Since my early teens, I was fascinated by the idea of game worlds that didn’t revolve around the player. Where things happened behind the player’s back, without the player’s influence.
At some point, I stopped pursuing that direction, and I don’t know why.
I’ve wrote about pursuing that direction more, but never actually applied any of that in the games I’ve developed.
In particular, there’s a part of me that dislikes how so many games are player-centric. It is egotistic.
Surveying games over history, player-centric games are a minority. I’m not very competitive, but at least the focus of competitive games is divided between two or more players.
I don’t think solo gaming is inherently wrong, but I’m starting to suspect that it can have unique problems when overused.
Part of the reason for player-centric design is it makes it easy to craft fun experiences. Player experience is the main purpose of a game, so it is natural to tailor the experience to the player.
However, ironically, people enjoy it when things operate independent of themselves. An essential part of awe and wonder is being a part of a world that is bigger than we are.
How can I design systems which are independent of the player, yet still fun for the player?
A good first step might be for me to gather some of the best examples of this I can find in existing games.
Games with autonomous simulation
A key part of making indirect agency personal is to have shared victory conditions with some of the agents.
Otherwise, agents simply become pawns to be used for the player’s own ends.