Take a look at board games, most of the top games are non-combat. Great interactions of great mechanics help to make ideas like colonizing the new world (Puerto Rico) into fantastic gaming experiences.
Pffft, if I wanted to ask someone to dinner I'd do it in real life. Video games are for dismembering people. If I started to ask people to dinner in games, I'd have to start dismembering people in real life.
Another good example of different activities having the same mechanics (and therefore being equally exciting), is the "Mouse Guard" RPG.
Through a mechanic called "conflicts" it uses four generic terms (attack, defend, feint, and maneuver) to simulate all sorts of situations. When in an argument, an "attack" would represent a straight-forward, solid point, while a feint is a line of dialogue meant to confuse your opponent.
It can even be expanded to things as mundane as building a bridge or dancing at a party. Because the terms are so generic, and because any interesting activity can be seen as a conflict, "Mouse Guard" turns almost any activity into something exciting as (and with the same mechanics as) fighting.
Hey i'm sorry but can someone please tell me if they remember playing a game about controlling one of two planets that are collecting stars and eventually your rival planet sacrifices itself to save you from destruction?
Actually, most of the games that I've played recently lack combat.
Various Point-and-click adventures, casual games, management sims (I don't think football counts as combat), music games, platformers...and I just finished a game of Crusader Kings II without fighting any major wars. Just concentrated on diplomacy, backstabbing and inviting people to dinner.
The first Monkey Island game used an awesome (and witty) verbal attack mechanic for its fencing combat. Instead of actually attacking the foe you would throw insults and counter insults at each other. It is still my favorite combat system to date
Well, these types of things have existed in gaming for a long time... the problem is that video gaming has opted to not bring these in from other kinds of gaming (well, to a limited degree in some places). Namely, board and rpg gaming. In RPGs especially, depending on the system, you have persuasion checks and various other possible game actions you can perform based on your skills. In GURPs and Call of Cthulhu, huge potential skill sets create very open ended gaming in what you can potentially do.... but these games also benefit from having a game master who can react and readjust to the players actions (to varying degrees of success depending on the GM)... while videogaming, can't. They have to consider everything ahead of time. If if they aren't seeing all the options, they aren't going to implement them.
I applaud something like this that can point out these alternatives and I hope that maybe you guys can do a show on real world role playing games. In those, you are much of the time having to think outside the box, which game designers need if they want to bring the kinds of interactions you suggest to the table.
Anyway, I love this show and am watching through it with an open mind to learn all I can and implement this direction of thought to better my own endeavors. Thank you, Extra Credit!
Sounds like a pen and paper rpg. The simple way to express conversation conflict - persuasion, baffle and lying (diplomacy). There is also the element of puzzles, some genius ones having more than one way to be solved: those are the best sort of puzzles.
Combat is simple and the easiest to recognize, however it isn't in over abundance. You just aren't looking in the right places.
If I may be so bold I have a game that does incorporate many aspects of non combat gaming, and it happens to be one of my favorite games ever. In the 1959 a board game was released called "Diplomacy". It became pretty popular and today there is a web site where you can go online, create an account, and play a game with people from around the world. To put the plot in a nutshell, you are placed in control of one of the great European powers circa 1900 and the goal is to control as much of the board as possible. While it does share the conquest mechanic with a game like Risk there is no element of luck or overwhelming force involved. What makes the game so interesting is that it is entirely dependent on how clever and devious the players are. Sure fighting is an important mechanic but a weak player can rise from the ashes with nothing but his or her wit alone. If you find this interesting I highly encourage you to check it out. It's now my favorite game ever.
You are pretty much talking about The Sims 2. You can invite people over to dinner and do a million other things, much of it based on conversation and other social behavior, with no combat aside from the occasional slap or fight. The later expansions ruined some of the gameplay by making it far too easy (strangers giving you lavish gifts out of the blue etc.), and Sims 3 is awful (thank you, EA), but try Sims 2 with the Nightlife, Open for Business, and Seasons expansions - maybe University and Pets although they are less necessary - and you will be BLOWN AWAY by what a great game it is.
Other games of this nature: The Guild and The Guild 2 (courtship, elections, trials) and Kudos 2 (simple game mostly about building and maintaining friendships through activities such as, yes, going out to dinner). But really Sims 2 spoiled me for other games, and since I'm not much into combat I barely buy games anymore. I wish EA would give The Sims back to Will Wright so I could have fun again.
So all you're saying is that you never played Sims... sigh. Inviting friends for dinner sounds like the kind of stuff that happens in lots of other games that you haven't been playing, that's all...
Posts
Through a mechanic called "conflicts" it uses four generic terms (attack, defend, feint, and maneuver) to simulate all sorts of situations. When in an argument, an "attack" would represent a straight-forward, solid point, while a feint is a line of dialogue meant to confuse your opponent.
It can even be expanded to things as mundane as building a bridge or dancing at a party. Because the terms are so generic, and because any interesting activity can be seen as a conflict, "Mouse Guard" turns almost any activity into something exciting as (and with the same mechanics as) fighting.
Various Point-and-click adventures, casual games, management sims (I don't think football counts as combat), music games, platformers...and I just finished a game of Crusader Kings II without fighting any major wars. Just concentrated on diplomacy, backstabbing and inviting people to dinner.
The first Monkey Island game used an awesome (and witty) verbal attack mechanic for its fencing combat. Instead of actually attacking the foe you would throw insults and counter insults at each other. It is still my favorite combat system to date
I applaud something like this that can point out these alternatives and I hope that maybe you guys can do a show on real world role playing games. In those, you are much of the time having to think outside the box, which game designers need if they want to bring the kinds of interactions you suggest to the table.
Anyway, I love this show and am watching through it with an open mind to learn all I can and implement this direction of thought to better my own endeavors. Thank you, Extra Credit!
Combat is simple and the easiest to recognize, however it isn't in over abundance. You just aren't looking in the right places.
Other games of this nature: The Guild and The Guild 2 (courtship, elections, trials) and Kudos 2 (simple game mostly about building and maintaining friendships through activities such as, yes, going out to dinner). But really Sims 2 spoiled me for other games, and since I'm not much into combat I barely buy games anymore. I wish EA would give The Sims back to Will Wright so I could have fun again.