I would pay $100 for this game. I don't play games because I have below average skill, dexterity, and coordination. Last game I played till finish was the first Splinter Cell game in 2002-2003. I hit save after every shot, movement, and action because I really suck at shooting targets, especially if they fire back at me or move. What I love are solo games where I can take my time, plan my course of action, and hit "go!" This game seems exactly what I want. Another example is one of the original variations of Desktop Tower Defense where you couldn't buy/sell equipment/weapons once you hit 'play'.
I divide games into two types: frying or baking. The frying games are where you have to be active throughout the course of the game from start till finish and you have to race against time. There may be preparation beforehand but execution during the main act is critical and if you slow down, you get burnt veggies. The baking games are where preparation is the only thing that matters. There is no race-against time and if you prepare well, you're almost guaranteed to win. I prefer baking games.
Seems you would be more interested in the Rainbow 6 part of the Tom Clancy franchise. I've only played the original (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Clancys_Rainbow_Six_(video_... ) so i'm not sure if the sequels are similar, but in the first you could design the entire mission waypoints, literally hit "go!", and sit back and watch. You wouldn't have to take control of any of the men if you didn't need to (sometimes you have to because the AI would get stuck trying to climb a ladder, etc).
This game is seriously awesome, yes the player count is low but you can find certain times where there's actually a full server.
You can get this game for dirt cheap from places like Amazon.com merchants and such... I payed only $0.01 plus shipping for my copy... Bought a bunch more for my friends so we can all LAN party at least...
In Gratuitous Space Battles (aka the best-named game ever) you plan out your strategy, hit play, and watch. I haven't actually played it yet, but it seems like a perfect "baking" style game for you.
I know everyone is now going to be suggesting their favorite non-action game but this one is just too awesome not to :p
I've just completed Machinarium (http://machinarium.net) and it's absolutely fantastic. It's a point&click like the old LucasArts games except it just gets it all so right, no insane puzzles where the only solution is to try everything on everything here, most can be solved using just the things on one screen. Add to that the amazing artwork, great soundtrack and the fact that you play a robot and it's the best game I've played in a long time. It's also available for Windows, OSX and Linux.
Deus Ex (if you're not familiar with it) is a first person shooter with some RPG elements. One of the reasons it's so well-loved, even years after its release, is that within each area, the player can choose their own pace and method. You can play through the entire game without being seen, or without killing anyone, or pretty much any way you want.
If or when you get a massively multi-player version, you'll be able to have every variation of the Turing test (say, a scenario with ten humans and one killer bot).
What would be really fun is if this were to ramp-up to a large enough scale that there was a financial incentive to create narrow-Turing passing bots - it would obsolete the Loebner prize.
I'm surprised that this game is 2 years away. Isn't that plenty of time for someone else to create a clone? Sure, the graphics are primitive, but it doesn't matter for a game like this.
Pretty sure this is just a one man side project, not something made by a full dev studio. Give him some time!
Anyway, if the guy is anything like me, he's probably hoping someone will waltz in and run the concept ahead of him, so he can play it without having to build it himself.
Really though, he's pretty save. It's too complex for the average indie to motor through, and it's too out there for a big studio to steal. Plus, aside from that, Chris Hecker is enough of a name that if someone tried to rip off the idea, he could probably litigate successfully.
I'm sure people will, indeed, run the concept ahead of him. I hope they do (or he hurries) because I can't wait to play it.
Variations would also be awesome--- Spy versus Spy would also be a stellar spin and maybe even more fun. Imagine trying to figure out if that "guest" is also a human spy who has identified you and is about to stab you when you turn your back.
It's an excellent idea, I can give it that, but I do not see how this fleshes out into a full game. We're talking about Person A tries to find Person B in a crowd. Person B has stuff to do, Persona A just has to find him.
If you're playing on the same screen (as the article indicated) Person B can't have an interesting interface because it's shared with Person A, and vice versa. Likewise Person B can't be doing anything interesting, because (as indicated in the article) his possible actions are easily investigated by Person A.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for new concepts in gaming. I play far too many games right now... I just don't see how this extends beyond a Mario Party / Wario Ware style mini-game.
The article mentions a trick whereby the other player clicked their "Camera move" stick instead of their "Character move" stick in order to fool the other play who could here the click the control pad made. This strongly indicates that the players are on different screens (close together in the scenario but I imagine usually it would be played over the net)
I agree that it sounds like it would be very hard to make this into a playable game. But if they manage that it could be really good.
Feels almost like a virtual version of the party game mafia. It seems like you would be able to memorize the different missions and then watch for them, but I'm sure the developers are aware of that risk.
does this remind anyone of assassin's creed II for the iphone? In that, you basically get contracts to kill someone in a crowd, except the guy you're trying to kill is also a human likely out to get you.
I divide games into two types: frying or baking. The frying games are where you have to be active throughout the course of the game from start till finish and you have to race against time. There may be preparation beforehand but execution during the main act is critical and if you slow down, you get burnt veggies. The baking games are where preparation is the only thing that matters. There is no race-against time and if you prepare well, you're almost guaranteed to win. I prefer baking games.