Level 3: Project Critique

I'm following along with the blog's critique framework here...My thoughts on The Great Profiteering write-up by DifferentName.

I like the idea that the player can use a "tech tree" to meet their needs or face up against different challenges that may surface in the game. What you described here reminds me of the tech tree from War!: Age of Imperialism. I played the PC version of the game - which was very accessible - and I fell in love with the nuance of the tech tree and the fact that those who weren't up on their technological research would eventually be left in the dust.

http://boardgamegeek.com/image/181463/war-age-imperialism

This resonates with the Great War theme, as technology (and tactical obsolescence when compared to that technology) was a defining factor during the various conflicts throughout those years.

That's not quite clear to me, but it seems like there's a lot of money competition going on. With the final goal of the game to have the most money,and that the designer mentions it has a "solo" feel to it, this makes sense. It would be nice to see some kind of competition going on during the different phases of the game. Do players have to compete for contracts? Are they based in a neutral nation, or with the Central Powers, or Allies? How might this affect their access to different contracts? Might two companies based in the same region or with the same allegiance be affected when trying to work on the same contract? Is there any competition for resources to produce these weapons of war? Most insidiously: since you're a military contractor, why not try to prolong the war somehow, draining country's coffers by filling your own?

There are lots of ways to go with this...!

I think you could manipulate this perception a great deal. For example, by adding in allegiance or nationalities or whatever, each company could have some sort of regional, customized bonus. That way, players would wonder which country has the greatest advantage at certain stages of the game.

It sounds to me like there would be randomly-determined contracts or demands available, so it can be a different game experience each time it's played. If more individualized bonuses or custom content was developed for each player's company, then this would increase replayability by offering more strategies with which to experiment in multiple playthroughs. And the massive tech tree can also provide multiple ways to gain the ultimate goal of most money. It seems solid so far.

The game sounds to me like an interesting mix of Power Grid and some other Eurostyle games I've played in the past: Agricola, Puerto Rico, Industria, and so on. Anyone who likes those kinds of games would likely give this one a try.

It's like Axis and Allies without the combat. What remains? Buying and selling, and the tech tree. From what I've read, the tech tree seems the most compelling to me. By making different routes along this tech tree very distinct and exclusive, and/or allowing only one company to acquire certain spots on the tech tree, then this can add some tension and competition without direct conflict, destruction, and territories. Experimenting with other methods of player interaction could result in some interesting, meaningful, and compelling decisions to keep players coming back to this one.

Best of success on this, DifferentName! :D

Looks like we'll be putting the Games Design Course on hiatus. Hopefully BGDF can revisit the course sometime later this year, perhaps late Spring or early Summer.

Best of success to everyone with their game designs. :)