Feature You'd Most Like to See

[Jayavarman 130]

- I, for one, would like to see an even more realistic, in-depth election simulation. The states would be broken down into their counties. You would of course have to choose the right county(ies) to visit.

- New defined voter profiles: ie race, religion, gender, etc.

- Many more candidate attributes should be available to really tweak and define your candidate. For ex. handsome (more powerful ads, TV spots, debate, etc.), womanizer (boosts women voters), ugly, veteran, Spanish-speaking (more successful campaigning and drawing Spanish votes), [insert ethnic background of candidate here], rich/patrician (avg. Joe may not relate to you; poor strata may distrust you;but businesses love you = $$$), stubborn/unyielding (plus morale;minus from undecided), senior citizen (youth don't vote for you), celebrity, and many more.

These attributes would have opposite ones and many could have both positive and negative effects to your electorate.

Now, stuff like this in an election game would not only boast the use of this game as a tool, but it would really cause me to dump lots of money to actually be able to view county by county the road to the White House. 80soft has one programmer, right? Well, he should depend on people here to become betatesters and do alot of the research and contribute the values and numbers that would go into such an exhaustive map and electorate.

[Waffen Thin Mint 0]

Now, stuff like this in an election game would not only boast the use of this game as a tool....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Read the header on this thread - IT IS A GAME! There are plenty of "analysis" programmes already out there, but damn few election games. They've got the untapped market in their hands.

If the programmers were to make this game ultra-realistic, what you would be left with is something no one would wish to play. There has to be a point where they put a barrier on too much facts, figures & stats for the sake of playability.

[LiberalUK 4]

Read the header on this thread - IT IS A GAME! There are plenty of "analysis" programmes already out there, but damn few election games. They've got the untapped market in their hands.

If the programmers were to make this game ultra-realistic, what you would be left with is something no one would wish to play. There has to be a point where they put a barrier on too much facts, figures & stats for the sake of playability.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes. I agree that we have to keep our feet on the ground, but four variables at a state level won't be that complicated when there are already 18 issues with a different centre in each state.

I think K-uglen's idea would work into things extremely well. For example, religious/secular would be more important in more recent scenarios in the wake of the rise of 'the religious right'. This could be brocken down in the same way as issue profiles.

[Jayavarman 130]

Read the header on this thread - IT IS A GAME! There are plenty of "analysis" programmes already out there, but damn few election games. They've got the untapped market in their hands.

If the programmers were to make this game ultra-realistic, what you would be left with is something no one would wish to play. There has to be a point where they put a barrier on too much facts, figures & stats for the sake of playability.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just because something is modeled, it does not neccessarily have to be initially shown or utilized by a player that hates micromanagement or depth. A game can be very complex, but still allow simple playing for a less enthusiastic person if the interface is done right.

[mokbubble2 0]

Please please please make an election night like what was done by the game President Elect. THat game was made so long ago, but no one has been able to match its election night. You can find the game at www.theunderdogs.org

[Anthony_270 990]

Hi LiberalUK,

Thanks for the idea, we'll think about it. The ability for scenario designers to customize bonuses for each candidate for each region is in Chancellor Forever, and this feature will be carried over to the new President Forever.

Jayavarman,

One idea that has been thought about seriously is adding the ability to target certain demographic profiles. Thanks for the feedback on this (and the other ideas).

Mokbubble2,

Thanks for the suggestion, we'll look into the possibilities for election night.

Anthony Burgoyne

80soft.com

[progressivedem 2]

Thanks for the suggestion, we'll look into the possibilities for election night.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I second his call. I know I've said this before, but I its so important to me I'll say it again: Election night is the most climactic moment of any campaign, and is personally my favorite night. The election night in the game is pretty anti-climactic and could be really cool, with states quickly being called, or having closer ones trickle in all night simultaneously, and if the results we're really close, recounts. I don't mean to sound pushy, but I this would be a better addition to the game than maybe even the primary update. Thanks for listening.

[alex xauw 1]

I think a great idea for the new Presient Forever would be to be able to have different states choose electors in different ways. FPTP + Winner Take All is most common, but Maine and Nebraska have the votes ofr each district (plus 2 at large), and Colorado almost switched to PR in the last election, and preference voting or other systems could be possibilities too... but not limit the whole game to one election style, make it more realistic and leave more scenario possibilities.

Also, perhaps a possibility to target specific districts like in the PM4E games...

[RonnieRaygun04 3]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but one cool thing would be that if you lose the Primary campaign you get the option of running as an independent. It's happened before (1980 with Anderson and 1912 with Teddy Roosevelt) and could make things interesting in the game.

[sven 1]

The idea about giving particular candidates different support in different areas is a good idea.

Clearly southern candidates perform differently to northern candidates, yet in this game, apart from the home state itself, a person's location (or their personality) plays little role. You should be able to set bonuses for particular candidates in each state.

For example, in the game I'm making for World President, I want Bush to be particularly unpopular personally (not the Conservative Party, just Bush in person) across the Middle East, and there are numerous others.

[Anthony_270 990]

RonnieRaygun04,

That is a good idea.

Alex Xauw,

We'll think about this.

Thanks,

Anthony Burgoyne

80soft.com

[K-uglen 2]

Read the header on this thread - IT IS A GAME! There are plenty of "analysis" programmes already out there, but damn few election games. They've got the untapped market in their hands.

If the programmers were to make this game ultra-realistic, what you would be left with is something no one would wish to play. There has to be a point where they put a barrier on too much facts, figures & stats for the sake of playability.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What LiberalUK were proposing would, could and should be made in the same manner as regionalism - an option to toggle on and off at the game starting screen. That way those who crave more depth and realism can choose for their games to have that. And those who'd just like a fun and less complex campaign can do so too.

Oh, and shouldn't your username by wafer thin mint? As in the Monty Python-sketch? 'And finally monsieur, a wafer thin mint!' (great sketch by the way )

[mokbubble2 0]

I think normally the makret is untapped, but this year there were something like five games.

[ktitus 4]

network/internet play

primaries

scenario builder

unlimited # of parties

Thanks,

ktitus

[danieldlmn 0]

how about drop out Feature for other candidates in primaries if they haven't gotten certain % by a certain date and they endorse somebody at random

[progressivedem 2]

how about drop out Feature for other candidates in primaries if they haven't gotten certain % by a certain date and they endorse somebody at random

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I kind of like the idea, but then Kucinich would've been gone in like November of 2003, but I don't think it should be random who they endorse, it should be whoever most matches their platform.

[Yoyo 2]

Two states (i.e. Maine) currently can split their electoral votes because of congressional districts, so I'd like to see that implemented in P4E. It'd be rather cool.

Proportional voting in a given state (Colorado's measure failed in 2004) as an option would be rather cool, too.

Also, I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned too:

Three difficulty levels: Easy, Medium, Hard?

Just some thoughts.

[Dennis Kussinich 08 23]

Ive got an idea for a future version of the primary version. When it is convention time you can type up speeches for the convention, choose who you want to speak, the music from the game or computer. Just an idea,

PS: I also posted this in game Developer's Log.

[LiberalUK 4]

I kind of like the idea, but then Kucinich would've been gone in like November of 2003, but I don't think it should be random who they endorse, it should be whoever most matches their platform.

It should also be someone who can win (in the hope that they can become running mate. Shouldn't it be possible to make deals with other candidates with regard to becoming the running mate and negotiating over policy. E.g. in 2004, Clark could have done a deal with Kerry that he (Clark) would drop out in exchange for the vice-presidencey, and their platform would shift to the left on a couple of issues.

[hillary'08 0]

i guess that would make a lot of sense, but it might be hard to make the feature. would it automatically choose the running mate when it's convention time?

[LiberalUK 4]

i guess that would make a lot of sense, but it might be hard to make the feature. would it automatically choose the running mate when it's convention time?

If the player wins the nomination he/she would choose the running mate as in real life. If not then the player could make an offer to the candidate which could then be refused or excepted depending on platform, state, electibility et.c.

How it would all work in practice is a difficult question. You would have the option of clicking a 'negotiate' button. The other candidate may then decide to enter negotiaitions with you. Offers nad counter offers would go backwards and forwards ovger policy. It wouldn't be so different from negotiating in Civilization III or Rome Total War.

for example:

Clark (the player) offers to negotiate with Kerry over the nomination of the running mate.

Kerry enters negotiations.

Clark offers to run on a certain platform set by the player.

Kerry puts forward a counter-proposal of adiferent platform.

Eventually, one of them accepts or leaves to continue the race as no compromise can be found.

Hopefully, 80soft will introduce customizable AI and so it will all depend on how principaled/ desperate the other canddate is.

[hillary'08 0]

i see what you're saying.

[Doug325 0]

I have several suggestions

Expanded endorsement feature: Have more potential endorsements and make them have

a more apparent effect. For instance, for "issue endorsements" instead of a hard to see "momentum boost", give the candidate get a +1 bonus in their issue rating. For organization endorsements, have them result

in free foot soldiers in certain states.

Make the candidates more differentiated within their party:

Give candidates special abilities and special issues

For instance,

* Excellent Spin Teams (Clinton92) Give them 30%/CP rather than 20%

* Grass Roots strength, like Dean in 04: Allow them to produce FS easier

* Teflon- (like Reagan) – Scandal Immunity

* Other candidates can increase percentage of solid voters for them (or opponent)

Have option for a candidate to have a "special issue" (like McCain and Campaign Finance)

State Issues: Some states have “focus issues”, which should be permanently at Very High(or higher)

status. Think Social Secutity in Florida, Immigration in the southern border states.

Have option to have 0 human players. You can facilitate scenario building by having the computer control the candidates to insure balance

[Flasuss 0]

Probably someone gave that idea, but how about if the initial % of the candidates changed according to.. who is the candidate. Today, on the electorate trends, is always the party's. And it's obvious than Giuliani won't begin losing by 20% in New York, regardless of how blue the state is.

[SaskGuy 16]

Probably someone gave that idea, but how about if the initial % of the candidates changed according to.. who is the candidate. Today, on the electorate trends, is always the party's. And it's obvious than Giuliani won't begin losing by 20% in New York, regardless of how blue the state is.

Well, there's already a feautre like that in PMF Canada that allows you to do something like that - at the bottom of the candidate file, you put in the region name and how much of a boost the candidate gives for the party in that region. I'm sure they'll integrate into PF 2008.