TempusFugit
Chieftain
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2023
- Messages
- 92
I can understand your puzzlement. And it is quite paternalistic of me, but I do believe these things matter in how much enjoyment people get out of their games. My conviction is that a “strict“ divide between saving/loading and normal game mechanics is better than a design where undoing things at any moment is as common as ordering units and building cities.Already the option?!! (which allows you to have it ALWAYS turned off for your games. But no, you also insist in refusing the option to all the other players altogether ...?!)
Why deny other players the option to use a feature they find (sometimes) useful for their games?
It is not a problem at all that one game is doing this, but if this became very popular and even the norm, I don’t think it would be good for the genre. But if this actually could influence other games is highly speculative.
Regarding options, in general I do think it is a good thing with many options in games and many options for how to play them. Computer games have always had more options for how to play them than console games, but for both computer games and console games there have been a sharp increase over the years in options. Both for menu options, variety within the games and in options for how you could play them that exists outside of the games. I do think this is a very good development.
But, I do not think every game ideally should have as many options as possible, or that all games should contain any kind of option. The options the designers give a player, do play a large part in how the players play a game, so if all games contained “all“ options, there would actually be less variety between individual games and the way they were played, than if some options were never included by their designers.
Also, while I think that people in general do know better what is best for them, than some random paternalist (like myself in this case). I don’t think anybody are perfectly good at knowing what’s best for them, in fact I think people are rather bad at this, because we have so much genetical “programing“ that incentives us to behave differently than what most people would think would be in their own “rational” self-interest.
How people play their games is of course extremely unimportant compared to a lot of other things, but the same principles apply there. Any individual do generally know better what is best for them than some random paternalist do, but there are also at least some paternalists who knows better what is best for that individual than that individual do, on some aspects of their life.
Last edited: