This was a very good read, and also a very good summarization by Chris.
Now that I think about it, as an avid Starcraft 2 player, I would absolutely hate to have "random" factors and elements in my game. But Starcraft 2 is pretty much considered the pinnacle of competitive RTS, and so those kinds of "new" and "random" mechanics would probably be awful for the game.
However, when I think about what makes a CO-OPERATIVE game fun, well suddenly the formula becomes very different.
Here are some factors I've noticed over the years when playing co-operative games:
1) Real-life gaming partners are usually not at the same skill level as you (or vice versa).
-Because of this, the most common type of co-operative game I like to play (competitive co-op), tends to end badly because it's either too easy for 1 party, or too hard for another. Also, since your "understanding" of the game tends to be so different and varying skill-levels, it creates problems when trying to communicate how to improve for the other player, and/or makes them feel uncomfortable.
2) Pure co-operative games (no competitive aspect) usually get really boring, really fast.
-Sure, I like playing Left 4 Dead as much as the next guy, but running around killing zombies for hours only keeps its appeal for so long. The same goes for World of Warcraft. The only way that game seems deep, is when people have convinced themselves it is deep. When you take a step back and realize that it's really an 80 level grinding fest with a pretty environment and a few other cool features, it tends to get pretty old, pretty fast. Maybe I've just never been able to "disconnect" myself from reality to the extent I would need to "immerse" myself in the MMO gaming "world", but suffice it to say that I also find that type of "co-op" VERY boring; and to the people that don't well, I also find them very boring.
3) Competitive Co-op (playing cooperatively against other human opponents) is the most challenging type of co-op, but also the most rewarding as well. However, there is no "safeguard" to prevent you from losing, and there are no "repeats".
-Another problem with competitive co-op (from my experience), is that defeat is always really disappointing. Everybody tends to get really competitive, and typically when you lose, you know you lost because they were simply better players. This can cause a lot of group frustration, especially when you have a "bad night" and it just keeps happening over and over.
These are my experiences after playing over 10 years of co-operative/competitive style games.
---
The thing that makes AI War so different is that it offers a really unique and re-playable cooperative experience, without NEEDING the competitive aspect. This is literally the first time I've ever experienced that. Where most cooperative games bore the shit out of you after the first few hours, or require other human opponents to keep things interesting, AI War seems to find a way to bring the best of both worlds, and do it in a way that is addictive and satisfying.
The benefit to having an ever-changing and dynamic experience, without the need for human opponents, can not be understated.
1) You can save the game against the AI, and so if you "lose", start at an earlier point with minimal frustration (something you could never do against a real opponent GG NO RE).
2) If your AI opponent is too hard, you can crank them down a notch. Alternatively, if they are too easy, you can crank them up a notch. Needless to say, you don't really get to CHOOSE how hard your human opponent is.
3) With AI types, you can choose, to a certain extent, how your opponent plays. You have very little, to any control over how a human opponent plays. This can be especially frustrating when human players resort to game "exploits" or even blatant "hacks" to give them unfair advantages over the player.
---
So basically what I'm saying is that some people will be eternally satisfied with coop games that never challenge them, ask them to critically think, or ever change in a meaningful way. Some people will be eternally satisfied with a cooperative experience against other people. However, there is still a large group of people that fall in that middle area, and AI War is simply the perfect solution for those type of people.
Are there drawbacks to the formula? Sure! AI War is one of the most complicated games I've ever played in my life. My dad, who used to play the more quick-paced RTS games with me when I was younger (think Total Annihilation, Dark Reign), and who eventually stopped because he said they were just too "fast-paced" for him, absolutely hated AI War. I thought that it would be perfect for him, being a fairly intelligent guy, who appreciates strategy and depth (the kind of a person who, from my understanding, the game was created for), but hates the whole "micromanagement" aspect of modern RTSes. But he didn't even finish the tutorials. This game is not for everybody.
In addition, if you were to ever even try to make this game PVP it any way, it would fail miserably. The concepts are too complex, the game mechanics actually TOO deep, that it would all be about who could "exploit" the other person first.
But every game design has its drawbacks. What I appreciate about AI War, is that it does what it is meant to do, and it does it in a unique and robust fashion. I have no qualms in saying that there is nothing else on the market today even remotely similar to it, and that's something to be proud of.
