Marius wrote:I know, I just don't see how it can be overcome and provide a true player-impact-player system at the same time.
You can have player consequences, or you can have a game that people enjoy playing a few hours a week. You can't have both.
Games that cater to existing casual needs will always need to exist because of this.
This is what I'm getting at in the article, it's about how much
flexibility the developer is willing to give to the player.
There's EVE on the hard left of the spectrum, with massive time investment required. Then on the right could be a game that has a completely player run economy, or political system, or dynamic event system. How about allowing players to create and run their own towns, including stores or even villanous cave systems and allowing them to develop their own raid experiences?
Casual players would like to invest in a real, functioning world like any hardcore player would, it's just down to the imagination of the studio on how to make this happen.
RE: Other games: I've played Glitch, and A Tale in The Desert, and while they have fantastic ideas they also have extraordinary flaws. Glitch is awful to roam. Tale in the Desert is so ridiculously hardcore even getting started makes EVE's tutorial look like WoW's starting area.
These ideas simply existing in the marketplace do not make good games, it requires a team of people dedicated to the cause in order to bring everything together in a system that invites new players. CCP were once a bunch of guys operating in a garage who put together this world with bugger all funding and support. The guys behind Perpetuum are exactly the same.
TLDR: Crafting a system that allows more player control/cause&effect while still allowing casual players to participate is the challenge. A dev that meets this will be graciously rewarded.