Gambling and Strategy

I’ve been thinking a lot about strategy games lately, partially for work and partially for private stuff. And while thinking (and talking and listening) I’ve come to a conclusion that a big part of strategic or tactical decisions is a sort of “calculated gamble”. I just quickly wanted to put this out there and see if I can get a discussion and some other viewpoints.

What I mean when I say gamble is that you start out with some sort of finite resource, be it military units, goods, space or money. Then you’re presented with an option: You can risk some of your resources and attempt something that would gain you even more resources. Say you could attack your neighbor to raid his cities, risking your units to increase your resources. This risk is essential. If there’s no risk involved, no chance of losing something, then the decision becomes a no-brainer. Clearly you will take the riskless option to improve your situation, I mean who wouldn’t?

So about that risk… where does it come from? Well it’s simply there because the outcome of your decision is not known beforehand. Propably because you most do not possess perfect information about the situation. Maybe you don’t know how strong your target’s defenses are or if he’s got friends protecting him. Even if you do know all there is you might still not surely know the outcome since there’s a random element involved. So to get more information and to be better at gauging the risk you could try to spy out their units – or you could simply build the biggest army possible, going in blind in the hopes that you’ll just steamroll over your opponent.

So in essence strategy is: you are presented with a certain risk/reward option. You’ll first try to understand the risk, then if neccessary try to minimize it before striking. However in the end there should still be a certain sliver of insecurity before you make the gamble.

Miegakure

Miegakure is a four-dimensional puzzle platformer. And when I say four dimensional, I don’t mean to use the 4th to refer to time or something equally lame. No, another actual spacial dimension. As far as I can tell the in-development game is played in three dimensions and at the push of a button one of the dimensions can be exchanged with another one. An intriguing concept and worth to watch for the mindbending spaces it is bound to create.

I won’t pretend to know how this is supposed to work but it certainly is interesting. Here’s a video that might help

Flash Game: Small Worlds

Small World - Level Start
Small World - First Steps
Small World - Further Out

A coworker of mine just pointed me to a little flash game called Small Worlds. I’ve started playing it and I immediately fell in love. Now normally I put all the playworthy flash games I find up over at the everyplay blog but Small Worlds was special enough in the way it treats game space that I wanted to mention it here. Before you read on, take some time and play it. It’s worth it.

The game was created by David Shute and is subtitled “A short atmospheric game about exploring“. It was entered in the Casual Game Design Competition #6 and won it as well. In it you take control of a simplistic avatar and move around to explore the world around you and find “the exit”. Sounds like most of the games out there, right?

What sets Small Worlds apart is that the entirety of the explored space always fills the screen. This means that in the beginning all you have are a few big colorful pixels, maybe some of them moving, and a soundtrack. At first it’s impossible to make out where or what you are. Then as you play with the keys you notice that the red pixels make up your avatar. As you move around and discover more of your immediate surroundings the picture becomes slightly clearer. Moving white pixels turn to snow as your understanding of the space shifts.

This is part of what makes Small World excel at it’s premise of exploration: As you explore you can feel the gears in your head turn as you understand more and more of the space. Then, after this happens, the game still doesn’t loose it’s magic. My guess is because of the immediate feedback: Seeing all of the discovered space on screen shows you which areas you haven’t uncovered yet. It gives you the feeling that even if you explore dead ends, you haven’t wasted your time, because instead you’ve gotten more of the big picture. In that vein it’s a bit like a scratchcard to me.

No More Wrong Turns

Alright my dear readers, the Gamsutra embargo for No More Wrong Turns is up so it’s time to post the article on this blog. In here I’m going to talk about navigation through the spaces of video games and the different tools that help us with that. This is mostly going to be relevant for 3d environments but much can be applied to 2d graphics as well. Also please bear with me, this is going to get quite long.

Navigation Tools
Continue reading

Level Design is Game Design

Level Design is Game Design!
Have I got your attention? Alright, so I admit the two are not perfectly the same but I am convinced that Level Design is nothing but a specialized application of Game Design. And I can prove it! First let’s start by looking at a pretty okay definition of Level Design:

Level Design is the process of designing and implementing the digital spaces of a video game

Sounds simple enough, right? Of course if we were scientific about this we’d have to take a closer look at what digital spaces are. However that’s beyond the scope of this article and will be something I’ll talk about another time. For now let’s look at board games. Why? Because they’re quite similar to video games and because it makes it a lot easier to understand the topic.

Chess boardNow with board games, you have the rules of the game, which encompass how pieces can move, how a turn plays out and what the victory conditions are. The other half of that puzzle is the design of the actual board, which could be seen as the level design of the game. It’s evident that when the board is changed, the entire game changes with it. Imagine a game of chess, where the board is not 8×8 fields but instead 8×12 or maybe something more outlandish like an L shape. This will drastically change how the game is played. The same is true when a level is changed.

Chess Board, 3 sidesSo if you think about it, the game space is nothing but another set of rules. They’re just visualized as a space to make it easier for us. Instead of rolling a die and tracking the movement pieces on a board, we could simply use numbers to denote a token’s position. Say if you’re on field “3” and roll a 5, you wouldn’t move your piece 5 spaces, you’d write down “8” instead. And then if there’s “special fields” you’d have a table where you could look up the number and see if there are any special rules for it. It’s obvious that this is a lot more complicated than moving a piece on the board, which is why we use spaces for a lot of our board games.

So if game spaces are just rules why is there a split between game and level design? There is no such thing in board game design, right? Well the answer’s simple: In the early days of game development there was no seperation: there often was just one person making the entire game, designing the rules, the spaces, the graphics and the sounds. But Because the increasing amount of content and complexity required specialization we now have different people doing different parts of the same job.

So with all that said, let’s look at that definition again:

Level Design is the process of designing and implementing the (spatial) rules of a video game

And let’s look at Wikipedia’s definition of Game Design

Game Design is the process of designing the content and rules of a game

Sounds awfully similar, doesn’t it? There’s just a few differences:

  • Level Design only deals with those game rules which are manifested as spaces
  • Level Design is also responsible for the implementation of these rules in the game
  • Level Design only really exists as a discipline in the realm of video games

I rest my case.