Tiny Tina's Wonderlands

GWJ Conference Call 807

Gran Turismo 7 (PC), F1 2021 (PC), Tiny Tina’s Wonderlands (PC), Weird West (PC).

Click Here to Download!

Amanda, Rich, and Glendon are joined by guest Daryl Lathon to talk about what makes simulation games so satisfying.

To contact us, email [email protected]! Send us your thoughts on the show, pressing issues you want to talk about, or whatever else is on your mind.

  • Subscribe with iTunes
  • Subscribe with RSS
  • Subscribe with Yahoo!
Download the official apps
  • Download the GWJ Conference Call app for Android
  • Download the GWJ Conference Call app for Android

Comments

00:02:04 Gran Turismo 7
00:14:25 F1 2021
00:30:35 Tiny Tina’s Wonderlands
00:37:09 Weird West
00:45:33 The Satisfaction of Sim Games
01:08:40 Your Emails

Anyone else find themselves pleading with Daryl to just get a gaming desktop during the podcast?

PSA for those who have never really looked into it: gaming desktops are often cheaper to acquire than a laptop, have a longer shelf life, and can be upgrade piecemeal. You really pay a premium for the miniaturization in a laptop.

To contrast, the proc/mobo/RAM core of a desktop can typically be kept in service for quite a while as long as you upgrade your graphics card every 2-3 years. Desktop parts (if you get a decent case and power supply) also tend to become obsolete before they die, which in my experience is not something one can count on with a laptop.

I'd agree with your assessment here. I'd also note that you're looking at it from a perspective that prioritizes platform preference, overall performance, and low cost over other necessities or conflicts that would make a laptop more preferable for a wider range of uses - it's more mobile and is optimal when space is an issue. I'm not going to speak too much for him, but Daryl does tend to be more of a console player, as well.

You can blame me for this, I'm the one that keeps asking him about to talk about his computer gaming. I'll keep that in mind

Putting aside my fear that his laptop may actually melt one day due to an extended period of not-starving or ageing his empire, I'd like to propose a motion for more Daryl on the podcast in general. He's awesome and makes me happy every time he's on.

Amoebic wrote:

I'd agree with your assessment here. I'd also note that you're looking at it from a perspective that prioritizes platform preference, overall performance, and low cost over other necessities or conflicts that would make a laptop more preferable for a wider range of uses - it's more mobile and is optimal when space is an issue. I'm not going to speak too much for him, but Daryl does tend to be more of a console player, as well.

You can blame me for this, I'm the one that keeps asking him about to talk about his computer gaming. I'll keep that in mind

I'm also something of a "build your own PC" evangelist, so don't take too much blame for my foibles!

But what you said is also all true - I have a desk with a massive quad-monitor setup at home that I adore, but not everyone games the same, and if the PC is just for the occasional indie gem or grand strategy game, then a laptop is probably more than adequate.

deadpet7 wrote:

Putting aside my fear that his laptop may actually melt one day due to an extended period of not-starving or ageing his empire, I'd like to propose a motion for more Daryl on the podcast in general. He's awesome and makes me happy every time he's on.

Yeah, Daryl is pretty great. He's up there with Julian and Sean/Shawn in terms of voices I'm happy to hear in the opening.

You are all missing the real reason why Daryl should get a PC: so he can joy the Racing Dorks. He already has the wheel!

Amoebic wrote:

You can blame me for this, I'm the one that keeps asking him about to talk about his computer gaming. I'll keep that in mind

I'd say in your defense he was on this episode to talk about a console exclusive!

Needless to say I very much enjoyed a podcast where you spent a lot of time talking about racing games. On racing sims in particular, the ability to have a set of wheel and pedals really separates racing sims from other sports simulators. It's like playing FIFA by kicking a ball around or NBA2K by shooting an actual ball into a hoop.

I don't know if I agree with the definition that staygold tried to put together about a sim game being about the abstraction of a particular activity (I may be misrepresenting this a bit because I listened to the podcast a few hours ago, sorry). In some sense, Tiny Tina's Wonderlands has an abstract representation of shooting and you wouldn't call it a shooting simulator. You could say sims typically attempt to recreate the main activity with some varying degree of realism and that's probably an important part of it. Another distinctive feature of sim games is that you typically do not play a character or, depending on how you see it, you are the character. This may not be true for 100% of the games we call "sims" but if think it's usually the case. To me, this removes a certain barrier to the player's immersion in the game. Still, it's probably impossible to give a straight definition of a sim game such that we would all agree to draw a line between "sims" and the rest of the games.

It feels like just yesterday that Daryl was complaining there were no new games for his Mac. So even an underpowered Windows laptop has to count as some kind of progress.

Pink Stripes wrote:

I don't know if I agree with the definition that staygold tried to put together about a sim game being about the abstraction of a particular activity (I may be misrepresenting this a bit because I listened to the podcast a few hours ago, sorry). In some sense, Tiny Tina's Wonderlands has an abstract representation of shooting and you wouldn't call it a shooting simulator. You could say sims typically attempt to recreate the main activity with some varying degree of realism and that's probably an important part of it. Another distinctive feature of sim games is that you typically do not play a character or, depending on how you see it, you are the character. This may not be true for 100% of the games we call "sims" but if think it's usually the case. To me, this removes a certain barrier to the player's immersion in the game. Still, it's probably impossible to give a straight definition of a sim game such that we would all agree to draw a line between "sims" and the rest of the games.

I've been thinking a lot this week about simulation and the definition of simulation games. I'm coming at this from a very analytical and mathematical background and the more I dig in, the more confident I am in my definition (which is not to say everyone has to agree!). Adding on a bit more:

From the Wikipedia entry on Computer Simulation:

Computer simulation is the process of mathematical modelling, performed on a computer, which is designed to predict the behaviour of, or the outcome of, a real-world or physical system.
[...]
A computer model is the algorithms and equations used to capture the behavior of the system being modeled. By contrast, computer simulation is the actual running of the program that contains these equations or algorithms. Simulation, therefore, is the process of running a model.

From my perspective a Video Game simulation game is therefore a game built around a model by which the game then allows the player to run a simulation. For the example of Tiny Tina's Wonderlands one could argue it is building a model of fantasy dungeons and dragons. In this case I would make the argument it's a deterministic model: "A deterministic model is one in which every set of variable states is uniquely determined by parameters in the model and by sets of previous states of these variables; therefore, a deterministic model always performs the same way for a given set of initial conditions."

For me what differentiates a sim game from something else (Tiny Tina's Wonderland, Elden Ring) is the underlying model is non-deterministic. If I play Elden Ring 1,000 times I am still limited to 7 endings (outcomes) and the world space (and parameters) are static. If I run a race at Monaco 1,000 times I have 20 places to finish (outcomes) and the race parameters are dynamic. Not once in those 1,000 races will I be able to take a snapshot of the race at the 21 minute mark and have the model parameters look the same (i.e. those that influence the outcome). We could get into a semantic argument that the same would be true of Elden Ring however there's a limited set of parameters that influence the model outcome of Elden Ring compared to a simulation game.

I think the modelling/simulation process is very instructive:
IMAGE(https://www.tutorialspoint.com/modelling_and_simulation/images/modelling_process.jpg)

Within a simulation there is a degree of learning and refinement that feeds back into understanding the model better. For my definition of simulation games, they are games that are built around the play with the "Simulation Program" and leveraging results to understand the model better. Thinking about this has also helped clarify why I interact with Madden much more differently than Super Mega Baseball 3 or F1 2021. In Madden, the model of football is not a very accurate one (for me). Therefore I find it a poor abstraction of reality and have more incentive to play it as fantasy (stick all the rookies on my team and try and score 100 points a game). SMB3 and F1 '21 are highly accurate, detailed, and realistic models and because of their grounding in realism I am more inclined to play with their systems at a level where I am learning about the underlying model and pushing my personal boundaries of reality.

I think there are elements of simulation within most, if not all, games by simple definition of the simulation that it is the execution of a model. Models are core to video games. But it's almost a recursive argument of "all games contain simulations but not all games are simulations". It's an interesting field that I'm not sure has been studied as much as it could be.