- I'm really intrigued by the idea of using a customizable deck of cards to work through a gamebook. So there might be two to four pre-crafted decks for players who just want to dive in, or the player could build his or her own deck.
- To keep the decks roughly thematically appropriate, I'd probably borrow the idea of Influence from Android: Netrunner. The players would have a particular Identity or Persona that have a particular set of cards associated with them that they can include at no cost. However, all cards would be marked with an Influence cost, and each Persona could only include out-of-character cards up to their Influence limit.
- For example, the Human character could only include a limited number of cards from the Cyborg deck.
- One of the reasons this idea appeals to me is that I can release expansions--new stories to overcome, new Personas, new cards for the different Personas, etc., all within the same rules system. Heck, I'd be more than willing to open the system up to all users, so that they can generate their own stories, Personas, and cards!
- The catch is that I have to get the system right. Once it's released, it will be much more difficult to go back and fix any problems inherent in the rules set.
- So let's think about the AI. What sort of challenges will the player have to overcome, and how will the game react to the player's decisions?
- I like to approach these sort of problems from a thematic perspective. So I'll start with a case study.
- Say the player is traversing some rocky terrain and stumbles across a goblin campsite. The goblins haven't noticed her, yet, but she's not confident that she can skirt around them. She has to go through them.
- What are her options?
- She could fight them, risking her life and probably taking some wounds
- She could frighten them, causing them to scatter.
- She could set up a distraction, and hope they abandon the camp to investigate long enough for her to sneak past.
- She could reveal herself and talk to them, hoping to persuade them to let her pass.
- Could I just keyword the encounters? So with the example above, the player must discard an appropriate number of Fight, or Frighten, or Distract, or Talk cards to progress?
- That's stupid; that's basically just asking whether the player has the right key or not, which does not make for compelling gameplay. I want the player to have to make difficult decisions.
- What if the encounters didn't spell out how to overcome them? It could be up to the player to decide how to use the cards at his or her disposal. So a card might say, "Distract +3." The player would use it, hoping that a distraction would work on the encounter. He or she would then look at the current paragraph number, add three, and consult that paragraph. So, if he or she was at Paragraph 24, he or she would proceed to Paragraph 27. If it said "Distraction Successful," the card worked.
- That doesn't work, either. First of all, that would require a massive amount of work on my part just to create a small story. I'd have to account for half a dozen or more permutations for each encounter. That's a lot more writing for a small gain. Plus, he player would have little to no basis for his or her decision. What if the player decided to Frighten the goblins, but it failed? How would the player no it was going to fail? What hints could the system give that one option was better than another? What sort of consequences would there be for failure?
- No, that's way too much work for me and not enough fun decision-making for the player. I'll have to find another solution.
- On top of which, I'm not sure I want the story to consist of numbered sections. Would it be possible to have a slightly more linear story, with random encounters scattered throughout? How would that look?
- So the player is going along, reading the story, and he or she hits a Random Encounter. He or she then rolls on a chart based on his or her location, and perhaps some other factors adjust the die roll. The chart then tells the player what sort of encounter he or she must face. He or she deals with it, suffers some consequences, gains some bonuses, and proceeds with the story.
- That could theoretically work. In fact, I like the idea that the story would have a general overall shape, but with little crests and valleys and twists that are with each play through. I could even have some branching paths that would only be accessible based on particular random encounters happening at particular points in the story. That could be fun.
- Okay, so I've got a basic story structure. But how do random encounters actually work? What information is given to the player when they hit a random encounter? And will I be able to have encounters that are not purely combat-based, so that players can work through the story in a number of different ways that don't involve the murderation of dozens of animals and sentient beings?
- Let's say that the player rolls an encounter. That encounter might have several different stats indicating how one MIGHT overcome it, and the player can use his or her cards to match or beat one of those stats.
- So the goblin encampment would have Fight 15, Frighten 20, Distract 9, and Talk 12. The player would have to muster up enough Fight, Frighten, Distract, or Talk cards to overcome one of those options. Otherwise, the encounter gives a certain consequence.
- That's still a bit too much like needing the right set of keys to get through the door. I don't like the fact that the player knows EXACTLY what he or she needs to beat the encounter.
- Is there some way to "hide" the exact numbers that the player will need to overcome? That way I could merely hint at what the player needs, but he or she would be uncertain about whether his or her Lighting Strike and Dual Wield Daggers (Fight 9 and Fight 6, respectively) would be enough to get through the goblins.
- I know! I could randomize the stats. So instead of "Fight 15, Frighten 20," etc., the player would see "Fight 2d6 + 6, Frighten d12 + 4, Distract d6 + 1, Talk 2d6 - 2." The player would assemble his or her response to the encounter, THEN roll to see if he or she defeats it. That adds a nice push-your-luck element that I think could really work.
- The best part is, sometimes the player will KNOW that the dice cannot possible roll high enough to defeat his or her response, but sometimes the player will be forced to gamble on a low number in order to conserve resources.
- Plus, I could have the story branch out in different ways, depending on how the player overcame the random encounter.
- Yes, I like this a lot! It's potentially very compelling, and can reward players for progressing through the game in multiple ways. Replayability is always good for a solitaire game, especially one with a customizable component like the player's deck.
- Now to think about theme....
- This system could obviously translate very well to a fantasy theme. The player could be a mage, a soldier, a noble, or a merchant, with different strengths and weaknesses against different kinds of encounters.
- The problem with fantasy is not only that it's been done a lot, but it's been done WELL a lot. That's a lot of pressure to compete!
- I'm not sure I'm interested in a modern thriller or spy story, but it could work. Something to keep in mind.
- Sci fi would be fun, though. I love a good sci fi story. And this system could let the player play in the universe in fun ways. A human, a cyborg, an uplifted animal, and a robot would all interact with the encounters in different ways. The robot might be prone to hacking and electronic warfare, while the cyborg uses brute strength and enhanced speed to bring down his or her enemies. The human is relatively weak and fragile, but overcomes many different types of obstacles through creativity and ingenuity. The uplift has certain social obstacles and advantages, as an animal living in a world designed for humans, but is a master of stealth and surprise.
- Yes, I like this a lot! I think I'll go with it.
- Now, let's consider what a deck actually looks like.
- I like the idea of smaller decks. The players shouldn't need a 60-card monstrosity to get through a story. Let's say a 30-card minimum deck. Probably a maximum of 3 copies of any given card. That makes printing easier--my card sheets are 3x3, so I can put three copies of three unique cards per sheet.
- I also like the idea of giving the player actions to take outside of what is explicitly written on the cards. So while the Human player might have a card that he or she can discard to draw three additional cards, or to search his or her deck for a particular card, all Personas will have the option to, say, discard a card to draw a card.
- I don't think I want the player to have to deal with his or her own stats, not even Health or Oxygen or anything like that. Everything he or she needs should be in the deck or in the encounter tables. It's just simpler that way. So what sort of punishment can the AI dish out?
- Perhaps running out of cards in the deck means death? No, that would reward players for playing huge, bulky, cumbersome, extremely random decks. I think I'll allow the player to shuffle his or her discard pile into a new deck when the deck runs out.
- Hand size, then, could be the player's Life. Take damage, discard a card. Run out of cards in hand, and you're dead.
- The problem with that idea is that a player could get into a death spiral. He or she doesn't have enough cards to overcome a particular encounter, so he or she takes damage, so he or she has fewer cards to deal with the next encounter.... So that doesn't quite work, either.
- What about removing cards from the game permanently? Take damage, exile the top card of your deck. That card is gone forever; I don't care if it's a really strong card, you don't get to use it this game. Hm... maybe. I don't like the fact that it won't always FEEL like damage. "Oh, I don't really care about that card, so that encounter wasn't very punishing at all."
- Maybe a mixture of those ideas? Some encounters force you to discard cards from your hand if you fail, which limits your options. Some of them force you to exile cards from your deck, which CAN limit your options. And some of them could put a cap on your hand limit, so you don't necessarily have to discard cards, but now you can only ever hold 4 cards in your hand instead of 5. So when you draw cards, you'll occasionally be forced to discard cards.
- I also think it's important to keep the player from just digging through the deck for the exact cards he or she needs for every encounter. So there should be a penalty for having to shuffle your discard pile to create a new deck. Perhaps, if you run out of cards in your deck, you shuffle your discard pile into a new deck, then exile the top two cards? So each time you have to reshuffle, you have fewer and fewer cards left in your deck. Yes, that should work. It's not too punishing initially, but if the player abuses that strategy, he or she will find him or herself without many options.
- Okay, I'm really liking this idea. Time to go brainstorm some cards, and to sketch out an outline for the first story!
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Brainstorming for the 2013 Solitaire Print and Play Contest
This year's solitaire game design contest has begun, which means I have a few short weeks to prepare and submit a game. I was originally planning on submitting Horns of Thunder, the sequel to my well-received solitaire story game Wings of Lightning. However, I've had a lot of thoughts banging around in my head about how to integrate story and game mechanics, and wanted to put it all on paper. This post is a massive brainstorm, and will subsequently be long and somewhat incoherent. However, it may be useful for some people to see a designer's mind at work. Or this will just be really boring--I've no idea.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Designing Tabletop Games for Solitaire Play
I recently wrote a long post on the boardgamegeek forums that I would like to share and expound upon. You can see the original post in context here.
Solitaire game design has unique problems that multiplayer game design does not have to deal with. The player is not competing against an intelligent and determined opponent, so you have to give the player a challenge in other ways. Looking at other solitaire games will give you an idea of how other designers have tackled this problem.
Multiplayer games have the benefit of incorporating social interaction into the game. The human element creates uncertainty, tension, and fun. Players can compete against each other to prove their mettle, as in Android: Netrunner or Settlers of Catan. They can work together to overcome algorithmic obstacles, as in Pandemic or Space Alert. Some multiplayer games are ALL ABOUT the social interaction, such as Apples to Apples or The Resistance. Solitaire games cannot stand on this leg, so other elements must be put into place to keep the game engaging, and to allow the player to feel as if he or she is mastering the system.
Dice Dice Baby
Most solitaire games will have some sort of randomized gameplay element, whether that be dice, a shuffled deck of cards, random chit pulls, etc. This forces the player to stay on his or her toes and prepare for the worst possible outcome. It also forces the player to occasionally take risks. "If I don't roll a four or better right now, I am SCREWED." This helps add tension to what would otherwise be a solvable puzzle--and if the player wanted that, he or she could just play Sudoku.
This is one of the reasons that Zed Deck is a successful solitaire game. In Zed Deck, the player shuffles a specialized deck of cards. Each turn, the player draws the next card in the deck, then deals with the event on the card, usually by drawing two or more cards and referencing particular pieces of data on those cards. Then all those cards are discarded, and the player starts the next turn. The player only experiences perhaps a third of the available events each game, and always in a different order. This keeps the game fresh and interesting even after dozens of plays.
Limited Resources
Another good trick is to give the player plenty of actions which he or she CAN perform, but only enough time or action points to perform SOME of them. In Space Hulk: Death Angel - The Card Game, for example, each squad can only perform a single action per turn. Sure, you may WANT to shoot and kill some filthy xenos, then shift the formation to get the best fighters in range of the worst threats, then activate the control panel for a positive effect, then add support tokens to the marine in the most danger... but that's too bad. You only get one action, so use it wisely.
Todd Sanders' games tend to do this very well, especially his Lassadar games. Check 'em out! They're free to print and play, and are consistently eye-pleasing and fun.
Flexible Game State
One of the keys to making the above idea work is shifting priorities. Giving the player 10 different actions that he or she can perform is all well and good, but if it is ALWAYS correct to kill zombies, that's what the player will do, and gameplay will become stale. Players will want to make the optimal move, so the optimal move cannot always be obvious, or your game will be boring.
Dan Verssen's games tend to do this well, I think. In Thunderbolt Apache Leader, for example, the player might have a juicy target to take out just over the ridge. The player then thinks, "Okay, I want to destroy that thing. Do I spend a couple of turns flying around the ridge and approaching the target from the north? Do I risk flying through the ridge at low altitude? Or do I go into high altitude and fly over the ridge, but expose myself to fire from that AAA over there?" Each of those options is better or worse depending on the game state. The player has to weigh variables such as how much fuel remains, how much damage the plane has already taken, and how much stress the pilot is already under. At different game states, the optimal approach will be different. Heck, sometimes the correct move will be to just ignore the target and move on!
See the Victory Point Games lineup for more inexpensive examples of this principle in action.
AI See You!
Another problem to tackle is the game's artificial intelligence. Are you going to use an algorithm to have the game mimic human behavior, so that the player feels like he or she is playing against an intelligent opponent? There are ways to do this, but it often means a lot of work for the designer, a lot of work for the player, or both.
For example, Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm is an expansion to the base game that introduced a way to play the game solo. The player essentially rolls a die to see what the AI opponent does. However, the creation of this AI required thousands of computations to create a balanced and reasonably "intelligent" and difficult opponent for the player. That's a lot of work for the designer!
Other games force the player to perform a large number of tasks--drawing cards, moving tokens and cubes, rolling dice, calculating damage, et cetera--in order to perform all of the enemy AI's tasks. That's a lot of work for the player. Some gamers are willing to do this, but it is tiresome, and will dissuade a lot of potential players from really diving in to your game.
Other games don't try to emulate a player, though. In my own Enki-Des: The Soul Gates, the player has to battle six different monsters in turn. Each monster has one or more unique abilities, but each monster is also stupid. Every monster performs the exact same action each turn--attack! This makes it very easy for the player to keep track of what is happening--all he or she must do is decrease his or her Life. This SOUNDS bad, but the game still gives the player plenty of options each turn, as he or she balances short-term goals (killing the monster) with mid- and long-term goals (boosting stats, healing, preparing to fight the next monster, winning the game). Sometimes, the player will deliberately choose to take damage, because killing the monster or blocking the attack is not as important to him or her as some of the other actions he or she can take. Which ties back to the idea of shifting priorities.
Jessey Wright's stellar print-and-play dexterity game Nimbles the Spell Thief demonstrates a great use of AI. In the game, the player must flick Nimbles through a series of hallways and corridors in order to grab a precious Spell Tome and escape. Nimbles must avoid being seen by or colliding with the various guards as she makes her way through. The guards are controlled by simple rules--they move along preset pathways, and if they can "see" Nimbles (which in game terms means that you ended your turn too far outside the shadowy areas) then bad things happen. If too many bad things happen, Nimbles is captured. Even though the player is performing the actions of the guards, and the guards' actions are extremely limited, the player still feels as if the guards are active antagonists.
System Mastery
A key aspect to a successful solitaire game is system mastery--that is, the player's ability to improve his or her performance through practice and learning. This encourages the player to play the game multiple times and gives the player a feeling of accomplishment.
Let's look at a bad example first. Say there's a game called Roll High. In Roll High, the player rolls a die. If the player rolls a high number (4+ on a d6, for example), he or she wins. If he or she rolls low, it's a game loss. Not a very compelling game, is it? No matter how many times the player plays the game, no matter how much the player studies, he or she will not be able to improve his or her performance. (Well, aside from practicing specific dice-rolling methods that are typically considered cheating.)
One of the reasons my game Derelicts of Sin: Heresy fails as a solitaire game is that there is little reason to play more than a couple of times. Once the player has experienced all of the different branching paths (and there are only a few of those), the gameplay is very straightforward--conserve oxygen as much as possible, and try to place the location tiles in such a way that the engine room and the bridge are close to each other. There is no system to master, no skill at which the player can improve.
Utopia Engine, on the other hand, is a fine solitaire game. The mechanics are interesting and unique, and it takes practice to figure out their intricacies. The game is also difficult enough that a player may not QUITE win on his or her first few attempts, but will have gotten so CLOSE to victory that he or she is compelled to try again. And once the player masters the system enough to win consistently, he or she can then try to improve on his or her own high score.
In Soviet Russia, Decisions Make YOU!
The most important thing to remember is that solitaire players want to make difficult choices. They are not looking for a hand-out or an easy win. They want to weigh the different options against each other and decide what is most important. It is an exercise of the mind, so be sure to give the player difficult decisions with a wide possibility of outcomes.
DO NOT make a player's actions dependent on randomness. I know that I said that solitaire games should include randomness, but that's not what I mean. What I mean is: The player should always have a choice about how to proceed. Monopoly's dice-rolling movement mechanic is terrible, because it takes the action decision away from the player. "What do I get to do this turn? Oh, I rolled 4. That means the only thing I can do is move 4 spaces along this track." BORING.
What you want to do is give the player things to do, but mask the precise OUTCOME of those decisions. The player can move, shoot, hide, heal, or loot, but he or she does not know IN THAT MOMENT that he or she is about to draw an Overrun card that will buff all the enemies, so he or she may not realize that moving or hiding are better options than shooting or healing. That uncertainty provides tension in the player's decision making, which makes the game interesting.
I hope this was helpful for you! Now go forth and make awesome games. :D
Solitaire game design has unique problems that multiplayer game design does not have to deal with. The player is not competing against an intelligent and determined opponent, so you have to give the player a challenge in other ways. Looking at other solitaire games will give you an idea of how other designers have tackled this problem.
Multiplayer games have the benefit of incorporating social interaction into the game. The human element creates uncertainty, tension, and fun. Players can compete against each other to prove their mettle, as in Android: Netrunner or Settlers of Catan. They can work together to overcome algorithmic obstacles, as in Pandemic or Space Alert. Some multiplayer games are ALL ABOUT the social interaction, such as Apples to Apples or The Resistance. Solitaire games cannot stand on this leg, so other elements must be put into place to keep the game engaging, and to allow the player to feel as if he or she is mastering the system.
Dice Dice Baby
Most solitaire games will have some sort of randomized gameplay element, whether that be dice, a shuffled deck of cards, random chit pulls, etc. This forces the player to stay on his or her toes and prepare for the worst possible outcome. It also forces the player to occasionally take risks. "If I don't roll a four or better right now, I am SCREWED." This helps add tension to what would otherwise be a solvable puzzle--and if the player wanted that, he or she could just play Sudoku.
This is one of the reasons that Zed Deck is a successful solitaire game. In Zed Deck, the player shuffles a specialized deck of cards. Each turn, the player draws the next card in the deck, then deals with the event on the card, usually by drawing two or more cards and referencing particular pieces of data on those cards. Then all those cards are discarded, and the player starts the next turn. The player only experiences perhaps a third of the available events each game, and always in a different order. This keeps the game fresh and interesting even after dozens of plays.
Limited Resources
Another good trick is to give the player plenty of actions which he or she CAN perform, but only enough time or action points to perform SOME of them. In Space Hulk: Death Angel - The Card Game, for example, each squad can only perform a single action per turn. Sure, you may WANT to shoot and kill some filthy xenos, then shift the formation to get the best fighters in range of the worst threats, then activate the control panel for a positive effect, then add support tokens to the marine in the most danger... but that's too bad. You only get one action, so use it wisely.
Todd Sanders' games tend to do this very well, especially his Lassadar games. Check 'em out! They're free to print and play, and are consistently eye-pleasing and fun.
Flexible Game State
One of the keys to making the above idea work is shifting priorities. Giving the player 10 different actions that he or she can perform is all well and good, but if it is ALWAYS correct to kill zombies, that's what the player will do, and gameplay will become stale. Players will want to make the optimal move, so the optimal move cannot always be obvious, or your game will be boring.
Dan Verssen's games tend to do this well, I think. In Thunderbolt Apache Leader, for example, the player might have a juicy target to take out just over the ridge. The player then thinks, "Okay, I want to destroy that thing. Do I spend a couple of turns flying around the ridge and approaching the target from the north? Do I risk flying through the ridge at low altitude? Or do I go into high altitude and fly over the ridge, but expose myself to fire from that AAA over there?" Each of those options is better or worse depending on the game state. The player has to weigh variables such as how much fuel remains, how much damage the plane has already taken, and how much stress the pilot is already under. At different game states, the optimal approach will be different. Heck, sometimes the correct move will be to just ignore the target and move on!
See the Victory Point Games lineup for more inexpensive examples of this principle in action.
AI See You!
Another problem to tackle is the game's artificial intelligence. Are you going to use an algorithm to have the game mimic human behavior, so that the player feels like he or she is playing against an intelligent opponent? There are ways to do this, but it often means a lot of work for the designer, a lot of work for the player, or both.
For example, Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm is an expansion to the base game that introduced a way to play the game solo. The player essentially rolls a die to see what the AI opponent does. However, the creation of this AI required thousands of computations to create a balanced and reasonably "intelligent" and difficult opponent for the player. That's a lot of work for the designer!
Other games force the player to perform a large number of tasks--drawing cards, moving tokens and cubes, rolling dice, calculating damage, et cetera--in order to perform all of the enemy AI's tasks. That's a lot of work for the player. Some gamers are willing to do this, but it is tiresome, and will dissuade a lot of potential players from really diving in to your game.
Other games don't try to emulate a player, though. In my own Enki-Des: The Soul Gates, the player has to battle six different monsters in turn. Each monster has one or more unique abilities, but each monster is also stupid. Every monster performs the exact same action each turn--attack! This makes it very easy for the player to keep track of what is happening--all he or she must do is decrease his or her Life. This SOUNDS bad, but the game still gives the player plenty of options each turn, as he or she balances short-term goals (killing the monster) with mid- and long-term goals (boosting stats, healing, preparing to fight the next monster, winning the game). Sometimes, the player will deliberately choose to take damage, because killing the monster or blocking the attack is not as important to him or her as some of the other actions he or she can take. Which ties back to the idea of shifting priorities.
Jessey Wright's stellar print-and-play dexterity game Nimbles the Spell Thief demonstrates a great use of AI. In the game, the player must flick Nimbles through a series of hallways and corridors in order to grab a precious Spell Tome and escape. Nimbles must avoid being seen by or colliding with the various guards as she makes her way through. The guards are controlled by simple rules--they move along preset pathways, and if they can "see" Nimbles (which in game terms means that you ended your turn too far outside the shadowy areas) then bad things happen. If too many bad things happen, Nimbles is captured. Even though the player is performing the actions of the guards, and the guards' actions are extremely limited, the player still feels as if the guards are active antagonists.
System Mastery
A key aspect to a successful solitaire game is system mastery--that is, the player's ability to improve his or her performance through practice and learning. This encourages the player to play the game multiple times and gives the player a feeling of accomplishment.
Let's look at a bad example first. Say there's a game called Roll High. In Roll High, the player rolls a die. If the player rolls a high number (4+ on a d6, for example), he or she wins. If he or she rolls low, it's a game loss. Not a very compelling game, is it? No matter how many times the player plays the game, no matter how much the player studies, he or she will not be able to improve his or her performance. (Well, aside from practicing specific dice-rolling methods that are typically considered cheating.)
One of the reasons my game Derelicts of Sin: Heresy fails as a solitaire game is that there is little reason to play more than a couple of times. Once the player has experienced all of the different branching paths (and there are only a few of those), the gameplay is very straightforward--conserve oxygen as much as possible, and try to place the location tiles in such a way that the engine room and the bridge are close to each other. There is no system to master, no skill at which the player can improve.
Utopia Engine, on the other hand, is a fine solitaire game. The mechanics are interesting and unique, and it takes practice to figure out their intricacies. The game is also difficult enough that a player may not QUITE win on his or her first few attempts, but will have gotten so CLOSE to victory that he or she is compelled to try again. And once the player masters the system enough to win consistently, he or she can then try to improve on his or her own high score.
In Soviet Russia, Decisions Make YOU!
The most important thing to remember is that solitaire players want to make difficult choices. They are not looking for a hand-out or an easy win. They want to weigh the different options against each other and decide what is most important. It is an exercise of the mind, so be sure to give the player difficult decisions with a wide possibility of outcomes.
DO NOT make a player's actions dependent on randomness. I know that I said that solitaire games should include randomness, but that's not what I mean. What I mean is: The player should always have a choice about how to proceed. Monopoly's dice-rolling movement mechanic is terrible, because it takes the action decision away from the player. "What do I get to do this turn? Oh, I rolled 4. That means the only thing I can do is move 4 spaces along this track." BORING.
What you want to do is give the player things to do, but mask the precise OUTCOME of those decisions. The player can move, shoot, hide, heal, or loot, but he or she does not know IN THAT MOMENT that he or she is about to draw an Overrun card that will buff all the enemies, so he or she may not realize that moving or hiding are better options than shooting or healing. That uncertainty provides tension in the player's decision making, which makes the game interesting.
I hope this was helpful for you! Now go forth and make awesome games. :D
Sunday, April 7, 2013
Horns of Thunder In Progress
I've been getting some nudges from my... fans? I'm going to go with fans--over at Board Game Geek who are eager to play the sequel to my award-winning solitaire gamebook, Wings of Lightning.
The sequel, Horns of Thunder, is in the works as a couple of weeks ago. The rules are basically finished save for some minor editing, and I am perhaps halfway through Chapter One. The game's outline currently puts it at 9 or 10 chapters, and should include some interesting narrative surprises for fans of the first game while remaining playable and fun for those new to the trilogy. I'm trying to write it so that those completely unfamiliar with Skoros, Molina, and the events of Wings of Lightning will still be able to jump into the world of Myesta without feeling lost.
Progress is currently rather slow. I'm juggling two intense college courses with 25+ hours at work every week, including trying to earn a pretty sweet promotion. Subsequently, it has been difficult to find time for creative writing. (You'll notice this is my first blog post in months.)
Still, the semester ends in about two weeks. After that, I will be working full-time, but will not have to bring my work home with me. So I should have plenty of free time to work on my creative endeavors.
With Horns of Thunder, I have added examples of the combat system and cleaned up the combat rules to make things easier for those new to the game. It is, after all, a unique combat system, very different from those found in other gamebooks and RPGs. Combat requires a standard deck of poker cards. The player uses the face cards to make his or her attacks, generate combos, and slay his or her enemies. The number cards are drawn one at a time to determine whether the surviving enemies hit the player and what abilities they activate, although the player can attempt to block attacks with maneuver cards built up during his or her turn. Those who played Wings of Lightning will find the combat very familiar.
The narrative structure of the game is getting some pretty major tweaks. Rather than being completely linear, each chapter will be broken into a series of Scenes and Battles. Some Scenes (and possibly some Battles) will give the player an option of how he or she would like to proceed through the story. As long as the player survives combat, he or she will always be able to progress to the next chapter, but certain choices will make the journey easier or more difficult.
I am quite excited for Horns of Thunder and hope fans of Wings of Lightning will enjoy it. The current (tentative) release date is 1 July.
The sequel, Horns of Thunder, is in the works as a couple of weeks ago. The rules are basically finished save for some minor editing, and I am perhaps halfway through Chapter One. The game's outline currently puts it at 9 or 10 chapters, and should include some interesting narrative surprises for fans of the first game while remaining playable and fun for those new to the trilogy. I'm trying to write it so that those completely unfamiliar with Skoros, Molina, and the events of Wings of Lightning will still be able to jump into the world of Myesta without feeling lost.
Progress is currently rather slow. I'm juggling two intense college courses with 25+ hours at work every week, including trying to earn a pretty sweet promotion. Subsequently, it has been difficult to find time for creative writing. (You'll notice this is my first blog post in months.)
Still, the semester ends in about two weeks. After that, I will be working full-time, but will not have to bring my work home with me. So I should have plenty of free time to work on my creative endeavors.
With Horns of Thunder, I have added examples of the combat system and cleaned up the combat rules to make things easier for those new to the game. It is, after all, a unique combat system, very different from those found in other gamebooks and RPGs. Combat requires a standard deck of poker cards. The player uses the face cards to make his or her attacks, generate combos, and slay his or her enemies. The number cards are drawn one at a time to determine whether the surviving enemies hit the player and what abilities they activate, although the player can attempt to block attacks with maneuver cards built up during his or her turn. Those who played Wings of Lightning will find the combat very familiar.
The narrative structure of the game is getting some pretty major tweaks. Rather than being completely linear, each chapter will be broken into a series of Scenes and Battles. Some Scenes (and possibly some Battles) will give the player an option of how he or she would like to proceed through the story. As long as the player survives combat, he or she will always be able to progress to the next chapter, but certain choices will make the journey easier or more difficult.
I am quite excited for Horns of Thunder and hope fans of Wings of Lightning will enjoy it. The current (tentative) release date is 1 July.
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Boardgame Revolution
Every time I hear the name of the local game store I discovered recently, I get a flashback to high school, when a friend of mine made up a little ditty about the popular videogame Dance Dance Revolution.
"Dance. Dance. Re-vo-LU-shun!"
"Board. Game. Re-vo-LU-shun!"
There are several reasons I've come to like Boardgame Revolution over some of the game stores closer to my apartment:
1. Atmosphere
Boardgame Revolution is CLEAN. It's quite the novelty compared to the poorly-lit stores that smell vaguely of sweat, cigarettes, and loneliness which I have had to suffer for the last few years.
The bathroom is one of the better public restrooms I have been in, quite the step up from another store that... well, let's just say that I'm always worried that I would get both herpes AND pregnant from that "restroom."
I have yet to enter BR without being greeted by a store employee and asked if I need help finding anything.
The staff seems quite knowledgable about the selection of games, which I appreciate in a game store staff.
The gamers with whom I have associated there did not smell bad, nor were they... overly enthusiastic about winning.
In general, it's just very pleasant there, with a nice, relaxed atmosphere inviting everyone to have fun.
2. Variety
Boardgame Revolution has been striving hard to get a tournament scene going for multiple enjoyable games: BattleCON, Call of Cthulhu, Game of Thrones, and even the recently-released Android: Netrunner. I can stop by every Saturday afternoon (which is a GREAT time for me) and play a bunch of the games that I love.
Yesterday, not only did I get in several games of BattleCON, one of my all-time favorite games, but I was introduced to Sentinels of the Multiverse. It was a delightful cooperative game where the players take on the roles of themed superheroes trying to stop a super villain controlled by the game's AI. I'll probably write up a review soon.
3. Focus
Boardgame Revolution sells boardgames. That's it. It doesn't sell boardgames AND comics, or boardgames AND videogames, or boardgames AND miniatures AND painting/hobby supplies. It's just boardgames.
I really like that. It's just... so pure. Now, I understand why other game stores can't be as focus; there isn't actually a ton of money to be had as a brick-and-mortar game vendor these days. The boardgame INDUSTRY may be doing well, but a lot of that money is going to online distributors. So supplementing a store's income with other products makes plenty of sense.
Boardgame Revolution doesn't have to do that. They get away with this by renting boardgames. It's genius! You pay a portion of the game's price tag and can take home the rental copy. You can try out the game with your friends, see if you like it, see if they like it, and if everyone's down, you can buy the game at a discount. I mean, it's usually discounted anyway, because BR is awesome like that, but it will be further discounted by the rental price. Why aren't more stores doing this?
BASICALLY, I really like this store and hope to be able to play there on at least a semi-weekly basis. If you're in the area, I'd recommend checking it out. It's at 411 E 1400 S in Orem, UT. They're theoretically open from noon to 7pm M-F and 10am-7pm Saturday, but they hold regular card tournaments on Wednesdays starting at 7pm, so who knows how late they tend to actually stay open? I myself was there until about 7:20pm yesterday.
"Dance. Dance. Re-vo-LU-shun!"
"Board. Game. Re-vo-LU-shun!"
There are several reasons I've come to like Boardgame Revolution over some of the game stores closer to my apartment:
1. Atmosphere
Boardgame Revolution is CLEAN. It's quite the novelty compared to the poorly-lit stores that smell vaguely of sweat, cigarettes, and loneliness which I have had to suffer for the last few years.
The bathroom is one of the better public restrooms I have been in, quite the step up from another store that... well, let's just say that I'm always worried that I would get both herpes AND pregnant from that "restroom."
I have yet to enter BR without being greeted by a store employee and asked if I need help finding anything.
The staff seems quite knowledgable about the selection of games, which I appreciate in a game store staff.
The gamers with whom I have associated there did not smell bad, nor were they... overly enthusiastic about winning.
In general, it's just very pleasant there, with a nice, relaxed atmosphere inviting everyone to have fun.
2. Variety
Boardgame Revolution has been striving hard to get a tournament scene going for multiple enjoyable games: BattleCON, Call of Cthulhu, Game of Thrones, and even the recently-released Android: Netrunner. I can stop by every Saturday afternoon (which is a GREAT time for me) and play a bunch of the games that I love.
Yesterday, not only did I get in several games of BattleCON, one of my all-time favorite games, but I was introduced to Sentinels of the Multiverse. It was a delightful cooperative game where the players take on the roles of themed superheroes trying to stop a super villain controlled by the game's AI. I'll probably write up a review soon.
3. Focus
Boardgame Revolution sells boardgames. That's it. It doesn't sell boardgames AND comics, or boardgames AND videogames, or boardgames AND miniatures AND painting/hobby supplies. It's just boardgames.
I really like that. It's just... so pure. Now, I understand why other game stores can't be as focus; there isn't actually a ton of money to be had as a brick-and-mortar game vendor these days. The boardgame INDUSTRY may be doing well, but a lot of that money is going to online distributors. So supplementing a store's income with other products makes plenty of sense.
Boardgame Revolution doesn't have to do that. They get away with this by renting boardgames. It's genius! You pay a portion of the game's price tag and can take home the rental copy. You can try out the game with your friends, see if you like it, see if they like it, and if everyone's down, you can buy the game at a discount. I mean, it's usually discounted anyway, because BR is awesome like that, but it will be further discounted by the rental price. Why aren't more stores doing this?
BASICALLY, I really like this store and hope to be able to play there on at least a semi-weekly basis. If you're in the area, I'd recommend checking it out. It's at 411 E 1400 S in Orem, UT. They're theoretically open from noon to 7pm M-F and 10am-7pm Saturday, but they hold regular card tournaments on Wednesdays starting at 7pm, so who knows how late they tend to actually stay open? I myself was there until about 7:20pm yesterday.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Wings of Lightning Update, and My Next Project
If you frequent the boardgamegeek.com design forums, this is probably old news, but my gamebook, Wings of Lightning, did quite well in the 2012 Solitaire Print and Play Contest. Out of the 48 completed entries, Wings of Lightning placed 8th overall. Not too shabby.
In addition, it won first prize in the Best Paragraph Game and Best Large Game categories, and second place in the Best Sci Fi/Fantasy Game category. Pretty good for my first completed gamebook.
The prize isn't spectacular--just a pile of "GeekGold" that can be used on the boardgamegeek website to purchase certain perks, like new microbadges to place under my avatar. Still, it's a nice confidence-boost in my writing and design abilities.
Subsequently, I'm working on another gamebook, Traitors' Path. This one is heavily influenced by space opera like Star Trek and David Weber's Honor Harrington series. I think it will be a much better game than WoL in terms of balance and replayability. It's much lighter on combat, which I think actually makes it faster-paced than WoL; the combat systems in both games is fun and unique from other gamebooks, but it can get repetitive.
Traitors' Path is about Seventh Fleet patrolling the edge of human expansion for fear of the return of an alien threat. It turns out that the real threat to humanity, however, is itself, as the Interplanetary Socialist Initiative brutally and illegally takes power. The ISI takes control of the military and seizes most human-occupied systems within a matter of days.
As a young commander in Seventh Fleet, you vow your loyalty to Admiral Vonn and swear to help her and Seventh Fleet free humanity from the tyrannical Izzies. Check it out! The first three missions are playable right now. When the gamebook is complete, it will probably be the longest work I have ever completed.
And if you're interested in gamebooks, please check out this year's Windhammer contest. There are some really intriguing entries, and I'm a little disappointed that I didn't find time to complete a submission of my own. Next year, I suppose. Anyway, the winner and two other "merit award" entries will get the chance to be published as an app by Tin Man Games, so be sure to vote!
In addition, it won first prize in the Best Paragraph Game and Best Large Game categories, and second place in the Best Sci Fi/Fantasy Game category. Pretty good for my first completed gamebook.
The prize isn't spectacular--just a pile of "GeekGold" that can be used on the boardgamegeek website to purchase certain perks, like new microbadges to place under my avatar. Still, it's a nice confidence-boost in my writing and design abilities.
Subsequently, I'm working on another gamebook, Traitors' Path. This one is heavily influenced by space opera like Star Trek and David Weber's Honor Harrington series. I think it will be a much better game than WoL in terms of balance and replayability. It's much lighter on combat, which I think actually makes it faster-paced than WoL; the combat systems in both games is fun and unique from other gamebooks, but it can get repetitive.
Traitors' Path is about Seventh Fleet patrolling the edge of human expansion for fear of the return of an alien threat. It turns out that the real threat to humanity, however, is itself, as the Interplanetary Socialist Initiative brutally and illegally takes power. The ISI takes control of the military and seizes most human-occupied systems within a matter of days.
As a young commander in Seventh Fleet, you vow your loyalty to Admiral Vonn and swear to help her and Seventh Fleet free humanity from the tyrannical Izzies. Check it out! The first three missions are playable right now. When the gamebook is complete, it will probably be the longest work I have ever completed.
And if you're interested in gamebooks, please check out this year's Windhammer contest. There are some really intriguing entries, and I'm a little disappointed that I didn't find time to complete a submission of my own. Next year, I suppose. Anyway, the winner and two other "merit award" entries will get the chance to be published as an app by Tin Man Games, so be sure to vote!
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Wings of Lightning: A New Kind of Solo Gamebook
Old School
With the astounding rise of popularity in role-playing games in the late 70s and early 80s came a demand for role-playing adventures that could be played solitaire. After all, not every gamer could round up several friends and devote 4+ hours to a gaming session on a regular basis. But the craving for role-playing-style games was nigh insatiable.
Several major titles rose to meet this demand, notably the Fighting Fantasy series by Ian Livingstone and at least two different Steve Jacksons, and Lone Wolf by Joe Dever.
These gamebooks were designed to provide a single player with an RPG experience mimicking the popular mechanics of the time. There were stats to track, inventory lists, and most importantly, dice! The games played a bit like Choose Your Own Adventure books with dice-rolling. The player would make decisions, turn to paragraphs as instructed, and roll dice to see if they fail or succeed at various endeavors. The gamebooks essentially acted as GMs for the player.
I have attempted to write gamebooks on multiple occasions. They combine two of my favorite hobbies: game design and creative writing. None of these projects ever came to much, though. I would get really excited by the story of the game, but the mechanics always felt... flat. I didn't feel I was adding anything new to the genre.
I had to do some research. I played a wide variety of both professional and amateur gamebooks, trying to figure out what worked, what did not, what I enjoyed, and what I felt could be improved. The Fighting Fantasy Project was a particularly useful site, as was Project Aon, the attempt to make all the Lone Wolf books available for free online.
New Project
When I began to work on my newest design, Wings of Lightning, I tried to write a gamebook that drew upon the lessons that I had learned.
One of the key differences between Wings of Lightning and traditional gamebooks is the lack of dice. I had attempted to write WoL several times, always with various attempts at dice-based combat, and none of them worked. The problem was the Wings of Lightning was originally conceived of as an action-adventure video game, in the style of Legends of Zelda, God of War, and Shadow of the Colossus. Combat in such games revolves around patience, combos, and pushing one's luck to get in the last few hits. Dice just couldn't seem to emulate this.
Combat Evolved
I cast about for a mechanic that would mimic the fast-paced, brutal combat of God of War and Dante's Inferno. Dice were not working. What else could I use?
Many of my ideas seem to come during that blissful half-awake period when I am lying in bed waiting for my alarm to go off. During one such time, it occurred to me to use playing cards rather than dice. Playing cards have "memory," which in game terms means that the chances of achieving a certain outcome change over time as cards are depleted from the deck. Dice lack memory; previous rolls have no effect on future rolls.
I initially thought about having the player guess the color or suit of the top card of the deck, then revealing that card. A correct guess would mean a hit; an incorrect guess would therefore be a miss. Too many misses, and the player would receive a damage penalty. More hits would lead to better combos, thus encouraging the player to push his or her luck.
I liked this idea, because it would allow astute players to improve their accuracy over time. The more cards they revealed, the more information they would have about what cards remained, giving them a higher chance of guessing accurately.
It occurred to me, though, that a deck of cards has too many cards. Drawing four or five cards does not significantly alter the chances of drawing one suit or another. I had to limit the number of cards so that drawing even one card would significantly alter the chances of revealing one color or another. "Face cards!" I thought.
I tested the idea, and it seemed to work. Using only the 16 face cards (Jack, Queen, King, Ace), I could guess with a decent amount of accuracy the color of the top card.
What, then, to do with the remaining cards? "Enemy AI!" I thought.
For enemy attacks, I decided to use the numbers of the cards, rather than the colors. For each enemy, the player would simply reveal the top card of the deck. If the number on the revealed card was equal to or less than that enemy's Aim stat, the player would take a hit. It was fast, simple, and easy to understand.
After releasing an initial draft for viewing on boardgamegeek.com, some early testers helped me iron out some kinks on the system. (Shout out to Tony, Jessey, and Michael!)
First, the player wasn't interacting with the enemies enough. The enemies would either hit the player, or not, and the player could do nothing about it. I decided, then to utilize the "miss" cards that the player was accumulating anyway. The "miss" cards became "maneuver" cards. They would work the same way, in that too many maneuver cards would lead to a damage penalty, but they could also be used to cancel enemy damage. If an enemy hit the player, the player could cancel the damage by matching the revealed card with a maneuver card of the same suit. This added a nice extra layer of strategy, as players could deliberately miss in order to gain the suits they wanted to use to dodge enemy attacks.
Second, the idea of using guessing either colors or suits was too much. Colors were much easier; suits were just too difficult to guess consistently. So I ditched suits and went with colors only. The player only had to guess the correct color to get a hit.
Linear Story
Wings of Lightning was originally intended to be a video game. I had a very detailed plot laid out in my head, with several key characters playing important roles. The game was originally a sort of on-rails adventure, a la God of War or Dante's Inferno; there would be no wandering around looking for extra items or performing menial tasks for NPCs.
This meant that when I sat down to write WoL, I had to make a crucial decision. Instead of giving the player a lot of free reign over the story, with many branching paths and decision points, I decided to tell the story that I had already plotted. Wings of Lightning has a chapter structure traditionally found in novels, but not really seen in gamebooks. The player reads through and completes each chapter consecutively. He or she still makes choices, but ultimately the story will be the same each time.
There are pros and cons to this approach. On the one hand, the story will always be cohesive, and the characters consistent. I get to tell exactly the story I want to tell. On the other hand, once the player has completed the game once or twice, there is little incentive to replay. But WoL is intended as a free print-and-play game, and I don't think replay value is as important in a game that cost nothing.
Looking Ahead
Wings of Lightning is being designed for the 2012 Solitaire Print and Play Contest. Submissions must be complete by the end of July, which gives me about two weeks to wrap up the gamebook. I've been writing steadily, but some upheaval at work has been very draining, making it difficult to complete more than about a page a day.
Still, I am hopeful that I can complete a solid draft in time. I have outlined 10 chapters. The rules and chapters 1 and 2 are complete. Chapter 3 should be done by tomorrow evening. The biggest hurdle will be chapter 9 (assuming I stick to my outline), because it involves a very tricky plot twist. I think I can do it, with encouragement and dedication. Even if I don't manage to complete the game in time to submit to the contest, I definitely plan to finish the game before the end of the summer.
Then I'll get to work on the sequel: Horns of Thunder!
With the astounding rise of popularity in role-playing games in the late 70s and early 80s came a demand for role-playing adventures that could be played solitaire. After all, not every gamer could round up several friends and devote 4+ hours to a gaming session on a regular basis. But the craving for role-playing-style games was nigh insatiable.
Several major titles rose to meet this demand, notably the Fighting Fantasy series by Ian Livingstone and at least two different Steve Jacksons, and Lone Wolf by Joe Dever.
These gamebooks were designed to provide a single player with an RPG experience mimicking the popular mechanics of the time. There were stats to track, inventory lists, and most importantly, dice! The games played a bit like Choose Your Own Adventure books with dice-rolling. The player would make decisions, turn to paragraphs as instructed, and roll dice to see if they fail or succeed at various endeavors. The gamebooks essentially acted as GMs for the player.
I have attempted to write gamebooks on multiple occasions. They combine two of my favorite hobbies: game design and creative writing. None of these projects ever came to much, though. I would get really excited by the story of the game, but the mechanics always felt... flat. I didn't feel I was adding anything new to the genre.
I had to do some research. I played a wide variety of both professional and amateur gamebooks, trying to figure out what worked, what did not, what I enjoyed, and what I felt could be improved. The Fighting Fantasy Project was a particularly useful site, as was Project Aon, the attempt to make all the Lone Wolf books available for free online.
New Project
When I began to work on my newest design, Wings of Lightning, I tried to write a gamebook that drew upon the lessons that I had learned.
One of the key differences between Wings of Lightning and traditional gamebooks is the lack of dice. I had attempted to write WoL several times, always with various attempts at dice-based combat, and none of them worked. The problem was the Wings of Lightning was originally conceived of as an action-adventure video game, in the style of Legends of Zelda, God of War, and Shadow of the Colossus. Combat in such games revolves around patience, combos, and pushing one's luck to get in the last few hits. Dice just couldn't seem to emulate this.
Combat Evolved
I cast about for a mechanic that would mimic the fast-paced, brutal combat of God of War and Dante's Inferno. Dice were not working. What else could I use?
Many of my ideas seem to come during that blissful half-awake period when I am lying in bed waiting for my alarm to go off. During one such time, it occurred to me to use playing cards rather than dice. Playing cards have "memory," which in game terms means that the chances of achieving a certain outcome change over time as cards are depleted from the deck. Dice lack memory; previous rolls have no effect on future rolls.
I initially thought about having the player guess the color or suit of the top card of the deck, then revealing that card. A correct guess would mean a hit; an incorrect guess would therefore be a miss. Too many misses, and the player would receive a damage penalty. More hits would lead to better combos, thus encouraging the player to push his or her luck.
I liked this idea, because it would allow astute players to improve their accuracy over time. The more cards they revealed, the more information they would have about what cards remained, giving them a higher chance of guessing accurately.
It occurred to me, though, that a deck of cards has too many cards. Drawing four or five cards does not significantly alter the chances of drawing one suit or another. I had to limit the number of cards so that drawing even one card would significantly alter the chances of revealing one color or another. "Face cards!" I thought.
I tested the idea, and it seemed to work. Using only the 16 face cards (Jack, Queen, King, Ace), I could guess with a decent amount of accuracy the color of the top card.
What, then, to do with the remaining cards? "Enemy AI!" I thought.
For enemy attacks, I decided to use the numbers of the cards, rather than the colors. For each enemy, the player would simply reveal the top card of the deck. If the number on the revealed card was equal to or less than that enemy's Aim stat, the player would take a hit. It was fast, simple, and easy to understand.
After releasing an initial draft for viewing on boardgamegeek.com, some early testers helped me iron out some kinks on the system. (Shout out to Tony, Jessey, and Michael!)
First, the player wasn't interacting with the enemies enough. The enemies would either hit the player, or not, and the player could do nothing about it. I decided, then to utilize the "miss" cards that the player was accumulating anyway. The "miss" cards became "maneuver" cards. They would work the same way, in that too many maneuver cards would lead to a damage penalty, but they could also be used to cancel enemy damage. If an enemy hit the player, the player could cancel the damage by matching the revealed card with a maneuver card of the same suit. This added a nice extra layer of strategy, as players could deliberately miss in order to gain the suits they wanted to use to dodge enemy attacks.
Second, the idea of using guessing either colors or suits was too much. Colors were much easier; suits were just too difficult to guess consistently. So I ditched suits and went with colors only. The player only had to guess the correct color to get a hit.
Linear Story
Wings of Lightning was originally intended to be a video game. I had a very detailed plot laid out in my head, with several key characters playing important roles. The game was originally a sort of on-rails adventure, a la God of War or Dante's Inferno; there would be no wandering around looking for extra items or performing menial tasks for NPCs.
This meant that when I sat down to write WoL, I had to make a crucial decision. Instead of giving the player a lot of free reign over the story, with many branching paths and decision points, I decided to tell the story that I had already plotted. Wings of Lightning has a chapter structure traditionally found in novels, but not really seen in gamebooks. The player reads through and completes each chapter consecutively. He or she still makes choices, but ultimately the story will be the same each time.
There are pros and cons to this approach. On the one hand, the story will always be cohesive, and the characters consistent. I get to tell exactly the story I want to tell. On the other hand, once the player has completed the game once or twice, there is little incentive to replay. But WoL is intended as a free print-and-play game, and I don't think replay value is as important in a game that cost nothing.
Looking Ahead
Wings of Lightning is being designed for the 2012 Solitaire Print and Play Contest. Submissions must be complete by the end of July, which gives me about two weeks to wrap up the gamebook. I've been writing steadily, but some upheaval at work has been very draining, making it difficult to complete more than about a page a day.
Still, I am hopeful that I can complete a solid draft in time. I have outlined 10 chapters. The rules and chapters 1 and 2 are complete. Chapter 3 should be done by tomorrow evening. The biggest hurdle will be chapter 9 (assuming I stick to my outline), because it involves a very tricky plot twist. I think I can do it, with encouragement and dedication. Even if I don't manage to complete the game in time to submit to the contest, I definitely plan to finish the game before the end of the summer.
Then I'll get to work on the sequel: Horns of Thunder!
Saturday, June 16, 2012
A Thousand Years of Blood
I have released another print-and-play game titled A Thousand Years of Blood. It was designed for the June 24-Hour Game Design Contest, which was very intense. It looks like the 24-hour design contest might become a monthly contest, with each month presenting different restrictions or challenges. This month, the trial month of the contest, was open-ended. Participants could design whatever they wanted!
To start the clock, the participant posts on the contest thread, announcing that they are beginning their game. They then have 24 hours to create a game entirely from scratch. No revisiting half-finished prototypes, no starting the graphic design or mechanical testing prior to the start, nothing. Of course, this is all on the honor code, but we experienced designers have a good idea of what can and cannot be done in 24 hours.
My submission was designed, tested, tweaked, and released in a whirlwind weekend. The game is about an alternate reality wherein a superhuman named Heinrich Kirchner took over Nazi Germany after Hitler's assassination. Heinrich has lead the Nazis to victory over the human race. You, as a fellow superhuman, must escape capture and bring down Heinrich's regime.
The game fits onto a single PocketMod, a sheet of paper that can be folded origami-style into a little booklet. The player starts the game by selecting two super powers, then proceeds through each of the three levels to reach and defeat Heinrich.
It was definitely a fun and intense challenge. I learned a lot about my design methods and sensibilities. I definitely work better starting with a theme and then matching mechanics to it. The original concept for the game was to make a board game version of a side-scrolling adventure, but I quickly realized that there was no way to create that sort of game in 24 hours. A side-scroller really needs artwork to distinguish the various obstacles and enemies, and there was no way I would be able to pull that off in a day.
It occurred to me, though, that I could have the players draw their own enemies and obstacles. It was a stupid idea, and there was no way I could actually get players to do it. But it did lead me to the idea of having players generate the maps, themselves. Once I latched onto that idea, I decided to try and squeeze the game onto a PocketMod. The small space would restrict the design possibilities--which is a good thing when you only have a day. Additionally, I know from experience how to craft PocketMods, and I was confident that I could craft one quickly and get to testing.
The fact that the game was solitaire was extremely useful. I could get in a lot of testing in a short amount of time, and tweak the game quickly and easily.
There haven't been very many participants in the June contest, yet, but we're only halfway through the month. I'm hopeful that we'll be able to drum up more interest. The prize isn't hugely compelling, but the challenge is very fun and quite instructive.
Anyway, feel free to check out the game! The rules can be downloaded here, and the PocketMod is available here.
To start the clock, the participant posts on the contest thread, announcing that they are beginning their game. They then have 24 hours to create a game entirely from scratch. No revisiting half-finished prototypes, no starting the graphic design or mechanical testing prior to the start, nothing. Of course, this is all on the honor code, but we experienced designers have a good idea of what can and cannot be done in 24 hours.
My submission was designed, tested, tweaked, and released in a whirlwind weekend. The game is about an alternate reality wherein a superhuman named Heinrich Kirchner took over Nazi Germany after Hitler's assassination. Heinrich has lead the Nazis to victory over the human race. You, as a fellow superhuman, must escape capture and bring down Heinrich's regime.
The game fits onto a single PocketMod, a sheet of paper that can be folded origami-style into a little booklet. The player starts the game by selecting two super powers, then proceeds through each of the three levels to reach and defeat Heinrich.
It was definitely a fun and intense challenge. I learned a lot about my design methods and sensibilities. I definitely work better starting with a theme and then matching mechanics to it. The original concept for the game was to make a board game version of a side-scrolling adventure, but I quickly realized that there was no way to create that sort of game in 24 hours. A side-scroller really needs artwork to distinguish the various obstacles and enemies, and there was no way I would be able to pull that off in a day.
It occurred to me, though, that I could have the players draw their own enemies and obstacles. It was a stupid idea, and there was no way I could actually get players to do it. But it did lead me to the idea of having players generate the maps, themselves. Once I latched onto that idea, I decided to try and squeeze the game onto a PocketMod. The small space would restrict the design possibilities--which is a good thing when you only have a day. Additionally, I know from experience how to craft PocketMods, and I was confident that I could craft one quickly and get to testing.
The fact that the game was solitaire was extremely useful. I could get in a lot of testing in a short amount of time, and tweak the game quickly and easily.
There haven't been very many participants in the June contest, yet, but we're only halfway through the month. I'm hopeful that we'll be able to drum up more interest. The prize isn't hugely compelling, but the challenge is very fun and quite instructive.
Anyway, feel free to check out the game! The rules can be downloaded here, and the PocketMod is available here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)