Nicolaus_von_Kues

Someone took the time to talk about the project, about a different approach.

Twenty years after its founding, 0 AD has been one of the most ambitious open source projects in the gaming world. It's a game that competes with giants in its field.

Caesar III is a city builder add more layers of complexity. It doesn't mean that I don't close myself off to these ideas. But those ideas don't come alone.

It could change in the second phase. As I understand it, the first phase is a rural settlement. ---These ideas are already in DE.--- 1. Land Use and ZoningIn antiquity, land near the city center was highly valuable. The game could reflect this through strict building zones: Central Urban Zone: The area immediately surrounding the Civic Center would only allow houses, temples, markets, blacksmiths, and government structures. Farming Restrictions: The game would completely block players from placing large crop fields inside the city's central radius. What existed were family gardens in the houses.

I have a question: the programming is different regarding the movement and behavior of a LOTR BFME battalion. How do you plan to modify that without touching the engine?

You're assuming it's a game, and the problem is that it would stop being fun. Games have internal logic; you don't expect that much realism. Games have a fun curve. Why does realism sometimes harm the experience? Fun Curve: In video games, extreme realism often makes controls worse. Selection of Details: The human brain ignores many things. An excess of realistic details can distract from the narrative. --- Not to mention that it ruins the experience.

https://game-studies.fandom.com/wiki/The_Art_of_Game_Design:_A_Book_of_Lenses?__cf_chl_f_tk=fa4sKWZua3gfigepm6bbTQxdawl.9m8tH11Ybr6uiK8-1783016138-1.0.1.1-M854n8mjY6x1rfJt5zx3Fs0JvutGq7w3_zukY9AIIto The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses ISBN-13: 978-0123694966, ISBN-10: 0123694965 It is a good source that explains the balance between fun and when a game is no longer fun.

In video games( and movies) there is something called "credibility" which is not the same as realism. Many of the things you do in a video game have to be believable.It should be logical, not absurd or exaggerated. The game is an abstraction of reality. Imagine an RTS where you add physiological needs; it would be realistic but not logical or believable. ---Clear Definitions--- Realism: Attempts to replicate reality as faithfully as possible (physics, human behavior, visual appearance, logical consequences, etc.). Credibility (or plausibility/verisimilitude): Makes the audience believe in the world even if it is impossible. It is based on internal consistency, consistent rules, and emotional/narrative logic within the created universe. Realism seeks external precision. Credibility seeks convincing suspension of disbelief.

Sounds interesting.

A way has to be found to create those portraits. I personally don't like the current style, but especially when they're seen on a large scale.