Welcome to this month's episode of "Jarl has a game-idea again which probably won't ever be realized", this time about sandbox gaming. Instead of doing something productive like writing my long overdue Hinterland review or the second part of the Lesbian Elfporn Story, I'm writing some shit up about an idea I had. Oh well, let's get started, shall we.
Well, have you ever wondered why sandbox games grow boring and tedious after a while? Probably because there is no change in the gameworld, I'd say. And then a certain thought went through my head: why shouldn't sandbox RPGs profit from game mechanics that are used in strategy games? Strategy games, especially those of large scale, like the Total War series or the Paradox games, have almost infinite replay value. Why? Because every playthrough is different, since the AI will always try to do similar things like the player: build up their empires, conquer others, make diplomatic deals with others etc. This, along with the choice of playing a different empire each time you start a new game, adds immensely to the replay value of said games.
Now, why didn't anyone ever think about doing something like that in an RPG? Think about it like in Mount and Blade. There are several empires, each having alliances or being at war with others. There's constant change in the gameworld. There's endless fun to be had. And this is the perfect moment to introduce my game idea *drummroll*: Vikingar!
A game set around the beginning of the 9th century where you play a male or female Scandinavian who... well... can choose to do whatever he or she wants. Which is another thing that could make for an incredibly awesome sandbox game, but more to that later. Let's talk about the more conventional part of the gameplay, and about how strategy game elements could make such a game incredibly awesome.
Now, imagine you buy yourself a boat and sail to the shores of Europe. You go to some lord or king or whatever and want a quest. But not just any quest. A quest that makes sense and has been created by a certain event. Like... bandits having raped and pillaged in a nearby village. You're sent to kill them. In what way is this different from the way most quest are handled, you ask? Well, it's a quest that emerged out of a situation: AI-controlled bandits decided to plunder a town. The king isn't pleased and wants someone to take revenge. Or how about this: bandits have started attacking trade routes. A merchant wants you to escort him.
This kind of emergent gameplay would require some kind of AI that "thinks big". As in, an AI that is similar to strategy games, looking at the big picture and thinking about, in case of bandits, whether it's better to plunder a town or attack a trade route. Of course, those bandits should also react to increased guards on the trade route and pick another target if the number of guards becomes too much for them to handle. The AI should react to changes, and thus create a dynamic world where quests aren't scripted but emerge because of things the AI decides to do.
Now, imagine you're playing a peasant woman at some town at the shore of England or something. You just live your peaceful life, working at your farm and giving your taxes to the local lord. One day, Vikings appear without warning and pillage the town, attack your farm, kill your family, rape you and take you prisoner. That was pretty unexpected and might be kinda frustrating, but it also offers interesting gameplay opportunities: do you try to flee, or do you accept being a slave?
Or what if some other country declares war on the country you live in? It might not directly affect you, but one day a war party might stand in front of your town and you either have to try and help with the defense, or hide and pray your side wins.
All of these situations happen because of things that you don't notice directly, like another country declaring war on yours, or a Viking party deciding to plunder the town you happen to live in. This way, the actions of a strategy-game-like AI would affect your gaming experience directly, or indirectly. Indirectly maybe by the prices of food rising and you earning more money, because recently some farmland has been conquered by an enemy country. Non-scriped events like those would bring a lot more replayability into the game.
Now, to the "you can do whatever you want". Yes, you should be able to in a sandbox RPG. If there are farmers and blacksmiths in the gameworld, why not let the player become one? Doesn't sound too exciting at first, but if implemented in an interesting way, it could provide for some interesting alternative ways of playing the game.
So what are your opinions? Do you agree on strategy-game elements being able to enhance a sandbox RPG by making it less predictable and more varied? Opinions plx.
Well, have you ever wondered why sandbox games grow boring and tedious after a while? Probably because there is no change in the gameworld, I'd say. And then a certain thought went through my head: why shouldn't sandbox RPGs profit from game mechanics that are used in strategy games? Strategy games, especially those of large scale, like the Total War series or the Paradox games, have almost infinite replay value. Why? Because every playthrough is different, since the AI will always try to do similar things like the player: build up their empires, conquer others, make diplomatic deals with others etc. This, along with the choice of playing a different empire each time you start a new game, adds immensely to the replay value of said games.
Now, why didn't anyone ever think about doing something like that in an RPG? Think about it like in Mount and Blade. There are several empires, each having alliances or being at war with others. There's constant change in the gameworld. There's endless fun to be had. And this is the perfect moment to introduce my game idea *drummroll*: Vikingar!
A game set around the beginning of the 9th century where you play a male or female Scandinavian who... well... can choose to do whatever he or she wants. Which is another thing that could make for an incredibly awesome sandbox game, but more to that later. Let's talk about the more conventional part of the gameplay, and about how strategy game elements could make such a game incredibly awesome.
Now, imagine you buy yourself a boat and sail to the shores of Europe. You go to some lord or king or whatever and want a quest. But not just any quest. A quest that makes sense and has been created by a certain event. Like... bandits having raped and pillaged in a nearby village. You're sent to kill them. In what way is this different from the way most quest are handled, you ask? Well, it's a quest that emerged out of a situation: AI-controlled bandits decided to plunder a town. The king isn't pleased and wants someone to take revenge. Or how about this: bandits have started attacking trade routes. A merchant wants you to escort him.
This kind of emergent gameplay would require some kind of AI that "thinks big". As in, an AI that is similar to strategy games, looking at the big picture and thinking about, in case of bandits, whether it's better to plunder a town or attack a trade route. Of course, those bandits should also react to increased guards on the trade route and pick another target if the number of guards becomes too much for them to handle. The AI should react to changes, and thus create a dynamic world where quests aren't scripted but emerge because of things the AI decides to do.
Now, imagine you're playing a peasant woman at some town at the shore of England or something. You just live your peaceful life, working at your farm and giving your taxes to the local lord. One day, Vikings appear without warning and pillage the town, attack your farm, kill your family, rape you and take you prisoner. That was pretty unexpected and might be kinda frustrating, but it also offers interesting gameplay opportunities: do you try to flee, or do you accept being a slave?
Or what if some other country declares war on the country you live in? It might not directly affect you, but one day a war party might stand in front of your town and you either have to try and help with the defense, or hide and pray your side wins.
All of these situations happen because of things that you don't notice directly, like another country declaring war on yours, or a Viking party deciding to plunder the town you happen to live in. This way, the actions of a strategy-game-like AI would affect your gaming experience directly, or indirectly. Indirectly maybe by the prices of food rising and you earning more money, because recently some farmland has been conquered by an enemy country. Non-scriped events like those would bring a lot more replayability into the game.
Now, to the "you can do whatever you want". Yes, you should be able to in a sandbox RPG. If there are farmers and blacksmiths in the gameworld, why not let the player become one? Doesn't sound too exciting at first, but if implemented in an interesting way, it could provide for some interesting alternative ways of playing the game.
So what are your opinions? Do you agree on strategy-game elements being able to enhance a sandbox RPG by making it less predictable and more varied? Opinions plx.
.
