I recently picked up Zoo Tycoon: Complete Collection in the bargain bin and I’m having fun with it.  I love games where you get to create and develop things, and Zoo Tycoon does its job well.  (It has isometric 2D instead of 3D, which means less processor load, brighter colors and more visibility!)  However, playing it has got me thinking about “Scenarios”.

When you start up Zoo Tycoon you can play a “Freeform” game, a complete tabula rasa which you can develop in any fashion you see fit.  There is a losing condition–your zoo loses so much money that it goes out of business.  However, there is no true win condition and no restrictions (other than initial conditions like zoo size and starting money).  Instead of playing a Freeform game, you can instead play through “Scenarios”, each of which gives you a very specific set of constraints.  Often the zoo is partially built when you get there, and often your construction options are limited.  There is always a set of objectives that must be completed, within a set time limit, for you to win the scenario.

Of course, Zoo Tycoon isn’t the first game to implement scenarios; they’re a pretty common tool in strategy games.  SimCity Societies encourages you to attain Achievements, each of which is basically a scenario in itself.  Galactic Civilizations 2 has a number of scenarios that form a history of the war against the Dreadlords…and some that are completely different, just for a change of pace.

So, what is a scenario exactly?  I’ll go ahead and advance a definition:

A scenario is a set of objectives and constraints within a game.  It is possible to play the game in a completely unrestricted way, but while playing the scenario the player attempts to fulfill the objectives while working within the constraints.  There is an initial condition, the situation in which the player starts, and a win condition, which the player is working toward.

The interesting part of this definition is the second sentence, which implies that a scenario places unusual constraints on the player, thereby creating an experience that is somehow outside the norm.  Without this caveat, the definition could apply to anything.  It could apply to Super Mario Bros., for example; the player attempts to defeat Bowser while working within the constraints of the level designs and gravity.  This reductionist viewpoint could be useful, so we’ll keep it in mind.

So, to have a scenario you need gameplay that is restricted in a special case.  A good example of this is the web-based game Billy vs. Snakeman, specifically the Wasteland missions.  During Wasteland missions, ordinary Strength bonuses don’t count; Range, therefore, becomes much more important.  The usual bonuses of allies do not take effect; only special Wasteland allies can be used.  Similarly, Chakra costs are multiplied by 10 (and even, eventually, 100), meaning that only special Wasteland Jutsu can be used.  The player must scramble to find items, allies and bonuses that will allow him or her to solve these special missions.

The Wasteland missions are basically a “side quest”; there is nothing that forces you to complete them.  When you start out, you have no Wasteland gear, so your initial condition is fairly weak.  There is a win condition–one final Wasteland quest that provides a permanent reward.  (There is no “losing condition”, in that the only way you can lose is by giving up and turning your attention to some other part of the game!)  So, in my view, this is a good example of a scenario.

The interesting thing here is that most people might not think of Billy vs. Snakeman as a “strategy game” in the same vein as SimCity Societies or Galactic Civilizations 2.  However, it does allow the player to develop a situation (your character) over time, and it does allow a certain amount of freedom as to which actions to perform.  And if you don’t like your situation, you can start over…by creating a new character, if nothing else!

Another valuable example is Kingdom of Loathing.  Another web-based character development game, KoL focuses on humor, but it does have a lot of content and some elaborate strategy.  To summarize: Once you have completed the main quest in KoL, you may “ascend“.  When you ascend, your character’s status is reduced to starting levels and you do the whole thing over again–with a couple of differences, of course.  You may change your class, which results in a very different experience.  You may also choose a few sets of constraints to make your new playthrough more exciting–in other words, scenarios.  “Casual” allows you to use items from your previous ascension(s); “Hardcore” does not.  “Teetotaler” disallows consumption of alcoholic drinks (a good source of extra turns and stats) in exchange for the promise of a special bonus item upon completion of the run.  “Moon signs” unlock different special areas, each of which provides their own unique items and bonuses to assist you in your new life.  Not only that, players have created their own scenarios to play through to provide even more interesting experiences.

Kingdom of Loathing has enough variety in the player actions that these scenarios can be interesting; the constraints can really create new experiences.  But let’s go further, let’s try to hybridize these two kinds of scenarios.

What if, in Kingdom of Loathing, there was an accessory that provided a stat cap; each stat could not be more than 50 while you were wearing it.  And there was an area that you could only visit if you were wearing that accessory.  And there was a quest that required adventuring in this area to receive a special reward, with monsters that were difficult.  Players would have to find skills or items that provided effects other than stat bonuses to defeat the monsters guarding the treasure.  This would provide an experience outside the norm, and that is the point of scenarios.  This is a tool that could be applied to many games, opening up the range of experiences they can provide.