next »

[gimymblert]

Okay I think I got it thanks:

Let's look at tetris, oh it's not exactly a management game but saty with me here.

The perceive goal of tetris is to make line, but we can argue that its more about keeping the space empty, making the space empty create line, nd line create speed making keeping the space empty harder. Neat loop isn't it?

What I have done Is that I shift "goal" to "need". Basically right now I think management game is about "protection" while game is more about "aggression", it's about "fulfilling need". You have a need to fulfill (keeping space empty) and most mechanics is here to challenge that need. Once that need is down (the space is full) the game is lost.

Hum that's a weird way to put it.

CIVilisation wich is a fake management game (you optimize for a goal) but still work as one is more telling. You begin with some population and you "need" to feed them, you build way to harvest food and as a result the population grow and ask for more food, and then they are attacked, you need to protect them by building barrack which mean having more people which mean more food, etc.... The growth is a product of the compulsion like more than the goal the player aspire to.

So what you manage is need.

Need is not opposite to goal, we can see it as a nuance, not a place to reach but a place to stay ( = fulfilling), pressure are the mechanics that push you from that place (attack, famine, etc...) and keep the game rolling. SO basically management game is about growth and pressure in a design sense, growth keep interesting thing happening because it attract more need and more pressure, therefore more complexity and more management. By adjusting growth, pressure and need we adjust the play experience. We can also see a game as a management perspective (fighting game as not battle but survival management).

Is that so?

Can you find exception?

[zovirl]

I think you can break Sim City down the same way. Even though the game doesn't give you a goal specifically, I think most players start with a goal of increasing the population to some level. So they build some houses. Then people want jobs so they zone some commercial land. Then the traffic is bad so they build more roads. Then crime is bad so they build a police station. I think most early games go something like this...it is all fairly straightforward.

In the end game, it gets more complicated, as the negative pressures (crime, pollution, etc.) seem to grow faster than your population. Eventually the player hits a point where they can't get any more population by doing simple things like building more buildings, more police, etc. Instead they have to find ways to be more efficient (maybe zoning patterns that don't require as many miles of roads, or carefully using high-value land like waterfronts). This is still pretty similar to expert-level play in other games, though. In World of Goo, for example, players might replay a level several times trying different ways to suck up the maximum number of balls.

The machinations wiki link is helpful, thanks for sending that.

[gimymblert]

It's only me or some schema does not work on the wiki?

[Chromanoid]

At least I didn't see any changes to the Monopoly thing when I pressed run and I could not press any action or something.

Your analysis seems to be correct. I think management games are very life like. You normally don't have a real goal but needs, milestones and some metrics.

[baconman]

[img=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1993624284569945666]http://They're designed to encourage and/or prevent something like this from happening.[/img] (/irrelevant?)