Grand Strategy Historia Realis: Rome - A character-driven historical simulation of Roman life and politics

[OndrejSc]

Sure, all of those, if the right partner comes along. You can fill this form

Fill this cup.

 

[Wyatt_Derp]

Take this game and mix it in with some Total War style battle shit and you pretty much have the best ancient era strategy game ever.

 

[:Flash:]

Will there be a Latin language version?

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

You play as a Roman, and can be elected to offices in the Cursus Honorum such as Consul, Tribune of the Plebs and so on. You get married, have children, get divorced and live your life however you want. Make friends, rivals, become a priest, a Stoic philosopher, whatever.

so... "the guild", but with a different coat of paint?

 

[AD1337]

Looks nice, when's the plan to release this bad boy? Next year? Next decade?

No release date yet, sorry! I understand that might be frustrating, but I'd rather give no date until I'm sure I can commit to that date.

Will there be a Latin language version?

Maybe! It would be awesome.

You play as a Roman, and can be elected to offices in the Cursus Honorum such as Consul, Tribune of the Plebs and so on. You get married, have children, get divorced and live your life however you want. Make friends, rivals, become a priest, a Stoic philosopher, whatever.

so... "the guild", but with a different coat of paint?

I haven't played The Guild, so I wouldn't be able to say. But I believe the gameplay is quite different, even if the description might sound similar.

 

[Malakal]

Looks nice, when's the plan to release this bad boy? Next year? Next decade?

No release date yet, sorry! I understand that might be frustrating, but I'd rather give no date until I'm sure I can commit to that date.

Will there be a Latin language version?

Maybe! It would be awesome.

You play as a Roman, and can be elected to offices in the Cursus Honorum such as Consul, Tribune of the Plebs and so on. You get married, have children, get divorced and live your life however you want. Make friends, rivals, become a priest, a Stoic philosopher, whatever.

so... "the guild", but with a different coat of paint?

I haven't played The Guild, so I wouldn't be able to say. But I believe the gameplay is quite different, even if the description might sound similar.

The guild is more about money, thing less important to Roman patrician. The focus here need lie elsewhere...

 

[Shaki]

So it basically like CK2 in Roman setting, but with even more focus on characters and without the retarded map painting aspect? Seems like a game I've always wanted, really hope it won't turn out to be vapourware.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

I haven't played The Guild

this, i just can't wrap my head around. a guy makes a movie and instantly a thousand people find out how he copied that jugoslavian short from 1462 which only 4 people watched and whose copies got lost the next day. a guy makes a videogame, he doesn't even investigate direct competition, but then neither the journos realize.

 

[AD1337]

So it basically like CK2 in Roman setting, but with even more focus on characters and without the retarded map painting aspect? Seems like a game I've always wanted, really hope it won't turn out to be vapourware.

Yeah, that's a pretty close description! I'm glad it's something you're interested in, and I hope I won't let you down.

The guild is more about money, thing less important to Roman patrician. The focus here need lie elsewhere...

I haven't played The Guild

this, i just can't wrap my head around. a guy makes a movie and instantly a thousand people find out how he copied that jugoslavian short from 1462 which only 4 people watched and whose copies got lost the next day. a guy makes a videogame, he doesn't even investigate direct competition, but then neither the journos realize.

Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check out The Guild. I actually have The Guild II in my Steam library, but never played it. One difference I can tell you already is that, in Historia Realis, you don't walk around an environment as your avatar. I'm sure there are a lot more differences, but hopefully I can get a few cool ideas from playing The Guild. Thanks again, appreciate it.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

One difference I can tell you already is that, in Historia Realis, you don't walk around an environment as your avatar. I'm sure there are a lot more differences

and you're starting already wrong, because you don't walk around in "the guild" either. i'm sure there are a lot more similarities.

 

[whydoibother]

Your previous game Robotherapy came out a month ago, how far along this one are you?

 

[AD1337]

One difference I can tell you already is that, in Historia Realis, you don't walk around an environment as your avatar. I'm sure there are a lot more differences

and you're starting already wrong, because you don't walk around in "the guild" either. i'm sure there are a lot more similarities.

Awesome, thanks for the correction!

Your previous game Robotherapy came out a month ago, how far along this one are you?

Robotherapy was a side project, I started Historia Realis years ago.

 

[Axioms]

It doesn't really sound much like The Guild, 1 or 2 or 3, to me. It has the same themes I guess? But not the gameplay.

 

[Alex]

Hi AD1337. Thanks for posting about your game. I had 2 questions; sorry if they were already answered elsewhere.

First, your screenshot reminded me a lot of the storytron/erasmatron system from Chris Crawford. Have you heard of it? If not, you might want to check it out because it does have some interesting ideas.

Second, at what year does the game take place? If it is late enough, is there the option to become Christian?

 

[Aemar]

It doesn't really sound much like The Guild, 1 or 2 or 3, to me. It has the same themes I guess? But not the gameplay.

The Guild is first and foremost about that grind to make a shit ton of money in the chosen professions, create a dinasty and outlast your competitors. The political path is secondary and can be ignored. This game seems larger in scope and more open ended.

 

[AD1337]

I wrote a dev diary about emergent stories, one of the pillars of Historia Realis:

https://steamcommunity.com/games/2560540/announcements/detail/3708207929370057494

This one is more vague and less gameplay-focused. If you want one that explains the mechanics more, check out the previous one about the Action System.

Hi AD1337. Thanks for posting about your game. I had 2 questions; sorry if they were already answered elsewhere.

First, your screenshot reminded me a lot of the storytron/erasmatron system from Chris Crawford. Have you heard of it? If not, you might want to check it out because it does have some interesting ideas.

Second, at what year does the game take place? If it is late enough, is there the option to become Christian?

I did an online course with Chris once, very energic guy. I hope I have the same drive and passion as him when I'm his age. However, I haven't personally seen much value in his approach to emergent storytelling, even though we share similar goals.

Historia Realis ranges from about 300 BC to 50 AD, more or less. The game will focus on Romans, so maybe Jesus will make a cameo, but definitely won't be the focus because Christianity took a while after him to become a thing.

Thanks for the questions!

 

[Alex]

(...)
I did an online course with Chris once, very energic guy. I hope I have the same drive and passion as him when I'm his age. However, I haven't personally seen much value in his approach to emergent storytelling, even though we share similar goals.
(...)

This opens up a new question, if you don't mind. What would you say are the most important differences between your approach and his?

 

[AD1337]

(...)
I did an online course with Chris once, very energic guy. I hope I have the same drive and passion as him when I'm his age. However, I haven't personally seen much value in his approach to emergent storytelling, even though we share similar goals.
(...)

This opens up a new question, if you don't mind. What would you say are the most important differences between your approach and his?

Great question. From an attitude perspective, Chris's approach to design seems, to me, too theoretical. There's not enough iteration. It "should" work, but I don't think that's enough. Reality decides what works and what doesn't; one has to implement and iterate, let go of old ideas and let them transform and blossom upon contact with reality. I don't care much about what should work, I'm guided by one thing only: player experience. What's the desired experience, and what experience does this system actually provide? My job is to accurately pinpoint both and make that gap smaller and smaller through iteration.

As for the game design itself, his approach is more focused on linking bits of writing. While there is writing in Historia Realis, the focus is more on giving the player enough for them to create a string of meaning. One could ignore the flavor text and still understand what's going on, why characters act how they act, and what that means for their stories.

These are subtle differences in design philosophy, hard to convey with words, but hopefully the game will speak for itself. That's what matters, anyway. Also, greetings from Brazil. Hue.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

How often do you think about Rome?

 

[Axioms]

(...)
I did an online course with Chris once, very energic guy. I hope I have the same drive and passion as him when I'm his age. However, I haven't personally seen much value in his approach to emergent storytelling, even though we share similar goals.
(...)

This opens up a new question, if you don't mind. What would you say are the most important differences between your approach and his?

Great question. From an attitude perspective, Chris's approach to design seems, to me, too theoretical. There's not enough iteration. It "should" work, but I don't think that's enough. Reality decides what works and what doesn't; one has to implement and iterate, let go of old ideas and let them transform and blossom upon contact with reality. I don't care much about what should work, I'm guided by one thing only: player experience. What's the desired experience, and what experience does this system actually provide? My job is to accurately pinpoint both and make that gap smaller and smaller through iteration.

As for the game design itself, his approach is more focused on linking bits of writing. While there is writing in Historia Realis, the focus is more on giving the player enough for them to create a string of meaning. One could ignore the flavor text and still understand what's going on, why characters act how they act, and what that means for their stories.

These are subtle differences in design philosophy, hard to convey with words, but hopefully the game will speak for itself. That's what matters, anyway. Also, greetings from Brazil. Hue.

This is pretty similar to my philosophy. Dialogue and hand-crafted writing and stuff is expensive and labor intensive and also limiting mechanically. Better to create extensive and intensive mechanical systems that the player can interact with.

 

[GamingConnoisseur]

What century is this game set in?

 

[GamingConnoisseur]

How often do you think about Rome?

https://youtu.be/2j2bTM34ymE

 

[Anthedon]

Looks interesting, going full Sulla on the popularis in a game could be very entertaining.

 

[Lord_Potato]

The guild is more about money, thing less important to Roman patrician. The focus here need lie elsewhere...

If you didn't have assets worth at least one million sesterces you were removed from the Senate by the Censors. Basically a game over for a Roman that wanted to make his name.

So wealth mattered a lot. On the other hand the system didn't always work and Caesar was a senator (and even got governorship of Gaul) despite being heavily indebt. In his own words: "I need at least thirty million sesterces in order not to own anything".

 

[Malakal]

The guild is more about money, thing less important to Roman patrician. The focus here need lie elsewhere...

If you didn't have assets worth at least one million sesterces you were removed from the Senate by the Censors. Basically a game over for a Roman that wanted to make his name.

So wealth mattered a lot. On the other hand the system didn't always work and Caesar was a senator (and even got governorship of Gaul) despite being heavily indebt. In his own words: "I need at least thirty million sesterces in order not to own anything".

No it was stored in real estate, great estates of the patricians and other property not cash on hand. It, obviously and as always, mattered but prestige mattered more.

Basically one you did qualify for the senatorial class wealth was just an afterthought.