15 Years and Worlds Apart - Autumn Dynasty: Warlords & The King of Dragon Pass

Introduction

I've been playing two games on my iPad recently, Autumn Dynasty Warlords (Touch Dimensions) and King of Dragon Pass (developer A Sharp for iOS on ITunes or PC @ GOG.com). While the two games are quite different in their intent and are separated by a mere 15-years of time - I can't help but draw comparisons between the two. In many respects, the merits and failings of each game may underscore a shift in game design over the years, or perhaps a shift in my own expectations and gaming desires in relation to the wider gaming audience.

In short, I feel that King of Dragon Pass does so many things right and creates a deep and captivating experience. And it really showcases and embodies the fleetingly lost art of game design. AD: Warlords on the other hand, like so many games in the Civ/4X genre today, seems more interested in having players "just do stuff" because once upon a time some older game had "players do that stuff" and established expectations. Yet in reality the stuff you do is trivial and dull, despite it hiding behind an otherwise intoxicating level of production polish.

Beware, harsh criticisms ahead ...

Game Format: Competitive, Cooperative, and Semi-Quasi-Collaboration Games

One of my interesting side projects has been working with a few other BGG’ers in the Game Genome Project Guild. I’ve referenced this earlier on the blog, but the Game Genome Project (2.0) is an effort to start mapping all of the various characteristics of games across a number of different traits. One of the topics that’s been a fascinating source of speculation and reasoning has been the “Game Format” traits.

The “Game Format” trait is an attempt to describe the structure of a game in terms of its possible win conditions and teaming arrangements. Broadly, this trait can be used to define whether a game is cooperative or competitive (or in between), and whether formal teams are allowed and whether those teams are known, hidden, dynamic, or static over the course of the game. The effort to map all of this has led to some interesting observations – most notably that there are a lot of gaps where there do not appear to be many (or any) games that exist. Designers, get motivated!

This blog post will present the game format flow chart (enlarged at the end) by way of explaining the approach and key ideas that the brain trust developed. I should note that two fellow BGG’ers have been instrumental in developing this, and are equal collaborators on the effort. So big a shout out to FlyingArrow and Selwyth.

Crossing the Digital Veil

Given that iOS Boardgames has been posting their 2013 year-end wrap ups and best of’s, it seems appropriate timing to tackle the subject as well. Back in August, I was gifted, courtesy of my wife as a birthday present, an iPad Mini – which I had hinted at wanting but assumed it wasn’t in the cards. So imagine my surprise when opening that up!

I had been using an older iPod touch for a few years, and managed to find a few boardgame App’s that worked on the older iOS version, but not many. With our growing family, I’ve been finding opportunities for face-to-face boardgaming becoming more sporadic as expected. There are a lot iPad only boardgame apps, and most needed a few version of iOS than the old iPod would support. So the iPad Mini would provide a way to play a much expanded library of games with friends (or other gamers) online, or even solo against the AI.

As a general note – while I do enjoy gaming (or boardgaming) on the iPad, it certainly isn’t the same as being face to face. For some games, it isn’t a huge deal breaker on my enjoyment of the game – but for others it can be. And yet other types of games are just never going to work as well in an online format.

The Gulf Between: Civ vs 4X Games

I am always interested in 4X or Civilization style boardgames. I was thinking earlier about what aspects of these games makes one game a 4X game and not a Civ game. Or another Civ and not 4X. And another game a bit of both, or neither. I took a stab at outlining some of the key traits that distinguish and these two genres from one another.

A Designer’s Perspective on Audience Feedback

When at BGGCON I was discussing game design with a friend and fellow game designer. He asked me what the biggest lesson was that I learned in the process of getting Hegemonic designed and published. I don’t think I had a very good answer to that question at the tip of my tongue. I believe I muttered something incoherent about streamlining mechanics or some other gibberish. I wasn’t satisfied with whatever it was I said, and I’ve been mulling over what I should have said ever since.

After a week or so, I’ve come up with the following answer, which is a little more insightful:

---

Realize that your game can’t be everything for everyone - even within the intended audience.

---

Of Finding Civilization in a Barn

A few weeks ago I was rummaging around in a family friend’s barn where they have all manner of amazing stuff stored - as befits any proper barn. Heaped in a storage stall and buried beneath all types of barn-stuff were some decaying old crates filled with ….. BOARDGAMES!

And specifically boardgames from at least 25 years or more ago. This included a number of old wargames in giant foggy plastic bags (our family friend was apparently a wargamer in the old days), a copy of the 1976 Avalon Hill edition of Acquire and … wait for it … Civilization! I mentioned that Civ in particular might be worth something, and that regardless these shouldn’t be kept in the barn where all manner of calamities (no civ pun intended) that befall barns might begat upon the treasured games as well. He looked at me sideways and said … “why don’t you just take them”.

Begrudgingly I said thanks and accepted the games, promising to get at least some of them to the table and invite him over as well. He had never played his copy of Civ, and to my surprise it was only about 30% punched out. I started drooling.

So last night, in a rare more of quiet and solitude, I poured myself a gin-and-tonic, opened the box, lovingly punched out the components, imagined myself back in the year 1981 (except I was only 1 year old at that time!), cracked open the rules and got to seeing what all the Civ fuss was about.

Breaking the Shrink

I had the pleasure of driving four hours yesterday to hand sign a modest number of copies of Hegemonic for Kickstarter backers with Minion Games. And a special thanks to Jeff, a local KS backer, for helping out during the signing bohnanza. Regardless, this was also the first chance I’ve had to look at the finished product and to break the shrink wrap off my own first game box. A surreal yet humbling experience seeing the culmination of many people’s hard work and diligence in seeing the game come to fruition.

If you’ve been following the Kickstarter campaign (or participated in it), you no doubt have caught a glimpse of the logistical and timing challenges associated with making games. It all sounds quite straightforward and easy on paper – yet the realities and timing considerations are myriad. The signing event took place at a warehouse/shipping/packing where Kickstarter orders are being organized, packaged up, and shipped out – and there is a lot to consider in how to best accomplish what amounts to 1000+ custom orders. It was all cool to see – especially the giant tower of games on pallet that represented ~400 copies and only a fraction of the total volume. Crazy!

Conflict Soup for the Gamer’s Soul

This post was a key link in the Game Genome Project effort to characterize a particular dimension of games, in this case the level of competition in a game.  It has been a great reference post that clarifies my thinking on the topic quite nicely.  I hope you find it helpful as well.  (July 7, 2014)

---

Lewis Pulsipher's recent post, “Competition, direct conflict, wargames, and screwage games,” discussed the degree of conflict in a game. The post stirred up a number of prior conversations I’ve had on the topic, and in particular the thinking a number of us invested in the Game Genome Project – specifically in the “competitiveness” category.

I posted a reply to Lewis’ post summarizing my stance on the subject, but thought it could warrant additional conversation, clarifications, examples, and general blabbering. So here we go...

Emissary: A Study in Brain-burn and Emergence

Hopefully this whole post doesn't come across as pompous - but here's the gist of what I'm talking about today: I designed a Decktet game called "Emissary" as a Hegemonic-inspired light 4X style game. And, having played quite a number of games so far, I've been pleasantly surprised by the amount of "brain-burn" and also "emergence" that seems to be emanating from the game. Apologies for the self-indulgence - but that's how I feel about it, and it makes me excited.

So, I wanted to take a step back and look at the game through my critical-ish filters and articulate why it seems to induce brain-burn (in a good way mind you!) and emergent gameplay. All this in a game that plays in about 15 minutes per player (and supports 2-4 players). Maybe we can learn something along the way...

Hegemonic - A Pictorial History

James Mathe from Minion Games received the first final production (retail) copy of Hegemonic from the printer, and took a number of unboxing photographs. All I can is that the game looks incredible. Hegemonic is a complex game with a lot of different pieces, and James did an outstanding job getting it all coordinated with the printer. I'm certainly inspired by what I see!

I thought it would be interesting to pause for a moment and do a little photo documentary of Hegemonic’s evolution from the early prototypes to the final copy, making note of some of the important events along the way.

The first steps for the design of Hegemonic occurred around September in 2010. In total, the process has taken roughly 3 years, with the game due to be shipping out to kickstarter backers later this fall.

Enjoy!