Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >>

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

- 10/23/2003 1:39:15 AM

Endur

Posts: 18
Joined: 10/22/2003
Status: offline

Boardgame vs. Computer game is an interesting issue.

On the one hand, you have to ask who is the subject matter expert, the person who wrote the boardgame or the person who is writing the computer game translation of the boardgame (or for that matter, the novelist vs. the movie script writer). In almost every case, the subject matter expert is the person who did the original work (we don't want to see NUKEs and Robots in the LOTR movie, no matter how cool the script writer thinks those items would be). And so the new translated work should be as close as possible to the original work.

On the other hand, the original author wasn't focused on the new media. So there can be things in the computer game enviornment that the board game creator never considered or it wasn't feasible for a board game. So you can add in new stuff (graphics, etc.). A full map of China and the USA instead of the minimal map that comes with the boardgame, etc.

Additionally, there are some phases that are hardly ever used in the board game. You would probably want options to turn those phases off so you don't have to continually "click through" those phases. i.e. Combat Air Patrol, etc.

Finally, there is playability. Given the limits of AI in computer games, I play most single player strategy wargames once or twice. Once I beat it as one side, I try the other side, then I put the game away and never play it again because it is no longer challenging without massive cheating by the AI side (i.e. greater resources, more units, etc.). A multi-player game on the other hand, can be played many times over and over again, because you have different opponents and every game is differnent and challenging.

[QUOTE=Les the Sarge 9-1]I think I will support Von Rom on boardgame vs gameplay. Might seem odd for me to say that, but some things easy in a boardgame just won't fly on a computer game.
[/QUOTE]

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 1

- 10/23/2003 1:53:56 AM

James Taylor

Posts: 638
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Corpus Christi, Texas
Status: offline

You are right on Sarge, I've been a big proponent of the "option to intercept" in SC since day 1, rest assured it will be there in SC2. As far as your opponents ability to interact with your present move and combat phase, I believe that could be handled by a list of optional (automatically activated) choices for the unphasing player to select for his units that are elligible to interact. This of course would be done in his (unphasing player) active turn. Take a page out of the HttR book or better, maybe "Battlefields", there has got to be a way. Rob definitely hit the nail on the head for CPU games the interface is the key. I'm sorry Sarge, but I just can't go back to the board games, as much as I loved them, in my life they're past history, and the accidents with the die counters......count me out.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 2