So far I get that you have a simulation system/mechanic/rule set/theory/something that is like magic to the current state of art of designing games (edit: no sarcasm intended, this is more or less what I understood you saying). And you want to pitch it to somebody. I'm still not clear who are you targeting. Depending on which of your posts I read, it could be the scientific community, the board game publishers or the video game publishers. I'm going to blatantly ignore the scientific community because I have no idea how that world works.

You have already gotten very good advice so far, but I want to add a couple of points you might want to consider adding to your elevator pitch.

• Is it technically feasible? Either if we are talking about making board games or video games, have you considered what technical implications does your idea have? There are so many great simulation ideas in the video games industry that can simply not be done due to technical reasons. If I were to put money in your idea, the first thing I would want to know apart from what actually is your idea, is if it can really be done or it's just another great idea that we cannot do anytime soon. So consider adding which technical implications you have considered and how your idea can be implemented.
• Is it fun? We are talking about games here. Nothing of what I have read so far makes me think that what you have will actually be fun to play. Simulation system? Sure, we can simulate how the leafs of a tree grow with an astonishing accuracy. Still, it's funnier to go kill some orcs and grab the loot they magically drop without caring for how the computer decided the orcs would be there or what loot they would drop. So, what makes this system you have developed actually fun to play? How will it make the end result funnier than the current alternatives?

Samoth, when I say it is a "scientific modeling simulation of a god", that is something very specific. In the kind of simulation design some of my generation did there is a thing called a "Statement of Function" which is simple to understand, it is essentially a simple "flow chart in words" that describes the precise function of a simulation. A means of proving that it's basic function will work before spending any time working on it. Rube's "Statement of Function" is, of course, far to detailed to provide here. But it is the description of a "scientific modeling simulation" of a god. Rube does actually function as the literal god of it's reality. It creates all of its reality, and plans the future of every individual "living thing" within its reality. Scientific modeling simulations were made because they teach things, and one talent among those of us who made them is identifying what unintended results within a simulation might be representing. I didn't "make a god", I "found a god". That is what Rube's "Statement of Function" describes, not something that I intentionally set out to make.

And Rube is more of a powerful tool than a game. Rube can be used at to core of many types of games, or even metaphorically "waved over" an existing game to enhance some of its existing features. Of course, as a "God Game" Rube truly is in his natural element... which is why the 2-part big grand ending of my universe would be a 2-part God Game. That is actually the newest edition added on very recently, to what had been a 10-game universe for the last few years, after realizing the nature of "Rube" that was at the core of almost all of my games in some form.

Gian-Reto, you are incorrect. The hobbyist game industry collapsed in the early 1990s and it ceased to exist. The more recent board games are what we call the "Neo-Hobbyist" game industry which is a completely different thing. Read my blog, it covers this quite extensively in an attempt to preserve this lost history and the epic stature of "The Big Three" and the vast influence they have on games even to this day, Everyone knows that D&D has been the most influential game of our time, few know that SFB and ASL are a VERY close second and third. All modern game design ultimately comes from The Big Three games... especially Star Fleet Battles. These games most definitely have been forgotten by the modern game industry, if they weren't then you would all be calling Stephen V Cole "the father of modern game design" but instead you've never even heard of him before. Which is a perfect example. You have heard the names, but know none of the story of what those games even are. ASL and SFB are not like any other games that have ever been made, they are on a completely different level. Both were designed by hundreds of people over a period of decades, no other games ever were. They are, far and away, in a class by themselves represent a level of detail and complexity with which modern gamers do not even have a frame of reference to begin to imagine. There is no question at all that The Big Three era was forgotten by modern game makers, almost from Day 1 in fact. They were absolutely certain that "board games are not relevant to what we do", I was there. I know.

Okay, let me try again...

1) At least one of your "Big Threes" is not dead, far from it. D&D is still played extensively by many fans all over the world. If you want to argue about the current edition no longer being the "true D&D expierience", be my guest. I am not really into D&D, I only have heard that there are quite some differences between the different revisions. I know from my expierience with Games Workshop games that such differences can make all the difference (3rd edition 40k was really taking a long time to grow on me... it never did until GW softened the blow with later revisions).

If that really warrants calling the game "being dead" I don't know....

2) Look, the fact your old Pen and Paper systems never got the fame they might as well have deserved (besides D&D to some extent) might be sad, but is understandable... they lost in popularity during the time when gaming wasn't mainstream yet, and just the initiated geeks knew that Dungeons and Dragons was NOT some Neo-Satanist cult.

There is no conspiracy behind these games fading back into obscurity, and no one didn't mention the guys involved with the creation of these games on purpose.

Just as with LotR, where people just use some of the "enhanced nordic mythology" elements that tolkien came up without even thinking about the source nowadays, because the tolkienized nordic mythology has become the accepted standart for high fantasy, so do people use gaming systems that might have been pioneered by D&D (though D&D certainly wasn't the first of its kind and borrowed heavely from earlier games) as accepted de facto standart for RPG games, pen and paper and videogames alike, nowadays.

They might not even be aware of the source. Because they are using mechanics passed down from the source indirectly.

3) Took the time to google your "neo-hobbiest games" phrase.... is that written by you -> http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/MarcMichalik/20160602/271918/Tiny_Little_Branches_The_GameMaster_Series.php?

I got no other direct hits over google, so I guess this is a phrase you made up. Well, not trying to judge here, just make sure we are on the same page.

Now, working from the assumptions above I guess you are trying to express your own judgement of older vs. newer hobbyist games. I can relate to that, having seen the downfall of the once mighty, quirky, and pretty hard to get into GW games to streamlined, easy to pick up but depth lacking mainstream tabletop games.

But then, I have seen what a mess the older system was, how the additional depth was often just complicating things, and how games consumed whole DAYS because of the depth of the ruleset.

40k 2nd Edition was a raw diamond, but often unplayable if you didn't had to time to invest to both play the game (with single turns taking 2 hours and more to play out, and 6 turns to go), and read the many resources needed (resource books were HUGE at the time). I wasn't happy about the "Kiddification" of 40k 3rd edition, but to some degree without that, the game wouldn't have seen the success it did after that. It was just unplayable for most people in its 2nd edition state.

So, judging form what I read from you until now, you crave deep systems and a game that really challenges you to learn EVERYTHING about it, and has a ton of information to absorb. That is fine really, the crowd that loves such games is still around today. But as in the 70's and 80's, this crowd is really small. Most people cannot invest 12 hours into a Pen and Paper or Tabletop marathon, AND invest countless hours into reading all the resource books, creating their characters, preparing as game master, painting armies and whatnot.

Most people have a life beyond tabletop or pen and paper gaming. Newer games more and more cater to this audience, because it outnumbers the more dedicated group by far.

Eh, the Matrix would be a pretty lousy game if you wanted to interpret it that strictly. You're right, but since we're talking about game design it's probably more useful to not go for hyperrealism or permadeath, and instead think more in terms of Star Trek's holodeck, or at least incorporate some kind of reincarnation.

Well, what is the difference between "The Matrix" and a simple VR Game then?

As far as I am concerned, the defining characteristic of "The Matrix" is that ITS NOT A GAME! Thus it does not have to be fun... it does not have to be safe... it does not have to be anything really other than hyperreal to the extent that someone expieriencing it cannot tell it apart from reality (which means it being fun or safe is actually counter productive... if you fall down a skyscraper and get a continue, you know you are not in reality from that point onwards, making you very dangerous to whoever is running this Matrix implementation. Having too much fun is also counter productive, because the real life usually isn't that fun. Some people will find that "Immersion breaking" too).

Look, I might be pedantic here, but when "The Matrix" is just a very advanced VR Game it ceases to be "The Matrix" to me. Its marketing hyperbole at its best to call things names they do not really deserve.

Eh, the Matrix would be a pretty lousy game if you wanted to interpret it that strictly. You're right, but since we're talking about game design it's probably more useful to not go for hyperrealism or permadeath, and instead think more in terms of Star Trek's holodeck, or at least incorporate some kind of reincarnation.

Well, what is the difference between "The Matrix" and a simple VR Game then?

As far as I am concerned, the defining characteristic of "The Matrix" is that ITS NOT A GAME! Thus it does not have to be fun... it does not have to be safe... it does not have to be anything really other than hyperreal to the extent that someone expieriencing it cannot tell it apart from reality (which means it being fun or safe is actually counter productive... if you fall down a skyscraper and get a continue, you know you are not in reality from that point onwards, making you very dangerous to whoever is running this Matrix implementation. Having too much fun is also counter productive, because the real life usually isn't that fun. Some people will find that "Immersion breaking" too).

Look, I might be pedantic here, but when "The Matrix" is just a very advanced VR Game it ceases to be "The Matrix" to me. Its marketing hyperbole at its best to call things names they do not really deserve.

I guess I am just used to seeing stories where the concept of "The Matrix" has been evolved from what it is in the actual movies. I've commonly seen "The Matrix" referred to as the game system behind a multiverse/reincarnation existence which allows every person (specifically, they are an uploaded consciousness, not tied to a single body) to be the main character of a game-ified life. The player chooses game settings before each incarnation, with "real life" being nightmare mode with all the tutorials and menus disabled. For 2nd/3rd/4th lives, easier settings tend to be more popular. Very little of this is inherent in the actual Matrix movies, it's stuff fans have added on afterwards to increase the interestingness and usefulness of the concept.

Gian, if you read my blog here... http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/MarcMichalik/787769/ you will understand what I am talking about when I say the "Big Three" era hobbyist game industry died. It did, and I was working in the industry when it happened. All three of the games still exist today, they had millions of fans most of whom are still alive. But that game industry died for specific reasons in the early 1990's. That is what I mean by that. My blog also explains how and why the Star Fleet Universe was forgotten by your history, I never said it was any kind of conspiracy. I know how it happened and I explain that in my blog. The short answer is... SFB was not allowed to make a computer game when it needed to, combined with the fact that the thinly veiled Star Fleet Universe game called "Master of Orion" stole the reputation of the Star Fleet Universe.

So, after having had half a day to think about where I am at now... Here is what I could use some advice about from those who know and understand the business side of the computer game industry. I think Rube is ultimately of interest to real science, even if only as a conceptual physical construct. I am happy about that because I am a fan of science and the advance of knowledge, but in another sense I could really care less about that. I am an obsessed "savant game designer" who has spent his entire life make games that I've known for certain for the last 10 years would never be made. That didn't matter too me, I still had to make them all and complete the entire universe. After adding the last two "God Games" recently, that Rube kind of demands be made, I am probably back to being about 75% finished with the entire universe. The plan was always to make two games at a time, at all times, so I would still live long enough to actually do this... and the 6th game is actually a potential ending point if need be. So I am not too old yet to still do this, just barely. But here are my big problems with making this happen, even with Rube which you would think would make this a sure thing but, no, it doesn't...

1) Venture Capital people will still ignore me. Rube changes nothing for them, I am still one person with an idea and they don't do that. You need to be a team of people with proven track records. So Rube actually changes nothing with them, and it would still be a waste of time for me to try that route... which I was just about too.

2) I am inherently incompatible with the modern game industry. Existing game companies have a plan, and already know what they are doing and what games they are making in the near future. I don't fit in to ANYBODY'S plan.

3) The only way to make my game universe has not changed as ultimately determined nearly 10 years ago, I have to be wealthy enough to fund an entire game dev company myself. That's the only place where my plan fits, all the existing companies already have a plan.

So, this is the nature of my problem as I see it. Does this sound right to you? Do you see any way around this? Or should I just give up again, even with Rube, because me and the modern game industry are just inherently incompatible with each other?

Like I've been asking from the beginning... Even with Rube, is it still not possible for me to make games unless I can find $10 million somewhere?

Why exactly is it you can't make this game yourself? Grab a game engine, go to town. Civ-like games don't need great graphics, so you don't need $10 million to get started. Maybe if you can show your amazing matrix god game actually being played in a prototype state, people might care enough to fund it. Or pitch in enough to help finish it. There are plenty of examples of games out there without much in the way of graphics, who have managed success. Dwarf Fortress is in ASCII, Rule the Waves looks like it was written in MFC, both are successful games, the latter was only released in 2015.

I am a "scientific modeling simulation designer", in the terminology of my day, not a programmer. My universe is meant for others to add to it once it has been established, and over the years I have come up with 5 "side games" of my own. I would't live long enough to ever get past the "core 12" games now, but one of those side games was specifically designed to be very simple to produce. It exists solely to be the game done as an "indie project" if that ever became an avenue to doing this. So, I can't do it myself... and I would imagine that few designers respect the necessity of the programmers and artists as well as I do because of that fact. But I have always been prepared to go that route with one of the side games as a kind of "prequel" if that happened. But I am 48, most "indie devs" are young-20's... it's not a crowd I am really a part of, but certainly a route I would take if it were available. But that seems fairly unlikely to ever happen for a lot of reasons.

Actually, now that I think about it... I have publicly published the complete design document for the single core "Audience Retention Flagship Game" of my game universe online before. I have no problem with showing the entire 220 page design document for THE core game of the entire universe. I have done it before. A good way to think of my entire game universe is "11 games that orbit the core MMO audience retention game". I don't know what the etiquette about doing something like that is, so I don't want to just throw it up here. But it a moderator were to give the OK, I have no problem showing the complete design document for the core game of the entire universe.

Some around this place may remember my "vengeful retirement" from seeking employment in your industry about 8 years ago where I went by the name "Pirate Lord" and showed everyone this design document before. I was actually surprised I wasn't STILL banned from this place when I tried to come back this time... it was soooooo worth it!!! Haha:-)

Anyway, if people want to see it and the moderators approve it, I have no problem putting that up here if there is a way for me to upload a document that large somewhere to do that, I don't have a website anymore.