Would you want to know more about Leoreth?

[strijder20]

Yes, I do.

Blasted, you just completely destroyed the mental image I had of you

 

[Leoreth]

I always encourage people to stick to their headcanon

 

[Sanguivorant]

Buttocks or bosom-What's your favourite DoC civ?

 

[Leoreth]

No preference

 

[mrrandomplayer]

Now, for mrrandomplayer's million dollar question:

Do you play Magic the Gathering?

 

[Leoreth]

I only rely on slightly less efficient ways to burn my money

 

[mrrandomplayer]

I only rely on slightly less efficient ways to burn my money

Magic is a huge money-funnel.

As for Leoreth's age...

IT'S OVER 9000!

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

What is your favorite area of the United States?

 

[Leoreth]

I've only been to New York City yet, so I can't really give a fair judgment. I'll be in California in the spring though, then I can compare.

 

[Hojsimpson]

What kind of music do you like?
Are you blonde? I imagine you as a blonde guy.

 

[Hippo8085]

I'll be in California in the spring though, then I can compare.

Guarantee it will be better unless you are in Southern California, in which case there won't be much difference other than that it smells worse. Could be interesting if we are water rationing by then though.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Are there other German modders?

If I'm not mistaken, there are a lot of German modders on some of the teams for Paradox games, namely EU.
I know incidentally, as well, there was a German modder, or at least working from Germany at the time (WilliamBerne) on vanilla Mount & Blade that created an excellent WWII mod known as China WWII Battlefield.

So I have several questions. What are some of your thoughts on modern game design?
A lot of it ties into business practices nowadays, and as seen with the prevalent F2P model, and microtransactions, games are actively being designed around these aspects.
Also, I know a lot of people who play games complain that games aren't as hard as they used to be.
Personally I'm of the opinion that most old games weren't hard by design, but because the players had to deal with bad mechanics.
Do you think modern games that purport to be difficult successfully meet the difficulty threshold?

One more question. If you had the opportunity to spin off DoC from a Civ IV BtS mod, into a standalone game, kind of like what Kael and Fallen Enchantress became, would you do it? Or is this just a hobby?

 

[Leoreth]

Guarantee it will be better unless you are in Southern California, in which case there won't be much difference other than that it smells worse. Could be interesting if we are water rationing by then though.

Mainly Mountain View and San Francisco, which counts as the north I suppose.

So I have several questions. What are some of your thoughts on modern game design?
A lot of it ties into business practices nowadays, and as seen with the prevalent F2P model, and microtransactions, games are actively being designed around these aspects.
Also, I know a lot of people who play games complain that games aren't as hard as they used to be.
Personally I'm of the opinion that most old games weren't hard by design, but because the players had to deal with bad mechanics.
Do you think modern games that purport to be difficult successfully meet the difficulty threshold?

Huh, good questions. I could write paragraphs about this, unfortunately not now because I'm too tired.

Because I don't think it's that clear cut. I agree that old games weren't hard because of good game design. Usually the difficulty came from bad design, or just a plain unfair setup (restricted saving, cumbersome interface, ridiculous AI advantages ...). But there also was a different approach to what beating a game meant. Previously it was already an achievement to complete the game at all, which now is basically a given. Which I can kind of understand, because who buys a game without being able to see all of it?

That being said, what modern games have mostly changed is that their learning curve isn't nearly as steep. Which is a good thing. And it shouldn't be underestimated that nowadays no one needs to "figure out" a game first. Good tutorials are standard, and if you get stuck, you can always find a strategy guide or walkthrough on the internet. This also means that being moderately good isn't very hard, and over-optimized powergamers have become more widespread. So comparing these eras isn't entirely fair to begin with.

And while unfair AI advantages still exist, they are now much more transparent and under the control of the player (like Civ's difficulty levels). Unfortunately they are still necessary because AI capabilities haven't improved much over the last two decades.

So I think the developments have been mostly positive. But still somehow a part of the challenge is lost, and I don't know where that comes from. Maybe it's that strategy titles these days don't pay that much attention to miniscule details of game design that really created the fascination of titles from the golden age of TBS for me. I think I've ranted about the Total War series before, and how well thought-out design and good AI are ignored in favor of flashy marketable battle graphics. It seems in the past there was more of an appreciation for this. For instance, my favorite tactics game Battle Isle (a German title comparable to Panzer General) had a lot of the negative aspects I've criticized above, but still the maps were so carefully crafted that every one of them played like an intriguing puzzle. But it may just be the nostalgia speaking here.

As far as F2P and microtransactions are concerned, I don't know, I haven't played that kind of game. Usually I'm not the kind of player who invests additional money in DLCs and the like, so it never interested me, but I've never understood the outrage about this business model. If it helps fund the developers, I can only benefit from it. At least that's my experience with EU4 and the improvement in quality Paradox had after they relied more on that kind of business model. As long as it doesn't influence a competitive balance (say in MMOs) I don't see any harm in it.

(As you can tell, I'm mostly talking about (turn based) strategy and to a lesser degree RPGs here - I don't play many games per year anyway so maybe I'm kind of out of touch.)

One more question. If you had the opportunity to spin off DoC from a Civ IV BtS mod, into a standalone game, kind of like what Kael and Fallen Enchantress became, would you do it? Or is this just a hobby?

Assuming I would get unlimited money to do so, hell yes. Actually I've already thought a lot about what kind of game I'd make to have a more proper "history simulator" without being restrained by Civ4's mechanics and limitations.

But as we all know and Fallen Enchantress has proven, making games is a risky business, and I wouldn't want to risk my financial future on it.

Edit: Look at that, it's the paragraphs after all.

 

[trexeric]

What's your favorite color? Animal? Plant? Food? Book? Bacteria? Fungi? Protist?

 

[Leoreth]

Red. Crows. I probably have a good plant answer but can't think of one right now. Hard to pick a favorite food. Book changes constantly*.

Generally I find it very hard to answer favorite X questions because it's just such a weird concept. I cannot understand people who have officially chosen a favorite X. Things can be good in so many different ways that it seems impossible to have an absolute favorite. Hell, even the first two definite answers aren't really definite.

*I really love Patrick Rothfuss though and I incessantly recommend his books to everyone who does or doesn't ask.

(I feel compelled to add that, unsurprisingly, my favorite work of fiction overall is still Homestuck.)

 

[The Diocletian]

Does the name Leoreth have any meaning or significance?

 

[Sanguivorant]

Do you think Europe has an immigration problem? Why or why not?

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Foods and movies you like? Favorite historical time period? Best form of government?

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Mainly Mountain View and San Francisco, which counts as the north I suppose.

You should hit up Hippo or I then. Maybe civ_king but he doesn't seem to be active around here anymore. We could show you around.

I'm a major foodie so I would recommend:

Sushiritto @ 59 New Montgomery St.
Found in the Financial District.
They sell sushi rolls in the style of burritos that are pretty good.
There's another site somewhere a couple blocks away but I don't know that location by heart.
Ike's @ 3489 16th St.
In the Castro. Some of the best sandwiches on the planet,
with an amazingly diverse list of things you can stuff into your sandwich.
You haven't had a sandwich until you've stuffed jalapeno poppers or onion rings in them.
Farmerbrown @ 25 Mason St.
This one's actually a sit down restaurant that does soul food/Louisiana cuisine.
It's in a bad neighborhood (The Tenderloin) so I wouldn't recommend heading there at night, but they've got some amazing food.

P.S. Don't even think about getting a street hot dog. Ever.

That being said, what modern games have mostly changed is that their learning curve isn't nearly as steep. Which is a good thing. And it shouldn't be underestimated that nowadays no one needs to "figure out" a game first. Good tutorials are standard, and if you get stuck, you can always find a strategy guide or walkthrough on the internet. This also means that being moderately good isn't very hard, and over-optimized powergamers have become more widespread. So comparing these eras isn't entirely fair to begin with.

That's true. I think the Internet has had a major hand in how people play games.
In the 80s & early 90s, I believe people took photos of their scores, had the photos developed,
then mailed them to the studio/publishers and received badges to commemorate their achievements.
The sophistication of information access when it comes to a game is constantly evolving too.
I remember referring to FAQs on GameFAQs very often in the mid 2000s, and now everything is better found on something like a game-specific wiki, given the game is popular.

As far as F2P and microtransactions are concerned, I don't know, I haven't played that kind of game. Usually I'm not the kind of player who invests additional money in DLCs and the like, so it never interested me, but I've never understood the outrage about this business model. If it helps fund the developers, I can only benefit from it. At least that's my experience with EU4 and the improvement in quality Paradox had after they relied more on that kind of business model. As long as it doesn't influence a competitive balance (say in MMOs) I don't see any harm in it.

F2P has been very prevalent among MMOs, MOBAs & smartphone/tablet games for awhile, as they follow the loss-leader marketing strategy.
However, microtransactions are beginning to appear in $60 premium games.
The latest Forza was blasted for being a $60 game, but the cars could be instantly unlocked by paying obscene prices, some cars costing more than the game itself.
While you could earn the cars in the in-game economy, it required too much grinding to be considered human, and the game came under fire for this.
As for DLC, I generally like DLC so long as it doesn't upset the balance of the game or basically forces you to play around its paradigm.
For instance, Nintendo's forays into DLC have been atrocious.
With Fire Emblem: Awakening, the latest in their fantasy turn-based SRPG series, you basically need DLC in order to grind in order to survive Lunatic or Lunatic+ difficulty.
Without it, you need to reset a stage to cook favorable conditions for a long time in order to even think about clearing a stage.
There is certainly good DLC though like some of the early DLC for Borderlands 1 & the expansions for Valkyria Chronicles and etc.

DLC and microtranscations are two different things though.
DLC is in the vein of expansions and bonus content. Microtransactions are little "cheats" or help like power refreshing or instant unlocks and sometimes additional resources.

Assuming I would get unlimited money to do so, hell yes. Actually I've already thought a lot about what kind of game I'd make to have a more proper "history simulator" without being restrained by Civ4's mechanics and limitations.

But as we all know and Fallen Enchantress has proven, making games is a risky business, and I wouldn't want to risk my financial future on it.

Edit: Look at that, it's the paragraphs after all.

I would put my full support behind this.
After all, Paradox shouldn't have a complete monopoly on the genre!

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

and watch the The Room, the Citizen Kane of bad movies. Revel in how well you know how English and human interaction works in comparison to Tommy Wiseau. The movie is from San Francisco. One of the funniest movies I've ever seen.

Sushiritto sounds amazing.

You could develop a board game as a "kickstarter" for seeing how you like marketing games and from there see if you can go into making video games.