The State of SMAC 2

[Yitzi]

Bioshock.

Haven't played it, but from what I've seen I see nothing that can match the scale and tone of Alpha Centauri.

Over and ranker.com, SMAC doesn't even rate in the top 110.

http://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-most-compelling-video-game-storylines

That's not "top 110", that's the 110 that happened to be added to the list by somebody.  Also, without knowledge of how the overall ranking system works, it's unclear how much effect simply being well-known or not-well-known has.

Do a Google search for best computer game stories.  Whilst SMAC is mentioned on Civ-SMAC fansites, it's hardly mentioned at all on industry sites.  It's not just one site that says SMAC doesn't rate that high, it's most industry sites that don't list SMAC.

Yes...it's not well-known.  That does not change the quality of its story from a purely story perspective.  (Also, the story isn't exactly overt the way it is in a game like Bioshock; you get part of the story from the interludes, but have to piece together a lot of the rest from the various blurbs.)

Rather than polling the Internet (a poor measure at the best of times), why don't we see who can find something to challenge the tone implied by:

"We welcome you, earthdeirdre and earthwheat and earthtree as honored guests, for you add great power to our ancient song--planetfungus and planetworm and planetmind sing and play here, and you are welcome among us.", or

"It is possible that we humans can help to break this tragic cycle.", or

"You are the children of a dead planet, earthdeirdre, and this death we do not comprehend. We shall take you in, but may we ask this question--will we too catch the planetdeath disease?", and going on to

"Imagine the entire contents of the planetary datalinks, the sum total of human knowledge, blasted into the Planetmind's fragile neural network with the full power of every reactor on the planet. Thousands of years of civilization compressed into a single searing burst of revelation. That is our last-ditch attempt to win humanity a reprieve from extinction at the hands of an awakening alien god.", and culminating with:

"No longer mere earthbeings and planetbeings are we, but bright children of the stars! And together we shall dance in and out of ten billion years, celebrating the gift of consciousness until the stars themselves grow cold and weary, and our thoughts turn again to the beginning."

The story of SMAC is, above all, the story of the triumph of humanity's better nature, with inevitable huge effects on nearby solar systems.  There is simply nothing in Bioshock that can come close.

I'm not "talking down the story" as you say.  Yes, SMAC has a very full storyline.  But it also has a lack of spots to be able to tie other stories into.  Basically, you have to accept that anyone (not just me) tackling a sequel, will make changes to the story.

No question that it would require changes to the story.  But the basic outline, from landing to Transcendence, would need to remain.

[ete]

And Dale, you're not going to be winning many friends here by talking down AC's storyline :p (also a ranking with the top game having a few 100 votes and entirely public is not exactly.. a great way of judging it).

Do a Google search for best computer game stories.  Whilst SMAC is mentioned on Civ-SMAC fansites, it's hardly mentioned at all on industry sites.  It's not just one site that says SMAC doesn't rate that high, it's most industry sites that don't list SMAC.

That doesn't make the story bad, or diminish it in any way.  It could also be a huge reflection on the relative business success of the games involved too.

SMAC's "story" is the world not a classic storyline, and it's a 14 year old game.. expecting it to rank very well in a specific google search would be silly. Try

Critics praised its science fiction storyline (comparing the plot to works by Stanley Kubrick, Frank Herbert, Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov), the in-game writing, the voice acting,....

I'm not "talking down the story" as you say.  Yes, SMAC has a very full storyline.  But it also has a lack of spots to be able to tie other stories into.  Basically, you have to accept that anyone (not just me) tackling a sequel, will make changes to the story.  If you can't accept that, then there's no point me continuing.  At least if it's someone like me tackling a sequel, you will find I will try to keep intact as much of the original story as possible.  Hence why the idea of a "second fleet" is appealing to me.

Lack of spots to tie other stories into? If by that you mean it's very open-ended and sandboxy so there's not that many things which will always happen, that seems like a positive thing. And if that's not what you mean, please explain?

I think it'd be great to expand upon the story, and yes, if done carefully the second fleet idea would be a way to do that consistently and would be able to add a lot. I would greatly prefer if you took care to avoid actually breaking cannon though, and I'm sure many other fans feel the same and would be more than happy to check ideas over for cannon conflicts and possible resolutions. Luckily for you, most of how the story unfolds is in the hands of the players, so there is a whole lot you're free to choose (what happened to the first settlers), so you should be able to take the story in almost any sensible direction without problems.


And yea, with the quotes like those Yitzi posted... you're going to need some really top-notch writers to compare.

[testdummy653]

Bioshock.

Haven't played it, but from what I've seen I see nothing that can match the scale and tone of Alpha Centauri.

Then you will have to take my word. I have played both. I played Mass Effect 2, Portal, and Half Life. I'm not downgrading the story of AC but these games got it beat on storyline.

If it was just strategy games, then I would argue that your right, SMAC has one of the most compelling and interest story lines.

However, I don't read the blurbs or the interludes anymore. WHY? because I know the story, I read the books, I have the comic book.

[Yitzi]

Then you will have to take my word. I have played both. I played Mass Effect 2, Portal, and Half Life. I'm not downgrading the story of AC but these games got it beat on storyline.

What makes their storyline so great?

However, I don't read the blurbs or the interludes anymore. WHY? because I know the story, I read the books, I have the comic book.

A good story is worth re-reading every so often even when you know it.

[Dale]

SMAC's "story" is the world not a classic storyline, and it's a 14 year old game.. expecting it to rank very well in a specific google search would be silly.

Baldur's Gate on industry sites is always rated higher than SMAC for story.

It was released 1998.

Yes it's a great story.  But it's not the best.

[Dale]

At the end of the day, if I got the rights to produce a game using the SMAC IP, as a designer, I would not compromise the game just because of lore.  I would change the lore.

Stories don't make games, gameplay does.  It comes back to the old Civ rule: gameplay/fun trumps realism.

[testdummy653]

What makes their storyline so great?

Compelling.

Unique. Each story is extremely unique and really hasn't been done before.

Value. The developers  value the character/player learning and seeking  the storyline rather than forcing the player through storyline via missions.

Nothing substitutes the actual gameplay.

Portal focus on telling the story through graffiti and hidden rooms in different levels. Glados tells a few bits of info, but not is all believable that comes out of her mouth.

Bioshock the story is told through hidden and sometimes overt journals and audio recording as well as the environment . Their is a mission and such in the game, but you learn more by exploring and looking.

In Mass Effect 2 you make the story by interacting with your crew. The side effects are unknown to the player until the end. Also a lot backstory in datalinks and such in game.

A good story is worth re-reading every so often even when you know it.

I agree 100%. I occasionally re-read the interludes, and blurbs.  I don't play the game to re-read them, but to play the game.

I just started reading the books again. I stopped though because I hate how the author made the Spartans look like rubbish warriors.


For ete and others.
SMAC does really well at
http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=&cat=45&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

In the top 10 of strategy and the top 250 of all time games.
Note: top 5 of 1999

[testdummy653]

At the end of the day, if I got the rights to produce a game using the SMAC IP, as a designer, I would not compromise the game just because of lore.  I would change the lore.

Stories don't make games, gameplay does.  It comes back to the old Civ rule: gameplay/fun trumps realism.

Dale, I agree with you on the point that story can be changed, and that you should be given flexibility to create a good sequel.

But you need to do your best to be sensitive to story.... I don't need a CIV 6, I need an AC 2.

On another note, when ANW coming out?

[Yitzi]

Baldur's Gate on industry sites is always rated higher than SMAC for story.

I suppose that industry sites use a different approach to ranking than I do, then, as I've played BG2 (which I'd presume to be similar in the strength of the story), and while it's good it's nowhere near Alpha Centauri.

Compelling.

Certainly important, but at the end of the day that just makes a good story, not a truly great one.

Unique. Each story is extremely unique and really hasn't been done before.

I'm pretty sure that Alpha Centauri manages that as well.

Value. The developers  value the character/player learning and seeking  the storyline rather than forcing the player through storyline via missions.

I personally don't consider the need to search for the storyline to improve the story; it may improve the game's benefit from the story, but not the story itself.

Nothing substitutes the actual gameplay.

True, but plenty of games have gameplay to compete with Alpha Centauri; it's the story that gives AC the edge.

Portal focus on telling the story through graffiti and hidden rooms in different levels. Glados tells a few bits of info, but not is all believable that comes out of her mouth.

Bioshock the story is told through hidden and sometimes overt journals and audio recording as well as the environment . Their is a mission and such in the game, but you learn more by exploring and looking.

That's a possible strength in the presentation of the story, not in the story itself.  Alpha Centauri doesn't present its story as well as many others (nobody's going to play the game through because they want to learn the story), but the story itself is a lot stronger (which is more important for replayability; after all, you can only learn the story once, but you can fulfill it each time you play.)

In Mass Effect 2 you make the story by interacting with your crew. The side effects are unknown to the player until the end. Also a lot backstory in datalinks and such in game.

AC also lets you make the story; there's limited backstory, but the story itself is longer than most games' backstory.

All these things you mention make for a story that will encourage you to finish the game.  Alpha Centauri has a story that will help encourage you to start the game over after you've finished it; the only other games I know of that can achieve that are the Starcraft series.

I just started reading the books again. I stopped though because I hate how the author made the Spartans look like rubbish warriors.

The books associated with a game are often not very good.

[testdummy653]

Yitiz,  Your telling me in the last 13 years no other game could possible have a better storyline?
The games I listed I played, and I'm telling you that they are better. It's my opinion, but I'm hard press to find someone outside this forum that doesn't agree with me that these game have some of the best story lines.(I'm not arguing that the loudest voice is alway right).

I love AC, obviously, but we need to face the facts that there just might be a better story out there.

As for replay-ability:
All the Civ game have the same addicting one more turn, and one more game feel. I would argue that AC story adds to the replay-ability, but its the changing interactions with the gameplay that make the game great.

Alpha Centauri has a story that will help encourage you to start the game over after you've finished it; the only other games I know of that can achieve that are the Starcraft series.

Fallout 3.
Age of Empire.
Any Civ game.

[Yitzi]

Yitiz,  Your telling me in the last 13 years no other game could possible have a better storyline?

I have yet to encounter one that is clearly better (by my standards), and the only one I can think of that might be better is the Starcraft games.  The story of SMAC really is that good.

The games I listed I played, and I'm telling you that they are better. It's my opinion, but I'm hard press to find someone outside this forum that doesn't agree with me that these game have some of the best story lines.

Maybe it's just a difference of opinion about what makes a good storyline; I know that my own standard puts SMAC extremely high.

I love AC, obviously, but we need to face the facts that there just might be a better story out there.

Oh, there might be; I just haven't encountered any that are clearly better.  (Most games either lack the scale of Alpha Centauri, or lack its human qualities, and it is the interaction of the two that makes it such a great story.)

All the Civ game have the same addicting one more turn, and one more game feel. I would argue that AC story adds to the replay-ability, but its the changing interactions with the gameplay that make the game great.

Don't the other Civ games have the same great gameplay?

Fallout 3.
Age of Empire.
Any Civ game.

I've never played Fallout 3, but it looks like it definitely lacks the scale of SMAC, and you simply don't get the sense that what's going on is going to have an effect on galactic powers.  That's not automatically bad, but it does limit things somewhat.
Age of Empires and the Civ games don't really have a story to speak of; their "story" is just history.

[testdummy653]

I have yet to encounter one that is clearly better (by my standards), and the only one I can think of that might be better is the Starcraft games.  The story of SMAC really is that good.

Play some more games. You will be surprised.

Fallout 3 may not have the scope of "galactic powers", but the story has one of the greatest replay-ability. Blown up Megaton or Save Megaton. Become a Cannibal? Trust me I played this game at least 6 times

[Dale]

At the end of the day, if I got the rights to produce a game using the SMAC IP, as a designer, I would not compromise the game just because of lore.  I would change the lore.

Stories don't make games, gameplay does.  It comes back to the old Civ rule: gameplay/fun trumps realism.

Dale, I agree with you on the point that story can be changed, and that you should be given flexibility to create a good sequel.

But you need to do your best to be sensitive to story.... I don't need a CIV 6, I need an AC 2.

On another note, when ANW coming out?

I totally agree that where possible, lore must remain intact.  But like I said, I won't compromise gameplay/fun for lore.

ANW is looking to come out end of this year.  Beta should hopefully be from around mid-year.

[Dale]

As for replay-ability:
All the Civ game have the same addicting one more turn, and one more game feel. I would argue that AC story adds to the replay-ability, but its the changing interactions with the gameplay that make the game great.

I find it interesting you say that.  IMO, SMAC has a very static story.  It's the same every play through.  To me that does hinder re-playability some what.

But compare it to Civ.  Civ's story is the player's story, how they re-create history through how they play the game.  This is different each and every single time you play.

In that sense, Civ is a lot more re-playable than SMAC.

[Yitzi]

Play some more games. You will be surprised.

Fallout 3 may not have the scope of "galactic powers", but the story has one of the greatest replay-ability. Blown up Megaton or Save Megaton. Become a Cannibal? Trust me I played this game at least 6 times

I have played quite a number of games, including ones with choices...and such choices still just extend its lifetime from one play to 6 or so.  But once you've played through all the options, it's not going to get you to pick up the game after a two-year hiatus and play through it again; for that, you need either good gameplay, or a truly amazing story.  SMAC has both.

I totally agree that where possible, lore must remain intact.  But like I said, I won't compromise gameplay/fun for lore.

I think that's the way to go.  However, there are a few aspects of the lore that will need to stay in order to be an heir to SMAC, both in terms of story and gameplay.  I'd say that they consist of:
1. Native life.  Fungus, mindworms, and eco-damage.  You can change the rules around if it will make for better gameplay, but the basic mechanics (fungus starts on the map and is bad for resource production early in the game, but gets better as the game goes on, mindworms attack with psi so they remain relevant throughout the game, and eco-damage results in the spread of fungus and later in the appearance of mindworms, but can be significantly mitigated via social engineering and facilities/projects) should stay.  The fluff of the Planetmind should stay as well.
2. Transcendence.  You're going to want a tech-based victory anyway; keep it fluffed as it is now.
3. The existence of both "enlightened" and "tyrannical" approaches to social engineering throughout the tech tree, but with the highest-tech one being of the "enlightened" variety.  So SMAC has Police State and Democracy near the beginning of the tech tree, and Eudaimonia and Thought Control near the end, with Eudaimonia being the highest on the tech tree.  (The fluff of Eudaimonia as a response to Will to Power is a nice touch.)
4. The ideological nature of the factions.

I find it interesting you say that.  IMO, SMAC has a very static story.  It's the same every play through.  To me that does hinder re-playability some what.

Not really; as a very good strategy game with numerous factions (each with its own playstyle) and several ways to win, SMAC can achieve replayability purely through gameplay.  Where the story comes in is after you've played it through enough to get tired of it and it's been sitting on the shelf for two years; at that point, addicting gameplay isn't going to get you to pick it up again, but the story will.

There are really three questions going on here:
1. After you took a break, will you come back to it?  That can be motivated by gameplay or story (either is enough, with a slight increase for having both); for story, the most important factor is the ability to uncover the story, followed by the strength of the story, with variability of the story being essentially irrelevant.

2. After you just finished it, will you play it again?  There, the most important factor is gameplay (and variability thereof), followed by variability of the story, followed by the strength of the story, with the ability to uncover the story being irrelevant.

3. After you stopped playing it for a while, will you pick it up again?  That can be motivated by gameplay or story (either is enough, with a substantial increase for having both); for story, the most important factor is the strength of the story, followed distantly by its variability, with the ability to uncover the story being essentially irrelevant.

SMAC has both very strong and fairly variable gameplay and a strong story, making it very strong for (1), strong for (2), and very strong for (3) despite its fairly poor story variability and poor story uncoverability. 
Something like Bioshock has good uncoverability and variability of the story, but the story itself isn't as strong (I doubt gameplay is as strong either, simply because RPGs rarely if every can match the gameplay of a 4x game, though they usually make it up in story), so it's strong for (1) and fairly strong for (2), but quite weak for (3).
Something like Civ, on the other hand, has very strong and somewhat variable gameplay (probably not as variable as SMAC, because the differences between factions aren't as pronounced, but not far behind), but its story is fairly weak, with no uncoverability and fairly poor variability (sure, you can re-create history, but it's essentially the same basic path regardless, same concept as SMAC.)  Therefore, it's very strong for (1) and strong for (2), but only medium-strong for (3).