next »

[Cojack]

I'm still a ways off from starting development on my first game, but I'm hoping to begin with a simulation. I have my own opinions on what makes or breaks a sim game, but while I'm working on brainstorming I wanted to hear what other people have to say. I'm not going to limit the scope, consider everything from farming sims to mechanic sims, or even survival.

What features in a sim game absolutely killed your playing experience?

What about the game makes you want to keep playing?

Is there anything that you can't normally do (or always end up doing) in sim games that you would like to see implemented or removed?

What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?

[ViktorTheBoar]

Can I talk about vehicle simulations? I love piloting anything, from cars to trains to space rockets.

Really important thing for me is good control binding and support for different controllers. I love to use improvised gamepad/joystick/wheel combinations for all the controls. I still dream about building my own styrofoam/arduino based simpit for Kerbal Space Program. I'm also waiting for the day that Pioneer Space Sim lets me bind throttle to an analog control.

There isn't an exact formula for what keeps me playing a sim, but rule of thumb is "have a good and accessible toolbox for me to make my own fun".

I also love detail levels that can be turned way way down, so I don't worry about frame rates and so I can try to play it with Cardboard VR.

Amount of ability to change my vehicle (visually and/or stats) also helps.

If it's a sim where you need lots of information, I'd love a way to display extra data on a second monitor or my phone.

A multiplayer that allows multiple people to control a same vehicle, or have their vehicle parked inside a bigger vehicle - I'm still waiting for someone to build a multiplayer version of the old Carrier Command

Big worlds are a plus. There's no real reason for them if the game works on smaller maps, but I still like the feeling of freedom, sometimes even if everything in the world has a copy-paste feel to it.

My favorite sim things are those that I can attach, drag, detach, drop, catch, fill my vehicle with etc etc. So, like, trailers, refueling stations, drones etc. Those are also a ticket to having fun non-violent missions.

Although most of my favorite sims include time warp, I love the idea that you can have fun without it. I'd prefer a good multiplayer over time warp.

I love a good damage system, so I can lose parts due to mistakes and then try to save my ride with one less wheel or wing or engine or something.

Okay, I'll stop now.

[Superb Joe]

WHIPPING ASS, BABY

[ViktorTheBoar]

Now I'll do my take on management sims :D

No sim game will ever be as good as Rimworld, so you can just give up right now.

I like "tutorial through scarcity" or whatever the technical term is. I think I saw it first in Cities: Skylines. When you need eg. housing, the game tells you to get more housing and how to do it. It's not obtrusive like old "WELCOME TO TUTORIAL, CLICK HERE TO OPEN MENU #12", but still help a lot.

Day/night cycle always looks pretty.

Having money is easier and less chaotic, but having resources and barter is way more awesome.

I love production chains, like in Settlers games.

Exploration element is nice if it exists. In other words, you first need to scout out the area before starting to build.

The ability to go down and visit your creation, like in Dungeon Keeper. That's really cool, if it makes sense (in a 2D game, it usually doesn't).

I like when my creation looks alive - has people or vehicles or lights or something moving around and getting more modern and crowded, the further you play. Sounds dumb, but that's what I loved most about Transport Tycoon!

I hate complicated late game - I liked every game of Civilization to around late medeival era. It gets too fidgety after that.

I'll let other people have an opinion, for a change

[Uplinked]

Always, always, always keep the game interesting. I don't really care for the opinion, "No sim game will ever be as good as Rimworld, so you can just give up right now." (I think this may have been a joke, so set your pitchforks down. I'm just using it in my example.) I love RimWorld to death and I have over 400+ hours in it, I believe. However, by the end-game, most of the challenge goes out the window. (I play on the hardest difficulty + permadeath.) 

Try keeping a steady difficulty curve, even with the endgame.

[ViktorTheBoar]

*lowes pitchforks*

I like the option of having lots of pre-set difficulty, it's probably a must for most simulations, but all the sims I loved and played to death were the ones where I had a huge toybox that let me make my own difficulties.

Here's an example of a sim that never caught me - The Sims (and sequels). Why? The original unmodded game never gave me enough time to have fun. I always had to push my characters through work, fun, toilet and social grind. The workday was simply too short for me to let loose and play around :/

[MrPhil]

I feel like something almost every sim has a problem with is by the end game it has turned into a micromanagement nightmare.  If you've made it to the end phase of the game, your probably doing well, even winning, but all the micromanagement does not give you the feeling of rising to the top and kicking ass!

[Rarykos]

Every sim game where the objective is to *add complexity* will have that micromanagement hell problem in the late game...
I love civ games for the first 100 turns.  First war. And then it's a different game altogether.
The problem is that games have to change into something different to accommodate the fantasy that "now you;ve made it and you feel powerful"
Imma say something -deep- now lol. When games go on, they must have either different challenges or more of the same challenge, to keep you interested. Games usually go into "more of the same" and try to fit it into the system somehow. So you can still have some fun in late game civ. But it's a broken sad version of early game civ.

I'm much more a fan of "different challenges" approach.
Invisible inc style. I get more powerful, i get more options, but then the system introduces additional obstacles, which cull my freedom and stop me from snowballing or falling into micromanagement nightmare...
Rebuild flash games also do that to some extent. Sarah Northway even explained it on her blog, that there are different challenges hard-coded in the game. First you worry about food. then shelter. then zombie attacks and then you win. If the game went on longer, as players wanted, it'd be a dreadful drag...

Hey, has anyone here heard of 50 years? It's a really cool little strategy game, tackles the problem very nicely.

[Cojack]

Every sim game where the objective is to *add complexity* will have that micromanagement hell problem in the late game...
I love civ games for the first 100 turns.  First war. And then it's a different game altogether.
The problem is that games have to change into something different to accommodate the fantasy that "now you;ve made it and you feel powerful"
Imma say something -deep- now lol. When games go on, they must have either different challenges or more of the same challenge, to keep you interested. Games usually go into "more of the same" and try to fit it into the system somehow. So you can still have some fun in late game civ. But it's a broken sad version of early game civ.

I'm much more a fan of "different challenges" approach.
Invisible inc style. I get more powerful, i get more options, but then the system introduces additional obstacles, which cull my freedom and stop me from snowballing or falling into micromanagement nightmare...
Rebuild flash games also do that to some extent. Sarah Northway even explained it on her blog, that there are different challenges hard-coded in the game. First you worry about food. then shelter. then zombie attacks and then you win. If the game went on longer, as players wanted, it'd be a dreadful drag...

Hey, has anyone here heard of 50 years? It's a really cool little strategy game, tackles the problem very nicely.

Thank you for giving examples!

Yes I agree with everyone on the endgame flaws that many sims carry. It's nice to hear others bring this up as I always found it hard to explain just why a sim becomes tedious instead of fun. My sim will move you through different stages, once you master one area you'll move to a completely different but connected project so I'm hoping this will help with the problem.

Personally, what frustrates me about most sims is I feel like there's more in the game I should be able to do, but end up not being able to interact/perform an action that would really make the sim feel more real. On the other hand, when the game allows you to do every step of the process it can feel boring and I find myself wishing to have that process automated. I think it will be difficult to find a balance between realism and fun.

[Rarykos]

The question is only "what's the fantasy?".

Then do what's essential for the fantasy.

If the fantasy is utter realism, then , bad news, it's time to make many different expensive systems just to cater to this fantasy.

Usually... it's better to go the way board games have gone. Simplify. It's always simpler than real life. Euro games, engine building games, have done this pretty well.

My sim will move you through different stages, once you master one area you'll move to a completely different but connected project so I'm hoping this will help with the problem.

Remember Spore!
Dark room.
paper clip idle game.

The best way to approach this is making flexible systems. For example, unit management: I'm managing 5 units. At first they are simple units, only move and attack. Later I build more advanced units for different situations that can do different things. But ALWAYS the basic unit has some use.
That's one way to do it.
But even when we have a system that's interesting, how to make it solvable in different ways. There will always be one, quickest way to win, how to discourage it?


I don't want to scare you! This is just a really difficult problem... I admire your motivation tho!
Coming up with an interesting system like this is something game designers like me get paid for. And then it takes a long while and many playtests to do it right.

So keep going and show us what you make!

[MrPhil]

Every sim game where the objective is to *add complexity* will have that micromanagement hell problem in the late game...
I love civ games for the first 100 turns.  First war. And then it's a different game altogether.

I feel like one of the reasons that Alpha Centauri was such a great game is because the philosophical goals of the leaders.  One way this worked really well is it made the end game feel more important and interesting.  For example, if you where getting into a lot of clashes with a neighbor race that was (or sometimes wasn't) a contender, one of the strategy was to align yourself closer with their goals so you could direct the resources away from military into a different winning path.
 

Hey, has anyone here heard of 50 years? It's a really cool little strategy game, tackles the problem very nicely.

Hey, thanks for mentioning that.  It wasn't on my radar, but it's a nice little game.  Has the "demake" sort of feel like Kingdom, too bad it isn't finding a big audience too.