Bene Factum

2012/03/29

The challenges of big-group games

Filed under: Gaming Blog — AlexWeldon @ 6:41 pm

In my previous two posts, I talked about the differences between designing two-player games and multiplayer games. Although I referred to games for three or four players in the latter’s title, everything I said there holds equally true in games for larger groups. However, I decided to create a separate post for big group games, because they have their own challenges on top of those of smaller multiplayer games. But whereas there’s binary division between two-player and multiplayer games, with fundamental differences between the two, here we see the problems appear and grow more gradually, as we increase the number of players. They may be minor, easy-to-deal-with issues in the case of a game for five, but become exponentially more serious as you add more – one of the main reasons there are few games on the market that can handle seven or more players.

The first problem is a pragmatic one: that of physical components. For most game designs, a certain amount of stuff is required for each player. Many games require each player to have their own set of pieces, for instance, which leads to the dual problem of manufacturing costs, and eventually (beyond about 10 players), running out of easily-differentiated colors to use. Even if this is not the case, game components such as a communal deck of cards or a supply of counters tend to run out if too many players are involved. From a publisher’s point of view, meanwhile, there is a problem of diminishing returns; assuming a game plays equally well with any number of players, providing enough components to play with five or six players instead of the usual four may sell more units… but moving from six to seven or eight may not. As such, decisions about the quantity of components to include are generally made based more on manufacturing practicalities; what will fit in that publisher’s standard box size, or how many cards can fit on a single press sheet.

If this were the only issue, however, players wishing to play a game in a bigger group could just buy two copies of it, or create their own makeshift pieces. The fact is, however, that most games have an ideal number of players and tend to deteriorate in enjoyability quite quickly when more players are added. There are a few reasons for this.

(more…)

2012/03/16

The challenges of three- and four-player games

Filed under: Gaming Blog — AlexWeldon @ 9:49 pm

In my last post, I talked about the unique challenges involved in designing two-player games. This time, I’d like to discuss the challenges of games for small groups; three or four players is very common, but most of what I’m going to say applies to games with more players as well, except that games for larger groups have additional problems that I’ll cover in a separate post.

As I said in the previous post, there are objective differences between games for two and games for groups. Firstly, whereas “perfect play” is guaranteed to exist for two-player games (even ones with chance and/or hidden information), the same is not true for games with more players. This itself stems from the other main difference, which is that cooperation is possible when there are more than two players. Thus, unless the game has minimal interaction between players, a player’s chances of victory are not solely determined by his own strategic choices, but those of his opponents.

(more…)

2012/03/11

Oliver & the Basilisks

Filed under: Digital Games — AlexWeldon @ 7:51 pm

Click here to play!

Oliver & the Basilisks is my personal favorite of my Flash games. It took a long time to finish precisely because my “testing” sessions often ended up turning into multi-hour marathons as I forgot about bug-hunting or mechanic-tweaking and simply lost myself in pursuing a new high score.

The basic gameplay is derived from the old game of Robots, or its better-known clone, Daleks. The idea is this: on each level, you are facing an ever-increasing number of enemies – in this game, basilisks. You can move one step at a time in any of the eight cardinal or ordinal directions, after which the basilisks will all take a step too, directly towards you. Although you can’t hurt them directly (and will die if caught by them), if two of them collide in pursuing you, they will turn each other to stone. The resulting heap of stone will also remain in place and kill any further basilisks running into it.

In the original Robots (or Daleks), your only options other than moving or passing were to use one of your limited number of sonic screwdrivers, killing all adjacent robots, or to teleport. Teleporting could be done at will, but would put you in a random place, potentially right next to a robot for an immediate loss.

Oliver & the Basilsks retains these two mechanics, in the form of the Teleport and Fire Shield spells, but these are only two of a total of fourteen at your disposal (in the Deluxe game mode, fewer in Simple or Normal). Thus, the tactical options in O&tB are significantly greater.

Additionally, there is an RPG-like progress in power for you, the eponymous hero. In Simple mode, it’s much like Daleks, as you simply acquire additional charges for your Fire Shield wand with each level. In Normal and Deluxe, however, you also earn scrolls, and can switch which spells you’re using for each level, assigning one each to your amulet, wand and scoll slot, each of which works slightly differently. In Deluxe, you also have access to only three spells initially, and must learn the rest by earning and using scrolls.

Finally, there is one additional complication in Normal and Deluxe mode, which is the addition of magic spirits. These appear randomly, and move semi-randomly, but with a bias towards approaching rock piles. If you catch one, it will recharge your wand and amulet… but if it reaches a rock pile instead, the two will merge to form a golem. Golems are very dangerous, as they will smash through basilisks and rock piles unharmed; they are worth many points if you destroy them (and you don’t need to destroy them to beat a level), but the only ways to do so are by collision with another Golem, or the Magic Trap, Lightning or Disintegrate spells.

Thus, Oliver & the Basilisks takes a very classic and elegant mechanic, and adds multiple layers of strategy and tactical freedom on top of it to produce a surprisingly deep and challenging game, while retaining the arcade-like feel. It will likely seem difficult and random at first, but if you stick with it, you’ll find that your high scores increase by leaps and bounds as you learn the tricks.

If you’re stuck, however, I made a couple of strategy videos for Simple and Normal mode, though I never got around to doing one for Deluxe mode.

Oliver & the Basilisks Simple Mode Tutorial
Oliver & the Basilisks Normal Mode Tutorial

2012/03/05

15×15 Cryptic Crossword #1

Filed under: Pencil Puzzles — AlexWeldon @ 11:56 pm

There isn’t much to say about this one, other than that it’s one of my personal favourite blocked grid cryptics I’ve made. Not all of the clues are quite as clever as I’d like, but a couple are (I think) very satisfying, and the grid itself is pretty good – the two long Across clues in the middle should help you open the puzzle up once you get them.

Download: (PDF)
Print: (JPG)
Solutions: (PDF) (RTF)

2012/03/03

The challenges of two-player games

Filed under: Gaming Blog — AlexWeldon @ 12:49 am

I had a debate with another user on a board game forum recently about whether it’s harder to design two-player games or multiplayer ones. He felt two-players games were easier and I felt multiplayer games were. In the end, we decided that our disagreement stemmed from our differing definitions of what constitutes a “successful” design, which is another question altogether. But it got me thinking about just how different a two-player game is from a multiplayer one.

There are two main differences: the first has to do with solvability, and the second with the way players interact. Both lead to a situation where the designer is forced to make a choice between alienating one type of audience or another, or attempting to strike a balance, which is easier said than done, and necessitates making certain compromises.

(more…)

Powered by WordPress