Is Losing Fun?

It’s the motto of Dwarf Fortress: Losing is Fun. And it’s one you need to take to heart with that game, because until you get the hang of it (And even after you do) you’re going to lose, a lot. But that’s not quite what I’m aiming at here. In conventional games you may often die a lot as well, but you’ll come back at the last checkpoint or save and carry on.

What I am thinking of, however, is something fairly unique to strategy gaming, which is to say, losses that don’t end the game, but rather that are just a part of the game, a thing you endure, carry on from, and ultimately recover from.

But does that happen? See, in a ‘regular’ game like, say, Halo, when you die you just come back from it. You try again. You succeed, or not, and that’s that. In a game like DF you may lose a lot of work, but in these cases the loss is indeed part of the fun. It comes about because of a silly mistake, or because of hubris, or because you just got bored and wanted to watch the world burn. But in a strategy game losses are different.

Decisions, decisions

In the real world of course no country is in permanent ascendance. Not even Rome enjoyed uninterrupted growth, and Rome eventually fell, as all powers do. So a strategy game must surely account for this as well. Yet in my experience, when you lose a city in Civilization or are forced to cede provinces in Europa Universalis III, it doesn’t feel good. It does’t feel like it’s part of the proper flow of the game. In a strategy game you do expect to be in permanent ascendance, and to not be is irritating and may well turn one off playing. I recall reading an interview with Sid Meier years ago where he said his original intention with Civ had been for your civ to go through periods of contraction and decline, but he found it was far from enjoyable to have it work like that.

Partly I think this is a case of momentum. In a strategy game, when you gain something, that something goes towards helping your empire grow. Overextension and the like are rarely simulated, and almost never simulated well, and in fact when that is attempted (As in the Magna Mundi mod for EU3) it often comes off as very arbitrary and pointlessly constricting.

How about you? Am I alone here, or do others feel the same and dislike accepting losses? Are there examples of games which do this well, and don’t make it feel arbitrary or unfair?

The Gaming Gods Love Us After All – XCom: Enemy Unknown

Firaxis – that of Civilization fame – has just announced that they are remaking X-Com and that it’s going to be a turn-based strategy, like the original. Excuse me while I post my face:

And now, Mister Adequate and myself shall post our thoughts on this:

Pike’s Thoughts:

There’s a lot that could go wrong here but there’s also a lot that could go right. The easy way out would be to say to just make X-Com but give it a graphical and UI facelift, but we could even improve upon that. RPS discusses this at length in this article. Mostly what I think is vital to me is that they don’t lose any of that feeling of being terrified between turns as you hear noises and “hidden movement.” Like old Hitchcock movies, X-Com largely works not because what it shows you, but because of what it doesn’t show you. I hope that, in the whirlwind of fancy graphics and whatnot, Firaxis doesn’t lose sight of this.

This is definitely going to be an interesting one to watch– since we don’t have any major details yet, it’s definitely too early to say whether or not this is all going to work, but as it stands now I’m rather cautiously optimistic. Firaxis isn’t perfect by any means, but if we’re going to put X-Com in the hands of a major studio I’m glad they’re the ones getting it.

Mister Adequate’s Thoughts:

Given that we know very little about the thing at this point, Pike has already covered most of the major points that could be made right now, and I echo everything she said. What I will add is that I am also cautiously optimistic if for no other reason than the fact that XCOM – the shooter that is – is already on the way. There’s nothing to be gained by trying to capitalize on the action market, 2K would be competing against themselves, and a studio like Firaxis is never going to have an easy time going up against 2K Marin in the shooter domain, but the strategy side of things is, Xenonauts aside, wide open.

There is an enormous wealth of ideas about what a new XCOM ought to be floating around out there, and I hope Firaxis have been carefully and continue to carefully read and think about them, and take them on board where it seems appropriate. We’re a rabidly obsessed, hard to please fanbase, but give us what we want and we will reward you with kingly sums.

Another, and absolutely vital, aspect here is modding capability. People have done some impressive things with the original X-Com despite the thing not being remotely modder-friendly, but look at the mod scene for Civ IV and imagine that transposed into XCOM.

And there you have it. Who else is excited?

Potential

You know, I think I’ve identified another hook that strategy games tend to have for me. It’s something I’ve noticed I feel in such games for a long time but have never really connected it in a logical sense to a reason of appeal.

That is quite simply potential. Think about when you begin a game, especially a 4X like Civilization. Think about how you see almost nothing of the world, just your immediate surroundings, unblemished by human actions, and beyond that the dark mystery of the unknown. Your first, tiny, puny settlement, protected by a handful of clubmen. You send out a scout and begin gradually cranking out buildings and units, gradually expanding.

I don't have a relevant pic, so have this cat hugging this kitten.

It’s that exact moment right at the beginning, the moment of seeing the potential but not yet being able to achieve it, that I love. Or at least is the first half of what I love. You begin planning, mentally placing future settlements, looking at how to fight a defensive war, scouting out your neighbors, all that sort of thing. The entire game is before you and it is a quantum, Schroedinger-esque value at this moment. It is not yet a game, but the potential of a game. Over at Flash of Steel, a good while ago, Troy Goodfellow wrote an excellent piece that is related to this. As he says it’s not that things are complete unscripted, in fact a lot of things are constrained by various rules and/or in-game costs, but one of the core aspects of a good strategy game is that it is fundamentally a story, or a series or collection of stories. The story of how the Iroquois conquered the world, or when the Cold War went hot, or whatever it might be.

And that pregnant moment in the first few turns of a good 4x where so, so many stories are possible, and you get to wrestle with your rivals to write one – that moment is truly delicious. Much later you will look back across a cultivated, irrigated, networked empire that has left no tile untouched in the quest for dominance and efficiency, and the story of getting from A to B is there to see. Some things will be obvious, like the masses of farms and mines. Some a little more subtle, perhaps, like how all the cities in the southern end of your Persian empire have French names. But all there to be seen and remembered. The potential has been realized, and now you have a completed game, and the memories of playing it.

A core aspect of this is the ability to affect the world itself, which may be why strategy games (and management/sim games) seem to scratch this itch most effectively for me, as opposed to the more typically narrative-led genres. It’s not just the transfer of territory, but also the utilization of that same territory once you own it. Not just the achievement of a prize, but the use of the prize. It’s an inherent strength in strategy games I feel; until you achieve your ultimate victory you’re always looking for more efficiency, how to get more gold or credits or beakers or whatever, using your past conquests to become ever-stronger.

Also, when Troy Goodfellow said “No action game has ever made me want to be a writer. Some strategy games have.”, that could have been me saying it. In fact my book, which I am currently editing, was originally intended to just be an AAR of Space Empires V, but it rapidly blossomed far beyond that.

SteamQuest 1: And Yet It Moves

SteamQuest is a series based around Pike’s quest to play all the games she has on Steam. Which is a lot. Her definition of “play”, here, is at least one hour for smaller games and at least three hours for more substantial ones. Feel free to follow along!

And Yet It Moves
Developer: Broken Rules
Genres: Indie, Platformer, Puzzle
Website: http://www.andyetitmoves.net/ – and the Steam Link
Time Spent by Pike: 63 minutes – unfinished

And Yet It Moves is a puzzle-platformer that revolves around the gimmick of rotating the screen around in order to get your character from place to place. This gimmick is not a new one and has appeared in more than one Newgrounds flash game, and if you’ve played said flash games before, the first couple of levels of this one will sort of leave you with a “Huh… that’s it?” taste in your mouth.

That’s why you need to give yourself at least twenty minutes to get to The Good Stuff.

The Good Stuff, here, are puzzles that show up in the later levels and are challenging without being frustrating. These puzzles also take full advantage of the screen-tilting mechanic and you’ll find yourself, for example, herding bats around (bats will only fly to the top of the screen) in order to chase monsters away and whatnot. It sounds weird, but it works really well, and I found myself frequently very pleasantly surprised with how these puzzles turned out.

The game also has a much lauded unique paper-cutout-collage artstyle but to be honest the game could use any style and it would still be just as interesting because of the puzzles.

Did somepony say paper cutouts?

Probably my biggest gripe with the game is one that may or may not simply be a byproduct of my own, well, derpiness, and that is that I can never remember which arrow key tilts the screen which way and then I end up killing myself as I frantically try to rotate the screen in the right direction. This killed me more times than I care to remember. This is really the type of game that would work better with some sort of tilt mechanism or something. Or maybe I am just that much of a klutz.

Regardless, you will leave the game with a sense of vertigo that has you subconsciously wanting to tilt webpages or other computer programs long after you’ve quit the game. This is really a fun, compact little game once you get past the tutorial levels and I can definitely see myself returning to it in the near future and trying to complete it. I do think the $10 is a bit steep if you’re not really into this sort of thing, but it shows up in Indie Bundles every now and again and when it does it’s worth snagging if you can.

Happy New Year – Part Two!

Welcome to the second day of 2012, friends!

Mister Adequate recently blogged about what he’s looking forward to in games this year. Myself, well– I’ve got too many old games to plow through to start thinking about new ones!

Firstly, I’d like to finish my goal of playing through all the Final Fantasy games, a goal which has been pushed to the side a bit because I keep getting distracted by other things. Fear not, though; I’m nearing the end of Final Fantasy 2 (I think) and then I am going to acquire and play FF3, another FF that I haven’t actually played yet!

Secondly, I would like to put at least a few solid hours into every single game I have on Steam. That’s a lot of games. Over 160, last I checked. And if it’s something you’re all interested in, I think I’m going to chronicle that little adventure on this blog this year. I’ll dedicate one post to every game I have. Sound good?

It’s going to be an exciting year filled with… old games!

Wunderbar!

Onward!

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year from us at The Android’s Closet! Thanks to all our readers and commenters for helping make this such an enjoyable little project for Pike and myself! Here’s to another year of ponies and discussing old strategy games! (We’ll try to branch out a bit, we promise!)

Now, to business – what are you looking forward to in gaming in the year 2012? Here are some of those I’m interested in:

Dead State. A turn-based zombie apoc RPG? Yes. VERY yes. I know every game and its mother has zombies in it these days, but there’s a big difference between having zombies and actually being a zombie survival game. I may blog about that at some point in fact. Or did I already? I can never remember.

Mass Effect 3. I know it’s probably going to be even less like 1 than 2 was. I know it’s almost certainly going to ignore all the decisions made in 1 and 2. I know they’re going to spend more time writing the romances than the main plot. But I’ve been with this series since the beginning, and damnit, I’m going to see it through to the end!

Something like this, yeah.

Final Fantasy XIII-2. The original was a guilty pleasure. I know it’s not a very good game, and not up to the expected standards of a Final Fantasy. But I had a buttload of fun playing it anyway, so I’m looking forward to more running through linear corridors!

Crusader Kings 2. This is the real meaty one though, a new Paradox game that updates one of their most trolly and looks almost as though it will be playable on release. I’m sure it won’t be, but it’ll hopefully need fewer patches than usual to get into such a state. Incest, bastards, and court intrigue is always a recipe for hilarity though. Also from Pox is the expansion to Victoria 2, A House Divided which focuses on the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-5. Oh no, my mistake. It’s about the US Civil War. They never make games about the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-5.

There should also be a new version of Dwarf Fortress on the way, with all kinds of crazy things like vampires and new NPC cities and improved trade. Very exciting!

There are others, but those are the main new releases for me. What about you all? What has you excited in games in the coming year?