would offer a lot more freedom.

Or would this setting be the sole responsibility of the designer? I guess this could enhance a storyline. Harsh encounters at one time, humorous at other times....

~~Jonathon

quote:

---

Original post by Nazrix

If I had my way, it would be up to the player to find conflict most of the time. I am an advocate of player choice, and we all know w/ choice comes responsibility. In this case, it''s responsibility to find the adventure.

---

quote:

---

Original post by Paul Cunningham

Just in case you''ve forgotten the logical perspective on all of this. It would seem that any beast or animal encounter would revolve around environment(incl time of day, month of year, etc). Then you would work out if the animal or monster is likey to be in a teritory a certain times of the year. It''s very easy to chart.

---

What do you guys think about the case where the adventure comes and finds the player? For instance, he''s ticked off the smuggler''s guild and they''ve sent people after him. Or he''s altered some balance of power or nature.

I think a combination of both would be cool if the player were given safe areas. So anywhere he travels might be fair game for an assassin encounter, let''s say, because he''s angered the wrong people-- but there could be strongholds or safehouses where he''d be relatively secure (he hopes )

This might open up wider uses for other types of gameplay, like bribery, disguise, or secret movement.

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote:

---

Original post by Jonathon

I love that idea. I think that random encounter tables are still with us primarily because of the limitations with computers in the past. It always takes someone to come along and make use of new capabilities to accomplish something truly innovative. Static encounter tables are just the easiest way to model reality in some situations. But a truly good game designer is not content to simply use the same old solution, simply because it is good enough.

---

Hey, thanks!

quote:

---

While your idea is a great step in the right direction, I would like to make some suggestions. First, changing the encounters based on character strengths/weaknesses is a great idea. But it is easy to interrupt the "suspension of disbelief" if taken too far. It is important to ensure that even the dynamic tables conform to a strict sense of reality, whatever that reality is.

---

Right, this is a tricky one. Do you ease up on the player (or increase difficulty if things are too easy) just because the situation is difficult (or easy)? Or do you leave things as they are in the name of suspension of disbelief.

If it''s possible to detect frustration and boredom, I''d lean toward altering the environment even if it''s a bit of a non sequitur. It would be useful to have a handy, world-appropriate excuse to do so, though. Maybe travelling companion that randomly shows up, or free roaming enemies that pop up like in serial comics.

quote:

---

Also, I would suggest modeling the behavior of entire groups of creatures. In the original Dungeon Masters'' Guide, Gary Gygax gives a good example of how an orc tribe''s behavior should change in relation to attacks on their village.

For example, the first time the village is attacked, after a long period of peace, the residents will be wholly unprepared. Few, if any, of the inhabitants are likely to be standing guard. Reaction to the attack will be slow and disorganized. Panic is likely at first.

If the village is attacked the following week, response will be more swift, and resistance is likely to be better organized.

If the village is attacked repeatedly, the village will be increasingly better prepared. Guards will be posted and vigilant. A clear warning system will be devised. Traps are likely to be prepared, and a clear strategy will be followed.

If the attacks stop for a long period of time, vigilance will die down. Some traps will be removed, or fall into disrepair. Yet others, like pit traps, may remain for a long time.

---

I like this. This shows a history in response to past events. It also makes the world less player centric, which in the name of immersiveness could be very powerful if used correctly.

quote:

---

I don''t know whether this has been helpful, or whether this is something that you have already considered. Certainly you know the value of those late-night gaming sessions with nothing but a few friends, some dice, and a whole lot of imagination flying around!

Good luck with your project. It already sounds like you''ve got the soul of a great designer. I hope you will let us know how it goes.

---

Whoa, thanks!!!! Now all I need is for you to whisper into the ears of some megapublishers!!!

Seriously, thanks for the vote of confidence. I''m actually thinking a lot about the historical aspect of encounters. The great thing about this is that it fleshes out the world, and creates something the player can make sense of.

One possibility that REALLY intrigues me is that you could weight actions both with history and an AI GM in mind, and theoretically cut down on the use of large scale AI. For complex games (like what I''ve been trying to puzzle out, an RPG + Empire game), this would be a bonanza!!!

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote:

---

Original post by bishop_pass

Hmmm... This all sounds kind of familiar. A good idea, I might stress, and something, if implemented well, could go a long way.

Now, where did I hear about this idea...

---

Um, uh, *ahem* (uh oh...)



Sorry, bishop, didn''t mean to step on your toes. I actually missed your original post-- which ticks me off, as I could have been on about implementing this months ago!!!!

Must''ve been all those inspiring e-mails percolating in the ol'' hindbrain!

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote:

---

Original post by Ketchaval

This system can apply to "natural seeming puzzles/obstacles" in other words things and situations which can be encountered in the (game) world, ie. a boulder blocking a cave, a troll with an appetite for goats, {ummm.. invent some good ones...}.

These shouldn''t be "puzzles" as in single-solution encounters.. (ie. find troll to roll boulder from cave), but multiple solution things which keep the world dynamic and fun. Ie. Dynamite the cave? Roll the boulder at an enemy? etc.

Thus the system can help to make the world environment more interesting.

---

Exactly what I was thinking. The system drops in an obstacle that it knows the player can possibly solve, and the player figures out what he wants to do. He could actually choose not to solve it; or he could approach it from many different directions if the game supported it.

This does raise the interesting question of persistence, though.

Should a challenge stick around forever once the player has encountered it (obviously not if it''s mobile, alive, or whatever).

I''d think that the obstacle would be seperate from this system if you want it to be permanent, but the tools for solving it could be generated on the fly (like the troll, for example, or some dynamite on a dead soldier''s body, etc.)



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote:

---

Original post by Ketchaval

What about an "Atmosphere/Mood table" which would determine the "tone" of the game etc.. ie. sad, humorous, gory, disturbing etc.

---

This would get into an asset / art issue, but if a game has the resources then I say go for it. I think it would work. Especially if you played tricks with lighting in a 3D environment, altered music, and had a cache of SFX at will.

If you make a game with zombies, though, you might run into a problem with representation, no matter how funny you tried to set the mode. (Heh, although you could make things MACABRE by playing happy music and having bright, cheery lighting in the middle of a zombie murder fest! )

quote:

---

Original post by Jonathon

I like the idea of a mood table. Would there be an interface for the player to configure this option? Perhaps the mood could be set at the start of any game session.

---

I remember the old System Shock let you determine something of a mood when you first started the game: I believe you could tell the game to favor combat, puzzles, and some other thing that determined overall gameplay.

I would like it if the designer had more input on this, though. Ultimately we pay them to entertain us. I remember being put off by the SS selection screen somewhat because I had no basis for making a judgement. I''m not saying explicit setting is wrong, but maybe it would work better if it were more "in game?"


--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote:

---

Original post by Ketchaval

QUOTE Wavinator "are dynamically changing encounter tables ".

So what would be the feedback mechanisms to control these gameplay / atmosphere etc. tables?

Having the player pray for safe journeys in temples? (Less encounters).

???Game Would need to compensate for experience not earned / money not gained via combat.

---

It all depends on what''s fun to do. Is missing the encounters fun? Unless there''s something else compelling to do, I wouldn''t think so. Rather, it''s missing either certain types of encounters (as too difficult or easy) or uninteresting encounters.

I like the "in game" suggestion of praying at the temple, though. It would work with the world fiction and help immersion (your god not only heard you, but DID something about it! :D)

I''m exploring other, more direct control variables as well: Friends allowing for or dimenishing certain encounters; the ability to get enough info to predict some encounters (so you can seek or avoid at will); and the change and growth of your own stats (wealth, or appearance, for instance) affecting them as well.

Wow! Lots of layers to something like this. I like it!!!


--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Hrm, nice topic. One that tickles my implementation-geared mind

I''m going to look at it from a statistical-table point of view, i.e. the game actually works with an encounter table. I''m going to analyse it in sequence of play.

1. The game starts. Depending on the style of the game, there may actually be some dynamics to the encounter table before play even starts. The player goes through a character creation process, some of which may influence the encounter table. Two examples:
a) in an ADnD style game you''ve rolled or picked stats and a class. The system picks up on your class, creating more physical encounters for a warrior, and more magical encounters for a wizard.
b) in a more role-play oriented game, you choose a "personality" for your character. If you choose a "care-giver" personality, encounters will be weighed towards protecting/rescuing people. If you choose a more "flamboyant" personality, you''ll be faced with things that could make or break your reputation.

2. You''ve started play. Though you may not have specifically met any of the encounters yet, your actions may be pushing towards a particular direction in the table. The table could be multi-dimensional, for instance more or less physical risk, more or less reputation risk, more or less diplomatic challenge, actual physical location of the encounter,etc.
Conversation responses could be an influence, for instance, if you keep telling villagers that you''re a very powerful wizard, your chances of having to prove it will increase.

3. You''ve faced one of the actual encounters in the table. There could be more than one possible outcome, but it ranges from complete success to complete failure, and it could vary based on the method you chose to attempt the encounter (did you dynamite the boulder or did you get a troll to do it for you?)
If you''ve successfully completed the challenge, the item in the table is removed (the boulder is no longer there) and replaced by a new one. If you''ve failed, it could be removed (one-shot encounters, can you convince the caravan to take you along?), or it could stay there until you try again (the boulder won''t budge unless you move it). Success or failure may also influence related encounters, as there is no rule to say that two different random encounters need not be linked logically!


So basically, there''s a multidimensional encounter table, with a certain range of possible encounters around the position you are currently in, and the actual entries in it can change because of the actions you have undertaken.

It seems like a very workable idea.

People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
Mad Keith the V.

Quote: Wavinator
I''d think that the obstacle would be seperate from this system if you want it to be permanent, but
the tools for solving it could be generated on the fly (like the troll, for example, or some dynamite on
a dead soldier''s body, etc.)

--> I like that, as it would generate more possibilities 4 action, and also make the player think more.. Ie. They find a rock hammer. Now can they use it profitably in the current situation.. To take the fossil out of the cliff, or do they try to chisel it with their sword?


Quote : Wavinator
If you make a game with zombies, though, you might run into a problem with representation, no
matter how funny you tried to set the mode. (Heh, although you could make things MACABRE by
playing happy music and having bright, cheery lighting in the middle of a zombie murder fest! )


--> Well the chance of something funny, or sad etc. would be tailored to the game.. as would the style of "funny" ie. blackly humorous events... like a Zombie stuck in a revolving door (ick!). Thus it would be a mixture of things they encounter & the art/sound/animation for things.

One thing to consider in Games, is why?? is the player having this encounter. Why is the computer generating these creatures?

Is it to advance the game, ie. the player achieves something by overcoming the challenge? maybe learning more info to point him towards the "final goal".

Or is it a way of delaying the player from getting to the goal.. he has to kill 100 rabbits to get across the field.

The third goal is to give the player something to respond to and enjoy doing. (Ie. Gameplay.).

We tend to combine the 2nd and 3rd goals to create long and enjoyable?? games. But would the 1st goal & 3rd would provide more interest, and enjoyment in the player (albeit maybe shortening the game slightly).