Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My idea of the tech tree: strategic depth at a cost

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • My idea of the tech tree: strategic depth at a cost

    A techs must reward the player with the impression of having made "an advancement" (and part of a game's ethos). It must also reward him with its function which will act all throughout the game.



    To me, a part of GalCiv2 is a bit like a war game which would have air1-air2-air3, ground1-ground2-ground3 and navy1-navy2-navy3 (Rise of Nations was gooooood at air-ground-navy style).

    I'm partly not searching techs, as I am searching functions (which presumably has some technology behind, obviously).

    I wonder if this functionality, the tech tree's strenght, is compatible with the un-blandness of searching things truly presenting human advancements. I don't know much about how other games' tech trees are done, I just see this now and am curious about it. I wonder which cross-breed exist out there between completely functional, and entirely esthetic, and where's the best of both worlds.

    Maybe if there's a division with say "technologies" (ie.forum) and "technology advancements" (ie.forum 2/bigger forum, with only the previous tech as requirement)? Age of Empires had a modified version of that, with unit upgrades. In term of personality (for techs like the rest), I always found SMAC to be truly impressive; but can it be like that without slashing seriously into strategic qualities?
    Last edited by Trifna; March 16, 2006, 10:32.
    Go GalCiv, go! Go Society, go!
Working...
X