GDC 2010: Sid Meier Keynote - "Everything You Know is Wrong"

[@jackhandy8402]

Lot of harsh comments here, so let me just say: Thanks for all the great games, Sid.

[@MarkOates2]

"Everything you know is wrong." I already knew that.

[@ivannovak3414]

So does that mean you were wrong and everything you knew was NOT wrong?

[@edstercw]

"Lets hear it for the cold war" Not the bizarrest cheer Ive heard in a lecture but a close second

[@Clovertone]

I found this talk quite interesting. Thank you Sid, GDC and all the poeple involved in getting it here, and keeping me from sleeping yet again!

[@3dzipp0]

11:02 - the Lazy Operator Phenomenon :)))) Quite effective solution if you're tired of zoom-tracking LOL

[@bonzaipeter]

Just bring back CITY VIEW !! in civilization !! for me it was at least 1/3 of the joy to watch every city randomly build buildings and see them get build.. wow.. that was so coold back in the days !!

[@dontnormally]

Static camera, folks - always set the camera and leave it. Glad GDC seems to've picked up on that by the newer vids.

[@AlbertBalbastreMorte]

I feel he's a bit too classical in his approach to game design, but it's interesting to have his reference.

[@paulyhart]

+Albert Balbastre-Morte You really don't understand what is going on here. This is like having JRR Tolkien give a lecture on Fantasy writing. "To have his reference" means "because he did what he did the reference is able to exist." or "his approach"; means "because he toiled down in the ditches for years with no credit, the rest of us have it easy."or even "too classical" being "you know, all that stuff that was written years ago so that today we could have what we have."

[@AlbertBalbastreMorte]

+pauly hart No credit? His name was all over the place!

[@paulyhart]

***** valid point, thanks.

[@ChadcholMeesaeng]

I said it before I'll say it again. We need Alpha Centauri 2.

[@randysewell3199]

Beyond Earth just came out. Still waiting for Alpha Centauri 2...

[@pedrotimoteo329]

Randy Sewell Problem is, Alpha Centauri (and, for that matter, Beyond Earth) had little or nothing to do with Sid Meier, other than having his name on the cover, and being based on his Civ 1 design. He did do Gettysburg, SimGolf, possibly Railroads, Revolution, Ace Patrol and Starships. In general, if it's "Sid Meier's New Thing", he actually worked on it. If it's "Sid Meier's Classic Meier Game IV", he probably didn't.

[@Merivio]

Wikipedia disagrees with you there Pedro. Citation?

[@bendranski6882]

@@Merivio Wikipedia is not a valid source.

[@Macronaso]

I find it very sad that he finds Covert Action to be a failure. It's my favorite Sid Meier's game apart from civilization, the way that game is designed is incredibly intricate for its time. The action parts had terrible controls though, but the design was rock solid.

[@crtglowgames]

Agreed. Ten year old me was utterly captivated by Covert. I'd spend so long on the crypto game. The circuit game was genius. Break-in tense and great fun - especially mastermind arrests on higher difficulties (so many guards!!). The driving game was awful though. It's been a while since I saw his comments on CA but I guess Sid's issue is that it didn't have the one more turn (case) compulsion that his other games had.

[@robbert-janmerk6783]

I have to disagree with the notion that every game should be 'an epic journey'. It's like saying that every novel should be a Lord of the Rings style epic. Not every game must be epic and awesome: some games should be humorous, relaxing, bittersweet sad and all the other emotions media can evoke. Games should not be one-note, they should not just all evoke one single emotion.

[@SuckItLily]

And for god's sake, not every game needs to make the player feel like they're "above average". We're not all babies. Some of us can take a challenge. Does Meier think no average player ever tries his luck at the highest difficulty and enjoys the experience despite losing? I think he's full of himself.

[@toddzelin4103]

Field of View Agreed, the first part of this talk is only valuable if your target audience is on the less mature side. Even his media examples are all examples of terrible storytelling, "hero always wins" formulaic Hollywood garbage.

[@caramount]

"Let's hear it for the cold war"

[@MemoryDealer]

Indeed, some things might be a full medium to certain people. But the thing that's unique about video games is the interaction, whereas with literature, film, and music you are only receiving (which is quite enough for many). It's really a subjective and personal thing.

[@Grishnoob]

Good god, NOISE GATE ON THE MIC PLEASE! That god damn buzzing is driving me insane.

[@bendranski6882]

Bzzzzzzz.

[@Voron_Aggrav]

What i miss most of Civ is the Palace build

[@Destragond]

Can't believe how much he's against cheats, the editor cheat mode thing in Civ 2 was the best thing ever for me. I was really disappointed when that wasn't really in Civ 3.

[@tcironbear21]

That is really amusing. It sounds like what Sid Meier originally planned to design was the sort of game that Paradox is known for, but it kept falling on its face. It almost sounds like without Sid's Civ games to whet our appetite for more, there would be no Paradox games.

[@guest273]

I had this in my "Watch later" list from like 2012 or something. Finally watched it! 😂 Cool talk, although a bit slow paced. I guess for 2010 standards it was ok.

[@javieraguirre4766]

I got interested about this lecture of the great Sid Meier, and i am so sorry to correct him, but his ideas about rise and fall, and natural disasters were not incorrect at all, since they both make two great expansions packs for the latest Civilization 6. Sometimes when you think your ideas are not well understood you just got to give it some time.

[@Jorbz150]

But wait, isn't there a difference between strength and probability? If a giant dog, and a dog 1/5th his size get in a fight, that doesn't mean that there is a 1/5th chance of the little dog winning. There's probably much less. If somebody can lift a weight of 200 pounds over his head, and something is 400 pounds, that doesn't mean there is a 1/2 chance that he can lift the 400 pounds over his head. Strength is not the same as probability.

[@theonewithoutidentity]

Very true, I think this applies especially to examples where the number of units goes up, like the 20vs10 army example. If you have soldiers of equal strength, weight, and weapon types, there's probably almost no chance the smaller army would win in this example. For melee fights, with more units, some can distract the enemy, while the rest can encircle the enemy and strike from an angle the enemy has no way of covering.

[@polnatista2410]

I had a dream about Homeworld once, was brilliant lol. Just thought i'd throw that out there.

[@handsomebrick]

If a game is based on probability, and players can't figure that out, shouldn't the game help them instead of giving up on them entirely? For example, have the stronger side win by default, but include a random occurrence that causes the weaker side to win, forcing the player to accept the possibility of negative outcomes.

[@DarkArtistKaiser]

Listen to what the players are saying? Ok lets start, can we take it easy on the effort to make Civilization a multiplayer game? Cause I prefer playing by myself really.

[@LungDrago]

You may be correct there, but that isn't really Sid's or any other game designer's fault. I genuinely believe every good game designer does his work because he has dreams and visions and has the determination to make them happen. But, it is a massive investment, finances and time-wise. When you invest, you want revenue. You can't afford to be generous, or you ruin your own life in this society. An amazing genius dream game you create is pretty pointless if it doesn't pay your rent.

[@hardkur]

i wish someone make a game that break every principle he makes just to prove something new is also good sometimes

[@SetupStreaming]

Well look at Dark Souls for example. It punishes players a lot, but also rewards them and gives them an awesome sense of achievement whenever they succeed. Look at DayZ where when you die, your character is gone and everything you collected/looted dissapears with him.

[@AwesomeRudi51]

Whatever you looted is being used by other people who are alive. Then agian, comparing dark souls with dayz is like comparing apples and oranges.

[@AbleAnderson]

Where is Sim Golf 2 Sid????? That was one of my favorite games ever. Why didn't you expand on the first one, polish up the imperfections, and make an unbelievable sequel with twice the goodies and none of the flaws?? Damn I wish I could make my own games lol.

[@beeblbrox1687]

This thing needs a super like.

[@LungDrago]

And that is what I believe Sid was pointing on. As a game designer, you make a lot of seemingly counter-intuitive choices, because in the end you want your project to succeed. If a project fails, every other great aspects about it that it may have are...instantly nullified.

[@alphacore4332]

Let me append this a bit: 1:2 is NOT the same as 10:20 and that is NOT a psychological statement. A real battle is a sequence of events, and if you'd boil it down to probability the 1st casualty based on that probability changes the equation to 9:20 or 10:19, and when the probability changes the situation must be re-evaluated. Much like if you flip a coin, it landing on heads changes the probability of it landing on heads 5 times in a row, you have 1 and need 4 more. You don't just flip all 5 at once and say it has double the chance of 10 coins all landing on heads, because that's extremely far from the truth. This wouldn't bother me one bit if he hadn't spoken in a tone that implied the tester was being influenced by some mysterious psychological force. He was not, he was being influenced by a logical force. I'd have said the same damn thing. Whatever... I haven't heard anything new or groundbreaking in the 1st 25 minutes, so I'm guessing the rest is more recycled ideas and psuedo-math. Someone correct me if I'm wrong and there's actually something worth listening to in the second half, I'll be glad to watch something original or intelligent.

[@Drellus]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

[@alphacore4332]

I don't think you read the link you posted. You can't just post GF any time someone says something about a coin.

[@DVAFP]

Alpha Core 1:2 = 10:20 if you flip a coin 20 times and the first 19 times comes heads, the probability of it coming heads or tails on the 20th time is still 50%

[@alphacore4332]

That is an incorrect analogy. These are little soldiers fighting each other, if it's 20 vs 20 and 19 of one side die then it's now 20 vs 1

[@georgebarota651]

You're misunderstanding completely. This is odds, not soldier numbers. 1:2 is exactly the same as 10:20.

[@mattmun12]

When he said "people never write to us saying "we won this game too much" " he was completely wrong. If a game gives a cheap win, it's not a good game. You must 'earn' the win, otherwise it's not satisfying. If a game is too easy, it can get slammed for it in reviews (look at the reviews of the new assassins creed game, it was slammed for being 'too easy'). Why else would people like games like dark souls? Because it is a challenge. If something isn't a challenge it isn't a good game.

[@octupus6]

I think a game has to have any level of challenge in order to be considered a game at all (obtaining some kind of goal is a point for most games). I disagree with the idea that a game has to be challenging in order to be a good game, though for sure there are people who prefer more challenging games over easier ones.

[@mattmun12]

octupus6 It has to have some level of challenge, I'm not saying every game has to be dark souls, but if there are no hurdles its far too easy and thus boring.

[@sohakes]

It looks like the game he said is bad because of the plot twist is called Dragonsphere. Actually, it has good reviews and from what I saw, a major positive point was the plot twist...

[@IvoryOasis]

It sounds like all his creativity was crushed by focus testing groups :/ It isn't about the art, the experience, it is just about appealing to the most common denominator now.

[@paulyhart]

+Ivory Oasis on the contrary, i believe. he admittedly knows zero about other humans. through the testing he was able to make Civ II eons better than Civ.

[@koalabrownie]

+pauly hart Civ II was "eons" better than Civ I? It's a design iteration, with a few things lacking from the original.

[@paulyhart]

koalabrownie tell him that. he said it.

[@koalabrownie]

pauly hart you got his email?

[@paulyhart]

no. we are not on speaking terms.

[@ivargu]

@sirmolio You are of course right. But my point was that sports are themselves games that have designed rulesets that exist to further gameplay/enjoyment not to represent any sense of "reality". You can play that game casually or professionally whether the game is called Basketball, Chess, Poker, or CounterStrike. Either way, all are just games and as such their rulesets and design have nothing to do with the representation of success and failure in "real life".

[@Shukfir]

Have you noticed? Every time on the screen Sid says phrase "test of time". Why?

[@Leyvin]

People associated Music, Sounds and Colour with specific emotions and atmosphere... it augments the experience, it can be used to fool the player but more often than not if for example; imagine Castlevania with the same colour palette as Mario. How would it feel to play that? That is the point he is making here ^_^

[@sirmolio]

Hey, was there a Q&A session after this speech? Where audience asked questions.. I'd love to see it, thanks

[@ImSim_Cook]

Hard not to let the "moral clarity" bullet-point ruin this entire talk

[@delicious_seabass]

Jon Blow brought me here... and then made me leave mid way through.

[@theonewithoutidentity]

Did he have any thoughts about this? Cos I can bet he would most likely hate this xd

[@stephenkamenar]

Weird. I disagree with a ton of what he's saying. I absolutely would complain if I played a game and I "won too often". I quit games all the time for just that reason. If there's no challenge, why am I wasting my time with the game. There's a reason why dark souls is popular.

[@YuriVachutinsky]

+Stephen Kamenar I think the meaning here is for game flow. If you can progress through the game. If you loose to much - there is no flow, and the player gets tired of "not getting new stuff from the game".

[@radsquid9541]

+Stephen Kamenar he meant game completion, there's no other way to finish a game than by winning, unless it's story heavy and has multiple endings

[@paulyhart]

+Stephen Kamenar have you ever had a 100 hour long Civ session and lost?

[@Gnurklesquimp]

Yeah, I think it's mostly a matter of what you're looking for in games. When I check these talks out I only take their information with their personal goals for a game in mind, as it's always either good to know how you can use the info in some way (example below), or avoid using it for the most part. I think even Dark Souls does it's best to pace the difficulty in such a sense that succesful learning and being challanged are somewhat in parallel, for the most part. Ofcourse losing is a fundamental part of it, but I think it helps, as you get more time to practise a certain aspect if you're not getting the hang of it. Losing in Dark Souls doesn't take a huge chunk out of your progression and it rarely stops someone dead in their tracks. They did however accomplish to make it feel significant, to me. I think it tries to not let you get stuck on something for so long that you run into the problem of the game's flow, but you have to go in knowing that failure is a part of that flow, in a sense. So yeah, I think the balance of is just shifted a bit more from rapid content unlocking to the sense of accomplishment that comes with it for those seeking a challange. It's a matter of taste as to which one you prefer, but the devs did a great job of accurately crafting the balance they intended for, I think.

[@bluegiant13]

+Farzher A ''win'' can mean alot of things. Killing a enemy in Dark Souls,feels already as a enormous satisifyin win. I think what he says has alot of valeu used in the right context.

[@qwertyuuytrewq825]

I remember these tanks beaten by spearmans. "Too scientific and logical" brain of Sid for some reason neglected these mechanics : ) Of course, it is my paranoia, game design is great.

[@beeblbrox1687]

AI outsmarted me bigtime ONCE in Civ4, with a Covert Ops action of assassinating the mayor in the city I had stacked my entire army then crushing me. I do NOT feel bad about that, I feel sore sure, but it was still like WOW this game still gets me.

[@TwinechoesEntertainment]

haven't you been watching? He said "Suspend your disbelief" !! My god, did you even learn something from this video?

[@Dandramere]

Nice to see a games designer with humility.

[@chuckiej]

Little does he know the dancing bears are actually in the game when you hit A on that screen at 35:00 :)

[@gukonni]

I thnk what Sid is really saying is he wants every gamer to feel like a winner because he wants to make lots of money and doesn't wantto make some gamers feel badly. After all, making money is alllll that matters. And if you got a lot of fans because they feel like winners and love you for it, by golly, you're going to feel like gandhi or something.

[@luckygozer]

2010 sid okay we take into account results of previous battles... 2012 firaxis releases xcom misses 4 60% shots somehow i feel worse about it now after seeing this then when it happened in game

[@stevendenton8994]

He's literally had the most impact on my life.... 1000s of hours of my life have been captured bySids games....it's shaped my imagination and ambition

[@DanStormont]

Great talk! Camera work was terrible, though!

[@MasterFancyPants]

@Hanueberalles No... 10:20 divided by 10 = 1:2 1:2 multiplied by 10 = 10:20

[@yrussq]

Interesting but WAY too controversial when it comes to his pov on rewards, narrative and randomness. He has extrapolated some biased CIV-oriented play testing on a whole discipline of game design which is a clear mistake statistically. Some conclusion are nothing more than his flawed personal opinion - the example with evil king in an adventure game clearly shows his lack of expertise in this field. It's like saying the people want to watch comedies only because they've paid money and do not want anything beside the joy. Mark Rosewater, lead designer of MTG got MUCH better talk concerning almost every aspect of GD briefly mentioned here. The talk "20 years 20 lessons learned". Structured brilliancy.

[@DavidM1337]

It's not for players, it's for designers. I'm a game designer myself, so I enjoy watching his thoughts.

[@CaioMGA]

joyful

[@Axelander9999]

Somehow, he sounded like he was improvising a lot

[@ghombar]

the point probably was that the barbarians somehow managed to sink the battleship, rather than the battleship being able to shoot at a land target.

[@kosiak10851]

Can someone tell me what is he saying at 46:20, please? I can't understand some words from that sentence! I hear something like "I'm kinda assuming that ... to the idea..." Help please!

[@kosiak10851]

@@CaneWithNoCandy oh thank you. Was waiting for that.

[@paulyhart]

there is a lot of ignorance in these comments from unqualified users. the only detractor i would come away with was the audio hum issue. good solid information from the creator of today's TBS games.

[@entelin]

Every time a player is frustrated, annoyed, angry, or feeling cheated, is *NOT* automatic cause for alarm. I think fundamentally, if you create a game that you personally enjoy there will also be at least a niche audience that will also. While it's not a bad thing to think about game psychology, I think its easy to get lost in it. Civ4 in my opinion was the best (and last) true civ game. Since then the series has sadly been getting more and more casual, and more and more dumbed down. Satisfy a core group of hardcore players, stay true to that, and work to grow that niche. Don't try to chase psychology around in some effort to please every casual out there, you'll just wind up with crap nobody cares about.

[@randysewell3199]

The problem is Firaxis can't make a single game that satisfies the whole genre. Where did the competition go? Has there been a single historical turn based civilization game since Call to Power 2 a decade ago? Not really. Just like the shooter genre wouldn't be satisfied with 1 FPS company, the civ genre should not be satisfied with 1 civ company.

[@christianpetersen163]

I don't think Civ3 is for hardcore players. The decisions you make in the game would also make sense in real life, so you don't have to know exactly how the game works in order to play it. You just need to set the right difficulty. I played my first game a week ago, so I clearly remember. Casual games are made for people who can't handle challenge by people who are not smart enough to program for it. Civ3 is a superior games because it can be everything from casual to challenging to nightmare, and it can be mastered on several tactical and strategic levels.

[@beeblbrox1687]

Do a dinosaur game! I played the Civ2 scenario (a little bit) - it had potential!

[@WETTV96]

I love civ but in civ beyond the sword I hated the random natural disasters. Especially the tiles that would turn into desert. If you had a city with a pop of 28 and 3 tiles turn into desert then you should expect to see it shrink to a pop of like 15

[@kisut7]

Wow.

[@sebastiantredinnick5060]

Huge fan of his games, but disagree with nearly everything he says in terms of what I would want (or at least think I want) from a challenging and interesting strategy game.

[@igorterzic4315]

we might think that but is it true it probably isn't since i literally worship his games and him

[@GonziHere]

2 vs 1 and 20 vs 10 isn't the same. Let's say that there is 80% chance of winning: 20 vs 10 is like 10 different 2 vs 1 matches. With normal distribution, that would be 8 wins and 2 loses. => you'd have 16 soldiers and enemy 2 for the round two. You can see how the chance of winning has shifted significantly. Alternatively, You'd have to loose at least 7 of the individual submatches to have less soldiers than the enemy... so with 20% chance of loosing each one, loosing 7 of them has a chance of about 0.001% (calculated). That's what's bothering people. It's not that people don't have an intuitive math brain (I mean, they don't, but still). It's that the game uses math wrongly and then authors are surprised. If it's 80% chance for 2 vs 1, it's basically a guarantee for 20 vs 10. Same can be said about XCOM and similar games. One chance number contains everything, which leads to situations, where a soldier has a drop on someone, with the perfect gun, pretty up close, from behind... and misses. Chance should drive the possibility of the best and worst outcome. Fine. But the best and worst outcome should be defined by the situation at hand. For example, for the described position, the worst outcome would be to just hit the enemy armor in such a way that it just throws him away, with some confusion, but almost damage. But not outright miss.

[@epicmonkey96]

Ever seen Battlefield Earth? Right, well, basically that.

[@x6xk1LLx9x]

cant believe i listened to that whole thing, it was actually kinda worth it though, i might never play video games the same way again.

[@epicmonkey96]

Ever seen Battlefield Earth? Right, well, that.

[@bernlin2000]

@WSWarthog Huh? WoW is far more addictive, from what I've seen: quest-based games oftentimes are. It's easier to quit Civ because games only last so long. WoW characters never have to end, and they continue to release expansions that raise the level, and add new content at all different levels. Not to mention that MMORPG's are probably the genre that has the greatest potential to be addictive, due to the social element.

[@Dreamifism]

Depends how you look at it. What i mean is for games to be a full medium, reaching its full potential, equaling at minimum to film and literature and anything else. On the idea of each medium lacking something another possesses, like books being best for imagination, but lacking interaction, music, visual artistry etc (and they all have pros and cons) then sure, tho it could be debated. Or maybe it was just a wordplay? full, medium? eitherway, the above is antiquated :(

[@volmir69]

This is what is missing at EA, an inteligent developer... I love Sid's games because they are ineteligent.

[@theonly1V]

@L00pyL0u : I certainly don't disagree with that point - preventive programs, medical and social are always underfunded. I still think that the psychological components to game design are very important and that it indeed does have a significant cultural/social impact. The worth of paying entertainers and pro sport athletes is another debate entirely - and yes, I also think it's ridiculous. As for being condescending, I apologize - it was not my intention (I still disagree w/ ur pt of vu). :P

[@wasdwasdedsf]

lol, proof?

[@Dreamifism]

zero buzzing for me dude

[@wimrose]

Annoying camera work. I know what Sid Meier looks like. I don't need a close up of him constantly. Show me what he's projecting on the screen. I know it doesn't change as much, but it supports his story. And most of the time the camera guy is lazy and just point to the screen that is already following Sid. This causes the audio to be out of sync,

[@vleup]

@SmokinDragon666 sorry but sim city isn't Sid's work but will wright's ;)

[@lifes40123]

i wonder how they boarded your battleship and destroyed it with stone age weapons

[@KilferMF]

I'm not a big fan on his "if you have bright colorful stuff, and then it starts taking a dark turn and all of this moody dark stuff starts happening, you lose the player". Gray, brown, black, and white don't always mean evil spooky mean, and bad. Art and creativity over many many lifetimes says that it's much much deeper than that silly assumption.

[@DeoMachina]

How can such a legend fall so far? Beyond Earth is so bad it's insulting, and made even more so by the fact that the same developer knowingly cut stuff they knew was good. Firaxis must be a victim of success I suppose.

[@buzbarn1644]

DeoMachina DJ Khaled

[@clray123]

You do but you don't want to admit it.

[@boskopils4153]

25:04 Diplomats with democracy in civ2, not saying it wasn't fun

[@jetblackjp]

the winning part doesn't really apply to rogue-likes

[@billybob4462]

Yeah, he's really need to work on his talking skills if he wants to talk publicly.

[@randysewell3199]

Just like you should really work on your grammar if you want to type publicly? Pretty sure both of you will continue doing what you are doing regardless of what some other idiot thinks.

[@lapamjuka]

What a shit talk. "Everything you think is wrong?" He just tells all the same things we have always been thought about making games. Worst was the part about it being bad to have a morale dillemma in civilization. That would just make it more interesting and give depth.

[@Voron_Aggrav]

the ultimate Difficulty an AI that can largely interpret a players Action and will come up with an equal counter reaction is kinda the holy grail for game designers some come close but so far i know there is not yet a game on the market that gives a player a Difficulty based on their own actions getting harder when the player get's better but also decreases if the player decreases (still up to a point of a challenge)

[@beeblbrox1687]

3 to 1? I had (in a game of Civ4) an indestructible Pikeman Enemy - Mechanised Infantry vs. Fortified Pikeman 99.9% chance of winning - lost every time! Apparently 1000 to 1 happens! I just need that luck on the lottery pmsl!

[@nottellinganyoneanything]

First 10 mins in, and I hear most of the things that I hate when I play games.

[@ivargu]

Funny that when he is talking about winners in real life he uses sports as an example, stating for instance that out of the 25 NBA teams only one gets to win. How is this reality? Sports are also games, and winning and losing in sports in the same as games... it's not "real life", that would be success in your private or personal life in my humble opinion.

[@Dreamifism]

He seems to keep stopping right when he should be pressing further with his ideas.....halfway right now, so ill see if he's working his way toward something but....he feels afraid of player reactions to failure, rather than incorporating it into the design

[@system3142]

"Whether you THINK you're left handed or right handed" What is going through this man's mind?

[@thepineapple1]

sid, think of this, what happens when you start dreaming that you are in a video game....tonight i dreamed i was in a game, epic map, was going around stabbing people in the throat, only to realise that i was holding a Killzone2 knife and was breaking the necks of hellghast....

[@gukonni]

Players should be rewarded for losing because that's half of the learning process. I mean, sometimes the only way to figure out something is to try several things and it's called the process of elimination. When you fail, you're actually making progress. That's why so many people save/load because they're not rewarded for the losses. But I disagree that I game shouldn't be built on stats. Stats are really just conditions. If a game has no conditions then it has no substance.

[@vargata]

you do math without IQ... 3 fighting 1 is not "odd" its strength difference and 3 should win 99.9 out of 100. its not a chance, its reality, its not math. also 20 fighting 10 IS NOT the same as 2 fighting 1. let me explain you: in 2 reds v 1 blue blue is lucky once takes down 1 red yeah? they are now 1 on 1 blue is lucky again... blue won in 20 reds vs 10 blues 1 blue is lucky, takes down a red now its 19 vs 10 1 blue is lucky again takes down a red its still 18 vs 10 1 red is lucky 18 vs 9 (its still 2:1 in your eyes but for this the blue had to be lucky twice) if the battle happens the other way and the red is lucky twice there would be 20 vs 8 which would raise the odds in your eyes to 2.5:1 battles are about strength not about odds and numbers and tech always wins over luck ok, maybe not in the remaining 0.1% forget that you can mimic battles with stats, you cant. if you want to make any sense you have to play down the battle... first of: if 2 reds fight 1 blue, the 2 reds are stronger so most probably beat the one blue. sometimes not, but that's luck. in case of 20 reds fights 10 blues, basically 2 reds fight every 1 blue BUT as soon as 1 blue falls there will be a blue that will have to fight 4 reds!!!! or 2 blues who will have to fight 3-3 reds so those fights will turn into 2 v 6 or 1 v 4!!!!! those blues will be absolutely overwhelmed by the reds and while their friends are fighting (and might taking down a few reds) they will still have 1-1 reds on them. each of them will have to win twice to go and help those heaving a nightmare against 3 or 4... after this, if you still laugh at those saying 20 vs 10 is not the same as 2 vs 1... you might be good at math but absolutely shit at logic

[@lifes40123]

no you mean chuck norris militia?

[@11matt555]

I like the new system in Civ5 because it is VERY clear about what your chances of winning are and explains why (which I imagine would help newbies learn the combat bonuses and such), but the AI was terrible. It would always make stupid combat/movement decisions. Has the AI gotten any better yet?

[@gukonni]

More than that, if I can't lose then what's the point of winning? If I can't say I got a score of 13551555 and I'm in the top ten on the leaderboard because EVERYONE scores 13551555 and is in the top tend on the leaderboard then what's the point of playing? I play to get a high score and be better than others and to beat my previous scores. I play BECAUSE I can lose and BECAUSE I can do badly!

[@mememem]

This talk explains why only his old games are good and why his more recent games have been casualized milquetoast garbage

[@theonly1V]

@L00pyL0u: Psychology is relevant to all things human - it's about how people perceive events, and how they deal with them. A video game would have a huge psychological componenet, because it's about the immersion of a gamer into a world designers have created. For this immersion to be successful, you need to understand how people will perceive the experience. FYI, video games are not trivial - they are an increasing part of our daily lives, changing how ppl think of entertainment in general.

[@clray123]

Interesting talk, very condescending toward the players overall...

[@11matt555]

Not to mention his lack of common sense. Ships can very easily file cannons/missiles at land targets if they are close enough.

[@rogerwilco2]

I don't really agree with a lot of what he's saying.

[@ymeynot0405]

You making the assumption that the numbers are indicative of some flat stat. Their are numbers for both offense and defense. So how do you measure one unit's rating to kill against another unit's rating to defend it's self and survive? There has been some debate in the civ world as to if the defender wins that it should take no damage and also do no damage. The idea being HARD defense and HARD attack. You have to be doing one or the other, not both at the same time.

[@fly7188]

Ironic how the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction was initially conceived directly in the concept of games as mathematical constructs. Neumann's study of adversarial game theory lead to his proposition of deterrence as a viable strategy in the post nuclear world.