|
Endur -> (10/23/2003 1:39:15 AM)
|
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]
|
|
|
|
