Skip to Content
 

[GDW] New feedback idea?

6 replies [Last post]
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008

While we're all waiting for me to get my game up on the board, I'd like to propose a possible system that might be useful in "rating" games in the GDW.

From an article in the Games Journal (www.thegamesjournal.com) called "game alignment", the writer proposes a five-step scale in three categories:

Chaos/Control, Light/Heavy, Abstract/Themed

See the site for an explanation of these. So, for Seth's game, 8/7c, for example, I might speculate the following ratings might be appropriate:

Chaos - - | - - Control

Light - - - | - Heavy

Abstract - - - - | Themed

These aren't meant to be subjective, but can be useful in determining whether a game is likely to be to one's taste. I think they could be useful for us in helping to quantify our impressions of the games we're hearing about, and to provide another means of feedback for the designer as to whether impressions are consistent with the game experience he was trying to create. One could also add categories like "Dull/Fun", which would be more subjective.

I encourage people to consider using something like this, if interested, as a supplemental and quick way to say a little bit about the game, if it helps one to formulate/articulate one's thoughts on the game.

Hopefully, my Archaeology Game will be up on the board sometime today. I'll let you know!

-Jeff

FastLearner
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
[GDW] New feedback idea?

I think this is a good idea, especially so we don't try to steer the game in a direction the designer wasn't looking for.

BTW, what type of game are you shooting for with Profit and Provenance?

jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
[GDW] New feedback idea?

FastLearner wrote:
I think this is a good idea, especially so we don't try to steer the game in a direction the designer wasn't looking for.

BTW, what type of game are you shooting for with Profit and Provenance?

Good question. I would say, for P&P, I was shooting for:

Chaos - - - - | Control

Light - - - | - Heavy

Abstract - - - | - Themed

Dull - - - - | Fun (obviously!)

I want the game to be pretty high on control, or at least, pretty low on random elements (the Black Market being the obvious exception). Obviously, what other people do will heavily determine whether or not your plans will succeed, but I want you to feel like your decisions matter a lot and directly impact your fate in the game.

I want it to feel semi-heavy. That doesn't necessarily mean "long"; I envision a 60-75 minute game here. 45 minutes would be great, but is totally unrealistic. 90 minutes would be tolerable, but I think it's pushing it. I want the game to be good natured and fun, and interactive, but still with some depth, perhaps depth that takes several plays to reveal.

As for theme, obviously I want the theme to be somewhat engrossing. I'm envisioning a "1930's", Indiana Jones kind of feel to the components. I am a bit concerned that I'm going to be relying heavily on the components to evoke the theme, but I think the gameplay at least isn't at odds to the theme.

I want the game to be fun and interactive, not chess-like. I think it could result in some heavy thinking because there are a lot of factors to consider, and so perhaps there need to be ways to streamline that, yet in general, I think it will be fun to play, although only testing can reveal that.

Not sure if this helps. I think so far, most of the commentors have similar gaming preferences to me, so I don't think people have been trying to steer me in a different direction than I was already going in...

-jeff

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
[GDW] New feedback idea?

jwarrend wrote:
I would say, for P&P, I was shooting for:

Chaos - - - - | Control
Light - - - | - Heavy
Abstract - - - | - Themed
Dull - - - - | Fun (obviously!)

OK, let's cut that last one out for the moment :)

For me, your game tends more towards:

Chaos - - - | - Control
Light - - | - - Heavy
Abstract - - - | - Themed

I think there is more chaos in there than you think, and you are nowhere near something like Chess (total control). Princes of Florence level of Control, perhaps.
And I think the game is slightly lighter than you do - but I may be wrong. Certainly a more intense theming (which you are well on the way towards) wll tend to make it "feel" lighter than it is.

jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
[GDW] New feedback idea?

Scurra wrote:
jwarrend wrote:
I would say, for P&P, I was shooting for:

Chaos - - - - | Control
Light - - - | - Heavy
Abstract - - - | - Themed
Dull - - - - | Fun (obviously!)

OK, let's cut that last one out for the moment :)

Hey, he asked what I was aiming for, not what it actually was!

Quote:

For me, your game tends more towards:

Chaos - - - | - Control
Light - - | - - Heavy
Abstract - - - | - Themed

I think there is more chaos in there than you think, and you are nowhere near something like Chess (total control). Princes of Florence level of Control, perhaps.
And I think the game is slightly lighter than you do - but I may be wrong. Certainly a more intense theming (which you are well on the way towards) wll tend to make it "feel" lighter than it is.

Fair enough; if the game ends up actually hitting this range, that would be fine by me. I agree it's not total control, in the sense that the other players have a dramatic influence on how well you score, and which artifacts you acquire. But, I don't think there are a lot of randomizing factors, either (setting aside the black market, which may get changed) -- sure, there's a luck of the draw effect wrt artifacts, but since you control which ones you acquire, it's mitigated. So, I agree, it isn't chess, but it's not Monopoly either -- "more controlled than chaotic" is appropriate.

Light vs. Heavy depends on what you're talking about in terms of lightness and heaviness. I admit I'm thinking primarily in game length, and trying to mate length to depth. For example, I don't really like Illuminati, because I think it's too long for being a pretty light game. I really like Web of Power and Carcassonne, because they have a lot of depth despite being short. This game, I think, feels like it has about as much depth to sustain a 75 minute game as being a reasonable length. Thus, I would say it ought to be slightly "deeper" than similar games. Yet, because it is so highly interactive via the bidding, perhaps it's impossible to expect it to be too heavy, because so much is going to hang on what the others do.

Anyway, I think your rescaling of my initial placements of the indicators is appropriate, and within the realm of what I was shooting for. A 1.25 hour, German feeling game with decent theme and some challenging decisions.

-Jeff

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
[GDW] New feedback idea?

jwarrend wrote:

Anyway, I think your rescaling of my initial placements of the indicators is appropriate, and within the realm of what I was shooting for. A 1.25 hour, German feeling game with decent theme and some challenging decisions.

Sounds like a perfect definition of a Eurogame to me. :-)
As I've noted in my recent Journal entry, that's pretty much what all my designs tend towards, as they're the sort of games I like playing, natch.
Perhaps I need to have a phase of designing properly abstract games or something really deep and heavy, just to see what I can do...

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
[GDW] New feedback idea?

Scurra wrote:
Perhaps I need to have a phase of designing properly abstract games or something really deep and heavy, just to see what I can do...

Perhaps we should each try our hand at at least a concept for each type of game we can think of...

Euro-strategy, Family, Kids, Beer & Pretzel, puzzle/abstract, party....

And different mechanics as well, like...
Tile Laying, Auction, Political, etc.

- Seth

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut