Page: Guide.ModelingDesign12 - Last Modified : Mon, 22 Sep 14 - 1667 Visits

I don't think there can be any perfect board game design method. It will have impacts on the kind of game it will produce and it might restrict the type of game it could produce. For example, I don't think a party game would be designed with such method. Here are some of the thinks I am expecting from this design method.

Mathematic Oriented

I think there will be a more important place for mathematics and numerical values. In fact there might be no or little text abilities in such kind of games. What would have been a text special ability would be numerized since what would have been the case if it was implemented as a video game. Because text abilities requires special piece of code which you want to avoid. You want everything to be generic to make sure it could have been interpreted by a computer.

More Thematic than Abstract

In computer software design, you start by detailing the properties that each object will have. So it means adding detail to objects of the game without actually knowing how they are going to be used. So instead of starting the game from an abstract mechanic, you start it from a detailed thematic point of view. Then later during the refinement you can abstract certain concepts that you find too complex to handle. But in general, the game should be more detailed and thematic than abstract since you are starting from a detailed approach.

More convenient for solitaire game

Having more details to manage makes it more suitable for a single or 2 player game. More details also means the game will be longer which makes it again easier to play as solo since he can put more time in a game than in a multi player game since only 1 player needs to attend the game to play.

More freedom than restrictions

Most abstract board game mechanics gives you a certain limit of choice for example, there is 3 actions you can do, you must play 3 of the 5 cards in your hands, etc. Here since the game is more detailed, there could be dozens of action that could be performed. But this idea could take wings as a solitaire since you do not have to consider dominant strategies as much as in a multi player game. The value of each action does not have the same weight than in a multi player game where different combination of choice needs to to lead you to victory.

Better Story machines

One thing I realized is that a more detailed game with more freedom of action seem to lead to a better story driven game. Story driven board game seems to use the idea of adding story flavor text to the game, while video games used a scripted movie like story. From my point of view, story diven game rarely feel story based. It might depends on the define of story based games I have.

For me a good story based game is a game that can create stories: a story machine. I have less interest for scripted story because there is simply no replay value. Detailed games which have more freedom seems to be better suited for making story machines. As an example, I wrote 3 stories lately that happened in the PTO 1 & 2 video game which are Historical pacific war game. Beside the historical setting, there is no story based mechanics in this game. But those game still seems to be suitable to create stories that you are going to remember and tell the tale. Here are the story threads:

Stories from the Pacific - Part 1 - Were we not fighting a war or something?

Stories from the Pacific - Part 2 - Subs, Planes and Dreadnoughts

Stories from the pacific - Part 3 - Invasion USA

Easier video game adaptation

I always said that video games designers need to learn from board game design and vice versa. Now one idea that was tempting was to design video games and apply certain artificial restriction that board game design would apply due to component and space limitation for example. Instead I decided to use the opposite approach, design a board game that is very close to video game design, so that it could easily be impleted as a video game while keeping the board game physical world restrictions.

The goal is to make the game prototyping faster and easier to manipulate while keeping the opportunity to make it easily portable as a video game. Since the game is more detailed and has used a video game design approach it should be more suitable for such conversion than board games who used a more abstract approach.

Less prototype rebuilding

Since the games is based on a model and a more structure approach, there should be a lower need to design or redesign game components. Redesign is possible but it would rather be minor alteration. Else in board game design, if something does not work, you scrap it all and search for new mechanics. But since there should be no mechanic searching such situation should not occur often.

Have more fun designing the game

Since it can be a daunting task and since there is little reward to gain from designing a game, having fun during the design is mandatory. If the game is more like a sandbox game, the design approach could feel like you are adding features as the game progress. So you are simply expanding the possibilities of the game while playing it making it funnier as the game progress.

But more importantly, the possibility to play the game very soon during the design is much more rewarding as you can see the results in action. If the game is a solitaire game, each playtest you make is more play than work because you are actually playing the final product, not simulating what a multi- player game would look like.

Conclusion

So this is it, not sure if I will be able to meet those expectation, we will see at the end of the design. One thing for sure, it that it might be more suitable for the type of game I want to accomplish which might not be the case for everybody. But still it it could allow me to design game more easily, I would gladly take the restrictions that came with it. As for the original abstract approach, I think I will use this approach only for very simple and small games.

<< Problem and Solutions | Table of contents | Relational Database >>