Realism?

[Lannes]

This issue has come up in various threads now, so I thought perhaps it deserves one of its own.

Personally I like a degree of realism in games, however I do not consider it an end in itself, but rather a means to achieve immersion. Immersion requires a believable game environment. A believable game environment doesn’t have to be true to reality, but it has to be true to itself.

Immersion is lacking in most games because in no time you find yourself thinking of symbols in terms of the game rules that govern them. Symbols and rules become disconnected in a way not unlike is the case for chess. So, my first wish for CotN would be that this doesn’t happen. If "sandal maker" is a game symbol, then as a player I ought to deal with a sandal maker, not a set of rules that govern him. Of course those rules exist. As a player I just shouldn’t be able to reduce the symbol to its rules.

Realism is only a requirement for immersion inasfar as the game environment is presented as true to history, culture and nature. To that degree though it has to be applied with quite rigorous consistency. It's the latter that concerns me more. I wouldn't want to see equivalents of Caesar III's non-grid pattern Roman towns and commuting citizen-miners.

Lannes

[Keith]

This issue has come up in various threads now, so I thought perhaps it deserves one of its own.

Personally I like a degree of realism in games, however I do not consider it an end in itself, but rather a means to achieve immersion. Immersion requires a believable game environment. A believable game environment doesn’t have to be true to reality, but it has to be true to itself.

Immersion is lacking in most games because in no time you find yourself thinking of symbols in terms of the game rules that govern them. Symbols and rules become disconnected in a way not unlike is the case for chess. So, my first wish for CotN would be that this doesn’t happen. If "sandal maker" is a game symbol, then as a player I ought to deal with a sandal maker, not a set of rules that govern him. Of course those rules exist. As a player I just shouldn’t be able to reduce the symbol to its rules.

Realism is only a requirement for immersion inasfar as the game environment is presented as true to history, culture and nature. To that degree though it has to be applied with quite rigorous consistency. It's the latter that concerns me more. I wouldn't want to see equivalents of Caesar III's non-grid pattern Roman towns and commuting citizen-miners.

Lannes
Since we won't be dealing with random and destination walkers of old, I don't think there will be the same sorts of obstacles to a certain amount of realism this time around. No artificial housing blocks, no roadblocks, etc.

I think that realism is going to boil down to a set of predetermined rules and randomness of actions and events. There's only so much you can do when modelling life on a personal computer. Sooner or later players, through sheer repetition of play, will observe what makes a individual character "tick" and the sense of realism will be less of a mystery. There is no avoiding it.

While I would like the game to be a close approximation of ancient daily life, I don't want it to be so close that there is no "game" left in it. I do not want a 100% simulation. There must be some aspect of unpredictability.
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/horus2.gif
Keith Heitmann
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/my-cartouche.gif
dheitm8612@aol.com (mailto:dheitm8612@aol.com)
Pharaoh Music Jukebox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/pharaoh.htm)

[Lannes]

I think that realism is going to boil down to a set of predetermined rules and randomness of actions and events. There's only so much you can do when modelling life on a personal computer. Sooner or later players, through sheer repetition of play, will observe what makes a individual character "tick" and the sense of realism will be less of a mystery. There is no avoiding it.

Perhaps. In an early interview I read that the game will make use of fuzzy logic. If that applies to choices made by people in the game, that at least would make their outcome a whole lot less straightforward to predict than was the case before.

Lannes

[vovan]

To rephrase an old cliche, realism is in the eye of the beholder, I think. :) It is really a matter of perception, I think, to some extent. There is a certain category of players out there that will always reduce the game to a set of numbers and equations, and try to "exploit", for the lack of a better word, these rules to their best advantage.

When I play the game, for instance, I like to think of the world in game terms. When I play Civilization, I like to think of what is best for my people in terms of how I see the real world around me, not in terms of just what the happiness formula is, and so how much more I should spend on luxuries - 10% or 20% to maximize exactly both happiness and my profit (for instance). To me, this experience is realistic.

On the other hand, there are other people who think exactly the way I don't like to think about games - they like to figure out formulas that govern the game world, and adjust their strategies accordingly. There is nothing wrong with that approach, of course, but it just defeats all realism, no matter how much of it the developers put into the game. Going back to the Civilization example, for instance. There is a game concept called culture flipping, where basically if a small town is close to a large and influential metropolis of another nation, it can "envy" that other nation so much that it will flip under their control. Now, from my point of view, I say okay there is one small town of mine surrounded by four huge metropolises of my enemy, so it will probably flip out of my control sooner rather than later. That is realistic to me. A number-crunching person, however, would instead think: okay, my town is 30 squares away from my capital, its size is 2, there are four enemy's cities next to it, 5, 6, and 7 squares away, of sizes 10, 11, and 12, the enemy's total culture is 10000, and mine is 1000, hence the total probability of my town flipping out of control is 95.135%. All of a sudden, the whole idea of culture, and influence, which is there to add realism maybe, is reduced into a set of numbers, which are to be onverted into an optimal strategy.

Similarly with citybuilders. My hut is not evolving, and the advisor says that's because the neighborhood is ugly. As a person that loves realism, I would try to act as a real mayor and say, okay, let me just plop down a status here somewhere and see how it goes. A person who likes to crunch numbers instead, would say: okay, the statue provides 5 "beauty" points, and its radius of influence is 5 squares, where the influence decays with distance as exp(-d / a), where d is the distance from the statue in squares, and a is a proportionality constant equal to ... (contrived example naturally :)), hence I need to put the statue 3 squares away from the hut to maximize beutification, and minimize the expense. Here, again, the whole "realism" of beautifying a city, whereby a certain amount of guesswork is naturally invloved, is reduced into a set of numbers and formulas. And such approach to gaming is quite widespread - look at Emperor Heaven, for instance - there are scores of tables listing the numbers for you. Hence, however much the developers might try to reproduce realism, they will always fail for some people.

And that will always be the case. After all, computers are inherently mathematical tools (hence the name :)), and thus all of the gameplay can always be broken down into a set of numbers and formulas, hence the number crunchers will always find a way to expose those formulas and optimise their strategies using that knowledge.

Phew long rant. :) So, my point is, if anyone's forgotten, that realism cannot be implemented in modern computer, only faked, and hence it only depends on your approach to gaming, and certain role-playing skills whether you will see the realism in the behaviour of agents on your screen, or just a set of formulas governing their actions, which are inevitably there somewhere.

[Chris Beatrice]

Sometimes I'm truly stunned at how on target the discussions are on this forum (and I certainly don't mean that as a back-handed compliment).

The issue of organic and "realistic" behavior vs. ruleset-driven behavior is fundamental to the CotN concept - this is not your grandfather's city-builder! (hey, maybe that would have been a better tagline than "1st 3d city-building game...).

-Chris

[Keith]

Sometimes I'm truly stunned at how on target the discussions are on this forum (and I certainly don't mean that as a back-handed compliment).

The issue of organic and "realistic" behavior vs. ruleset-driven behavior is fundamental to the CotN concept - this is not your grandfather's city-builder! (hey, maybe that would have been a better tagline than "1st 3d city-building game...).

-Chris
You'll have to work that tagline in on future advertising. ;)

We will all certainly be waiting to see CotN changes our concepts of citybuilding. :D

http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/horus2.gif
Keith Heitmann
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/my-cartouche.gif
dheitm8612@aol.com (mailto:dheitm8612@aol.com)
Pharaoh Music Jukebox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/pharaoh.htm)

[Azeem]

Realism is of my least concern. Personally, I have a growing disdain for the obsession with realism. Reality is reality and a game world is a game world. Thus Zeus easily became one of my favorite city-builders. :) The only thing that should be of concern is how the game plays. Immersion into the game world should be left to the imagination (assuming people in these times of 3D graphics still have one ;) :p :D ).

[Jayhawk]

As vovan says there seem to be (at least) two large group of player types playing the city builder type games. Borrowing the terms used by one of our forumers competing in our Emperor contest, there are the Confusianist and the Zen (buddhist) players.

The Confucianist player does not play the game as such, but plays the rules. He goes for what makes the game ticks and calculates the best strategy to get the maximum effect with the minimum (game) effort. He's like the reductionist scientist that tries to work out the Theory of Everything (which in the game space, he can ;))

The Zen player has a more holistic view of things and doesn't really work ate knowing the actual formulas that rule the game. He aims for the larger picture, a deeper submerging in the game, looking on the features that emerge from the game's complexity, rather than the exact rules than govern them.
In the scientist metaphor he's looking at emergent features and dynamic systems, rather than the underlying detailed structures.

Personally, I'm more of the Zen type player than the Confucianist type and I hope that CotN rather than on simple rules works on more complex dynamic systems and as such will cause a deeper emergence in the game because it's much harder to reproduce the actual rules guiding the game features.

[Lannes]

Reality is reality and a game world is a game world.

The player inevitably brings reality along upon entering the game world. I don't think that immersion requires that games should be true to reality in every respect but I do think it requires a correspondence between game symbols and their counterparts in reality.

Lannes

[G-Force]

Realism can also be tied to house evolution. It's 'real' that if you provide more the citizens will upgrade their homes. It is 'unreal' however that if a house looses water access, the habitents will reduce their house to a hut and leave. If your dying of thirst you're not going to reduce your home first. You would simply leave it as it is. Have you ever seen someone undo improvements to his own home?

I realise (no pun intended) ofcourse that the house devolution is required to tell the computer how much people he can allow in a house, but it could be handled better.

After having said all this, remember that it has not yet been said that CotN will have house evolution. See the housing thread for more discussion.

G-Force

[Ineti]

Great explanation, Jayhawk. By your definition, I'm definitely a Zen player. I played Pharaoh by throwing cities together as best I could, very organic. I was always impressed (and a little intimidated) by the players who posted their materials online, showing the exact math behind building, but unless I followed their city plans to the letter, I didn't get the same results. I managed to finish Pharaoh with my Zen-like style, perhaps not as efficiently as others.

I hope CotN has room for both styles, and any others we're not considering here.

[mouse]

Another Zen player peeking into this thread :D

[Keith]

Great explanation, Jayhawk. By your definition, I'm definitely a Zen player. I played Pharaoh by throwing cities together as best I could, very organic. I was always impressed (and a little intimidated) by the players who posted their materials online, showing the exact math behind building, but unless I followed their city plans to the letter, I didn't get the same results. I managed to finish Pharaoh with my Zen-like style, perhaps not as efficiently as others.

I hope CotN has room for both styles, and any others we're not considering here.
I am more of a empirical style (Zen) player myself. I learn by observing, rather than the reductionist ("bean counting" or Confucian) method.

http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/horus2.gif
Keith Heitmann
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/my-cartouche.gif
dheitm8612@aol.com (mailto:dheitm8612@aol.com)
Pharaoh Music Jukebox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/pharaoh.htm)

[Niempie]

Seems that I'm also a Zen player! When I'm playing I don't want to calculate what to do next for the best results :)

[Azeem]

As vovan says there seem to be (at least) two large group of player types playing the city builder type games. Borrowing the terms used by one of our forumers competing in our Emperor contest, there are the Confusianist and the Zen (buddhist) players.

The Confucianist player does not play the game as such, but plays the rules. He goes for what makes the game ticks and calculates the best strategy to get the maximum effect with the minimum (game) effort. He's like the reductionist scientist that tries to work out the Theory of Everything (which in the game space, he can ;))

The Zen player has a more holistic view of things and doesn't really work ate knowing the actual formulas that rule the game. He aims for the larger picture, a deeper submerging in the game, looking on the features that emerge from the game's complexity, rather than the exact rules than govern them.
In the scientist metaphor he's looking at emergent features and dynamic systems, rather than the underlying detailed structures.

Personally, I'm more of the Zen type player than the Confucianist type and I hope that CotN rather than on simple rules works on more complex dynamic systems and as such will cause a deeper emergence in the game because it's much harder to reproduce the actual rules guiding the game features.

Personally, I fit in none of these two categories.

But what of the more "Daoist" player who goes along at a slow (almost snail's) pace and builds accordingly to maintain a sort of flow and harmony? Similar to this sort of "Zen" psyche, the "Daoist" is one who is not entirely interested in the actual mechanics but is nonetheless inclined to work with them when he or she discovers them. The "Daoist" does not look at the "larger picture," but does not focus on calculation either. Instead he or she is one that is in-between, having a bit of the aspects of both the Confucian and Zen player. He or she is one who prefers simplicity and simply goes along with whatever works, thus is not one prone to experiment very much.

[Pecunia]

Personally, I fit in none of these two categories.

But what of the more "Daoist" player who goes along at a slow (almost snail's) pace and builds accordingly to maintain a sort of flow and harmony?
I also don't really fit in those two categories. I'm a Confucianist type in the sense that I enjoy finding out the numbers behind the game and calculating a bit with them, but I don't do too much with them in 'normal' play (= non-contest): I like to take my time (in game-years) to get my city going, don't calculate how much appeal I'll need to get those houses up while not spending a single drachma/deben/denarius too much. I do plan my city: like, "where do I put my industry?", and "which housing block will be suitable?", but I'm not interested in playing the game to the limits, except in competitions, and even then I usually don't bother with too much 'bean-counting'.
I think I fall right between the Confucianist and the Daoist Azeem describes.

[G-Force]

My planning stage of the game is pausing it the beginning and looking at the map and available resources/buildings. Zen player it is :)

G-Force

[vovan]

My planning stage of the game is pausing it the beginning and looking at the map and available resources/buildings.

I believe that is one of the more common ways to start a map in a citybuilder. IIRC, in Emperor Multiplayer, many people even agreed in advance to pause for a few minutes to evaluate the map and plan out the city.

[Nero Would]

What a great thread!

Those who know me will surely agree when I admit to being an extreme Confucian when it comes to playing citybuilders. I not only prefer to make use of the hidden rules to play the game, I enjoy studying the game in order to tease out and define those hidden rules.

But for me to get the most enjoyment out of the game, the rules still have to make sense in the context of the game. I think Lannes said it very well.
Personally I like a degree of realism in games, however I do not consider it an end in itself, but rather a means to achieve immersion. Immersion requires a believable game environment. A believable game environment doesn’t have to be true to reality, but it has to be true to itself.

This is what Tolkien calls "suspension of disbelief". If the environment is logical within itself, then even if it is not strictly true to life, you can suspend your disbelief and become immersed. By this argument, even a fantasy game can be "realistic" if it is internally consistant.

Still, in my own case, I prefer games that are historically based. It just fascinates me to think that the cities I am building, in some way, correspond to their ancient counterparts.

Finally, I was interested to see Chris Beatrice comment on how our discussion. It sounds like Tilted Mill had similar discussions of their own. Now if only they would tell us a bit more about their conclusions ;)

[Bradius]

Hum, Jayhawk, you are right on about the two types of players. I guess though I can fit into both camps at different times. Lately I have become more of a Zen player myself, if for no other reason than just a lack of time. Because of this I like both aspects, and my prayer to the programmer gods is that COTN will be able to appeal to both of us. Unless most people can cross roads, I am still thinking that the bean counters can still allow for some artificial game manipulation by disconnecting roads. Even that aside, my guess is doing things like turning buildings on and off to maximize production or some such event, may still allow the bean counter to gain some edge. Certainly, doing things like complex bartering and favor gathering might also create edges for players. I am honestly not looking for realism. I am looking for an game that can engage me mentally in a challenge to build an amazing city (with some difficulties - it needs to engage me mentally). Frankly, I like being god in city building, and I like building a city my people like to be in.

[Ammurit]

He or she is one who prefers simplicity and simply goes along with whatever works, thus is not one prone to experiment very much.

Count me among the Daoists. When playing Zeus/Poseidon or Emperor, every city I build starts with the same housing block, with the various elements in more or less the same places. If Caesar III and Pharaoh/Cleopatra played the same (and I didn't suck at them :) ), I'd start all of those cities the same too. I like building while paused. That way I can take my time in creating an aesthetically pleasing city. I've scrapped entire cities after hours of playing because they started to look ugly.

[Atlantean Relic]

I hope there won't be a need for roadblocks.

[vovan]

Well, now there were these configurable roadblocks in emperor, which looked pretty much like wall gates. I imagine if they put in roadblocks here, they'd make them slightly more visually appealing, and they would make more sense than the red sticks in Pharaoh. :)

[G-Force]

Yeah that really didn't blend in much at all :)

G-Force

[Keith]

I don't believe that we are going to be seeing "roadblocks" in CotN, since we are no longer dealing with random or destination walkers of old. I think that where you people go or don't go is going to be more determined by distance and placement in regards to their points of origin. If a market is too far or too difficult to get to, the citizen may not choose to travel that far may be a very unhappy person causing other problems in your population.
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/horus2.gif
Keith Heitmann
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/my-cartouche.gif
dheitm8612@aol.com (mailto:dheitm8612@aol.com)
Pharaoh Music Jukebox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/pharaoh.htm)

[vovan]

I don't believe that we are going to be seeing "roadblocks" in CotN, since we are no longer dealing with random or destination walkers of old.

Indeed. I am so used to these market ladies, I have a hard time remembering that I won't have to direct them where to go any more. :)

[Atlantean Relic]

I think the first step to becoming a bazaar women in pharaoh was to have all common sense removed. I hated it when they almost always go either left or right but never both.

[Elvenwarrior2001]

I think that's historically accurate though. ;) I saw some papyrus ads looking for bazaar/bizarre women. And a qualification was a lack of common sense.

What? :o

Elven

[Afterburner]

I don't believe that we are going to be seeing "roadblocks" in CotN, since we are no longer dealing with random or destination walkers of old. I think that where you people go or don't go is going to be more determined by distance and placement in regards to their points of origin. If a market is too far or too difficult to get to, the citizen may not choose to travel that far may be a very unhappy person causing other problems in your population.

The impression I got, based on the comment that the games will be "The Sims"-like in its individual character AIs, is that the citizen in question WILL go to the market if it's far away...

...but then he won't have much time to do the other things he needs to do during his day to keep him happy, content, and well-fed. And after a while, that piles up and he becomes discontent.

That's just an impression based on a single comment, though, so take it with a grain of salt.

[Miut]

Vovan and Jayhawk, nice posts - that explained to me why I can't get into the number crunching playing. But I have read it. I, too, prefer to build my housing blocks and city so all the inhabitants are as well provided for as possible, without reference to the rules. However, those who do the number crunching have added to my understanding of the game which otherwise I couldn't play in an instinctive way - I know the block nearest the temple complex will be the one most likely to evolve to higher residences, so I plan accordingly.

Both modes of play have their own raison d'etre and are as valid. But I still like to work on a level like Vovan's and Jayhawk's - if the peasants are wanting temple access, I try to provide it near them, same with beautifying their surroundings, even if I already have a higher Culture rating than demanded - I get my most pleasure from developing nice shiny white houses with good supplies of food and pottery and beer. :) I really don't want streets just lined with shrines to get the necessary ratings - that doesn't seem like building a city to me, it is more like winning a mission.

Heck, I feel an attachement to my citizens - I want them to be as comfortable as I would want to be. ;) That's where I derive my deep pleasure in city building in Pharaoh.

[Ammurit]

Heck, I feel an attachement to my citizens - I want them to be as comfortable as I would want to be. ;) That's where I derive my deep pleasure in city building in Pharaoh.

Indeed. I prefer to play the role of benevolent ruler rather than tyrant.

[Elvenwarrior2001]

Of course! I always like being the good guy! Although...after I while turn the other way just to see what happens. In Jedi Knights II: Strike down Luke Skywalker. In Caesar: Raise the taxes to max. Ahem...my, I do have a dark side to me. Well...actually I just want to see what would happen. Like some games I never lose, so I lose on purpose to see what happens when I lose. ;)

Elven

[Jayhawk]

All this talk about housing, does make me wonder if there will be a kind of housing levels? I also wonder if once you get the higher housing levels (bigger houses) they will turn into dilapitated, near haunted house-like) mansions if you forget to supply their needs, rather than hae them turn into the lower level shacks.

It would be harder to spot housing levels going wrong, but it would be a lot more realistic.

Who knows, we might even have the citizens of the ignored housing show up in front of the palace, demanding to be given access again to beer and onions :cool:

[Eddy]

I also build my cities to be the way I would want to live if I had to reside there. This caused problems for me in the Timna mission in Pharaoh where speed was more important than quality. My cities always turn out to be heavily beautified areas with lavish gardens. For some reason I am not too enamored of the statues because gardens seem more tranquil to me, however I do use some of the statues to control housing growth. I do like to use neighborhood shrines to fill in the empty spots around a roadblock and the like.

[vovan]

Who knows, we might even have the citizens of the ignored housing show up in front of the palace, demanding to be given access again to beer and onions

Funny that you'd mention that, as I was just looking at a screenshot like that:

http://home.tiscali.nl/ancientcitybuilding/images/screenshots/gs_screenshot_14.jpg

[Ineti]

The placard of the foot kicking the double crown is priceless. :)

[Atlantean Relic]

I wonder how Dictatorial you can get. Can you send some thugs to rough up trouble makers.

[Elvenwarrior2001]

I would think that would be following in short order. ;)

Elven

[vovan]

There probably will be some kind of way to ... forcefully encourage (:D) the protesters to leave, though I imagine that wouldn't make them like you any more than they already do. :)

I wonder what can prompt a demnstration like this. I guess much the same things as those that made people leave your city before. I wonder what would be the deciding factor between a demonstration and leaving altogether. I also wonder: if the overwhelming majority of the population of your city comes to your palace to protest, can they actually kick you out, as that sign goes. :)

[Ammurit]

And of course while people are protesting, their various industries and crafts suffer. Perhaps a protest by the very lowest members of society may have a ripple effect into the higher strata that require the goods and services produced by the protesters.

[Elvenwarrior2001]

No rest for gods...;)

Elven

[Bradius]

Hey, fresh meat for the boats! Like adventure? Want to "sea" the world? How about joining the navy! :D (Lets see how well you kick after several years row, row, row your boating)

Of course, one should still be careful about your sailors. The Russian revolution started by some sailers getting fed up with the royal family. The sailers had worms in their soup. Unfortunately for Nicholas II and his family, the sailers were stationed right outside their palace, and sent a complaint notice attached to a shell!

[G-Force]

This all good and well, but what if your soldiers are protesting?? Then who do you send to disperse the demonstration?

G-Force

[Elvenwarrior2001]

You start shouting "plebs are needed! plebs are needed!" Ah...C2...CLASSIC!!! ;)

Elven

[vovan]

Good point. Such a little protest could cost you big, if some vital industry is stopped. I imagine if it is time to plant crops, and your farmer guys are protesting, the rest of the population is not going to be very happy about this either, especially when the next flood season comes, and the granaries are half-empty. :)

[EmperorJay]

Now.. I do think the people should not get too much power. If you want a Ferrari, you'll try to win the lottery or find a better job, you won't start protesting... if an Egyptian woman wants Jewelry, she'll have to do better instead of going on a strike.

Not every unpleasant thing should also have consequences.

[vovan]

Not every unpleasant thing should also have consequences.

I guess that goes back to the point I raised back towards the beginning of the thread somewhere about how is it determined when people will start demonstrating. I figure it would have to be something extreme any way. I mean, I can't imagine people in ancient egypt just going to demonstrate for some small reason. The palace guards might just kill everyone. :)

[Keith]

I would say that the most common reasons for unrest in the ancient world was the lack of food or high taxes. People might have been unhappy with a ruler but I don't think they would have expressed it publicly unless conditions were extremely oppressive.
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/horus2.gif
Keith Heitmann
http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/my-cartouche.gif
dheitm8612@aol.com (mailto:dheitm8612@aol.com)
Pharaoh Music Jukebox (http://members.aol.com/dheitm8612/java/pharaoh.htm)

[Kiya]

If the people were unhappy because of lack of food or poor health care or there is not enought entertainment, one of the gods could send a curse or disaster, like a sandstorm or a heavy rain or locusts ... Perhaps only in serious cases citizens would start rioting, like Keith said.

[vovan]

I still wonder about the distinction between people leaving the city and them coming to the palace to riot. I guess thinking in terms of the old city-builders, the people would leave the city when their houses devolve and hence have less capacity, and they would start rioting when the houses have not devolved, but a certain service is lacking. Of course, it seems that then that would sort of hurry the player up in evolving the housing, which may not be such a great thing...

Hmmm. :)

[EmperorJay]

I think most won't leave the city, but become beggars. We know there are beggars, most likely they're unemployed and can't afford leaving the city with a caravan or ship.

[vovan]

I think most won't leave the city, but become beggars. We know there are beggars, most likely they're unemployed and can't afford leaving the city with a caravan or ship.

Hmmm. Indeed, taking this of on a little tangent, I wonder what kind of criminals there are going to be in the game. In Emperor I believe there were three? Muggers, beggars, and some other... I wonder how crime is going to manifest itself here. :)

[Uatch-Khepheru]

Hmmm. Indeed, taking this of on a little tangent, I wonder what kind of criminals there are going to be in the game. In Emperor I believe there were three? Muggers, beggars, and some other... I wonder how crime is going to manifest itself here. :)

Yeah, that would definitely be interesting. I think you will get an inkling of crime from some of the lower-level citizens by how they respond to you, like "This city's ruler should be hung by his genetalia (spelling?)", or "I hope the gods strike down this accursed place". I wonder if you do an exceptionally horrible job at building your city would you be assassinated by an angry citizen?. Maybe a bit over the top, but I think there should definitely be consequences to this, they might raid your tomb as in Pharaoh. Or maybe vandalize parts of the city (as well as your burial place).

[Miut]

Well I think we have to remember the Arabic way of thinking too - putting your foot onto the person or image of those you hate or your enemies is the worst insult you can make to them - we saw that with the mosaic of Bush Snr in Baghdad and with footage of Iraqis hitting images of Saddam with their sandals at various points in that war.
Perhaps the poster symbolises just annoyance not an actual desire/ability to depose Pharaoh.

On the other hand - there is always an other hand isn't there? - during several periods of Egypt's history there were times when all was anarchy because Pharaonic leadership was weak and he was deposed... ;)

[G-Force]

The Patrician series (trade game with minor city building) has 3 levels of people: poor - wealthy - rich. It makes sense that every city should have poor, wealthy and rich people. If everybody is rich, noone will work.

G-Force

[EmperorJay]

Thinking out of the box again, why would we have types of criminals? What prevents a beggar from becoming a burglar? What prevents a burglar from becoming a tomb robber? The only real distinction I can think of is that we'll see professional criminals (the people who hold up caravans and kill for money) and the regular criminals, the beggar/burglar/tomb robber.

[Lannes]

I think the types of people we'll see will depend a lot on the way the game has them interact with one another. I suspect people will be connected through a number of interdependencies. Perhaps there we'll see some of the categories of old: economy, education, healthcare. These interactions are mostly "material" though. I don't think you'll get true mass psychology unless individuals are assigned a "state of mind" that can rub off on others merely by "talking". If it were up to me I think I would have the perception leading to discontent linked to deteriorating conditions and the form it takes to absolute levels of wellbeing.

Lannes

[vovan]

Thinking out of the box again, why would we have types of criminals? What prevents a beggar from becoming a burglar? What prevents a burglar from becoming a tomb robber? The only real distinction I can think of is that we'll see professional criminals (the people who hold up caravans and kill for money) and the regular criminals, the beggar/burglar/tomb robber.

It's not even so much a matter of occupation as representation, as far as the old games were concerned. I mean, every walker had a certain type, and that could be for instance some type of criminal. Since every walker of some type was exactly identical to any other walker of the same type, as far as the avatar image went, the "criminal type" stuck.

I wonder how this will be handled here. :) I gather from the info around that the walkers will actually look different - that is, on market lady could look different from another market lady (though I assume there would be a great dedal of similary, otherwise if would be hard to tell the walker types apart), and plus, if the walkers, or maybe "people" would not be more appropriate a word, will satisfy their own desires, then it seems only fitting that there is no particular role stuck to any given walker. At one moment he might want to go to the marketplace to eat, and at another, maybe to the plaza to see a juggler's performance. Hence, maybe even the appearance of any given walker will change slightly? For instance, maybe an off-duty engineer (or architect, or whoever the guy is that sees to it that buildings do not fall apart) is dressed differently than one that is making his rounds...

Ahh the possibilities. :)

[vovan]

I suspect people will be connected through a number of interdependencies.

Well, since they say to have done away with the destination walkers, I am thinking that the system of satisfying one citizen's desrires will be somewhat reminiscent of Tropico, where essentially you have your service buildings, and the citizens just walk to those buildings when they need something.

So, for instance, you could have a place to eat, so when a person feels hungry, they will go there. There are also people working at that place, but you only see them off-duty, when they go off to satisfy some other desire.

[Elvenwarrior2001]

Imagine if the bizarres need pottery and the pottery makers need food...they both go to each other's place of work and find no one there. Hehe...:D

Elven

[vovan]

Imagine if the bizarres need pottery and the pottery makers need food...they both go to each other's place of work and find no one there. Hehe

:eek:

lol. :D

That would be terrible. :)

[Elvenwarrior2001]

Actually I think it's quite amusing...;)

Elven