Advertising Project.

Interactive ideas:

Interactive projection.

Uses the movements of onlookers to alter the projection, allowing for an artistic and interactive performance. Face tracking/custom optical flow was used.

Art Style Influences

I wanted the art for my game to be as simple as possible -- my own style is intensely meticulous and I overly detailed for an iPhone game. The most successful iPhone games are very streamlined and uncluttered in appearance. Therefore, I started looking at styles that were capable of representing forms with few lines and strokes.

Phoenix Wright, a well known title for the DS, uses simple shading and lighting in order to portray depth. Anime, while not my style of choice, is very good for expressing human form in an oversimplified way. Next, we go back to a game previously mentioned as an influence for its gameplay, The World Ends with You.

TWEWY is very distinctive, using thickly weighted lines and again, simple shading, to express form. The game is very consistant in its style, with each character thinly waisted and many enemies reminiscent of animals a person might find in the real world.

Above is an image from Tales of Symphonia. While in-game, models are heavily simplified and not overly detailed. While this game is not handheld, it captures the intentional movement away from realism I was trying to grasp. Below are some initial attempts and experiments, moving more toward something closer to what I wanted to achieve.

Tenative concept.

After reading through Andrew Loomis' figure drawing book this evening, inspiration struck. Drawn to Life, with its sketchy art style, always appealed to me stylistically. It showed, to a point, different stages of drawing aside from the finished product; something I find very interesting as an artist.

Drawn to Life has multiple modes:

• Village mode: Interaction with buildings and NPCs takes place here. Displayed in top-down view, this area is the central hub for level access, item buying and story progression.
• Adventure mode: Side-scrolling platformer mode where battles take place. Players draw their own platforms in order to cross obstacles and defeat bosses in each zone/area.
• Draw mode: Where players design their own creations and bring them to life using the stylus/touch screen.

(Wikipedia, 2009)

Within Loomis' book, he introduces the mannikin frame on page 38, under the heading 'we begin to draw: first the mannikin frame'. The visual simpilicty of this frame was always something I found very appealing -- it enabled the artist to be able to express movement and form with very few lines.

I was keen to find a way to express this simplicity and form within the art style of my game. Eventually, the idea formed; a game wherein the player begins in the mannikin form, then advances to a more fleshed out, humanoid being as they make progress through dungeons and defeating bosses.

Concept:

• Set in a small village that becomes the safe zone hub mentioned in a previous post.
• Village is watched over by a guardian in the form of a tree, which is then corrupted by an invading evil.
• As a result of the tree's corruption, the inhabitants of the village and the village itself begins to lose form and mass, becoming close to Loomis' mannikin representation of people.
• Players must climb the floors of the tree, fighting in a hack-and-slash style through randomized dungeon floors toward bosses.
• When a boss is defeated, the village and the player character begin to move back toward their original forms.

  

An idea.

iPhone and iPad games, in my mind, should not be too story heavy or demanding on a player's time. While the App Store does have bigger, more involving games like RPGs, the top selling and most well known games are those repeatedly described as 'simple' and 'easy to pick up'. Mobile gaming is all about convenience; games that are easy to jump in and out of are more successful because they can be played during lunches or ten minute downtimes throughout the day. A list of the most popular iPhone games can be found here.

The top ten games are visually distinctive and easy to play. While they, like most games, take practice to become very good at, the average player can pick the game up and become familiar with the controls within just a few short minutes. Thus, the controls are 'intuitive'; easy to use and understand.

Replayability in hack-and-slash games is very important, especially when they're competing against the appeal of score-grinding in a puzzle game like Angry Birds. The randomization of dungeon floor generation is a way to combat this.

An extreme example of floor randomization can be seen in the RPG Persona 3. Players are required to navigate their way through Tartarus, a tower that only appears at midnight and leads toward an unknown evil. There are 265 floors a player must fight through in Tartarus, broken up by bosses every ten or fifteen floors. The process is kept from becoming too repetative by changing the layout of each floor every time it is traversed, and by having enemies increase slowly in difficulty.

While the combat in Persona 3 is the usual turn-based mechanic you would expect from a JRPG, it manages to achieve the objective of having a player repeat the same action multiple times without it becoming repetative. Floor climbing is broken up by visits to non-combat zones and social interaction. While the latter is not suitable for the game I have in mind, this gave me the idea of using a hub as a base of operations for the player; a place for them to view their achievements (enemies defeated, longest run made) and organize the items they have acquired while taking a break from the fighting sections of the game.

I have no words and I must design.

This week's contextual studies assignment was to read through Greg Costikyan's 'I have no words and I must design' and pick out a number of points to take a further look into.

Greg makes a point to discuss MUDs and roleplaying games, noting that these games do not have explicit goals set out for the player. He goes on to note that these games allow a player to pick and choose his own goals -- and often the goal simply comes down to character improvement. Greg also addresses the issue of boredom in these kinds of games; an interesting point. MMORPGs, games that allow players to do what they wish within the world, are constanting being updated and maintained to provide new content because, inevitably, the players of the game become bored with constantly redoing what is available to thm. There is an issue with games that have no set point of completion; eventually a player strays into the realm of repetition and eventually becomes tired of the game. I have played, and ceased playing, a number of MMORPGs. The first of these was Ragnarok, a Korean MMO. Within Ragnarok existed a core flaw; the only real goal or activity within the game was solely character improvement through the repeated killing of the most experience per hour effective monsters. Many MMORPGs, while boasting open ended gameplay that allows a player to choose what to do within a world, fall into the 'grinding' trap -- forcing players to mindlessly repeat the same action in order to advance. Developers of MMOs find that the biggest challenge is keeping end-game content, things for the player to do once they have reached the ceiling, up to date and engaging. Within the MMORPG genre, boredom is the greatest threat.

An amusing area of Greg's book is within the 'Struggle' section, and is in regards to his description of 'coperative games'. He notes that the call for cooperative games is a call for games without struggle or conflict. However, in today's world of gaming, a cooperative (or co-op) game is a game wherein players work together specifically to achieve a goal, and the conflict/struggle comes from the challenge within the game itself. The term co-op gaming, in regards to a game such as Lara Croft and  the Guardian of Light, appears to have different meaning within Greg's book. It is interesting that Greg notes that cooperative play is entertaining in the attempt to achieve a mutual goal, but seems dismissive of the term "cooperative gaming".

Greg makes a comparison between EverQuest and Ultima Online during the Structure session, explaining that while both are intensely similar games, EverQuest does not allow player versus player conflict, while Ultima Online encourages it through better rewards for doing such. He explains that such a small difference creates a huge change in player interaction; Ultima Online breeds fear and avoidance of other players, while EverQuest players engage in relaxed conersations and assist each other. This was very apparent when I played World of Warcraft; within the same game the difference in player interaction could easily be seen between PVP and non-PVP servers. Within a PVP realm, players often instigated witch hunts to take out players of the opposite faction, and paranoia ran high while out and about exploring the realm; high levelled players saw killing lower levelled players as a sort of sport. Relations between the two factions were as the developers intended; people were at war and developed a genuine dislike for players of the opposite faction. By contrast, on non-PVP realms, while conversations between factions were difficult due to chat filters, players from opposite factions were happy to ignore each other, or even sometimes assist using what little communication there was available with emotes and stunted phrases.

Straight on from the previous point, Costikyan then stresses the importance of understanding how game structure affects player behaviour, and explains that the player killing aspect of Ultima Online was not wholly intentional, pointing out that the developer's previous games focused on moral, prosocial paths. However, it is very difficult to predict how people will respond to certain structures. An example of a negative response would be one wherein people attempt to find creative and roundabout ways to exploit the system in order to cause another player grief or difficulty. Within many, many multiplayer games, player versus player interaction is prohibited. In a competative environment, though, people become very adept at finding ways the developers did not intend to kill or take revenge on one another. Going back to Ragnarok Online, player vs player is restricted to designated PVP zones, some of which are only active at certain times of the week. Players found that certain monsters had patterns of aggression that would allow them to switch target to the nearest and more vulnerable players, to prevent easy 'tank and spank' encounters. This behaviour allowed players to gather up large groups of monsters and then run them passed another player, causing all of the monsters to swap targets and ambush the unsuspecting victim. Costikyan briefly touches on this by stating that 'by an dlarge, you can expect that a player will respond to the incentives a game provides. Not always; players sometimes delight in doing the perverse'.

Initial game research/ideas.

According to the data found at this site, games apps currently make up 16.80% of the total App Store market. The data was last updated 2011-10-31 06:00:27 -0700 PDT.

Having had no hands-on experience with an iPhone, my initial ideas looked toward successful DS games I've played for inspiration. While the two platforms are not overly similar, they both use a touch screen. One game that caught my attention was 'The World Ends with You'. The World Ends with You merges action and role-playing genres to create a hack-and-slash style battle system merged with heavy doses of JRPG story. While the latter isn't necessarily something I want to incorporate, the battle controls allow for flawless touch-based input.

To move a character, a dragging motion is used -- starting from the character and moving around the screen. Finally, to attack, a player is required to tap an enemy, or draw shapes upon the screen depending on which type of attack the player wants to use. The way the game uses the touch screen during battle is almost flawless, and something that could easily be transferred across to an iPhone/iPad format. Below are two pictures of different attack types being used within the game; the first activated by dragging across remote empty space and the second activated by tapping the target enemy from a distance.

Barbed wire is cast across the screen, where it remains for a set amount of time to damage enemies.

Attacking with bolts of lightning.

Additionally, gameplay videos where the different kinds of attacks are demonstrated can be found here and here.

With this in mind, the sort of game I want to create will merge hack-and-slash controls with a roguelike inspired dungeon replayability. One recent and successful 'roguelike'-esque game that captures the simplicity I wish to aim for is The Binding of Isaac; featured on the PC.

The Binding of Isaac follows a boy's journey through the dungeon-like basement of his house. Rooms are randomly generated, allowing for huge amounts of replayability. The game isn't heavily story focused aside from an introduction to set the scene, and much of the game's appeal are the many, many items a player can retrieve in order to improve their offensive and defensive capabilities. Each item modifies the player avatar, often with amusing results visually.

As well as rooms being randomly generated, entire dungeon 'floors' are also made at random. Each floor contains a boss which must be defeated in order to move to the next floor. At the end of the chain of floors, the player must face Isaac's Mother, who is attempting to sacrifice him in order to prove her faith to 'God'.

In contrast to The World Ends with You, which allows multiple attack methods, the main way to attack in The Binding of Isaac is ranged. The player is able to shoot Isaac's 'tears' at enemies. While there are special weapons that occasionally allow for other methods of attack (such as one that turns you into an invincible boy with a unicorn horn), the main method remains very much the same throughout the game. Strategic use of bombs is also a valid tactic.

The game mixes a very simplistic artstyle with often disturbing concepts (travelling through Mom's womb to attack her heart) and themes in order to create a distinctive and memorable visual style. The Binding of Isaac is very much a pick up and play game -- permadeath is used and runs are often cut very short by a spree of bad luck. This is a very suitable gameplay style for an iPhone or iPad game, as many of the games on these platforms are timewasters during periods of downtime. There are no save functions; items gathered and items unlocked are saved automatically upon game end/death. The only thing retained between runs is information on the items a player has unlocked and is able to obtain on their next run.

Randomly generated room. From left to right: Map, coins bombs and keys remaining, arrows, special item and health remaining.

The Binding of Isaac boss battle.
 

Another interesting little feature of the game is the inclusion of items such as 'Brother Bobby' and 'Sister Maggie'. These are items that can be picked up in much the same way as any other, but float beside your shoulder and attack with you. These are 'familiars' and are able to attack, defend and perform other tasks for the player. 

Sister Maggie

As I do within many games, I felt a little comforted by the presence of a 'helper' I could use to go through the dungeon.

This brought me to a game I'm playing currently; Rune Factory. A spin-off from the long-standing Harvest Moon series, Rune Factory combines the farming and social bonding aspect of HM with dungeon crawling. However, as an extension of farming, the player character is capable of taming creatures found within the dungeons they traverse. These creatures are capable of picking their own target and different creatures have signature attack styles and skills.

These monster companions are not necessary or gamebreaking; they are useful assistants but will not make or break the tide of a battle.

My initial game parameters so far would be:

• Hack-and-slash real time combat through touch screen attack input.
• Dungeon crawling replayability through randomized rooms and floors.
• Stat increasing items.
• Optional companion system.
• Simplistic but distinct art style.

New project, new labels!

With the majority of the work on the board game project out of the way (bar some document compiling), we've received the second brief. I am to design a game for Apple's App Store. Having never so much as held an iPhone, iPod or iPad, my research started at the very beginning; examining the technical specifications of the devices.

All of the devices mentioned feature multi-touch technology, allowing for 'multi gestures'.

• One finger touch:
• Generally used to move objects from one place to another, via dragging. One finger touches are also used to tap objects, like a button or an app.
• Two finger touch:
• Also called a 'pinch' and most comfortably done with the thumb and finger. This is done to zoom in on images. Reversing the pinch enlarges an image.
• Three/four finger touch:
• Mostly used on Macbooks, three finger swipes allow navigation back and forth between webpages. A four finger swipe activates Expose (application switch menu) or shows the desktop, depending on which way the fingers are swiped.

iPhone - iPhone 4 Specifications:

Display and resolution: 

• 88m (3.5in) glass LCD, 3:2 aspect ratio.
• 480 x 320 px (HVGA) at 163 ppi.
• 960 x 640 px at 326 ppi from the iPhone 4 and onward.

Storage:

• 4, 8 or 16 GB on the original iPhone.
• 8 or 16 GB on the iPhone 3G.
• 8, 16 or 32 GB on the iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4.
• 16, 32 or 64 GB on the iPhone 4S.

CPU Core:

Apple iPhones utilize underclocking of more poweful CPUs to preserve battery life. It was found that slower processors caused worse battery performance than a more powerful, but underclocked, processor.

• 620 MHz (underclocked to 412 MHz) ARM 1176JZ(F)-S in the iPhone and iPhone 3G.
• 833 MHz (underclocked to 600 MHz) ARM Cortex-A8 used in the iPhone 3GS.
• 1 GHz (underclocked to 800 MHz) Apple A4 used in the iPhone 4.
• 1 GHz (underclocked to 800 MHz) Dual-core Apple A5 used in the iPhone 4S.

Memory:

• 128 MB DRAM in the iPhone and iPhone 3G.
• 256 MB DRAM in the iPhone 3GS.
• 512 MB DRAM in the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S.

Features:

• USB 2.0/dock connector.
• Assisted GPS, including earphones with mic (added with the iPhone 3G).
• Voice control, digital compass, Nike+ camera tap to focus. Includes earphones with remote and microphone (added with the iPhone 3GS).
• 3-axis gyroscope, dual-microphone, noise suppression, microsim, rear-camera LED flash (added with the iPhone 4).
• Siri (beta) voice assistant and GLONASS support (added with the iPhone 4S).

All later iPhones retained the features from previous iPhones as well as their newly added additional features.

Camera:

• 2.0 Megapixel, f/2.8. Still images only. iPhone and iPhone 3G.
• 3.0 Megapixel, f/2.8 VGA video at 30 frame/s. Added with the iPhone 3GS.
• Rear 5.0 Megapixel, f/2.8. 720p HD video at 30 frame/s. Added with the iPhone 4.
• Rear 8.0 Megapixel, f/2.4. 1080p Full HD video at 30 frame/s. Added with the iPhone 4S.
• Both iPhone 4 and iPhone 4s have a 0.3 Megapixel (VGA) 480P video at 30 frame/s.

Power:

• All iPhone models use a built in, nmon removable, rechargable lithium-ion polymer battery (LiPo).

iPad/iPad 2:

Display and resolution:

• 9.7 inches (25cm) multitouch display. 1024 x 768 pixels with LED backlighting and a fingerprint/scratch-resistant coating. 

Processor:

• 1 GHz Apple A4 system-on-a-chip. Used in the iPad.
• 1 GHz (dynamically clocked) dual-core Apple A5 system on a chip. Used in the iPad 2.

Memory: 

• 256 MB DDR RAM built into Apple A4 package. Used in the iPad.
• 512 MB DDR2 (1066 Mbit/s data rate) RAM built into Apple A5 package. Used in the iPad 2.

Storage:

• 16, 32 or 64 GB.

Environmental Sensors:

• Accelerometer, ambient light sensor, magnetometer.
• Gyroscope added in iPad2.

Camera:

• 720p HD still and video camera 0.7 MP, 30fps still camera, 0.3 MP. iPad 2 only.

iPads and iPhones as gaming devices:

Two of the clearest advantages the iPad has over the iPhone are the screen size and resolution. The iPhone 4S, being the latest iPhone model, has a resolution of 960 x 640 px at a ratio of 3:2. The iPad, however, sits at 1024 x 768 in a 4:3 ratio. Physically, the iPad is much larger; 9.7 inches vs the iPhone's 3.5 inches. The iPad's build also renders it faster than the iPhone 4, allowing for the development of more advanced and taxing apps.

However, apps designed for the iPhone can be played on the iPad, while iPad exclusive apps cannot be played on the iPhone.

The features of the iPhone and iPad are actually well suited to gaming. The multi-touch screen in particular is very responsive to different kinds of touches; in a hack and slash game a single finger drag could move the character, while a tap on an enemy could be used to indicate a sword slash.

Caillois.

Caillois' ideas in regards to waste are not incorrect. Play, especially with video games, is not inherently productive. While the player can accomplish something within the video game and even have something (within the game) to show for it, outside of the game it rarely amounts to anything of worth. An exception to this would be online games, wherein items procured can actually be sold for real currency. This is most common in MMOs, and also in Valve's game 'Team Fortress 2'. While the sale of game items for actual currency is not actually officially sanctioned, transactions do occur and these salesmen can actually claim that their play has gained them something valuable in the outside world.

However, the argument could be made that those using a video game to farm for real profit have changed play into work. When one plays a video game for any other purpose than to enjoy that game, it ceases to be play.

Everything so far.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/5s42fr

All my research so far is in the link above. I've warned the group that I may have to stop there, as I'm still ill and haven't really been able to focus on anything in the last few days. This is the last week, so I probably need to set a point to top writing anyway.

Bit of a delay.

After some unpleasant news and general ill health, I'm back on track. The group have been playtesting their game and generating ideas to throw around and take a look in to. Currently, my research covers;

General overview of board games,
A more in-depth look into abstract strategy games,
A history of influences (chess, checkers).
Bibliography.

A look back.

I've moved most of my research activity offline now, to create a more document-suitable version to include in our final submission. The team are still playtesting the game. Tomorrow we are required to present our ideas to the rest of the class and also the tutors. Logicially, the best way to do it would be to go through as following:

Overview -- A very brief description of the game without any mechanics details. Probably given by the team leader.
Research -- Inspirations and a general look into what we wanted to achieve with the game and which previous board games influenced our idea.
Games Mechanics -- Moving more into detail with how the game works and rulesets.
Visuals -- Concept art and descriptions of how we want the game to look and feel.

Day three.

The group has decided to stick with the first idea. In terms of research, I will look into successful strategy games throughout history and note their common traits. A general overview of the history of board games seems unnecessary if we look at the document and design process as though we were designing something for an actual company. An employer would not want to look through eight pages of unfiltered board game history -- they would be more interested in specific evidence that our type of game has been successful in the past, and will be successful again.

Day Two.

The group discussed an idea today, opting to go for an abstract strategy game instead of something closer to a eurogame or a family game. This choice means that gameplay and ruleset will have to be utterly perfected and playtested heavily. Without the inclusion of luck and random chance, the game will rely on strategy and sound playing rules for complete balance. The majority of the group's time will likely be used to tweak game mechanics.

While I think it would be better to come up with a few different ideas and see which one suits the timeframe and project best, the group appear to have decided on building upon the first idea they were given. While I'm slightly worried that the mechanics will take too much trial and error to perfect within our time frame, it does not seem likely that the group will switch at this point.

The main points that need to be kept in mind are:

-  A sound, solid system needs to be developed for piece weaknesses and strengths. These also need to be kept relatively simple, without becoming convoluted.
- In a true strategy game, there is no inclusion of luck. Variation is essential in playstyle and strategy, but completely random chance will turn away those who look to buy strategy games. Previously I have suggested using a game with both luck and skill involved; I still believe that these games are heavily marketable. However, if the idea the group wants to use is abstract strategy based, then there should be no random chance.

As the group has already decided on an idea, further research into different types seems a bit redundant. I'll turn my focuses to look at abstract strategy games in general.

Initial research, thoughts, suggestions and ideas.

The brief for the first project was given today. Our group assigned roles as a first action and exchanged email addresses/phone numbers. Those confident in what they wanted to do in the project picked their role. I opted to take part in researching various aspects of board games history and popularity, as there were a few in the group who wanted to do art primarily.

The research I'm most keen to do would detail the following:

• General history/overview of board games.
• A look into the most popular board games today, and examination into what may have caused that popularity through analysis of their common themes/traits.

Additionally, I am prepared to contribute to the conceptual/game idea areas of the project. From my own experience, I believe a board game is best when it encourages player alliances, rivalries and general interaction. Board games that allow the sabotage of other players as a means to win are generally very popular. Strategy games are also often better received than random chance games, as a win through a person's own careful planning and set up is more satisfying than a roll of the dice.

After moving into my research, I found that the most well known and long lasting games reflected this idea. Below are a few of them:

• Monopoly
• Trivial Pursuit
• Scrabble
• Cluedo
• Chess
• Cranium
• The Game of Life

Many of these games emphasize the use of strategy and skill based play to win. The exception to this observation is 'The Game of Life', which uses many luck based cards and has been criticized due to many 'decisions' made in game having very little impact on the outcome in comparison to the aforementioned life cards.

Generally speaking, games based purely on luck are marketed more toward children. Examples of this would include Snakes/Chutes and Ladders, or Candyland. However, luck-based games are frowned upon due to their not being mentally engaging and giving no lasting satisfaction in a win. Even so, in all games there is a degree of randomness in order to keep players interested in coming back again. If there was no variation in each play of a board game at all, there would be no reason to play more than once. Even in games with no real luck involvement such as chess, the variation comes in the moveset and playstyle utilized by an opponent.

Some of the financial success of a number of the board games above can be attributed to their ability to serve as a template for spin-off games and variations on their formula. While Monopoly and Cluedo are games in their own right, they are also highly adaptable and their base ruleset can be applied to different themes – allowing them to appeal to different audiences and fans of popular cultures. For example, both Cluedo and Monopoly have game versions adapted and more suited to a younger audience; they are simplified but still the same game.

Below are a few of the categories board games fit under. However, there are many board games that belong in one or more categories so this shouldn't be considered an absolute list.

• Abstract strategy games.
  These are games that rely very little on luck and look more toward skill and strategy. Examples of these games would be chess or reversi.

• Dexterity games.
  These are games wherein physical skill (balancing, steady hands) is required to play. An example of this would be Jenga.
• Eurogames.
  These games are generally tabletop based with simple rules and indirect player interaction. Eurogames also emphasize strategy and put little stock into luck or conflict. Eurogames are generally also more economic than militant in nature. Eurogames are a good middle of the road, sitting in the middle of the scale between strategy games like chess and party games such as Pictionary. An example of a eurogame would be The Settlers of Catan.
  Family games are much like Eurogames, though often with more player interaction.
• Roll and move games.
  Games in which a player rolls the dice to move a token around the board. Many games are roll and move games while also falling into other categories.
• Race games.
  These are games in which the objective is the be the first to move all of your pieces to the end of a track. Race games are the earliest and most widely used kind of game. An example of a race game would be backgammon.
• Trivia/Quiz games.
  Self explanatory, an example being Trivial Pursuit.
• Word games. 
  These are games based on wordplay, such as Scrabble or Boggle.
• Wargames.
  These games are board games that simulate a battle/war. Players generally control an army and utilize heavy strategy to win. An example of a war game would be Risk.

Depending on the category of the board game and how much luck is involved, a board game can run from any time between 10/20 minutes to several hours. However, at most a game will only keep the attention of an average player for an hour or two. War games and abstract strategy games appear to have the longest average running time, while more luck based games finish faster.

Taking into consideration all that has been said above, a good set of criteria for a simple game could be the following:

• A game with a balance of both luck and strategy. An entirely strategy based game like chess will likely be too big a task to attempt in three weeks. Abstract strategy games, while satisfying due to the elimination of random chance, are also intensely complex with entire books devoted to moves, counter-moves and overall game play. On the flip side, an entirely luck based game is unsatisfying and often childish to play, even for children. Luck based games also often end overly quickly.
• A game that is adaptable. A base template that can be used to fit other franchises and themes has more of a resell value than a game that cannot. Additionally, an adaptable game can be tailored to suit multiple audiences rather than being limited to a single crowd.

I will suggest these to the group when we meet tomorrow. Then, we can begin to brainstorm some specific ideas and start the process of design.

Visited URLs/research material:

• http://www.mademan.com/mm/top-10-best-selling-board-games-all-time.html
• http://www.vitalstatistics.info/sub-category2.asp?cid=20&scid=597
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_of_Life#Criticism
• http://bestdanggames.wordpress.com/2009/07/21/luck-in-board-games-how-much-should-there-be/
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_game#Luck.2C_strategy_and_diplomacy
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_game#Categories
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluedo#Spinoffs
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_%28game%29#Spinoffs
• http://boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/glossary
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-style_board_game
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_game
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_wargame
• http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/big-game-hunter-the-search-for-the-next-monopoly-1813587.html?action=Gallery