next »

[Jasmine]

delete me

[gimymblert]

I think elite was perfect on his pacing, the gameplay loop was tight. It was minimal in a good way, nothing more to add, nothing more to remove.

Trade, travel, space flight, upgrade, repeat. The progression was varied non linear in every way, not only you could choose the way you want to travel and where to trade but your action has consequence that feed back into the gameplay loop affecting the way you progress. You simply have a lot of clear option with clear effect.

It's hard to do something better because it essentially mean adding bloat to the loop, better graphics don't expend the loop, better story would be a distraction, more element mean more cognitive overload and there is already a lot of element so it might not impact the experience really.

The only way to go further is not to try to improve but to add a meaningful twist to the loop.

[Giaddon]

Well, space trading has certainly gone nuts since Elite, with the X series being the most robust (and frustrating and slow and...)

I myself am working on a small trading game (not like Elite, however), so I have been thinking about trading game mechanics recently.   

I think the core of the appeal of trading games is simple and tycoon-like: it's a pleasure to start small and end up big. In typical RPGs, this progression is earned through fighting: fight, get XP, level up, be more powerful. In a trading game, you trade goods, get $$$, which you can use to expand your capabilities.

A good trading game will reward the player for being shrewd (again, in a typical RPG the player is rewarded for sound tactical decisions in the moment of combat. In a trading game, a grasp of the big picture is rewarded). This is the most difficult aspect to a trading game. You want the system to be clear enough that your players can understand how things work, but opaque or dynamic enough that they need to think about how they can make the most money. That way, when they do find a very profitable route (oh! Gamma 9 makes rayguns which means they always need a lot of zinc alloy to build them with! I should sell all my zinc alloy here). Dynamic events that change the flow of trade is good: if the player can influence them, even better.

Also, all that money should be good for something -- expanding your trade empire should be fun in its own right.

And, as in most games, introducing difficult decisions is a good idea. Upgrade your ship this way or that way? If you travel here to trade, you may miss out on an opportunity over there.

[Danmark]

One of my current projects is a (vaguely) Elite-like. my experience with the series is extremely limited right now.

To be honest, I'm looking more to Mount & Blade for inspiration. The great thing about M&B is that, despite its abysmal AI, it succeeds in conjuring a living, breathing world. We all recognize that tired catchphrase, which has been applied to any decent so-called "sandbox game" ever. Thing is, it's always used dishonestly, applied to games which provide mere illusions of living worlds. Seldom are the worlds interesting to watch without interacting, nor do they permit non-trivial long-term consequences to the players' actions. Save for a small radius around the player, these worlds are dead.

In Mount & Blade, on the other hand, there's usually at least a couple wars on, with dozens of forces constantly maneuvering and fighting. Cities can change hands, greatly affecting the fortunes of the victor and defeated. Villages are looted, affecting the prosperity of towns to which their supplies were being sold, as well as the wealth of the noble who receives tribute from the village. Nobles are captured, leading to one fewer army for a faction. When two states go to war, they no longer trade with one another. Trade caravans are robbed. And so on.

It's held back a little by the fact that, unlike any competent player, all NPCs have a terrible sense of strategy. Still, the player's actions are far more significant than in a typical non-linear game. Crucially, Calradia feels like an actual world.

I agree with Jasmine that depth is preferable to breadth. How I've been planning to achieve that in my game is to simulate the entire world all the time. Mount & Blade has the fault of a two-tier scheme, where fights are resolved abstractly unless the player is participating (necessary due to technical constraints). So the casualty rates of a battle seen on the world map tend to be at great odds with the ones you'd see first-hand.

So far all I've got to show is a (not fully tested) data-oriented component system, and the rudiments of some basic component types. The idea is to push the hardware to its limits while emphasizing simulation over graphics. My technical bounds are few tens of thousands of objects in general, only a few hundred NPCs, and a world that can be traversed in only around 10 minutes.

[/hijack]

[s0]

Is it bad that I prefer Elite's "imperfect" sequel Frontier?

[Oddball]

Is it bad that I prefer Elite's "imperfect" sequel Frontier?

That's an interesting use of the word imperfect. As I recall Braben's design for Frontier was to correct all the imperfections in the original. He added realistic physics, planet-side landings and all the other bits he couldn't do in the original. Personally I prefer the non-realistic flight physics of the original, and the improved trading and missions in Frontier. Did anyone ever get First Encounters to run properly? I tried a few times, but could never get it working. Braben does keep teasing about an Elite4, but I doubt it'll ever happen.

The two original programmers are both still active in the game industry today

Is Ian Bell still active in the games industry? I got the impression that after Elite he disappeared from the coding scene to pursue other things. I certainly don't remember him being mentioned anywhere except in his various lawsuits/disputes with Braben.

[s0]

The use of "imperfect" was in response to Jasmine and Gilbert who called Elite a "perfect" game.

Though I guess the reason I could never really get into Elite is that I didn't grow up in that era of computing.