My solo game: Ball is life

when designing my solo game I did come across some problems when making it, near the end when it was coming up to the deadline I have computer problems which stopped me from doing codding. now I've starting working on it again I've starting to think of new ideas I can put into the game which I wasn't gonna have before.

Design document

Design document

Game scenario:

Red vs Blue is a modern-day war game on a 11 by 11 board, two players go head to head as one player plays the attacking team whose aim is to captures their opponents captain and as the other player plays the defending team whose aim is to get the captain to one of the four corners as both players battle it out capturing other pieces along the way.

Board design:

For this design I wanted to have a clear differences between where the attacking and defending teams were arranged for the start of the game. I felt an 11 by 11 board would be a great for this design as by placing the attacking team on the outside it gives enough room for the defending team to move out.

The attacking teams starting square: These squares are designed with a red background and a black cross in the middle of them which I felt displays elements of attack. Five squares are arranged along each side of the board.

The defending teams starting square: these squares are designed with a blue background and a black circle going through it because of the colour background it already looked like a defending square but by adding the circle it was defined. These squares are located in the middle of the board surrounding the captain’s starting square.

The Captain’s starting square: this square has the same design as the defending teams starting squares but with an added black dot in the centre of it to make it different to the squares which it is surround by. This square is located in the centre of the board.

Safe zone: These squares are designed with a gold background and small back crosses and circles in the centre of it. This is to show that the squares do not belong to either team and it is a mutual square. These squares are located in each corner of the board.

Squares: these squares are designed with just a black foreground. These squares are located in areas on the board which have not been placed with any of the squares above. There are a total of 84 of these squares on the board and they are not controlled by any team.

Game Pieces:

The Captain                                                

 

 Attacking team’s Pieces

 Defending team’s pieces

When it came to designing the pieces for my board game, I wanted the captain of the defending team to be different than the other pieces which belong to the defending team. I made the captain a lighter blue and as where the pose is different to the other pieces the captain stands out to the rest. With the main board pieces the poses are the same for both attacking and defending teams, the only difference between the two is the colour; the attacking team has red pieces and the defending team has blue pieces.

Asset list:

-          -Board (11 by 11)

-         - 1 Captain

-          -12 defending pieces

-          -20 attacking pieces

Gameplay:

Games of Red Vs Blue last around seven to ten minutes depending on how the players decide to play the game. When players rushed their moves without thinking what can happen next the games were considerably less long-lasting (between five and seven minutes). When the games where mixed with both a player that rushed and a player who carefully considers their moves the games lasted around eight to ten minutes. The player who rushed their moves were in their favour as it made the passive player think of reasons why the pieces where moved where they were.

With games which were played by both players that rushed their moves did show pantones when the games were taking place. When on different teams the players switched and did the same thing as each other when playing different sides. When the attacking team were making their moves the players seemed to place their pieces as close as they could to the defending teams pieces. This restricted their moves. As this happened more, the board became more cluttered, making this strategy not as good to play by unless the defending teams gets their pieces out of the centre. When the players played as the defending team they focused more on getting their captain out of the middle and having open space to move around. I found that if the defending team achieves this, the attacking team spends the rest of the game chasing the captain around the board.  Therefore, the defending team is forced to only move their captain move after move unless they see they can use another pieces to block the chaser. When both players play without putting much thought into their moves it makes the game respective for both players but more for the defending team, therefore not making the gameplay as entertaining.

When the game is played by players who both think out their moves it starts off similar to how players who rush play. The attacking player tries to keep the defending teams pieces in the centre of the board. They then quickly try to capture any pieces the defending team manages to get out of the centre whilst trying to get as much control as possible from the start of the game. As the defending player they try to position their pieces so that they can move their captain from the centre without putting the piece in danger.

Rules:

There are a total of 33 pieces in the game.

The board is marked to initiate where the pieces have to be placed.

The attacking team (Red) are placed around the outer of the board marked with red squares.

The defending team (Blue) are placed around the centre of the board marked with blue squares.

The captain is placed in the centre of the board marked with a blue square with and a circle in the middle of it.

The attacking team makes the first move to start the game, players can only move straight ahead, backwards and side to side. They cannot move diagonally.

For the defending team to achieve victory the player has to get the captain to one of the four safe zones on the board.

For the attacking team to achieve victory the player has to capture the defending team’s captain before it reaches one of the safe zones.

For a piece to be captured a player must place two of their own pieces either side of the opposing teams piece (creating a sandwich between them).

The attacking team cannot block a safe zone to prevent the captain from reaching it. If this is done it becomes an automatic lose.

A player cannot take any longer than five minutes to make a move.

A player can move more than one square per move.

References:

Hnefatafl board. (). Hnefatafl board. [Available online]: http://www.jamesadamshistoricenterprises.com/treasuretrove/images/hnefatafl_boards3.gif.

[Accessed 27th February 2015]

Daniel. (). Toy Soldier. [Available online]:

 http://gadgetsin.com/toy-soldier-book-ends.htm.

[Accessed 27th February 2015]

Michael Dorstewitz. (). Toy Soldier. [Available online]:

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/03/08/school-confiscates-cupcakes-for-toy-soldier-decorations-54327.

[Accessed 27th February 2015]

Expanded bibliography

Full length books:

Jesse, S. (2008). The Art of Game Design: Good Games Are Created Through Playtesting. Morgan Kaufmann: Elsevier . Page 389-390.

Richard, R. III and Steve, O. (2005). Game Design: Theory & Practice, The Function of the Focus. 2320 Los Rios Boulevard Plano, Texas 75074: Wordware. Page 74 - 77.

Articles in books:

Geoff, K. Die hard/try harder: narrative, spectacle and beyond, from hollywood to videogame. Page, 50-64. in King, Geoff. Krzywinska, Tanya. (2002). Screenplay:cinema/videogames/interfaces. London, U.K.:Wallflower Press

Nick, F. The strange case of the casual gamer. Page, 143-163. In Isbister, Katherine. Schafer, Noah. (2008). Game usability. Burlington, USA: Morgan kaufmann

Academic journals;

Brosius HB, Engel D (1996). The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes toward media influence? Int. J. Public Opin. Res., Page 142-162.

Cho HY, Boster FJ (2008). First and third person perceptions on antidrug ads among adolescents. Commun. Res., Page 169-189.

New games Journalism

Halo The Master Chief Collection challenges the traditional sentiment that value is parallel to age. It is proven that just because the games are older, it does not necessarily mean that they are worth less. So while it's good to see Halo 3 and 4 clutching extra pixels and loaded with map packs, I was really excited when loading up the original Halo. Memory is never stronger than when playing the games you did when you were a kid.

Above all else, it's good to have the original Halo's multiplayer back. Considering the disappointment of 2011's Anniversary edition was its absence, and now it’s playable over Xbox Live for the first time. While some of the maps have lived on in remakes, some of the best have been sealed away like the orbital sniper battles of Boarding Action, Combat Evolved's movement has a heavier feel than any of its sequels - and very particularly, a delay on landing before Chief can jump again which prevents fleet-footed navigation but it's still enjoyable, and playable on merit and not just novelty.

343 Industries. (). Halo The Master Chief Collection. [Available online]: https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-gb.

 [Accessed 11th March 2015]

Games design workshop

I missed the section which this happened in but UCS video game design hosted a games workshop by David Parlett. David has won many rewards including a game of the year reward. in the section student where asked to create and design non digital games which involved a racing mechanic without the use of a dice.

EDDIE DUGGAN. (). Non-Digital Games Design Workshop with David Parlett. [Available online]: http://digitalephemera.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/non-digital-games-design-workshop-with.html.

[Accessed 11th March 2015]

Pervasive games/La decima vittima

In a lecture we watched an hour long film called "La decima vittima"  This is an Italian science fiction film made in 1965 and seen around the world. It depicting a society where it is possible to compete in a deadly game of hunter and victim. A person who survives five rounds as a hunter and five rounds as a victim win one million dollars. This is the film that inspired the fembots of Austin Powers, Assassins and other Circle of Death games. I found the film interesting but couldn’t keep focus on the film as where I am not a fast reader to keep up with the subtitles.

 Stenros. (). La decima vittima. [Available online]: https://pervasivegames.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/20/.

 [Accessed 11th March 2015]

Games Britannia: "Joystick Generation"

Joystick Generation is one of the three-part series presented by ‘historian Benjamin Woolley’ about popular games in Britain which ware from the Iron Age to the Information Age, in which he unravels how an apparently trivial pursuit is a rich and entertaining source of cultural and social history.

In this episode of the three part series, Woolley explores the journey games have taken from board games to video game, reflecting the rapidly changing history of modern Britain.

In the 1980s, the power of our imagination was harnessed in early video games, putting the players at the heart of a space adventure they could influence. The British boom years of the 90s introduced characters like ‘Lara Croft’ to a world beyond video games as players started to move into the internet age.

Woolley's investigation leads to the present day, where he finds our morality tested in the world of ‘Grand Theft Auto’ and our identity becoming transported to the digital domain with virtual games such as ‘Runescape’ and ‘World of Warcraft’.

I watched the episode here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00phmrs

Games Britannia: "Monopolies & Mergers"

Monopolies and Mergers is one of the Three-part series presented by ‘historian Benjamin Woolley’ about popular games in Britain which ware from the Iron Age to the Information Age, in which he unravels how an apparently trivial pursuit is a rich and entertaining source of cultural and social history.

In this episode out of the three, Woolley traces the impact that board games have had on Britain over the last 200 years. It was the British who developed the idea of the board game as an instrument of moral instruction and slowly made its way to America.

This crusading element in board games is perhaps best exemplified by the best-selling game in history, Monopoly which celebrated wealth and avarice in the wake of the Great Depression.

Now in the information age, board games have evolved to include fantasy role-playing games like Dungeons and Dragons. The British continue to produce niche political games like War on Terror which plays on satire, but mainstream British games designers have moved on to video games.

I watched the episode here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00pf0rr

Ancient games: Senet

Senet was a game which was played by the ancient Egyptians. people are not sure how the game is meant to be played exactly but they can be deduced by experts who studied this board and worked out how the game could have been played back in the Egyptian times.

A Senet board consisted of three rows which all had ten squares set in a rectangle. In one corner the square which assumed is the last square has a single stroke. The square which is next to the final one in the row has two strokes, the one next to that has three strokes. Senet is assumed to be a two player game with both players starting with five pieces. how many squares which the players move are determined by the dice which are thrown, the dice which are used in Senet are different compered to most board games which use dice.

A square can only be occupied by one piece at a time. If a player can't move a pieces in their go the turn is passed down to the other player. If a players piece lands on a opposing players piece, the opposing piece has to be moved back to the square that the attacking piece came from. The House of Happiness which is a square on the board cannot be passed over. Every piece must land on it before continuing to the next squares. The House of water which is an other square on the board is to be avoided, when a players piece lands on this square, the piece has to be returned to the House of Rebirth. Pieces can only move on the final three squares by throwing the number which are on the square.The first player to get all their pieces off the board wins the game.

J. A Storer. (). Senet. [Available online]: http://www.cs.brandeis.edu/~storer/JimPuzzles/ZPAGES/zzzSenet.html. 

[Accessed 6th March 2015]

Senet. (). The Rules of Senet. [Available online]:

 http://www.mastersgames.com/rules/senet-rules.htm.

[Accessed 6th March 2015]

Ancient games: Royle game or Ur

The Royal game of Ur is played on an unusually shaped board. It is a very different shape compared to other board designs, the board has a four by three squares which is joined by two squares which acts like a bridge which connects to a two by three squares. 

No one knows the right way how the game is meant to be played but there have been three suggestions by games historians as to which path the counters should take around the board. All three say that players enter the board by using the outer row on the fourth square from the left going left. One player enters on the top row and the other player enters on the lower row. When a players counter reaches one of the corners, it moves to the middle row and travels along to reach the other side of the board.

British Museum. (). Royal Game of Ur. [Available online]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Game_of_Ur. 

[Accessed 6th March 2015]

British Museum. (). The Rules of the Royal Game of Ur. [Available online]: http://www.mastersgames.com/rules/royal-ur-rules.htm.

[Accessed 6th March 2015]

British museum trip

A field trip to the British museum was arranged by one of my lectures to help with our study on critical game design. we was shown around and saw some really interesting ancient artifacts.
we saw some of the ancient board games we have been looking and playing in our lectures and seeing the actually board of them which was made years and years ago really was interesting to me.

I didn't take any pictures my self but here are some of the things which we saw when visiting the museum.

British Museum. (). Royal Game of Ur. [Available online]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Game_of_Ur. 
[Accessed 6th March 2015]

British Museum. (). ancient chess. [Available online]: http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g186338-d187555-i89949351-British_Museum-London_England.html.
[Accessed 6th March 2015]

Tweaking Ancient Games

The ancient game I will be tweaking is called: Hnefetafl 

First iteration: I made it where the attacking team are allowed to move two of their pieces in a single turn. To balance this out I also made sure that the attacking team couldn't capture the defending team’s pieces apart from the king. When these new rules were tested I found that the game lasted longer than the usual five to ten minutes. If after playing the game for a few minutes the defending team fails to get a piece behind the attacking team to allow a capture to happen, the game slowly comes to a halt, and both sides are unable to move around the board.

Second iteration: I change the rules slightly. I decided that the king could get captured the same way as other pieces could, one on each side and not one on all four sides. The second rule that I added was that the king could assist other pieces on capturing the attacking team pieces. By doing this the attacking team would have to be quicker when it came to capturing the king as it will become easier for the king to escape from difficult situations. When it came to play-testing these new rules the games became quicker. They lasted around four to six minutes each. Both the attacking and defending sides had an even chance of winning with these rules where the attacking team was winning more than usual compared to the original rules.   

Third iteration: I decided to add a facture where the attacking team had to capture the opponent’s king within 15 turns. If this attempt was failed it would result in victory for the defending team. To make this achievable, the defending team was not allowed to capture the opponent’s pieces or move one of their own pieces back to where it originally was. To make capturing easier, the attacking team can capture the king in the same way that other pieces could be captured on the board. When these rules were play-tested I found that the games lasted around five to eight minutes, even longer when the player takes time to think about his next move. Out of five games the attacking team only claimed victory one time, where the defending player started to move one spare at a time not making a gap for the attacking team.

Fourth and final iteration I decided to change how the defending team was able to win the game. The original rules say that the king must reach one of the four sides of the board to achieve victory but I decided to change it to being one of the four corners of the board. I felt as though this would be bit more of a challenge for the defending team. To balance this rule out, the attacking team was not able to place one of their pieces on one of the four corners, as this would stop the opponent’s team completely from reaching one of the corners. When play-testing with these rules I found that the games lasted a lot longer than usual and were lasting around seven to ten minutes. This is because the defending team had difficulty in reaching one of the corners with their pieces. Three games were played with these rules and all three games ended with the same result. These rules favoured the attacking team more as I was finding that the attacking team was blocking the defending team and therefore stopping their king from reaching one of the corners.

Ancient games: Hnefetafl

Hnefetafl is a board game which has two sides. The attackers team is arranged in groups of 6 at each side of the board, making a total of 24 pieces and the defenders team is arranged around the king which is placed in the center of the board. The aim of the attackers team is to capture the king.
The aim of the defenders team is to get their king to one of the four corner of the board. The Game starts with the attacking team making the first move.

Each pieces on the board all move the same way. A piece can move; forwards, backwards, left and right but can not move diagonally. every piece can move one or more squares, until it is stopped by the another piece, The central square is the starting square for the king, no other piece can move on this square but they can move over it.

To take one of the other players pieces you have to capture them, by doing this you have to place one of your own pieces either side of the other players piece. any side in the game can take more then one piece in a turn if your own pieces are positioned in the right places to do so, no more then three pieces can be taken in a turn. once the king has moved away from the center square then that square can be used for either side to act like a piece of their own and capture the other teams pieces. if at anytime the king is captured by the attacking team then it is game over and the attacking team wins the game.

Hnefatafl. (). Hnefatafl. [Available online]: 
http://www.fetlar.org/assets/files/hnefatafl-rules-02-09-2012.pdf.

[Accessed 6th March 2015]

Hnefatafl board. (). Hnefatafl board. [Available online]: http://www.jamesadamshistoricenterprises.com/treasuretrove/images/hnefatafl_boards3.gif. 

[Accessed 26^th February 2015]