Game Rules!

We don’t have a name yet but I’ve been working on the rules – so here goes..

Objective:

To be the first team to control a majority of the board. Control is had by having a house piece or player piece on a tile. A majority is [] number of tiles.

How to play:

2 teams of 2

Each turn, one player of the team rolls the die ( there is only one roll for each team.) The number given by the die represents energy points. The team must then decide what to use the energy points for.

Moving around the board:

The energy points can be used to move the player pieces. The team can divvy up the points e.g a roll of 5 = player 1 moves 3 tiles & player 2 moves 2 tiles

players may move left or right.

players do not have to move.

Resources:

On the board, players can pick up resources for their team. To use these resources, teams use their energy points to build items.

Pick up:

Wood

Iron

Make:

Boat = 2 wood + 2 iron + 3 energy

House = 3 wood + 2 energy

Weapons = 1 iron + 1 wood + 2 energy

Players must be on the same tile to make something.

 

 

 

 

ARDN506: Week 4

 

This week we play tested our games! We just used a form to give feedback on each others games and went around the class. Ours made another group rage quit:

20773273_10213648066705295_956162272_o20821136_10213648066665294_784089584_o

So Jireh and I stayed behind to re assess our game. The feedback told us:

  • That it was completely random. There was no player choice.
  • The inner ring was super hard in comparison to the outer rings.
  • It didn’t make sense.
  • Too long.

So we went back to our core mechanic, because there was so much going on in our game that we could get rid of.

Using the die roll as “energy” points, two teams of 2 can decide what to do. There are still resources, wood and iron, which you can use to build houses or weapons. These are finite resources, but you can decide when to use them or stockpile them for later in the game. You can also use the energy points to move and can divvy them up between the team, e.g with a roll of 5, player 1 can move 3 spaces and player 2 can move 2.

The aim is to manage your resources, energy, wood and iron, to take a majority of the board.  Each team starts on opposite rings and must complete a full round of their own ring (to collect resources), before they are able to migrate to the other ring.

The rings aren’t connected (there is a river between them), so the first step to crossing would be to build a “boat”.

How things would be “costed” out, we will figure on our next meeting, where we will playtest the thing. But initially, it would be:

house = 2 wood + 2 energy

Weapons = 3 iron + 1 energy

Boat = 4 wood + 5 energy

(Below is our initial planning)

game_plan.jpg

Other questions:

Can we save our energy points?

Is there free movement (left and right) after the first circle is done?

How do the resources and building and weapons interact?

Will we incorporate the chance cards from before?

Can you use the boat to move the same circle? ( maybe you can and it would be easier, but the chance cards are in the water and if you move past them, you must take a card?)

 

ARDN506: Week 3: Paper Prototype

Our group (Sasha, Kate, William, Jireh & I) made a paper prototype for a new game consisting of boats, sharks and zombies. Our board game used a circular board with three tiers/levels. The aim was to collect enough resources (wood, cotton, fibre) to build a boat to get to the second tier which was “water”. ¬†Unfortunately we didn’t manage to figure an end game with the third and last tier.

 

I don’t think we had any interesting or challenging mechanics. The die was used but without thinking about the function and it feels annoying to have a turn because all you had to do was roll the die and hope you landed on the right tile. This was also boring because there was no way to have control over your turn.

We haven’t yet worked out how to incorporate player choice into our game and therefore it doesn’t seem that interesting to play.

Looking back at our first week of ARDN506 where we looked at sources of unpredictability within game and play, there was:

  • Elements of chance
  • Player choice
  • Complex rules

Because our game is based off the idea that you compete against the other players to complete a set of tasks e.g., collect materials, build boat, travel and avoid zombies (?) and sharks and finish the game: there is no player choice.

This becomes a linear set of choices exclusively based off of chance. There are no complex rules that you can use to your own advantage or try use against others. This sounds scathing, but it is annoying when you have little clue how to implement what you are reading about.

The other thing that we talked about were the different types of mechanics, including:

  • Physics
  • Internal Economy
  • Progression Mechanisms
  • Tactical Maneuvering

For our game, we would be focusing on the last three, especially progressions mechanics. I still really like the mechanic that we came up with for the everyday activity: “walking the dog”. This was where the player (perhaps teams) were constrained by each others movements, so one could not travel without affecting each other etc..

I want to work on our weird internal economy and tactical maneuvering, but first we have to talk amongst and figure out the really basic stuff that I mentioned first.

Hopefully, our first play test will show us where we need to focus.

 

 

 

ARDN506: Week 3:Play

This week we looked at:

  • Johan Huizinga (Homo Ludens)
  • Salen & Zimmerman’s definitions
  • Frameworks of play
  • Mechanics & Excercises etc.

More

ARDN506: Week 2: Paper Prototype

Brief: Produce playable table-top game prototype.

Exploring fundamental design principles of game mechanics using basic table-top mechanic design methods and techniques.

Week 2:

Paper prototype 1:

  • choice
  • goals/narrative
  • coherence (flow)

Within our groups, we turned our basic daily activities into simple mechanics and then tried to put them (or some of them) into a basic table top game. Within my group we had feeding the cat, walking the dog, cooking an egg, changing a light bulb and going to the gym. We ended up making a board game that was separated out into “rooms”.

The most interesting mechanic was “walking the dog”, where we came up with the idea to constrain the players so that they could not move far away from each other. We also played with the idea of having 2 different teams each with different abilities, for example if there was a cat and a person both looking for an egg, the cat can only (or also) see in the darkness, so the light needs to be turned on in the “room”. It was hard to figure out, mostly because we had to focus on the mechanics of the game instead of the premise.

We started making the paper prototype in class:

 

 

We should have a proper game drawn up by next friday!

Game Trailer – After Dark

 

Here is my game trailer and game!

There is a levitating ghost mode operated by the shift key and a normal mode where the arrow left and right keys move back and forth across the screen and the space bar is used to jump. NPCs are engaged with by either the Enter or Tab key, and subsequent presses continue the conversation.

 

 

Issues:

Because of time restraints, my game does not have all of the complex branching in the conversations with NPCs.

Some small bugs happen randomly with the mechanics, because of the challenging nature of having 2 separate collision logic scripts, one for ghost mode and real mode, sometimes the player object sticks onto other objects.

 

After Dark Trailer (2017)

The Game:

After Dark Game

After Dark Game Reflection

It’s almost time to hand in the game and I have run into a lot of trouble due to time constraints. I have been very overly ambitious with my game and spent to much time polishing my animations, collisions and text.

More