Something a little more light-hearted today, I thought I would look at some of the aspects that make a great game, and why some popular games fail completely but are still somehow hailed as great games. As I stated in my previous entry, I have been playing videogames most of my life. I had an NES and a PC at home from as young as I can remember. I'm 23 now, and I'm still up to date with the most recent gaming hardware with a gaming quality laptop and a Playstation 3. I've played, loved, and hated games from just about every genre. What I'm trying to say is, I've been there, done that, seen it, and I know a few things about games. Despite what companies try to push on people these days, HD graphics, surround sound, pricey DLC that should come free in patches, and an ever decreasing difficulty are not what make great games. Looking back through the years, Master of Magic, a strategy game from 1995, is probably my favorite game of all time. This game had everything. The soundtrack was beautiful for its day, and the graphics weren't bad either. This game had exciting strategic combat that actually required thoughtful execution. Master of Magic has literally infinite replay value. The map is randomly generated, 5 difficulties (the computer cheats so much on the highest difficulty it can challenge seasoned veterans of the game), with insane customization options for your wizard. You get 11 “picks” to customize your wizard's abilities and magics. There are 5 magic types, and you can take up to 11 picks in one type, with more picks meaning more and stronger spells in that type, with 18 of special abilities and 14 different species your starting city can be. Each color brings a unique array of spells, and each race plays quite differently. Without going into more detail, you get the point. The AI isn't great, but gets enough cheats and bonuses that it will keep you on your toes. Good combat, fun spells, wide variety of races, exploration, loot, heroes to develop with items and levels, this game is a complete package.
Games like Civilization and Alpha Centauri and even games that try to clone Master of Magic like Age of Wonders Shadow Magic fall flat for numerous reasons. You can pick your nation in Civ, which grants a few small bonuses and a unique unit or two. Master of Magic's racial differences are HUGE. Civ and Alpha Centauri's combat comes down to a simple random number generator dice roll, which isn't exactly involved or exciting. Master of Magic's combat does have some RNG involved, however the way you move your units, cast your spells, and putting yourself in a position to strike first GREATLY influence the way a combat will play out. Civ having no player input into combat is lame, and I never got into the Civ series for this reason. These games claiming to be strategy when combat takes no player input, being decided by an RNG, is an atrocity.
Age of Wonders Shadow Magic has MANY of the same traits as Master of Magic, and is an obvious clone attempt (deemed a spiritual sequel). This game failed pretty badly in my book, while many critics claim it pulled off its mission with flying colors. The races all feel the same. They have unique units, but they are mostly the same as other races' with different graphics and slightly different stats. Master of Magic's units have massive differences in capabilities and special abilities. AoW: SM has the varying magic colors, but all the magics feel mostly the same. Many of the same spell effects show up in multiple colors with simple graphical and name changes, while having only minor number tweaks. AoW: SM tried to balance the game by making everything almost equal, which was horrible. Balance is good, but making everything the same is the wrong, and completely boring, way to do it. Master of Magic is by no means a balanced game, but it made it work to a degree. The AI cheats, and being a 15 year old game multiplayer didn't exist, so the comparison on balance isn't completely fair. The magic colors were all strong in their own way, I have my favorites but you can beat the highest difficulty level with any of the magic colors. Some of the special abilities suck, and I do feel some of the races are underpowered. There are plenty of races, special abilities, and magic colors that are top tier combinations. Obviously I haven't tried everything (possibilities noted above) but if you plan your magic/race/abilities/strategy well, you can win. Many races have overpowered units, and the magics all have overpowered spells, enough so that everything is overpowered so it sort of balances out to a degree (by no means completely). Heroes built properly, however, are totally overpowered (Warrax and Mortu especially). If this was multiplayer, it would need massive balancing changes. But I would argue this could be done without taking away the variability. A few changes to a few spells, units, and abilities, with a massive change to how heroes/items scale, and this would work on a multiplayer level. AoW: SM just feels like watered down Master of Magic. It gets difficult to explore this idea completely without diving into more details about Master of Magic than most of you probably care to read. This game is totally worth picking up today, even at full price.
I know this post probably reads a bit scattered. What I'm trying to get at here, is many newer games try to sell replayability through reskinning or adding small new features. Looking at a game like Master of Magic, you can see real variety in gaming. Without spreading itself too thin, it has offered me over a decade of gaming. Too many games these days give me the feeling of doing the same thing over and over (ever try leveling in World of Warcraft, or bought generic survival zombie shooter number 2948?). Games also try to balance themselves by making things rather unremarkable. Games frequently offer a wide array of abilities, weapons, or guns that are almost the same with different graphics and slightly different stats, simply out of fear that the game developers will be unable to balance everything if there are large differences in functionality.
But, I feel I'm ranting here.... Don't get me wrong, I have played plenty of modern games that I enjoy, I just feel that gamers are overwhelmed with mediocrity at every turn these days, and a truly good game is becoming more and more rare as time goes on. I have endless opinions on games, both old and new, so it is a safe bet that this will be a continuing series on this blog.
Triumphs: Master of Magic, replayability by giving the player limitless possibilities to customize their powers which all feel and play very different, making the player feel powerful while still providing a challenge
Failures: RNG only combat in strategy games, lazy game balancing, no worthy Master of Magic sequel has been made
As you know, I totally agree with your thesis. MoM is one of the best gameplay experiences ever in the strategy genre.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like other games miss the point that made MoM great. Tactical combat is great, but it's not what makes the game (see AoW). There are many strategic decisions of importance, but that's not what makes the game (see Civ).
The key is the VARIETY of the experience. The races and magics are so varied, every game plays differently, and even in the course of one game, the experience varies greatly.
When the enemy gets doom bolt or psionic blast, I have to totally change my combat strategy -- time to bring in the expendable infantry to absord the hits. When I'm up against a behemoth, by melee heroes are useless and I need to use crack's call or bring in some javelineers. When up against a sky drake, I better have some web :)
Even though there really only is one goal in the game -- military victory (you won't get to SoM unless you're ahead militarily anyway) -- there are so many ways to achieve the goal. Play as troll and have early game military dominance. Play high men for late-game uber units. Play halfing for natural growth. Play death for cheap and effective spells. Play sorcercy for handy utilities. Play chaos for straightforward combat dominance.
And, to another point you touched on, the "lack of balance" is part of what makes it fun. That is, every magic/race had its own OP stuff. Trolls with regeneration; halflings with slingers; high men with paladins; dwarves with +50% gold; psionic blast; magic immunity; doom bolt; earth elemental; torin the chosen. But they were all (somewhat) EQUALLY imbalanced, and the game works. It reminds me of the difference between stats in Diablo and WoW: Diablo had enormous bonuses, like +200%; WoW had tiny increments, like +10%. I feel like modern games, in the interest of making things more balanced, have tended towards WoW-style. But you can guess which is more fun!