What IS a 4X Game? (An advanced discussion)

[Evie]

I'm pretty sure I've seen an alternate definition of 4X that had one of its X (can't remember what the actual word was) representing RESEARCH. Which is something the vast majority of RTS (including the Crafts) simply don't have enough of to stake a serious claim.

However, even with the traditional 4X, the difference between the two is a matter of how much depth is given to each segment of the 4X.

In the -Crafts, the first three X are subordinate to the fourth. That is to say, yeah, you explore, expand and exploit, but the one and only point of doing this is to build an army with which to exterminate.

In Civ (or GalCiv, or AC, or several others), instead of having only one X directly contributing to victory, most of them directly do, and, instead of having three of the Xs as subordinate to another one, the Xs are tighly interlinked - working on one almost always help the others.

-Xplore : exploration of your surrounding reveals to you the best location to install new cities (Expand), new resources to acquire (Exploit) and new rival civilizations to interact with (Exterminate). In addition, exploration can be considered to include the tech tree, and exploration of the tech tree is almost always part of a victory condition (Space Race, etc)
-Xpand : Expansion gives you more city and trade, and thus, more access to the tech tree (Exploration), gives you control of more resources (Exploit), and more bases from which to build an army (Exterminate), in addition to directly increasing your points count (Time Victory).
-Xploit : Exploitation of resources again help you progress down the tech tree (exploration), build more settlers, or trade for new resources (expansion), and build better troops (extermination), and contribute to all victory conditions.
-Xterminate : Extermination (or, more properly, warfare) generally grant you access to enemy technology (exploration) either from conquest or the ensuing peace, cities (expansion) and resources (exploitation). Conquest is, generally, of course, its own victory condition again.

Essentialy that's what 4X is about : not simply having the X, but BALANCING the X, so they are each close to being equally important ; something the -crafts don't have (Exterminate dwarfs the other three in importance).

AOE II comes a lot closer, with the concept of the Wonder and Relic victories.

 

[Shaihulud]

Xploring in RTS games is not very exciting, its called 'scouting' instead. Scouting for enemies. EXpanding in RTS is only for the purpose of resource denial and to build up, its seldom for the sheer joy of the act itself. Xploiting in RTS games is too simplistic, usually only a few variable, and it is very linear, you harvest the resources to build, thats it! Xterminate is of course the soul of an RTS game and its a very nice way of doing it.

 

[Phlegmak]

All I would like to ask is that posters in this thread stop using acronyms instead of just typing out a word. Don't use SC instead of StarCraft, for example.

By the way, I'm certain no one cares (except me) but real time strategy games, tend to not be strategic at all, but tactical. Thus they should be christened RTT. StarCraft is a good example of that.

 

[Mr Moron]

All I would like to ask is that posters in this thread stop using acronyms instead of just typing out a word. Don't use SC instead of StarCraft, for example.

By the way, I'm certain no one cares (except me) but real time strategy games, tend to not be strategic at all, but tactical. Thus they should be christened RTT. StarCraft is a good example of that.

Many RPGs tend to have very little actual RP in them, even the western made ones. It's just the way people talk abotu games. Besdies RTS sounds much better than RTT.

 

[croxis]

I think epicness or gameplay time is another factor as well. Generally a session of -craft does not last for several hours, while 4X games generally do because of the amount needed to reach victory.

 

[dh_epic]

Essentialy that's what 4X is about : not simply having the X, but BALANCING the X, so they are each close to being equally important ; something the -crafts don't have (Exterminate dwarfs the other three in importance).

Xploring in RTS games is not very exciting, its called 'scouting' instead. Scouting for enemies. EXpanding in RTS is only for the purpose of resource denial and to build up, its seldom for the sheer joy of the act itself. Xploiting in RTS games is too simplistic, usually only a few variable, and it is very linear, you harvest the resources to build, thats it! Xterminate is of course the soul of an RTS game and its a very nice way of doing it.

These are both extremely helpful comments.

It's true, in the RTS, there ARE the four X's, but the first three are almost there for token value. The first three happen quite rapidly. And once the resources are built up, the armies are massed, and extermination takes place. In Civilization 4, they all seem to happen concurrently.

I think epicness or gameplay time is another factor as well. Generally a session of -craft does not last for several hours, while 4X games generally do because of the amount needed to reach victory.

Yeah, the time scale is part of it too. There's no real obstacles to exploration or expansion in Starcraft except what you can reasonably defend. In Civilization 4, you have to research better ships to get passed ocean tiles, learn more powerful economic techniques to be able to support a larger empire, and deal with city morale as you exploit their labor. In starcraft, you can pretty much go wherever you want and do whatever you want, with your opponent as the only obstacle.

 

[Masquerouge]

The ultimate 4x game ever was Master of Orion II. I had such high hopes for Master of Orion III and they totally blew it. Master of Orion II remains the undisputed king of all 4X games to date.

Have you tried Galactic Civilizations 2?

 

[Masquerouge]

Europa Universalis is pretty strong and balanced on the 4 Xs.

 

[Evie]

Yeah, Europa Universalis (and II, and III) are pretty clear cases of real-time 4X, with all the X being rewarded with victory points (which are the only measure of victory :-D).

Victoria and the HOI games might not be as much, though - unless you count "tech tree" exploration.

 

[Gladi]

Have you tried Galactic Civilizations 2?

Bright day
Yes, and MOOII is still better (Ship designing was much easier there, plus turn-based space tactical). And MoM and Emperor of Fading Suns (though that one is debatable if it is 4x) and Imperialism II.

And I have to join the choir and say that 4x game needs to have equal representation of the xes.

 

[Narz]

I have a question - what is the best freeware or shareware 4X game?

Anyone have any suggestions?

 

[dh_epic]

(Puts on Devil's Advocate hat...)


But what makes the representation of the four X's any more equal in Civilization 4? In Civilization 4, the ultimate victory is STILL to exterminate all your opponents.

Exploiting resources are done just for that, so you can have a larger army and huge technology advantage.

Expanding is strictly to put yourself in the best position to exploit resources, to get that advantage for extermination.

And naturally, Exploration is to aid expansion, to get the best position in exploiting resources, and get that advantage for extermination.

Am I talking about StarCraft, here, or am I talking about Civilization 4?

What makes Civilization 4 a more balanced representation of the 4 X's than Starcraft, when Extermination is the ultimate goal? Moreover, when Extermination gives you an advantage in all four X's?

 

[dh_epic]

I have a question - what is the best freeware or shareware 4X game?

I haven't played too many in the genre. But the only ones I know of are:

FreeOrion (Based on Masters of Orion)
FreeCiv (you don't get a prize for guessing what this one is based on)
VGA Planets (no clue what this one is like)

and

Warpath 21st Century


After that, you're pretty much on your own.

 

[Gladi]

(Puts on Devil's Advocate hat...)


But what makes the representation of the four X's any more equal in Civilization 4? In Civilization 4, the ultimate victory is STILL to exterminate all your opponents.

Exploiting resources are done just for that, so you can have a larger army and huge technology advantage.

Expanding is strictly to put yourself in the best position to exploit resources, to get that advantage for extermination.

And naturally, Exploration is to aid expansion, to get the best position in exploiting resources, and get that advantage for extermination.

Am I talking about StarCraft, here, or am I talking about Civilization 4?

What makes Civilization 4 a more balanced representation of the 4 X's than Starcraft, when Extermination is the ultimate goal? Moreover, when Extermination gives you an advantage in all four X's?

Actualy in CIV at least you can win be eXpanding- it is called domination victory. There is also eXploration victory of sorts- to explore Alpha Centauri. And if you eXploit your resource for culture you will win cultural victory.

BTW- there is somewhere on forum posted Ghandi-no-military victory.

 

[Narz]

thanks epic

 

[Evie]

Actually, who said the ultimate victory in Civ was extermination?

From where *I* stand, conquest is just an accelerated time victory - ie, proclaiming you the winner as soon as you're the only contestant, rather than waiting until the end of the game to show that you have more points than all surviving civilisations (ie, none of them), as Europa Universalis II does (Ahhh, fun...top-5 civs in the world, points-wise : France, Pirates, Natives, Mercenaries and Rebels) .

It may be players perception that this game is all about warfare, but it's not a universal perception (see the rabid denunciations of every suggestion of a Total War type military engine), far from it. There are players who consider the peaceful path to victory just as good as the military ones, sometime better, and who win without fighting any offensive war, or at times even no wars at all.

Whereas in the -Crafts, you have no choice but to destroy your opponent utterly - it's the one and only way to end the game (talking about standard game modes, of course ; scenarios can of course be different, but if you count scenarios, then both the -Crafts and Civs are just about EVERY genre of game out there, except maybe Action)

 

[Masquerouge]

There are players who consider the peaceful path to victory just as good as the military ones, sometime better, and who win without fighting any offensive war, or at times even no wars at all.

I'm one of these players. TO me civ is about civ building, and I just get very sad if I can't build every building in every city.

Life got a lot sadder in Civ4

 

[dh_epic]

I love building stuff, too. But strangely enough, I think the best thing they might do for builders is something more like the DYP mod, where there are so many things to build that you can't possibly build them all. Building everything means that eventually you're on mental autopilot. But if you can only build 50% of the buildings in each city, you have to think hard about which 50% you need.

It sounds to me, Oda Nobunaga, that maybe one of the key differences between 4X games and other strategy games is diplomacy.

 

[Evie]

It most certainly is, as without diplomacy, extermination is virtualy unavoidable, because that's what the other players will invariably attempt, even if you have access to a "builders" victory, and attempt it.

 

[Arcadian83]

Sorry, but after careful consideration, I'm going to have to conclude that the "RT4X" genre is just a gimmick to make this game appear not to be 'yet another RTS'.