What would make the "Ultimate Board Game"?

16 replies [Last post]

Wed, 01/04/2017 - 14:31

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

I tried a quick search to see if this has been discussed at length already, so please point me in the right direction if it has. Otherwise, I'd like to find out what everyone thinks about this concept of what I'll call "The coolest, most enjoyable, perfect game that has yet to be created"!

Let's break it up a bit into some categories. How about "Theme/Setting", "Game Mechanics", and "Game Elements" (like maps, dice & what types, player mats, tokens, miniatures, etc). Feel free to add any other categories!

As designers, we've probably all had a lot of smaller game ideas that we've developed, but we also probably have been working on a Masterpiece too, am I right? Not that our masterpiece has to be completely epic in scale, but don't we all envision a game, whether of our own creation or not, that would stand out as THE Game of all games? The one everyone just HAS to play?

So what would that Game be like? Has this Game, in your opinion, already been created? If so, which one is it, & why?

I think it'll be fun to see what everyone thinks. Again, if this has been discussed before, let me know where I can find the thread!

While some of us may feel that our favorite project should become this Ultimate Game, let's try to keep from hijacking this thread, but feel free to post any aspects of your own creations that you feel are the most motivating for you as a designer.

For example, while I'm putting a lot of effort into my current project "Chrysopoeia", and while it has a lot of elements that I like, I still feel it is a stepping stone toward that elusive concept of what would make the coolest, most fun and engaging game I've ever played.

Wed, 01/04/2017 - 14:50

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

To start out...

I've always loved maps (my current game doesn't use one). I also love having to think a few things through on how best to use random input to my gain - sort of puzzle out what to make of what each turn presents me, or what the results of each of my choices presents. I know that sounds pretty vague and conceptual, but I'm envisioning something that gives players individual goals, and they spend their turns seeking elements to a grand puzzle that they can be the first to complete.

I'll try to go into more detail later, when I have more time, but for now, Thematically I gravitate towards games with a combined fantasy/sci-fi world, involving some form of map exploration with the purpose of discovering what they need to win.

Wed, 01/04/2017 - 15:09

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

My guess is...

That from your OP and its title, you will want a "Board". As such I am less inclined to participate, because I enjoy designing "Card Games". Sure at some point in time, we may introduce a "Tactics Board" for "Tradewars - Homeworld" (and miniatures), but for now it remains only a card game.

I have struggle with this question in the "Card Game" space.

To me, I picture "Quest Adventure Cards(tm)" becoming an instant hit. But since it is only a card game, it has to standout from the crowd. It cannot be similar to other duel games such as Yu-Gi-Oh!, Pokemon, Magic: The Gathering and many other card games focused on COMBAT.

And the original game - which was my first design and only scored a 3/10... Well had some of the "spirit" in that it was not about "battling" but more about completing quests.

Fast-forward a few years and "Quest AC v2" is still very much an idea.

I've got some good ideas like "Telling a Story", "Fragments", a unique layout to how the EPIC Journey will be told. But still I'm not getting the EPIC "vibe" yet. I really wanted this to be a game filled with "adventure" just like the name suggests: "Quest Adventure Cards(tm)"

So while I'm not hijacking this thread - I just wanted to say I have thought about this a lot for this game concept. But it's been in the context of "Card Games" without any board (for the moment)...

Wed, 01/04/2017 - 15:38

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

I don't mean to exclude card

I don't mean to exclude card games at all sorry! - I used the term "boardgame" more generally, to keep it in the "physical" game realm, (not to include electronic or online, mainly).

One local gamer recently called MtG "the best game EVER!" when we were discussing some games. I really enjoy Elder Sign, even though I find some of the mechanics frustrating - that's a card & dice game with no board.

So go ahead and share what it is about a board-less card game that makes it more of a draw for you.

I realize that we're not going to all have the same idea, but with a bunch of us discussing some of the best or most engaging aspects of games, maybe we'll find some inspiration for the next project.

Wed, 01/04/2017 - 16:30

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I'll approach it from another "angle"!

One of the difficulties in designing games, be it card games or board games, is to include SUFFICIENT player interaction. IMHO Euro Games in which each player is focused only on his "workers" or "resources" is sort of boring...

Yes I know Euros can still affect how the other players can play on their turn but "occupying" or "taking" a resource, etc. An example is Ticket To Ride: you can't directly affect what your opponent can do, but you can use up some of the railways that an opponent might want to use.

Typically player interaction consists of "COMBAT". It seems like the END-ALL to most games. Or "trading" between players and some kind of semi-cooperative type of game, where players compete against each other but they can also make "trade deals" with other players to help each other out.

So one "aspect" we can debate/discuss is "Player Interaction". You need this if you want to have an interesting game. A gamer told me that in "Scythe" you are always trying to make the most optimal move ... and that combat usually occurs near the end of the game.

If there is some form of "COMBAT", I would recommend it be a useful tactic during the entire game. Also having alternate ways of "resolving conflicts" such as "Trade Treaties" and "Peace Negotiations" would also be beneficial as an alternate to combat.

This is what I got so far: Combat or Conflict Resolution = Good player interaction.

Wed, 01/04/2017 - 19:42

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

I agree wholeheartedly with

I agree wholeheartedly with player interaction. I have friends who love Carcassonne, but my family got bored with it because there's very little interaction. Even though you can affect each other's progress by taking a space that someone else wanted to use (just like in ticket to ride), there's nothing that other players can do but sit & watch.

Trading, combat, negotiating, etc however give players something do in between their turns.

One thing I've noticed about combat (this was also discussed by Gabe and Rahdo on Board Game Design Lab) is that many players don't like feeling they have to crush others in combat just to get ahead in the other aspects of a game. Pure battle games like Risk or any "wargame" is different of course because military supremacy is the whole point. But in games with a different objective, combat needs to have the right "feel". Effective, but not too debilitating. And yes, as questccg pointed out, should be useful throughout a game.

I bring this up because I don't think there are nearly as many female wargamers out there, and a really awesome Ultimate Game should appeal to more than just guys. Many of us play a lot of games with our wives & other couples, or with our older kids. My wife and daughters enjoy Catan, 7 wonders, but no interest in Risk or Warhammer lol!

OK, I bring this up because in my current game project, I have a combat "mini-game" a little like that in Scythe, but with a bit more meat to it, and it's useful throughout the game. It's also not the main point of the game, but allows you to interfere with other players.

But during initial play testing, my 16 year old daughter didn't want to attack anyone because she felt bad trying to make progress harder on someone else. She just wanted everyone playing to have as fair a chance of winning as she did. And that's kind of what Rahdo in his interview was saying - he's like that too. And I felt kind of the same - I didn't want to use my superior knowledge of the rules (as the creator) to beat everyone down so I could go on to a glorious win! Incidentally, my wife had no qualms about trying to attack me lol!

Turns out the individual battles aren't that decisive - which is what I wanted. They're effective but not devastating. The problem lies in how new players perceive combat, thinking it's too "mean".

So questccg, your suggestion of having ways to negotiate out of a combat situation just lit up a lightbulb over my head! I'm not sure, but I think I LOVE that idea! If you initiate combat with a player, they can make an offer of resources or such to get you to withdraw, then you can accept, negotiate, or reject the offer.

You don't have to feel so bad about initiating combat because the defender has an option to avoid the battle. And, if they don't want to give you what you request, you don't feel so bad about going ahead with the combat. Brilliant! Can't wait to try it!

Anyway, I think this kind of small scale combat works great with more "Euro-style" games - it's not heavy enough to turn it into a "guy" game so women (in general) can still get into all aspects of it.

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 01:19

BHFuturist

Offline

Joined: 11/01/2008

Quest Giver!

Mokheshur wrote:

"The coolest, most enjoyable, perfect game that has yet to be created"!

Well, I would like to think some of my board game ideas fit into the running for this, but...

The one game idea that stands out from the rest in my mind is:

--- EDIT: Don't bother reading this post (unless board)... I am not going to delete it (unless Mokheshur wants me to) but as it turns out I did not read the OP title and just ran with the "quote" above... for a split second I forgot where I was... BGDF! lol---

Quest Giver!

A "video" game "Persistent Openworld storytelling quest RPG sandbox"... with so many dynamic (background) systems that everything that the players do, mean something and can affect change on the world around them in subtle ways. A game where players are both the heroes (third/first person) & villains (RTS style overloads controlling minions and dens of evil).

--- don't bother reading lower if not already interested ---

This is a mind dump of part of the idea as a stream of consciousness

This game would bridge the gap between Minecraft/No Mans Sky style freedom and "The Lord of the Rings books" level story telling and LoTR movies level of graphics. but an new fantasy world not the LoTRs setting...

Players would just go out into the world and start playing. no leveling up, just all able to do the same types of things... but the more you do some things the better you get at doing things and the more things you can do in that "area of life"... use sword, become a sword master "someday"... you craft, become the head of a crafting guild someday. everything that a normal RPG has in the way of NPCs... Players could do instead. (farmville players will play for the planting and farming and selling, diablo players will play to raid dungeons, RTS players will play as the monsters of the world, something for every type of gameplay building a dynamic world)

Give the players a custom "AI" builder for their characters (like in dragon age) with drop down menus to select actions and choices and focuses, for their character to be doing when they are not online. (chracter would not be able to die when you are not online.. but would instead become NPCs that continue to act in away that fits how you set them up)... in fact there would not be many true "NPCs" in the game. "you are the quest giver".

Each player would have a "instance" or "safe free build zone" to customize while being part of an ever-changing larger world. (the entrance to this safe zone might be the door to your house in the overworld?)

A game where players are both the heroes (third/first person) & villains (RTS style overloads controlling minions and dens of evil) PvP "regulated instances" with checks and balances to ensure "fun" for everyone. The players shape the worlds around them and "craft" the parts and pieces from the ground up.

villain players would earn "skills and abilities and loot for their custom "instance" style dungeons (that they build). Based on how many heroes played their "instance". The loot would be from the dead players dynamically generation "loot recovery" and "revenge" quests based on the "level" of the dead characters gear. these player created instances would show up in the overwold dynamically based on the type of dungeon the player created. the "level" cap for the dungeon would be based on the creators level (as the types of things they can put in the dungeons, like monsters and traps would be based on their level)... these players might start with just one "pack of rats" that they have very little true control over... but in an overloard way they would be able to "infest" a building in the overworld. this would cause the NPC or player who lives there to "give" a quest for the rat extermination. or they could just spawn the rats into the world and hunt players. (the spawned creatures would be just like normal game fodder to the players, but be guided by real players!)

Your next character after death is your "relative" and their first main quest "hinges" around the death of your last character. If "someone else" completes that quest before you do... "A recorded version" of that players character will approach your new avatar in the game (as an NPC) and give you the recovered item, just as if your family had been the quest giver!". All dynamic and not directly controlled by you "the player" and not all the same for every character. you will have the advantage of having the quest available only after you are next online for a time... so if you don't make it a priority... someone else in the area might hear an "NPC" say something like "did you hear about..." and they will be able to start a quest line too!" you might even meet in the middle!!!

The idea is so large it goes far far beyond what I said here. It might be years before there are servers that will be able to handle the background things I would make it think about!

oh... and families to carry on the family line (with rogue-like elements to each generation)... and permanent character death. and no character "classes"... and every human fits into the same range of physical abilities.

I can see that this type of game is starting to be envisioned by others out their as well... but as it stands "trust me" there are no games out there like the one in my head!

If I ever make such a game it will be many many years from now...

-Eamon

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 01:31

radioactivemouse

Offline

Joined: 07/08/2013

Impossible.

Sorry, I don't think the perfect game is possible.

I say this simply on the fact that I have different needs when I want to play a game and they are not always the same.

Sometimes I want a very simple, easy and fast, not too heavy single-player card game...and sometimes I want a really meaty, tons of chits, co-op miniatures game for 5 people that lasts all day.

There's no way I could incorporate those two needs into one game, much less all the other game itches I want scratched. Even if the game was expandable, it would have to account for the multiple genres of games out there as well as the genres that I have yet to enjoy.

When I create a game, I'm aiming for a very specific audience. Yes, I want a wide berth as far as audience is concerned, but it's the balance of creating a game that's specific enough to attract a large enough audience to hook.

That way, you can create a richer game experience for the audience you're intending to create for, rather than creating a diluted game that tries to cater to everyone.

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 09:53

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

I'm leaving it open to

I'm leaving it open to everyone to define "perfect" in their own way. There are some games like Catan that have been a gateway from simple games like "Sorry!" and "Parcheesi" to well, everything else! That could be one definition - a game that sets a new standard. Or there are games out there that are cool but have flaws, and hundreds of variant threads posted on BBG - to me, a perfect game might be one that doesn't need any more tweaks because it's... perfect!

Eamon, sounds like you've got a full on second Life several times over, but epic fantasy style - cool concept!

I like the concept of letting players fill the various game roles based on their preferred style of play.

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 02:54

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

I think that this should be

I think that this should be divided into the theme's and genre's of board/card games.

To each group of people, their own game.

The ultimate game would have a bit of everything. But no one would like it.

***

How about pointing out parts of games?
I'll name 3.

To me:
The most ultimate maps would be. Those maps that are modular, but also are or look like 3D, in an efficient way. Mechanical is the most important factor here. "Graphics" come later.
(I am still experimenting to see what I like the best)

Every number that is used in the game should have a good reason. I don't like numbers that are used only once in the entire game.

Regarding card games. I want every card to keep their purpose/usefullness after adding expansion packs. Keeping the "power curve" intact.

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 09:56

#10

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

X3M wrote: The most ultimate

X3M wrote:

The most ultimate maps would be. Those maps that are modular, but also are or look like 3D, in an efficient way. Mechanical is the most important factor here. "Graphics" come later.
(I am still experimenting to see what I like the best)

Can you describe more about this idea of 3D maps?

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 10:29

#11

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Mokheshur wrote:Can you

Mokheshur wrote:

Can you describe more about this idea of 3D maps?

Sure!

The inspiration that I like to gather comes from these sites:
http://www.hotwirefoamfactory.com/customer/gallery/gamingindex.htm
https://boardgamegeek.com/image/1334824/heroscape-master-set-rise-valkyrie

Battletech and Heroscape maps. To bad that I don't have the materials and time to do the same. I would probably go the route with those hexagon Battletech maps. But then + slopes between hexagons.

Quoting myself:
"I am still experimenting to see what I like the best"
Is only referred to 2D maps. Which support the mechanics that I have in mind. But you know how it goes with play testing etc. I shouldn't have the need to be fancy yet with my maps. So, no high graphics yet. And no 3D for me yet.

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 15:06

#12

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

See we already have a conflict...

When I was talking earlier in my post about "interaction between players" assuming that it was in a "Card Game" context, the idea of having 3D Terrain, meaning that it's some form of "Wargame" instead - is a conflict of vision with regards to the game.

That's why I agree with @Jay: you need to define the GENRE for the Ultimate Board Game:

-Card Games
-Beer and Pretzels
-Party Games
-German-style strategy games
-Wargames
-Mass Market Games
-Tabletop Miniatures
-Abstracts
-RPGs
-CCGs/TCGs

All these genres are clearly different from one another. We all know what an Abstract game is and we know it's different from an RPG or CCG/TCG!

My personal genre that I enjoy designing is Card Games. Not all need to be CCGs/TGCs - but I have dabbled a bit in that genre too.

I actually got the genres from BGDF: http://www.bgdf.com/node/276

Cheers.

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 15:38

#13

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

Good point about genres, &

Good point about genres, & kind of goes along with what I was saying about gender biases too. You know, how some genres appeal more to males than females & vice versa.

Why don't we stick with Euro-style strategy on this thread? I think that's what interests me and my wife the most, and that's how my game ideas generally start. I wouldn't mind combining games with boards and card-only games here, since both can give similar types of gaming experiences for me.

If your ultimate game fits a different genre, go ahead and start a new thread for it - I'd still be curious to read about all of it!

Thu, 01/05/2017 - 17:04

#14

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

According to a post I made on

According to a post I made on BGG

https://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1693931/cost-games-according-their-...

The games that proves to give the best experience are actually middle weight and cost games. Most large and epic games are not more enjoyful than middle games, most of the time, they are less than middle games.

This is why I tried to stop making epic board games because it's simply not worth the effort. For me, it's not even worth buying and playing them.

See the thread for more details.

Fri, 01/06/2017 - 10:50

#15

Rick L

Offline

Joined: 08/22/2016

I generally prefer games that

I generally prefer games that are under an hour to play, so that there's still enough energy for a second round, or rematch. But a game that runs 1-2 hours gives you time to work on a "grand strategy" that can give a rewarding experience, even if you don't win, because you've had time to see the results of multiple choices and decisions, and time to correct problems in your tactics or overall strategy.

A game can have an epic theme without being "epic" in scope as far as huge maps, multi-session games, or tons of components.

I know theme won't carry a game that has poor mechanics, but theme is what drives my imagination and immersion in a game. It's a big part of what makes me want to buy a game as well as replay it.

Catan is about building settlements & cities - we enjoy it as a family, but it's not an epic theme. Games about the Lovecraft mythos, trying to save the world from utter destruction from unfathomably ancient beings from beyond - that's epic. Bad mechanics can ruin the epic feel of an epic theme, of course - mechanics have to match the theme.

An "ultimate" game for me would have a theme that makes you feel like you're trying to accomplish something monumental - settling an island isn't that monumental to me (as an example). Constructing a great wonder could be, conquering the world could be, although not always - Risk doesn't feel epic to me, but Axis & Allies does. Saving the planet, creating the Philosopher's Stone, discovering lost secrets - those can, if done right create that "feeling" of accomplishing something monumental.

These are of course just my personal opinions, but for me this is the kind of theme an "ultimate" Euro-style strategy game would need. Personally, even though conquering the world can be epic, it's not what I think of when it comes to Euro games, so if and/or when I try to make the Ultimate Game, it probably won't be about that!

Fri, 01/13/2017 - 18:04

#16

saluk

Offline

Joined: 05/11/2010

Yeah, I really think a game

Yeah, I really think a game where combat is sometimes effective is quite superior to a game where it is effective through the whole game. Even in a combat heavy game, I like it when you really have to be careful about when you make those attacks.

I also don't agree that there is no player interaction in an economic euro. It's a different kind of player interaction, and in some ways, is more interesting to me. Figuring out how to block someone and pull ahead is a lot trickier than always simply resorting to attacking their weakest units. The player who thinks of where the other players are going and blocks their routes in TTR is going to have a large point lead on those players who think its a solo game with no player interaction. But it is a very different feel.

On this line, one type of perfect game I could imagine, is one that supports both styles of gameplay well. I am not sure if it is possible, as if both paths are present, you will be forced by the other players to respond to them, and potentially forced into the type of gameplay you are not a fan of. But a game where one player can be doing a lot of combat or other direct interaction, without irritating the player who wants to build a cool thing, would be something special I think. Yeah, I'm dreaming. This is a dream thread :P

What would make the "Ultimate Board Game"?

User login

Navigation

Nov 23 2024

Nov 21 2024

Nov 20 2024

Nov 18 2024

Nov 17 2024

Nov 15 2024

Nov 13 2024

Nov 10 2024

Nov 7 2024

Nov 5 2024

Nov 1 2024

Oct 31 2024

Oct 29 2024

Oct 28 2024

Oct 25 2024

Oct 21 2024

Oct 17 2024

Oct 15 2024

Oct 14 2024

Oct 11 2024

Oct 9 2024