Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
0xmons
@xmon.eth
a lot of existing onchain game design seems to favor automated players this seems especially true for games with resource harvesting (e.g. rts/idle style games) i think this often puts non-automated players (e.g. humans) at a disadvantage for people who can write bots, i'm sure the meta-game is fun. and you can provide tools to let most people interact with bots. b ut at that point, i think the game itself has changed--it's not about whatever underlying mechanics are interesting, but it's some optimization game on top ideally games made for human players have the scripting/automation happen somewhere upstream of the actual in-game mechanics (e.g. user generated content/worlds/npcs) rather than having them compete on the same field. excited to see more games explore along these veins
13 replies
35 recasts
329 reactions
𒂠_𒍣𒅀_𒊑
@m-j-r
> this seems especially true for games with resource harvesting (e.g. rts/idle style games) I've always wondered about realtime objects having different security/value constraints. >for people who can write bots, i'm sure the meta-game is fun. and you can provide tools to let most people interact with bots. ideally, it's MPvE or MPvMP, less irrational/defective behavior like tking. >it's some optimization game on top should be a worldbuilding an escape, right? can't be mainly an offramp to IRL goods > ideally games made for human players have the scripting/automation happen somewhere upstream of the actual in-game mechanics (e.g. user generated content/worlds/npcs) ideally the intent is here on FC/Lens and the state has healthy expiry. seems like something that would start bottom-up like those alchemy games (or cellular automata).
0 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
