![]() ![]() UI is a huge topic in general, but core principles of the field apply to 4X games just as they apply to anything else. Intuitive interfaces (Civilization 5 is a good example) Also, some "broken" strategies are really just exploiting weak AI, so the solution to that is to iterate on the AI a bit. Entering a tactical or real-time combat map isn't something I've seen before in 4X, as it would likely ruin the pacing by making the overall game take too long.Īs opposed to what, following a single easy-to-find overly-powerful algorithm? Playtesting for game balance to prevent a single unit or tech or strategy or whatever from being overwhelmingly better than the others. Most 4X games that I've seen (such as the Civilization series) automate combat almost entirely you choose one unit or stack to move onto an opposing stack, a winner is determined behind the scenes, results are displayed. (Note that simply giving the player an option of full hands-on or automating is not optimal if the automation is just as good as micro-managing then there's no point to letting the player take control, but if it's significantly worse then you punish players for NOT micro-managing.) To cut down on this, it's generally a matter of simplifying the mechanics and automating certain processes. Earlier 4X games actually did have quite a bit of micro-managing, and in fact it could be argued that for SOME players who enjoy that level of control, this is desirable. Not repetetive (Such as using the same strategy over and over, or spamming units)Įconomical (Not having 7 trillion metal and coins after 10 minutes of play)Īlso arrived at through playtesting. Not particularly interesting or glorious but it works. My understanding is that AI is usually developed through trial-and-error and playtesting start with a fairly simple AI, play until you see it do something really stupid, then figure out how to make it so it doesn't do that stupid thing anymore. AI in a 4X game is a really hard problem the solution for many games is to keep it as a "dumb" AI but give it numerical boosts (faster production/growth curve). Most 4X games I've seen do not actually achieve this. Mostly done through randomized starting positions and a variety of opponents that each have their own strategies / special abilities.Ĭompetetive (The AI doesn't play like a 3 year old) ![]() Replayable (The first game isn't your last) Arrived at mainly through playtesting, I think. Not driven by a single game element, so much as the overall scope of the game. Well paced (You can't beat the game in 5 minutes, but it wont take a week) I'd be grateful if anyone could answer tell me how you or another game\developer has managed to successfully balance them together. Some of these seem pretty simple, but others look like balancing acts, and I'd like to have some opinions on how to make a game that is fun to play. And any other important parts to the Strategy/4X genre.Intuitive interfaces (Civilization 5 is a good example).Economical (Not having 7 trillion metal and coins after 10 minutes of play).Not repetetive (Such as using the same strategy over and over, or spamming units).Competetive (The AI doesn't play like a 3 year old).Replayable (The first game isn't your last).Well paced (You can't beat the game in 5 minutes, but it wont take a week).I'd like to know what elements these developers incorporate into their games to make them: 4X games (That is, Xpand, Xplore, Xploit and Xterminate) like Civilization, Sins of a Solar Empire, and other top Strategy games, all seem to have the same addictive hook. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |