Games...are diverse. There's no one game that appeals to everyone as everyone has their likes/dislikes. By defining what we want to express in our games, we can directly target our market instead of trying to make a game that pleases everyone; you'll find yourself disappointed in the end.
I truly believe the difference is between luck vs. strategy. By luck I mean elements that our out of our control...or at least elements that are not definitively controllable. When I refer to strategy in this blog, I mean play that is definitive; every move is controlled.
The ultimate strategy game that everyone knows about is chess. All your moves are controlled by you with the only uncontrollable element being what your opponent does...who is also controlling all of their choices.
The ultimate luck game would probably be a raffle or lottery. Winners are chosen at random; there's no real way for you to control the outcome.
Most gamers prefer a nice mix of luck and strategy. Typically more brainy gamers would prefer something with more strategy whereas gamers that don't want to think much might prefer something with a little more luck.
But what game mechanics are inherently strategic?
-Games with a free-roaming map
-Games that allow you to construct your deck in a card game
-Games that give you a choice that can affect the outcome of an action or a roll
-A hand of cards
-A list of commands you can choose from
-and of course others...
In its basic form, strategy requires CHOICE. If you can make it so that your players have more choices, then you're creating strategy. More experience with a game with a lot of strategy will give the feeling of mastery. Unfortunately, it's particularly punishing for new players.
What game mechanics are inherently luck?
-Dice rolling in any form
-Drawing from a deck where you don't know what's going to show up
-"Lottery" or "Pull from a bag"
-Card draw to determine result (i.e. War)
-and of course others...
In its basic form, "luck" is essentially RANDOM. If you put in your game more elements of luck, then an inferior gamer may have better odds against a player that is more experienced. However, it will cheapen a players mastery of a game and too much luck can make a player sour due to lack of control.
This is why there's a HUGE industry in card games alone. It allows for some strategy by either knowing what is in the deck or allowing customization, while at the same time is driven by luck because the ORDER on which the cards come out is random.
Other mechanics that mix strategy and luck:
-Drafting mechanic
-Dice placement
-Programmed movement
-Any game with card draw
But...there are illusions out there. It may give the idea of strategy, but are really luck...or at least NOT choice driven.
-Escalating resources. While it may be cool to wait until you have X amount of resources to play that one card you have in your hand, it's essentially the game slotting you into a strategy that you "think" you should do. Until then, it's a dead card in your hand.
-Roll and move. Everyone knows this is a old school game staple, but we've all been soured by games that put our entire destiny in a roll of the dice.
-Social Deduction Games. While strategically, if you know the people you're playing with, you'll have a huge advantage, but ultimately your gameplay succumbs to what players are thinking AT THAT MOMENT...and that may change as quickly as a glance.
This doesn't mean that any of the above is bad. It just means you need to realize what your game is setting out to do and if there's issues in testing, you can target them and fix accordingly.
Essentially you'll make a game that you'll want to play. This entry isn't to tell you how much luck you need as opposed to strategy, it's more about defining the tools you have.
Happy designing!
Comments
Here's a very good video on the subject
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av5Hf7uOu-o
Good read
Might I add that certain dice rolls. Even though there is luck involved. Some game actually have options to change the die roll to certainty?
I think you can agree that having to roll at least a score of 4. A good player tries to gather 4 cumulative rolls in one go. Some other game mechanics might be involved to create a strategy to reach that amount of dice.
Further, a die roll might not necessarily give out 1,2,3,4,5,6 where a complete randomness is the case.
But it might give out 3,3,3,3,3,6 where the roll is almost certain to give out a 3.
And last, some die rolls have like 1d6 + 5. While your target only needs to receive 4 to be defeated. (But I call that bad game design.) And hope a player notices that he/she actually doesn't have to roll at all.
Bottom line, there is a large grey area surrounding dice: If it comes to luck or strategy. It all depends on the mechanics around the die.
X3M wrote:Might I add that
I think you can agree that having to roll at least a score of 4. A good player tries to gather 4 cumulative rolls in one go. Some other game mechanics might be involved to create a strategy to reach that amount of dice.
Further, a die roll might not necessarily give out 1,2,3,4,5,6 where a complete randomness is the case.
But it might give out 3,3,3,3,3,6 where the roll is almost certain to give out a 3.
And last, some die rolls have like 1d6 + 5. While your target only needs to receive 4 to be defeated. (But I call that bad game design.) And hope a player notices that he/she actually doesn't have to roll at all.
Bottom line, there is a large grey area surrounding dice: If it comes to luck or strategy. It all depends on the mechanics around the die.
I defined luck as out of control, even slightly. So dice, no matter how much you have an expected result, is still random and you have no control over the result. Yes, there are mechanics that will change the result of a die, but now you're introducing strategy because you're definitively changing the result.