- Start players out slow, then add more challenge.
- Safe places create moments of respite; moving out of them then creates moments of excitement.
- Simplify the player’s interaction with the game as much as possible.
- Forgive enough player mistakes to let the player learn, but not so many that the game is trivial.
- Keep the effects of your medium in mind. If, for example, your computer chips are going to move the aliens faster as they get blasted, you want to know that in advance if at all possible. đ
- Let the player do things that clearly provide progress, but make it hard to tell which action offers the most progress.
- Related to the above, make it easy to be OK at the game, but as soon as the player reaches that point, let her see how much more there is to learn and do.
- Cute, appealing monsters are easy to like.
- Related to the above: art doesn’t need to be complicated or realistic to be cute and appealing.
- Tune everything. Player movement, enemy movement, victory requirements, average game time, everything. If it can be expressed numerically, tune it precisely.
- Don’t be ashamed to monetize a good product.
In the Grand Tradition
It seems traditional that every game design blog must sometimes say “I’m too busy working on X to post.”
Far be it for me to break with tradition. đ
I’m bug-fixing a game for class. The current bug has proven quite remarkable: it’s revealed a number of problems with my code, but fixing each one only reveals a deeper, more profound error. As a result, I keep thinking I’m having the “eureka” moment, and then discovering that I have instead found only a new tip of the same iceberg.
I hope it’s the same iceberg, anyway. If there’s two (or more?) icebergs below the surface . . . hoo, boy.
On the plus side, this is one of the games that’s motivating me to get a better website up and running. I think it’s actually pretty neat. When it doesn’t crash. đ
Theory: Maintain a Changelog
Long projects have a way of getting away from you. It’s hard to keep track of everything you’ve done, and it’s especially difficult to remember why you did it. Those times are the reason to keep a changelog.
You might have heard of a changelog in the context of programming. If you haven’t, it’s just a list of what you did for each version of your game/program/whatever. “Version 3–Reduced player chits from three to two, increased food to five units/player” is a perfectly good changelog entry.
Just doing that much will be a big help to your design. If nothing else, it will help you reverse course when something goes wrong (and I guarantee you, things will go wrong). A summary of what changed from version to version makes it easy to undo changes and get back to a version of the game that worked.
To get even more value out of your changelog, include a brief statement of why you did it. “Reduced player chits from three to two to avoid stalemates” is a short statement, but it allows you to reverse course selectively. If you’re still having a problem with stalemates, you can undo just the change that was meant to deal with them and try something else. If you’re happy with the stalemate situation but something else is wrong, you can roll back everything else.
Adding that extra detail to your changelog will also keep you from making stupid mistakes (of a sort, I will admit, I’ve made đ ). It’s very easy to forget which changes responded to which problems. You can very easily undo or modify a change that you need to keep, simply because you’ve forgotten what it was doing for you. Being able to quickly reference the changelog and say “wait, this thing that’s about to be altered is doing important work” can save a lot of time going down blind alleys.
For an example of a good changelog for a tabletop game, check out the one Mantic Games just put up for its Warpath rules. Most changes include a specific statement of why the change was made, so it’s clear which ones are safe to fiddle with and which ones aren’t.
(Disclaimer: I’m a backer for the current Warpath kickstarter, but only for about $20 to get a couple of specific models to use for other games. I don’t need more stretch goals met. ;))
Keeping this sort of changelog is the kind of thing that will take a few minutes each design/playtest session, and will save you hours of completely unnecessary design/playtest sessions. I can’t recommend it enough.
Theory: Coding Lessons Learned the Hard Way
- If you can’t say with certainty how many times a loop is going to run, it’s going to cause crashes.
- There’s a limit to how many statements can be nested before code becomes unreadable. A three-deep nest is OK. Five deep is a lot. Seven is begging for errors.
- Comment every function with, at the least, a brief statement of what it’s meant to do and what its arguments are.
- Javascript will let you get away with anything. That doesn’t mean you should feel free to do everything. Stick to good form; it might not be interesting, but it will only break in relatively predictable ways.
- Learn coding best practices, and force yourself to use them. Formatting, good use of functions, even proper variable naming–all of these will save you time in the long run.
- “If you’ve only backed up in one place, you haven’t backed up.”
- Don’t set code aside for too long; you’ll forget how it all hangs together, and lose time working back through it from scratch. Keep it current in your mind.
- On the flip side, don’t beat your head against a wall. If you haven’t solved a problem over the course of a few hours’ work you’re not going to solve it in that session. Do something else for a while.
- Coding involves working on the computer, and that can be distracting–not least because you’ve probably already got a browser window open to look at Stack Exchange or documentation. Be rigorous with yourself about not doing fun stuff when you should be working.
- As a game designer you can solve technical problems in two ways: the technical route and the design route. If a technical problem is proving unmanageable, put your design skills to good use. Find a way to change the game so that it’s in line with your technical skills.
Link: Jake Thornton on Age of Sigmar
There’s been a lot of discussion online about Age of Sigmar, but for the most part it’s been heavily based on the writer’s local experiences. Jake Thornton’s post is thus breath of fresh air. It’s a macro-level take by an industry insider, and well worth reading if you’ve been following the debate over AoS. Don’t miss the comments!
Hosting Services
My portfolio of digital games can currently be described, generously, as “modest.” It’s starting to grow, however, with Through the Jungle and some student games I’m currently working on.
So long as this site is hosted by WordPress, I can’t easily make these games available. Thus, I’m looking toward other hosting options.
Does anyone have a hosting service they would recommend, or recommend avoiding? Thoughts on the wisdom of taking on independent hosting? All comments and advice are appreciated!
The Bitter Irony
Here at NYU I’m doing so, so much more design than I ever have before.
I just have so little time to talk about it!
Since coming here I’ve built or collaborated with others to build a physics-based action game, an abstract chess-like game, a whole different abstract game based on overloading people on resources, a card game, and I think some other things that I can’t even remember right now. Currently I’m contributing to an altgame about different forms of embarrassment while also creating a game loosely themed on warfare in ancient Greece. It’s been amazing!
Of course, it’s also meant 80+ hour weeks. That’s limited my ability to post recently.
So, I apologize for the content-light updates over the last month. There’s design work happening in the background, and I hope to be able to show you more soon. Until then, please bear with the short posts, and get some sleep for me. đ
How to Get Into Minis Wargaming
People sometimes ask how they should go about getting into minis gaming. Itâs a fair question; there are a lot of hurdles to clear. First one has to choose a game, then pick a small army to start, and then figure out how to add on to that beginning force step by step. Each decision represents a substantial commitment of time, effort, and money, so thereâs a strong incentive to get them right.
Below are some tips Iâve found helpful over the years. Iâm confident following these steps gives you the best chance at having a great experience with minis wargaming.
1. Pick games for the people, not the rules. Miniatures games take a while to play out. If you spend that time with a friendly crowd youâll enjoy the experience even if the game isnât your first choice. On the other hand, if youâre stuck playing with jerks you wonât have fun no matter how great the rules.
The best way to start is thus to go to your local store or club and just spend some time with the people who play different games. See whoâs nice and whoâs not. Once youâve found a good group, play whatever theyâre playing.
2. Choose a faction based on story and aesthetics, not mechanics. Youâre going to be spending a lot of time looking at your miniatures, both during play and when pursuing the more hobby-oriented aspects of the game like assembly and painting. If you donât like what you see itâs going to be that much more difficult to maintain your engagement with your army, and by extension with the game.
Whatâs more, the mechanics arenât generally a factor you need to worry about too much in faction selection, because you can usually get your chosen faction to suit whatever style of play you prefer. Minis companies are aware of the danger of power creep, and they often resist it by giving armies new capabilities rather than strengthening their existing ones. Factions thus tend to become more or less generalists, capable of supporting whatever you want them to do.
For examples of armies sculpted into something unusual we need look no further than the 800 pound gorilla in the room, Warhammer 40,000. The Imperial Guard is the quintessential horde army in 40K, but you can turn it into a smaller, elite force by taking tanks and artillery rather than troops. Space Marines are traditionally the low-numbers strike team, but you can forego the fancy equipment and vehicles that make them so and just deploy a horde of footslogging Marines if thatâs appealing. Each of these armies has been given tools and options over the years that make them highly customizable, and you can now build them however you like
3. Start slow. Buy the starter for your chosen army, and then stop. Play a bunch of games. It might turn out that you donât enjoy them as much as you expected to, and itâs better to find out that you’ve made a mistake when youâve spent ~$50 rather than when youâve invested several times that.
4. Build in stages. People often go directly from their starter force to a full-scale tournament army, and then are overwhelmed by the jump in complexity. Every miniatures game Iâve ever heard of has graduated game sizes between âstarter kitâ and âtournament level.â Buy only what you need to get to the next step in size, and then play several games at that stage before moving upward.
5. Buy generally useful pieces. Youâre going to want to change your army during your time with a game. If you buy generally solid pieces for your chosen faction, youâll be able to do that without needing to make expensive purchases every time. By contrast, picking up narrowly useful, highly specialized pieces will mean that youâll have to drop a lot of cash every time you want to make even a minor change to what youâre putting on the field.
If youâre not sure whatâs generally useful for your game, take a look at tournament lists for your faction over the past year to two years. Take note of pieces that show up again and again, and buy those. Even if they donât end up being your favorites, you can at least be confident that they wonât be money wasted.
6. Decide how you want to deal with the hobby element of the game. Some people really enjoy building and painting miniatures. For others the game is the thing, and the hobby elements are a chore. Youâll enjoy your time with minis more if you figure out where you are on that spectrum, and craft your experience to suit.
If youâre in the group that likes hobby-ing, look for events that involve those skills. Thereâs no end of painting competitions and tournaments that require fully finished minis. Whether youâre looking for rewards for your skill or just a cinematic experience with beautiful armies, you can get what youâre seeking.
If youâd rather just play the game, reach out to your local community. Most minis groups, Iâve found, have one or two people who will build and/or paint on commission. Set some money aside for those services; I can say from personal experience that itâs a lot easier to have fun with a miniatures game when someone else is handling the parts you donât like.
7. Get a proper carrying case early. Theyâll protect the effort (or money) you put into your miniatures, and will keep them organized at home.
Miniatures wargaming is a lot of funâall the more so when you avoid some pitfalls. Following these tips will keep you clear of them, helping ensure that you have fun when playing and that your investments pay off. Enjoy!
Theory: Definitional Questions, Out in the World
It’s tempting not to want to talk about “what is a game” anymore. The discussion in popular culture has become toxic; debates in academia take place in ivory towers that can seem divorced from the practical requirements of designers. We shouldn’t completely abandon definitional questions, though, as they do become important from time to time–as in England right now, where a judge is weighing whether Bridge is a “sport.”
The facts, as I understand them, are as follows: Sport England is an English government body that provides funding to groups that put on sporting events. It’s made the decision that bridge isn’t a sport; ergo, bridge organizations aren’t eligible for money. The issue before the court now is whether Sport England made a “reasonable” decision.
(As a side note: this is a very common approach to judicial review of decisions made by government entities. The court doesn’t ask whether the decision was right. Instead, it considers whether the decision was made using the correct process. So long as the process was OK–all the necessary steps were followed, and the decision was made in light of the appropriate rules–the court won’t get involved in whether the decision was good or bad. The court will only overturn if there was a mistake in the process, and even then the court won’t change the decision; it will just tell the government entity to go back and revisit the question, using the right process.)
Whether Sport England was “reasonable” will depend, in part, on whether it followed the rules about what kind of organization it can give money to. Doubtless those rules involve–perhaps even revolve around–a definition of “sport.” Lots of money could ride on a word or two’s difference in a formal definition of what’s normally a very informal idea.
It’s not always easy to work through definitional issues regarding games. Recently, even the exercise hasn’t been pleasant. However, we need to keep hammering away at the problems. Definitions are one of the interfaces between games and the real world. Poor definitions mean poor interfaces, with all the unpredictable and undesirable results that implies.
Theory: Make Concessions a Part of Your Game
Concessions are generally viewed as disruptive, and a while back I talked about how to discourage them. However, there’s a little-explored alternative: embracing concessions, and making them part of a broader strategy. Backgammon and Magic have both taken this approach, and they’re better for it. It’s worth exploring for your games, as well.
Magic has a problem as a tournament game: there’s a fair amount of randomness, and only limited time in which to play rounds out. If a player gets a bad draw in game one of her best-of-three series, she can end up losing valuable minutes in a match whose outcome isn’t in doubt. Those minutes might end up being decisive, especially if one or the other player is piloting a slow deck that won’t allow all three games to be played. It’s disappointing for tournament results to be decided by luck and the clock.
Fortunately, Magic has long since solved this issue. By allowing players to concede, Magic gives them the option of reallocating time that would be spent in a doomed enterprise to games that can still be won. Players can now focus on the interesting games.
What’s more, conceding goes from being aggravating misconduct to being a valid, accepted strategy. It can even lead to interesting choices; it’s not always easy to know whether it’s better to concede and try again or to play a game out. By accepting concessions and giving them a purpose, Magic fixed them.
Backgammon goes a step farther, making the possibility of concession important in every game, not just lopsided ones. Modern Backgammon is played with a “doubling cube.” At the start of your turn, before you roll the dice, you may offer the cube to your opponent. If he accepts, the amount of money or points at stake is doubled. The six sides of the cube mark the six times the stakes can double, going up to 64 times the original pot.
I’ve played a lot of Backgammon recently, and I can tell you from experience: the decision as to whether or not to concede is hard. Probability, the board state, the number of points at risk and how they compare to the number needed to win the tournament–all of these things factor into a single fold-or-raise decision. The choice is tense, vital to good play, and all-around fascinating.
Concessions are usually thought of as a letdown: a game was going on, and then it just ended. Magic and Backgammon demonstrate that they can instead be meaningful and even exciting. When you’re trying to concession-proof your game, give some thought as to whether it might be possible instead to put a bridle on concessions, and make them work for you.
The Law of Game Design 