this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
151 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
30561 readers
96 users here now
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
One limitation that games like Civ suffer from is that diplomacy is ultimately pretty shallow because there can only be one winner, so even when you're building alliances or trading relationships it is generally to gain some temporary benefit until you are in a position to defeat your partner later on (whether militarily, scientifically, etc).
What I would love to see is a multiplayer game like Civ but where each player has independent win conditions (so that a game could have multiple winners, or no winners). The condition could even just be to attain a certain level of happiness or wealth. And if you achieve that then you win even if other nations are bigger or stronger, and conversely if you don't achieve it you lose even if you are the last nation standing. So decisions to go to war, or focus on technological development, or build alliances or trading relationships, etc, are driven by the wants and needs of your own people and not just a need to dominate others.
This is exactly what made me gravitate away from Civ games and more towards Paradox strategy, where the AI actually behaves more like a real country would do instead of a player trying to win a game.
It's been decades since I last played a civ game, and never played multiplayer, but I thought they had a version of this?
I was much younger then and only interested in battles and spectacle, so never tried them, but I do remember other victory conditions beyond kill everyone else.
There are multiple victory conditions in civ like science, culture, war, and so on. But only one player can win still, no matter what condition they use, which is the main point OP was trying to make
There are definitely other win conditions, but it's still winner-takes-all. So say if an ally is really strong scientifically or culturally it inevitably becomes in your interest to destroy them.
I think I'd like that if there was a single winner as well. Something like to win you need to complete two objectives, one public and one secret. So other players can still work against you but they dont know what you're trying to do.