iqzulk
Augur
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 294
Greetings. The reason behind this thread's existence is that I want to find as many videogames, that fall into a very specific set of criteria (described to the best of my ability below), as possible. So far, I am aware of the existence of only 3 games which, by the looks of it, do indeed seem to be the type (well, to an extent, at least). Those three games are: "Defcon 5: Peace has a Price" (1995 - not to be confused with "DEFCON: Everybody Dies / Global Nuclear Domination Game" published in 2006 by Introversion Software), "Sentient" (1997) and "Biosys" (1999) - all three, as one can see, fall into "90s experimental obscurity" category. To be frank, of these three games, as of this moment, I have only played "Biosys" (although I do plan to play the other two eventually). Still, I would be very glad if any of you would be able and willing to point me to any other (be it from 80s, 90s, 00s or even Early Access) such games. "Such games" meaning...
First of all, as the topic title indicates, the entirety of the game takes place from the first-person perspective. Whether the movement/turning is discrete or continuous, I don't care. Third-person perspective might be tolerable if (and only if) there is "closely behind the character" camera mode. Second. The entirety of the ingame world, which you explore a traverse during the course of the game, is one giant mechanism, which has certain global parameters (say, pressure, temperature, energy consumption levels, etc.) tied to it - and you can influence those global parameters, while interacting the specific mechanisms physically existing in that world (and which you find through, again, first-person exploration) and comprising parts of the whole global world-mechanism - which visibly changes the state of the entire ingame world in one way of another. Basically, the whole game must serve as a sort of "emulator" for this giant world-mechanism, the more complex (both in terms of number of input mechanisms tied to it - and in terms of number of interconnected global parameters describing its current state) and the more interconnected, the better - tied with the specific story-related goals (make sure the entire station doesn't explode), and in order to achieve those, you need to manipulate that entire world-mechanism around you as if it were a giant Rubik's cube, until everything sort of falls into place, and you get the world to the state, that lets you pass the current story-related criterion. Third, it must, explicitly, be a GIANT MECHANISM. Say, reputation systems from RPGs do not cut it (and yes, I am aware, that the whole "AI-controlled behavior and speech" is supposed to be a huge aspect of "Sentient", it actually might get a pass because, well, AI-controlled speech does indeed sound interesting). And, yes, one MUST be able to influence in globally in a multitude of ways (say, again, pressure, temperature, etc.) not When The Story Says So, but both at one's leisure AND as the main method of progression through ingame world and achieving the goals set before you. What this means is: a) Riven/RHEMs/other straight-up Myst-likes (which Biosys isn't) do not fit the request (static world, which can be influenced only locally), b) Robinson's Requem/Deus/majority of other straight-up survival games do not fit the request (same reason), c) the majority of mecha/exoskeleton-simulation games do not fit the request (again, same reason), d) Ultima Underworld/System Shock successors do not fit the request. Fourth, there must be a definite single-player campaign with the events (even if partly randomized) set in stone beforehand by the gamedesigners. No, I am not interested in pure sandboxing. No, I do not intend to play Dwarf Fortress no matter how hard one might insist. There must be a story-mode - and in order to pass through this story mode, it must be necessary for me to learn the systems comprising the ingame world as a back of my hand, and to skillfully manipulate the entirety of ingame world (and global parameters tied to it) as a fiendishly complex Rubik's cube until I get the entire world to the state "good enough" in order for me to progress.
This seems to be all. Please, excuse my excessive verbosity and, perhaps, a lot of unnecessary repetition of the same points over and over again, but, well. At least, I do hope that my point has, indeed, gotten across.
Thank you for your attention and time.
First of all, as the topic title indicates, the entirety of the game takes place from the first-person perspective. Whether the movement/turning is discrete or continuous, I don't care. Third-person perspective might be tolerable if (and only if) there is "closely behind the character" camera mode. Second. The entirety of the ingame world, which you explore a traverse during the course of the game, is one giant mechanism, which has certain global parameters (say, pressure, temperature, energy consumption levels, etc.) tied to it - and you can influence those global parameters, while interacting the specific mechanisms physically existing in that world (and which you find through, again, first-person exploration) and comprising parts of the whole global world-mechanism - which visibly changes the state of the entire ingame world in one way of another. Basically, the whole game must serve as a sort of "emulator" for this giant world-mechanism, the more complex (both in terms of number of input mechanisms tied to it - and in terms of number of interconnected global parameters describing its current state) and the more interconnected, the better - tied with the specific story-related goals (make sure the entire station doesn't explode), and in order to achieve those, you need to manipulate that entire world-mechanism around you as if it were a giant Rubik's cube, until everything sort of falls into place, and you get the world to the state, that lets you pass the current story-related criterion. Third, it must, explicitly, be a GIANT MECHANISM. Say, reputation systems from RPGs do not cut it (and yes, I am aware, that the whole "AI-controlled behavior and speech" is supposed to be a huge aspect of "Sentient", it actually might get a pass because, well, AI-controlled speech does indeed sound interesting). And, yes, one MUST be able to influence in globally in a multitude of ways (say, again, pressure, temperature, etc.) not When The Story Says So, but both at one's leisure AND as the main method of progression through ingame world and achieving the goals set before you. What this means is: a) Riven/RHEMs/other straight-up Myst-likes (which Biosys isn't) do not fit the request (static world, which can be influenced only locally), b) Robinson's Requem/Deus/majority of other straight-up survival games do not fit the request (same reason), c) the majority of mecha/exoskeleton-simulation games do not fit the request (again, same reason), d) Ultima Underworld/System Shock successors do not fit the request. Fourth, there must be a definite single-player campaign with the events (even if partly randomized) set in stone beforehand by the gamedesigners. No, I am not interested in pure sandboxing. No, I do not intend to play Dwarf Fortress no matter how hard one might insist. There must be a story-mode - and in order to pass through this story mode, it must be necessary for me to learn the systems comprising the ingame world as a back of my hand, and to skillfully manipulate the entirety of ingame world (and global parameters tied to it) as a fiendishly complex Rubik's cube until I get the entire world to the state "good enough" in order for me to progress.
This seems to be all. Please, excuse my excessive verbosity and, perhaps, a lot of unnecessary repetition of the same points over and over again, but, well. At least, I do hope that my point has, indeed, gotten across.
Thank you for your attention and time.
