Galactic War - How to make it awesome.

I think, with sports you just picked an example which works against your argumentation.
In many sports there is the side game of statistics (player done x times y) and in a way achievements aren't much different than exactly that with label on it. That doesn't makes the statistics more important than winning, but it's something the fans and media thrive on. In a computer game those roles mix a bit.

As mentioned before, a fitting achievement system also has to be done well do to offer something extra (e.g. achievements fitting sensible things etc).

Aside from that, from my perspective computer games in their objectives fit board games better than competitive (pro) sports. My first objective when playing computer/board games or playing a game of some sports with friends is having fun. Sure, the objective of winning is part of any standard game, but for having fun it's not strictly necessary. If the game is entertaining and well made you can have a nice gaming evening without being on the winners side. So any sensible side game, which enhances the experience (for some or all), is welcome, even if it isn't directly contributing to a specific winning situation.

I think there's a bit of talking at cross purposes going on here. Yes it would be bad if there were stupid achievements that distract from the game, but there's no reason there couldn't be more time or economy-based achievements, things that you get by improving your overall game and therefore encouraging players to get better at playing the game properly.

Separate from achievements (which despite the above paragraph I don't really care about), in-depth statistics would be great. I use the Hotstats mod for FA and it can really enhance my enjoyment of a game by looking back over the game to see tipping points and so on. Also freely-viewable stats about yourself and other players would be a cheap and easy way of greatly increasing the motivation to keep playing.

I'd played Total Annihilation for years, but never online. So I had that noobish tendency to just wait until I'd amassed what I thought was a sure-win amount of units before attacking. Playing FA online quickly showed me that not only is that not an efficient way to play the game, it's not a very fun way to play the game.

If online rewards can help persuade even a few people that they should give it a go, and they have a similar experience to me, then they will be very glad they did and the online community will have more enthusiastic players.

Also less bloody Thermo nonsense, hopefully.

-My main point is that every Galactic War map is going to end in GG long before the whole galaxy is conquered. There comes a point in games like this where you recognize you've lost and bow out gracefully to save everyone another hour of play.

-If you create game mechanics that give the underdog an advantage, you only make games drag out longer (or in extreme cases, forever...like a Monopoly game where everyone is nice to the broke player) Whereas mechanics that let people "steamroll" each other in the late game will bring a swifter conclusion to what may have otherwise gone on forever.

-A comeback victory that is truly "against all odds" carries an incredible sense of achievement. That excitement is minimized if there are mechanics that give the underdog an advantage.

From what I have seen of boneyards its just map after map, so you won't get a GG because you can still win even when all you have is a single system.

It just takes time.

First of all, please expand your mind just a little past the achievements concept and to the main topic at hand, namely that in order to make the Galactic War awesome, the developers should spend at least as much time developing features for casual players as they do for the pro, e-sports crowd.

Ayceem you said it yourself "Ever heard of custom games".... well that's exactly my point. Everything casual got lumped under 'custom games', and apart from being able to host them, players got ZERO support from the online service.

That's not entirely true pawz. For FA for instance... they got the ability to share and save replays, a map editor, a vault to store maps, decent mods and distribution, out of game chat, friend system, etc. All of these things, apart from the replays, favoured the casual players a lot more than the ranked players.

You act as if casual players are the red headed step child of gaming, when in fact I think it's the pro players that get that treatment.

Just be careful not to confuse the direction taken with balancing and the community/social features that come with a game.

They're both bloody important, but I think they're there to appease different ends of the player base. Balancing, and replays, for esports and competition. Achievements, chat, custom games, mapping and modding, for the more social gamers.

Zordon, it took AGES for them to implement most of those things. FA:F is already way more mod/casual friendly just in the design of the main game screen and the way it lets you click-play a mod. That's huge, and GPGNet never achieved that.


The thing is, with what Uber has promised with Galactic wars, there's a great opportunity to pull those casual games / mods / etc into the picture of the larger war. If you can play the GW as a single player campaign, it shouldn't be a great leap to have a player-vs AI Galactic War server hosted by Uber.

I agree that FAF is schmick, but gpgnet had the required functionality to support casual games. I'd be incredibly suprised if uber went backwards on this. Keep up the suggestions though pawz, you're doing a good job.

In my eyes having Achievements and Stat tracking in Galatic War wouldn't be a great chore to put in and would only improve.
Maybe having guilds and stuff to unite together and actually WIN the war occasionally would be cool
Then it could be reset and alliances set up to beat the winners last time or whatever

Also stop whining about FA or whatever and stay on-topic

How about Global Statistics ? Every player will be in there like:
Globally there was destroyed 120k tanks etc.

Player 1 dealt 24,567,324 damage
Player 2 killed 38 planets... seriously. 38. This dude makes Hitler look like a small timer.

PLAYER 2 HAS UNLOCKED AN ACHIEVEMENT
'MASS PLANETCIDE!'

Name one.

Achievements encouraging optimal tactics are also worthless because players are going to be permorming the most optimal tactics anyway; because those are the most optimal!

In fact, even achiemevents consisting of nothing but optimal tactics can be a detriment- Say players have unlocked most of them yet are still after "Reach 500 metal output": Those players will be determined in all their games to build up their infrastructure, even if situations call for building fighting units instead.

So to recap- achievements are utterly worthless at best and are a detriment to gameplay at worst.

"Achievements will persuade people to do so-and-so." - This isn't even an argument anymore; it's just contradiction. You guys aren't heeding what I post, are you?

@Pawz: I don't know what you're trying to expect out of an RTS game. When I turn on a game like Planetary Annihilation, it's because I want to build robots and send them against the enemy's robots. When I read "online multiplayer" I expect what the label reads; building giant death robots, but online against other players. I don't neel the need to be 'catered' to. Similarly- what label does "Galactic War" imply?...Planetary Annihilation projected into a campaign of some sort, which the developers haven't yet fleshed out the details of. Now people who like that sort of thing will appreciate it, and those who don't won't touch it. I need no reason to try and fold those people.

I'm sick of being accused of being a 'casual-hater', I'm not. There's nothing 'casual' about achievements. They bring about the same anxiety in players that stats have done which makes them obsessed and kills the enjoyment of a game, where it becomes "I MUST get all the achievements!"; "I MUST get a higher win:loss!". The actual 'have-a-day-job-and-little-time' demographic wouldn't have the time for achievements and just wants to experience the actual game. Now I don't deny there are different people with different tastes; which is why there exists many different games to suit those tastes. People who really just want to to achievement collecting can go play other games.

Achievements and the motivations to include them piss me off because they do absolutely nothing to advance the games people claim to, yet everything to advance tedious achievement collecting.

@BulletMagnet: Stop calling achievements 'social'. They really are not.

I didn't call them social.

I pointed out another important aspect of multiplayer gaming.

Don't be a retard by thinking everything is about achievements. I don't like achievements either, but I understand there's more to things than that.

soccer, at least here in germany statistics seem sometimes/for some as important as the game itself. At least the media always have a field day, when iterating the goal statistics for players or how long some team didn't loose against some other .... In the end, no one necessarily needs them (as they have no direct influence on the game itself, any serious statistician would tell you that), but many people have fun playing around with them. (so some practical similarities to achievements, without judgement if its good or bad)

the point you are missing is, that achievements should always be a minor motivation for players not be the main motivation to play. If you really have the case that masses of players just play the game to fulfill achievements, then you have to face the fact, that the game just isn't that good and lacks real long term motivation. In a bad game you get some of the effects you mentioned in a good game which entertains the players long term they aren't more than enhanced game statistics.


but I think that's enough derailing of the thread with a side topic, at least from my side.