Labels

Tuesday 4 October 2011

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.

No comments:

Post a Comment