next »

[Theophilus]

What is enjoyable in a life simulation game?

My main question is, why do people play life simulation games? What is enjoyable in them?

If you like them, why? What do you like about them?

If you don't like them, why don't you play them? What makes them this way?

What sort of life sim games do you like (EG, animal crossing's village style, where you live in a community, or some of the city-control games, where you run a city)?

Sorry for grilling you with so many questions. I'm doing some preliminary research for what might be best for my life sim game.


Your input is valuable!

[Coz]

Exploration.

Give me a game where I can see and hear new things, let me experiment and tweak the small details. Let me do crazy things
I wouldn't dream of doing in other games( like burning the weapon shop in an RPG game, surprising other characters in a fighting game by taking my clothes off or commiting suicide and see the world live on without me ).

Essentially people play these games for the same reason people roleplay.


I dislike when a sim game makes me wait a long time to show new things.

[:^)]

Things I hate about life sim games:

• NPCs with missions that impede progress unless you do them.
I.E. "I forgot my blah blah blah! can you go get my blah blah blah and bring it back to me?"
And If you don't do it this NPCs only response is, "Did you get my blah blah blah yet?"
• Things being too cutesy/lackadaisical yet entirely dreary and dead-end. As if the only purpose of life in this game is to fish/shop/work/something boring.

Things I like about life sim games:

• Building. The house building in The Sims came to mind. I loved Legos as a kid and ... Still.. Do.. now.
• Funny things. Simple funny things. This could be a block of text, a sound effect, an animation, a feature of the landscape, anything.
• Music that doesn't get boring in two minutes.

[Theophilus]

Exploration.

Give me a game where I can see and hear new things, let me experiment and tweak the small details. Let me do crazy things
I wouldn't dream of doing in other games( like burning the weapon shop in an RPG game, surprising other characters in a fighting game by taking my clothes off or commiting suicide and see the world live on without me ).

Essentially people play these games for the same reason people roleplay.


I dislike when a sim game makes me wait a long time to show new things.

This brings to mind another question... When does a game overstep the bounds of a game and into real life? When having too many 'you can do anything' options, it no longer is a game. What can I do to prevent this?

Thanks for your reply.

Things I hate about life sim games:

• NPCs with missions that impede progress unless you do them.
I.E. "I forgot my blah blah blah! can you go get my blah blah blah and bring it back to me?"
And If you don't do it this NPCs only response is, "Did you get my blah blah blah yet?"
• Things being too cutesy/lackadaisical yet entirely dreary and dead-end. As if the only purpose of life in this game is to fish/shop/work/something boring.

Things I like about life sim games:

• Building. The house building in The Sims came to mind. I loved Legos as a kid and ... Still.. Do.. now.
• Funny things. Simple funny things. This could be a block of text, a sound effect, an animation, a feature of the landscape, anything.
• Music that doesn't get boring in two minutes.

Good point about routine-ness. It can become very boring to do the same thing over and over; I'll make sure to prevent this. As for the chores, I'll add an option to drop out of it. It's no big deal; I wouldn't be mad if someone dropped out on a favor for me.

I've never played the sims (Gasp!), so I'm not sure about this one. Could you bring me a video or some such? (Did you bring me the video? Can I see the video? Where's the video? C'mon man, I need the video!).

This game will have plenty of simple jokes. It will be an enjoyable experience. I want the player to feel at home. What kinds of things do that?

[Coz]

This brings to mind another question... When does a game overstep the bounds of a game and into real life? When having too many 'you can do anything' options, it no longer is a game. What can I do to prevent this?

I'm not sure if I understand but..
You should introduce things slowly, and open up posibilities progressively and steadily, allowing new options. If you are talking about 'realism' then the answer is simple: don't focus on realism! focus on making the game fun.

[Adamski]

Ive recently been hooked on Animal Crossing Wild World (from october 2010 through till the end of Febuary)

I spent that time paying off a house upgrade, and once I had, I put the game away again.

I guess even Animal Crossing doesn't have enough variation to keep me entertained for so long. Having said that, I think the game's style and feel should have had a major overhaul a long time ago.

I guess to me, the most important aspects would be:

-Randomisation. Each experience unique, different and potentially never to be witnessed again.

-AI, or the illusion of intelligence. Other character's reactions to the player's decisions, wording or behaviour in general. Animal Crossing tried to incorporate this, but sooner or later it becomes repetitive, like the rest of the game (collecting things, talking to characters) it all merges into something that's been done before, unless the gameplay/events are updated now and then.

Which is why I couldn't face playing Animal Crossing for a few more weeks just to get another room in my house and a different coloured roof.

I think what a game like Animal Crossing would benefit from is focusing on forming relationships, forming families or just groups of friends. It seems to focus mainly on making money and expanding the home, instead of having different goals. Harvest Moon does this, but also seems to have a set out storyline and structure, which Im not so keen on.

-Customisation. As an artsy sort of person, I love being able to visually customise things in Sim games. For me, the Sims was ruined when they turned it more into a game and less of a building/living game.

Its late here, so my post is probably rambling, and Ill probably think of something else to add later >.>

[Theophilus]

If you are talking about 'realism' then the answer is simple: don't focus on realism! focus on making the game fun.

You can't have a life sim without life!

I guess to me, the most important aspects would be:

-Randomisation. Each experience unique, different and potentially never to be witnessed again.

-AI, or the illusion of intelligence. Other character's reactions to the player's decisions, wording or behaviour in general. Animal Crossing tried to incorporate this, but sooner or later it becomes repetitive, like the rest of the game (collecting things, talking to characters) it all merges into something that's been done before, unless the gameplay/events are updated now and then.

Which is why I couldn't face playing Animal Crossing for a few more weeks just to get another room in my house and a different coloured roof.

I think what a game like Animal Crossing would benefit from is focusing on forming relationships, forming families or just groups of friends. It seems to focus mainly on making money and expanding the home, instead of having different goals. Harvest Moon does this, but also seems to have a set out storyline and structure, which Im not so keen on.

-Customisation. As an artsy sort of person, I love being able to visually customise things in Sim games. For me, the Sims was ruined when they turned it more into a game and less of a building/living game.

Thanks for the informative post, helped a great deal. I'll be sure to add a unique experience for everyone. I'll try to make it so that no two files are alike. But how? D:

[Muz]

Getting laid. As long as it's not too easy.

Also, basically, the other mischief stuff I wouldn't pull off IRL.

[baconman]

Likes:

Seemingly limitless potential.

Resource management that you can screw up; but that won't leave you entirely helpless if you do.

Alchemy (combining two or three gameplay items/elements to make another different one).

Inconsistent motivations. Character motivation and interaction is a key element of gameplay.

Pictographic quote balloons. The ultimate destruction of the language barrier!

GOOD trading/value systems; especially ones that let you fulfill certain requirements by exchanging them for another service.

Simplistic, but flexible customization, yes.

Dislikes:

Beginning one. Usually you have a big pile of nothing, or some sproadic, inital resources; and it takes a couple hours of play before it even begins to get possibly interesting. A "kick start" system, understandably optional, would help this aspect a LOT.

Lack of gameplay cycles. No levels. No "days." No game overs. Sure, it's usually part of the game's appeal; but it helps to have the occasional time-oriented save point/end of level/start of level cycle, lest it become a time-sucker.

Lack of character/personality. Or more like overly-common troping wherever it IS featured. Also, lack of adversity! Nothing in the game is ever difficult or challenging. No risk/reward involved. No "loss potential," or consequences thereof (outside of maybe cash/scoring, if featured). They're always simply time-consuming.

In many cases, the lack of incorporating other forms of gameplay influence into the fold. 90% of these are ALL isometric, drag-and-drop games where most of the gameplay is completely automated. It's more like interacting with a set of LEGO bricks than it is "being a character that's interacting with a world."

On a related note to the above, overly simplistic "sameness." There should be a variety of ways to accomplish a variety of things, and you shouldn't be forced to "balancing act" them all at once. Also, the variety of things you can accomplish should provide a variety of gameplay experiences to go with them. (IE: having a variety of "puzzle minigames" is nice, but that won't deviate it from the common fact that they're all "puzzle" minigames...)

That "played one, played them all" kind of feeling that goes with them. I haven't played a whole lot of them for this very reason. They haven't really changed much at all. It puts me off from more modern RPGs and sports games, too; and before Need For Speed: Underground/UG2, it did that for racing/driving ones as well. I got more into those, bcause they felt like good adventure games that used "racing" as a battle system.

Once a world/life/etc. is built, hardly anything ever makes it change very drastically. It's not like you wake up one day, and "BAM!" something completely different is present, or something has made a drastic or unexpected change (can be bad, or good!). Real life does this in ways that "SimLife" never even comes close to. You don't even have to screw anything up, either. And in a SimLife, if it "can" happen, it *always* eventually does.

EXCESSIVE HAND-HOLDING.

This above all others! There's usually very little potential to "explore" in a game (in spite of "exploration" being one of it's key aspects); most games of this type will sit there and explain, step by step, exactly how to do everything. That's usually all the NPC "gimme quests" are, too. The entire experience eventually becomes distilled down to repeatedly finding and following instructions.

A little bit at the start, totally optional, that says "here's how this works" is fine. Even LoZ didn't make you leave the homescreen without a sword (or prevent you from it), but it still made you pick one up before you got it. Perhaps an out-of-context example; but provide an example or two of the gameplay that can be completely overlooked if a player (replayer!) decides not to do them.
__________

I'd always wondered what a resource/sim game would be like, played in "levels" competitively... like each screen could player could play something like Tetris/Bejeweled, Treasure Tower, DDR, Spelunky, LoZ, Galaga, Spy Hunter, etc. for rewards like items or cash to buy items that can help them in other titles (or create custom variations of them!); and competitive AI/players with friend/rival/foe kinds of interactions... but in an interface universal enough to be like "one big GamerSimGame."

But you can still play what you wanted, and neglect what you wanted. Or HIRE OTHER AI to cover these other bases for you (and have some things where most players would have to, to some extent!).

[s0]

The main point of lifesims is emergent gameplay letting the player toy with a system. "Challenge" as such is optional but can improve the game if handled well (see Dwarf Fortress).

I think a lifesim should have as few explicit goals and scripted events as possible, ideally none. Most of the gameplay should be handled algorithmically (or "procedurally" if you wanna use a buzzword). You'll want to write a simulation that allows for a great variety of different and unexpected situations.

Including "random" elements beyond the player's control or influence helps immmersing the player and also helps sustain immersion over a long period of time, otherwise it's just a matter of figuring out how the algorithms work and "abusing" them.

Hope that helps. 

[Theophilus]

-

Very informative post, thanks a ton.

The main point of lifesims is emergent gameplay letting the player toy with a system. "Challenge" as such is optional but can improve the game if handled well (see Dwarf Fortress).

I think a lifesim should have as few explicit goals and scripted events as possible, ideally none. Most of the gameplay should be handled algorithmically (or "procedurally" if you wanna use a buzzword). You'll want to write a simulation that allows for a great variety of different and unexpected situations.

Including "random" elements beyond the player's control or influence helps immmersing the player and also helps sustain immersion over a long period of time, otherwise it's just a matter of figuring out how the algorithms work and "abusing" them.

Hope that helps. 

Thanks for that; helps a lot.


From what I'm gathering here, people want...

-A unique experience each play-through
-Randomization, IE, events that happen periodically without warn.
-Only basic help, the player should figure things out on his own.
-(Endless?) possibilities. The player should be able to experiment with stuff to make things, potentially undocumented.

[gimymblert]

awesome thread, very informative, but could not help thinking minecraft too. I think it's a great exemple of random and yet meaningful surprise (because the whole world is made of gameplay brick)

[Theophilus]

awesome thread, very informative, but could not help thinking minecraft too. I think it's a great exemple of random and yet meaningful surprise (because the whole world is made of gameplay brick)

I'm glad you brought that up. Minecraft can sometimes feel empty to me... I'm stranded in a little world. Maybe I would feel less so if it was not in a first-person projection; they do a lot of immersing the player in the role.

Should I use a first person projection or leave it at fixed-third person? I feel that first person would be very ... different... almost taboo.

As for the randomness in Minecraft, it is done very well, and I think it is good in it's own right. My game will have very little or no procedural/random generation.

[s0]

awesome thread, very informative, but could not help thinking minecraft too. I think it's a great exemple of random and yet meaningful surprise (because the whole world is made of gameplay brick)

Minecraft is more or less a lifesim, or at least a close relative to the genre.

I like to think of lifesims as a sort of "metagenre", in that it (or elements of it) can easily be applied to a large number of different core gameplay types.

Lifesim games are in themselves a "bastardization", of pure life simulations, where any gamelike aspects (interaction, implicit or explicit goals etc), if they exist, are accidental and merely a byproduct of the simulation. The process of making a lifesim game is basically one of trading "realism" for "fun".

[ezuk]

Great topic!  I’d love to see some indie life sims – the potential for new ideas here is huge.

Here are a few likes of my own likes:

Ambience.  If I’m going to settle in and watch things emerge over a period of hours, I need to settle in with an appealing visual style and sound.  This doesn’t have to be professional – lo rez sprites or hand-drawn with a good palette would be great, 8- or 24-bit sfx without music is fine – but the colours can’t be too bright or the sounds too loud or grating. 

In fact, settling into a world I like is one of the big attractions of a life sim.

Chance for Things to Go REALLY Bad.  DEATH TO THE SIMS!  DEATH!! . . . *ahem* . . . A lot of players like these games for the same reason that people like staring at car wrecks.  It’s fun (and cathartic) to see things go bad.  I’ve turned to these games after a bad day to play the role of a really evil deity.

Personalities and Stories.  There has to be something to get me attached, either negatively or positively, to the creature or being on the screen.  I need to track what they are doing and see the progression from one state to another.  Unique visual appearances and clearly-defined traits help me do this.

I personally prefer a 3rd-person point of view – I like to feel that I am watching things unfold rather than being in the action myself.

Hope this helps.

[Sean A.]

Something that I kind of like in the games like GTA and such is know that the world doesn't depend on me. I could just stand there for 20 minutes and the "people" in the game would just continue their lives. It gives a good feeling of immersion like you are actually in a living breathing city.

[mirosurabu]

I was about to post a lengthier reply yesterday, but got tired writing it. ): I'm huge fan of life sims.

First, I should note that there are two different kinds of life simulations. The Sims and Kudos are for example role-playing ones, whereas Jones in the Fast Lane and SimGangster are arcade ones. Both can be challenging, but the first group is more about immersion and player fantasies, whereas the second group is more about punishment and competition. For example, Jones in the Fast Lane is multiplayer competitive game and SimGangster is level-based arcade fun.

That said, you should settle on whether you want role-play or arcade.

Now, onto the famous dislike list:

Minigames. Kudos Rock Legend has minigames. The worst one is the notes-playing one. Why? Because it's time consuming comparing to other actions in the game. I just ignore it.

Stereotypes. Um, not something your typical life sim fan would dislike, but I guess I'm old? Kudos 1 has this. You have a friend who is intelligent. Spending time with him will improve your IQ but will make you feel bored. Err..

Lack of proper presentation. If I'm jumping into the world where I already have friends, then please make an effort to introduce me to these friends in a nice way. Kudos 1 doesn't do this. It just throws you in there and makes you feel like an employee who is back from his vacation trying to catch up with e-mails.

Giving it all away at the start of the game. For a record, Kudos Rock Legend does this well. But it tends to be a problem with sims in general. You never want to give all of the content away at the start. You should have some content that only pops up somewhere deep down into the game. In arcade sims, it's simple to do - just make it exclusive to later levels. But in open-ended games, it tends to be a problem. One way to deliver new content is through shops, but shops spoil it as there should be hidden content too. Try to think of ways to deliver content through different means, things like phone, e-mail, social activity, etc.

Too much realism. Hang on for a second. It's a life sim, so it should reference life. But when you go so crazy with realism to the point you are sacrificing ludology for the sake of having smallest details feel real, then you're doing something wrong. Chart Wars 3 does this. It's a music sim, not a life sim, but it's still relevant. You are a record label and you want to sign a band. You click on that button and surprise, surprise.. you are presented with a full-blown record label contract. You ask yourself - what the fuck is this royalty percentage and what is this recoupment shit I'm reading about? Dude, I'm not a fucking lawyer, what's the point of this? Is it just there to make it appear real? Like, there is no ludological value behind it, isn't there? The fact is - there isn't.


Got tired again, damn. Have lot more to say, but oh well, another time.

[Theophilus]

-

Wow. *picks jaw off floor* So much information in your post.

Minigames - planned on having none. Why have a game in a game?

Stereotypes - I was going to have a few, but only mild ones.

Lack of proper presentation/Giving it all away at the start of the game - This is very important. Things need to be done very carefully, and slowly. Otherwise you'll just get bored. Thanks for reminding me of this.

Too much realism - I kinda got this down-pat. You live in a graveyard with monsters.

[mirosurabu]

Also these:

1. Dying easily
2. Situations only have one way out

If I'm playing it "the wrong way" and I cross the line I want to be put in a new but slightly harder situation not be forced to restart all over again. This is a cool way to add depth to the game but only if you make situations have more than one way out.

Suppose I get severely depressed. The simplest solution is "You die. Game over". Slightly better solution is to make everything stop functioning normally until I recover from the depression, which can be done, say, by paying a visit to GP. But the problem is that's not really fun, it just makes it more playable. Why not use that space to add some hidden fun in there? For example, what if I get a "HUGE PROMO OFFER" to get out of the depression by committing a homicide? This might not be realistic, but it moves the game forward in an interesting way. You could have a box on the main screen for "promoted activities" or, if we're gonna put it into context, "subconscious thoughts". All the while, the homicide activity had no strategical payoff, but suddenly, once you got into deep shit, you're offered a way out, partially knowing its effects. I could click on it, but I could ignore it. If I did, I'd get out of the depressive state, but would face an even worse situation.

I haven't seen  game do this before and I have no idea why. I believe it can be quite effective emotionally.

[s0]

Great topic!  I’d love to see some indie life sims – the potential for new ideas here is huge.

Dwarf Fortress is indie and is pretty much the ultimate life sim.