Re: Why play open-ended games (was: OLYMPIA: Why do you play?)

From: thmoe@oleg.hiof.no (THOMAS MOE)

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 12:09:56 +0000

[DEL]

>Ah, for a second I thought this was the start of a thread of general
>interest rather than a vehicle for Olympia advocacy. You see, the question
>I would like to hear answered is this:

>Why do people play open-ended games at all?

>As you may have guessed, I don't play any open-ended games, nor do I think
>I would enjoy them. I very much like playing close-ended game where I get
>a sense of accomplishment from winning/placing as well as possible given
>the limited resources of the game (including time) and competing against
>other players given the same or similar resources as myself and having the
>same goal as myself. In an open-ended game, even if I set up goals for
>myself, what is my sense of accomplishment if I "succeed"?

The difference between open-ended and closed-ended games is that in the
closed ones you set yourself some short-term goals, try to match/beat them,
then start all over again. Open-ended games, though, offers the opportunity
to set some serious long-term goals, while still being able to do the short-
term stuff. And you get a large amount of satisfaction from watching a
character/group develop and grow under your care.

>Another thing that makes me think I would not like to play an open-ended
>game is that even the longest-running game is going to end at some time.
>Most likely the end is going to be bad. Either the company or person who
>provides the game is going to close down the game, for any number of
>reasons, or I am going to drop out of the game, because of boredom, disgust,
>financial problems, time constraints or whatever. So what of all the time,
>effort and possibly money I put into the game before that?

What of all the time spent on a closed-ended game that you have absolutely
no use for after you have finished? This makes less sense to me than playing
an open-ended game from you start to you get bored, still playing the same
position. Me, I play BSE (UK), Monster Island (also UK) and Isle of Crowns.
The last is a closed-ended game. I have played Quest and It's a Crime, too.
I dropped It's a Crime because it offers too little variation, always
chewing the same stuff over and over again. Quest got boring, after having
played a group for 50+ turns. In BSE I am still active after more than two
years, I was there when the game started in UK. It's fun, you get to develop
ships/colonies, but the best part is the ongoing political intrigue that you
could never capture in a closed-ended game. In MI I have played the same
Monster for close to a hundred turns now, and it really begins to show some
results from the long-term goals I set myself when I started. That is much
more gratifying than having to dump your empire or character after 20-40
turns, getting nothing back.

>So why are open-ended games so popular (Atlantis, Olympia, M.I., Quest,
>BSE)? Is it because of the role-playing opportunities they offer? Could
>an open-ended game succeed without role-playing?

>What do you think?

The biggest difference, as I see it, is patience. Those who got plenty of
it, play open-ended. Those that cannot wait play closed-ended games.

>Morten Larsen

/\_./o__                      Thomas Moe                       __o\._/\
 (/^/(_^^'     Sandesund Terrasse 22, 1705 Sarpsborg, NORWAY     `^^_)\^\)
._.(_.)_                    thmoe@oleg.hiof.no                     _(._)._.

References

OLYMPIA: Why do you play?
morrow@romulus.rutgers.edu (John Morrow)
Fri, 21 Oct 1994 01:02:11 +0000
Why play open-ended games (was: OLYMPIA: Why do you play?)
pasquale@diku.dk (Morten Larsen)
Mon, 24 Oct 1994 17:10:52 +0000