That way if you’re playing a two term at most game it’s more condensed than someone who hopes to be playing as the country’s ruler indefinitely? Or conversely they could keep the frequency as very frequent as to have a very tactile first term and then stretch their reign out and make long term decisions like Margaret Thatcher or Roosevelt… Maybe you could have in the options alongside a choice of whether to have dilemmas or not a choice of how frequent the player wants them. Would you take suggestions of situations from players? To deal with the issue of running out of dilemmas I see the problem more of one to do with frequency. Liberals would rally around the government after an attack by the religious terrorist organization or assassination etc.įor dilemmas I like your ideas for them but it doesn’t change the fact there are too few. Posted in democrac圓, game design Taggedįor the assassination maybe the effects could be group specific as in there would be a general effect on everyone (whether that should be negative or positive that’s tough to decide on) but then each group would act differently according to who juxtaposes them politically and on who initiated the attack. I’m pretty certain I’ll replace the impact with a slight, short-term popularity jump. That also has the positive effect that it is a nice self-balancing game mechanism, rather than the current spiral of failure. I suspect the spirit of ‘rallying round the government’ would kick in, and maybe have a positive effect on your support. Surely the opposite is true? I might not like the UK prime minister, but would I like him less if someone tried to shoot him? Especially if I was a ‘floating voter’. This was because I wanted it to reflect how bad and unpopular your government was, implying that people who were on-the-fence about you, would see someone trying to kill you and go ‘oh Obama must be a fruitcake, look at those guys shooting at him’. Secondly, the current system has a negative effect on your popularity after an assassination attempt. if the player *wants* to play an endless game of D3, surely they shouldn’t ‘run out’ of dilemmas? This is a change that needs making. I think it should decay over a long timescale, and also that dilemma should possibly be re-usable. Do you say yay or nay? Saying yay obviously annoys environmentalists, but for how long? Right now… the answer is FOREVER. For example, there is an application to build a toxic waste dump. Dilemmas are a good mechanic because they are issues you cannot kick down the road. So after a brief chat about the design with someone else, I’ve realized I need to make two changes to the simulation stuff:įirstly, there is the topic of dilemmas. I sit here shivering in the small dark basement I program in sipping tea in my luxurious gilded office, and realize that I am alone in a bubble of game design where other peoples input goes unheard. Sooo… it REALLY helps to talk over your game design with other people, especially as a lone indie.
0 kommentar(er)
