What games allow fight fighting over resources or ideologies?

Recommended Videos

Y2N1-09631

New member
Mar 11, 2015
25
0
0
Unlike in almosts all video games, real warfare is not over getting the best kill to death ratio, capturing a flag, or just for the sake of fighting. Instead, warfare IRL is about gaining or protecting resources or protecting or spreading ideologies, which are valued either on their own right or are used to gain something else (e.g. an improved standard of living). I would like to see what (preferably free) games are like this. Below I describe the games I have found that best meet this requirement, though are still quite lacking.

The wars in the Total War games can be seen as wars over territory, which contain resources. However, as far as I know, players use the resources in the territories to do anything other than acquire more territory. Thus, wars in Total War games are really just about fighting for the sake of fighting.

The battles in Unturned, a zombie survival game, could theoretically be about obtaining resources from other players and protecting one's own. Indeed, after killing a player, it would be unusual to walk away victoriously from a battle without first looting the enemy for supplies to improve one's standard of living. However, in my experience, it is much easier to improve one's standard of living (get food, water, avoid disease, and stay safe) from simply foraging, rather than risking death in combat. Thus, for the most part, battles in Unturned are fought just for fun.

In Minecraft PVP servers, players can and do fight and kill other players for resources. However, in my experience, this is extremely rare on vanilla and factions servers. Instead, players tend to loot bases while the players in the base are offline, and players tend to travel to very isolated regions to hide their bases. Like in Unturned, with rare exceptions, it's simply more practical to gain resources by mining, finding, or creating them oneself. Thus, combat in Minecraft is almost always not for resources.

Edit: Many other games include fighting for resources, but do so as part of the story, rather than arising organically from player interactions, like it does in real life. This is not what I am looking for.

So, do you know of any games that have combat truly over resources or spreading ideologies, rather than combat for the sake of combat?
 

Redryhno

New member
Jul 25, 2011
3,077
0
0
Well, Civ games for one, CK2 and Europa, Diplomacy, Dominion, other 4X games, Age of Empires to a point. There's plenty of games that are about fighting over resources.
 

MysticSlayer

New member
Apr 14, 2013
2,405
0
0
I'm actually struggling to list the games I've played where this isn't the case to an extent.

Even in a lot of military shooters, the resources or ideology are either explicitly mentioned or implied, either by the game itself or its setting. Take the Call of Duty series (or at least as far as I care to recount):
-First three games were set in WWII. We understand the historical significance of the conflict.
-CoD4 was a battle over nuclear weapons.
-World at War was WWII again.
-MW2's entire story was based on two nationalists who both worked together and against each other, leaving everyone else to deal with the mess they were making.
-Black Ops was set during the Cold War, which was again a historical period.
-MW3 was about reclaiming America (first couple levels) or reclaiming Europe and stopping the ideologue responsible for the war.

Beyond that, Medal of Honor's story was either WWII or inspired by modern-day conflicts, so we again have the historical background. And in both of these series, many of the battles the player has are over certain information (a resource), a strategic position, or just simply self-survival or survival of an ally (neither of which I'd call "fighting for fightings sake).

Now, I haven't really played CoD since MW3 and have never been into BF's singleplayer, but from what I've read about them, they seem to follow similar ideas. In other words, most of these still follow the same basic story of resources, ideologies, or survival being used as the basis of conflict. Yes, it may just serve to help contextualize a shooting gallery, but the general idea is still there.
 

renegade7

New member
Feb 9, 2011
2,046
0
0
You could try EVE Online. Plenty of warfare originates in EVE that parallels how it occurs in the real world. Player alliances fight over strategic territory and resources on a very constant basis.
 

Y2N1-09631

New member
Mar 11, 2015
25
0
0
MysticSlayer said:
I'm actually struggling to list the games I've played where this isn't the case to an extent.

Even in a lot of military shooters, the resources or ideology are either explicitly mentioned or implied, either by the game itself or its setting. Take the Call of Duty series (or at least as far as I care to recount):
-First three games were set in WWII. We understand the historical significance of the conflict.
-CoD4 was a battle over nuclear weapons.
-World at War was WWII again.
-MW2's entire story was based on two nationalists who both worked together and against each other, leaving everyone else to deal with the mess they were making.
-Black Ops was set during the Cold War, which was again a historical period.
-MW3 was about reclaiming America (first couple levels) or reclaiming Europe and stopping the ideologue responsible for the war.

Beyond that, Medal of Honor's story was either WWII or inspired by modern-day conflicts, so we again have the historical background. And in both of these series, many of the battles the player has are over certain information (a resource), a strategic position, or just simply self-survival or survival of an ally (neither of which I'd call "fighting for fightings sake).

Now, I haven't really played CoD since MW3 and have never been into BF's singleplayer, but from what I've read about them, they seem to follow similar ideas. In other words, most of these still follow the same basic story of resources, ideologies, or survival being used as the basis of conflict. Yes, it may just serve to help contextualize a shooting gallery, but the general idea is still there.
Sorry, I should have further specified. In those games, unlike IRL, fighting for resources is part of the story. It doesn't arise organically from player interactions. This is not what I am looking for.
 

MysticSlayer

New member
Apr 14, 2013
2,405
0
0
Y2N1-09631 said:
Sorry, I should have further specified. In those games, unlike IRL, fighting for resources is part of the story. It doesn't arise organically from player interactions. This is not what I am looking for.
I'm still not sure we can make that much of a distinction. The story told by the developers and player interaction are really just two parts of one whole: The entire story that player share and discuss. Yeah, some games go heavier on developer-led contextualization, while others give players more freedom to forge their own stories. Yeah, it is probably a lot easier to reflect real-life (within the fantastical setting) if you give players freedom to tell their own stories, but a good developer-driven or history-driven story, no matter how fantastical its premise may be, is still a reflection of real life (or at least how people would respond in that situation).

Basically, the only real difference is that we're playing through the story rather than making our own.

But I guess if you want it to be more about your own story, then the Civilization games are a good bet. It's entirely possible to deal with resources through trade and diplomacy, but every once in a while you may launch a war after certain resources or territory, and given the numerous win conditions, wars can be fought for pretty much any reason. I've fought wars to protect my culture, gain much-needed extra land, grab a heavy mining area of the map, and anything else. Yeah, some players may just launch wars for the sake of it, but you can do things differently if you prefer.
 

WolfThomas

Man must have a code.
Dec 21, 2007
5,292
0
0
The problem with the OP's suggestion is that for most games the "fun" is derived from fighting. So the game has to find reasons for you to fight. As you say, superficially Total War is about resources but there's no reward in campaign for having a small rich nation. You're encouraged to conquer.

I struggle to find a game immediately to mind matching this criteria.