4 ms·
While I like Minecraft a lot, unfortunately, in this game, it does no good. Minecraft is a game which completely ignores conservation of matter and energy, whic
by js8 8y ago
While I like Minecraft a lot, unfortunately, in this game, it does no good. Minecraft is a game which completely ignores conservation of matter and energy, which is where you start with ecology.
I wish there was a game which would get the physical foundations right* so that the ecology could be put on as a topping. What I imagine is something like a Civilization, where each map cell would be like 1 km2 and you could define what industries would be in that cell (perhaps even design the content of each cell). Each cell would contain a little piece of civilization and/or nature. These cells would then exchange different materials with each other, according to conservation laws.
That could be used to educationally model ecology very nicely.
Most games of this type will focus on military and/or logistical challenges of civilization. But this game would focus on production chains, land/resource use and sustainability.
(*IMHO, the way to get the physical foundations right is to do proper accounting of materials. So in the game, you never really ever destroy anything, you just transform it. If you need to round a number for some reason, then it would become part of some global pool of "waste", from which it could be later retrieved by some industrial process.)
- zambal 8y agoI'd love to play that! Where can I track the development progress of this game? ;)
- Fordec 8y agoSounds like Eco https://store.steampowered.com/app/382310/Eco/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/382310/Eco/
- js8 8y agoWhile Eco is on my Steam wishlist, no, it doesn't. And please don't post further advertising for this game into this discussion, there is already plenty of people talking about this game. Edit: HN is funny. I could have downvoted the PP, and nobody would complain. Instead, I explain what I think is wrong with it... and get downvoted. I really think downvoting motivates people to silently disagree, as opposed to having a discussion.
- TLLtchvL8KZ 8y agoHave you considered that you have been downvoted because your response to a simple and clearly trying-to-be-helpful comment was quite frankly autistic bordering on aggressive for no clear reason.
- js8 8y agoYes, I considered that, and it wasn't a personal attack, but rather a plea. This was (I believe) a new account and one should, if possible, to read the full discussion first before commenting. If I was on Slashdot, I would probably use -1 Redundant, which tells the GP same thing as I told him manually. Not to mention, Eco seems to be quite different game to what I am proposing. It might also have the mechanic of exact accounting for resources, but it remains to be seen how rigorous that is.
- Faark 8y agoI still don't know why Eco should not be mentioned. Please give a tldr reason. Haven't played it. Negative steam reviews seems to mostly highlight technical issues. And while that should be noted, does make it a reason not to mention the game when discussion games teaching ecology models. I thing i did hear about this game a while back and apparently decided it wasn't something for me, even though i liked Factorio. But cannot remember why.
- js8 8y agoI agree Eco should be mentioned, my point was it was already mentioned in three another comments in this discussion (outside this thread) at the time I wrote the OP. In any case, I think a game with first-person focus (like Minecraft or Eco) and a game with civilization focus (like Civilization or Sim City or Transport Tycoon or even Factorio to an extent) are very very different style. They might touch same topics, but the challenges are different. If anything is similar to what I propose, it would be Block'n'Hood (which also has global warming, I believe). But again, the scale is different. What I would like to see is something that would really put, for example, Vaclav Smil's books into a game.
- arendtio 8y agoWhile I agree with what you write, I am missing the sociological part. I mean, you can't retrieve anything back from waste unless you had some success researching some procedure to do so (and sometimes research 'fails'). But funding for such research isn't as cheap as one player alone could pay for it. So you might want to install some taxes and a government in order to manage your finances. That would be even more educating but might stop being fun, as players would most certainly not agree on what to spend their money on. But on the other hand, if you would just offer the technology to extract valuable materials from waste at a cheap supermarket price you would just shift the realism gap to another part by giving them an easy solution to their problem.
- stale2002 8y agoWell there is a game called Eco, that does exactly that. Mine a bunch of iron ore out of the ground? Your storage container has to be just as big as the amount of iron that you dug up. Oh, also all those rocks that you dug up to GET to the iron have to go somewhere as well. You even create physical "waste" blocks that have to be stored somewhere, preferably underground and away from any running water.
- NeedMoreTea 8y agoThere used to be a game along those lines, back in '92 on the Amiga, called "Global Effect". I doubt it got the physical foundations, though my hazy memory is the concepts were there simplistically. I'm surprised there hasn't been more in this genre. More info and a download at: http://www.old-games.com/download/413/global-effect http://www.old-games.com/download/413/global-effect
- gameswithgo 8y agoSometimes when you make games too much like reality they become pointless because you could just take part in reality. RPGs don't simulate pooping, normally, because who cares.
- jontayesp 8y agoThe Sims and Roller Coaster Tycoon?
- gh02t 8y agoI've always thought the fact that The Sims was fun was a masterwork of good game design. Especially early in its life when it had fewer of the more fantastical additions - it's a game that simulates normal life down to some pretty mundane details. I mean, the game even started out as an architecture simulator and not an actual game! Yet, I sunk many hours into the first game as a kid and enjoyed 3 and 4 as an adult (2 was a bit of an in-between for me). Ironically, I think it's the life simulator aspect that makes it fun. It's an escapist sandbox where you can play out "real" life without consequence. Maxis was smart to realize that what was fun was the player's choices, and not so much the game mechanics itself.
- flamtap 8y agoNormally (i.e.: the vast majority of the time), games don't simulate pooping.
- sandworm101 8y agoThere is such a game. Eco. I bought it. Did not like. The only way to ethically exist in the universe was not to play. I learned that long ago from a different game. Also, just too many reasons for other players to write and enforce rules. Gave the impression that environmentalism is all about established players bossing around the new guys. Too many on-point messages kill the fun. Would anyone play minecraft if they had to get permission from an admin before digging a mine?
- zach43 8y agoThere is Factorio, which does have an important pollution-based game mechanic, although I’m not sure if it’s Conservation of Matter based.