Criteria for Preferring One Game over Another

[Patrick]

What are yours?

I don't know if I could make an exhaustive list, but some criteria
that factor into my preferences are:

1. The game ought to be challenging but not daunting--should make me
think every time I play it, even if I play often and for years, but
should not tax my brainpower beyond its limits.

2. The game should be reasonably small, short, and fast-paced.
Should fit on a card table or smaller surface; should be playable
within 30-60 minutes or so; should be quick to set up and fluid to
play. (Exceptions are wargames and RPGs and such. They can be longer
and more involved, but to compensate they have to really capture and
engage the imagination and immerse me in the story.)

3. The game should be one that my wife will play with me. If not,
then one I can play solo or against a computer AI. Since my wife
doesn't play nearly as often as I might like to, these days I stick to
games I can enjoy solo or on the computer.

4. I tend to have more appreciation for time-honored games. Not just
old ones; there are many old and mostly forgotten games I don't care
about. But if a game is both old and still popular, that's a big deal
to me--especially if it's popular worldwide or in many different
regions. So, I'm drawn to the likes of backgammon, chess, go, nine
men's morris, checkers, dominoes, and some traditional card games
(e.g., cribbage and rummy).

5. Aesthetic appeal is a consideration, but it's hard to explain my
taste. It's an "I'll know it when I see it" kind of thing. Durable,
eye-pleasing, tactilely satisfying components are a big plus--so a
fine chess set, for example, is a beautiful work of art to me; and
that makes me want to own and play the game. Games with too much
paper and cardboard don't impress me nearly as much--at least not at
first glance. Sometimes, though, it's enough just to know that there
are high-quality versions of the game out in the world somewhere, even
if I don't have one myself. For instance, I have no need for a
physical chess or checkers set, since I play exclusively on computers;
but still I'm drawn to those games partly because I know there are
classy-looking game sets around.

6. Portability is a factor--but it's partly an aesthetic thing with
me. I like the idea of being able to take a favorite game with me
wherever I go; but in practice, it ends up being just extra weight 99
percent of the time. Even my Nintendo DS stays at home, next to my
easy chair, which is about the only place I ever use it. Still, I
love the thought of carrying a pouch of dice or a deck of cards, or
maybe a box of dominoes, around so that I can play games anytime,
anyplace. Maybe it's a little like a security blanket--ready
entertainment, and a foil against boredom. I don't know. I do know
that I tend to dislike games that are not portable--e.g., billiards,
or a big game like Arkham Horror or The Longest Day.

7. Versatility is a plus. Ideally I'd like a game to be scalable for
any number of players, from 1 to 6 or more. But I rarely play
anything bigger than a 4-player game, so it's OK if that's the upper
limit. I don't like it when a game works *only* for a set number of
players, though, or when the *minimum* number of players is 3 or
more. It's also nice if the game is suitable for various age-groups
and is pretty easy to teach to new players.

That's what comes to mind at the moment. I'll probably think of other
factors later.

--Patrick

[Sukunai]

Replay value. I've heard ALL the conversations regarding the cost
against say a meal out or a movie ticket. Frankly if the game can only
be played once, it has damn near no value.
Most games like Chess don't have this problem of course. But then
again, if the person sucks, they might get bored of losing :)
Games with fixed rigid set ups (Chess for instance) really don't have
much variation possible. Let's face it, if it can only start one way,
that's a limiting factor. And that plagues plenty of otherwise great
wargames too.

Fun factor. I play games to have fun. The second LEARNING the game
takes several playings, someone might have tried too hard to make the
game too detailed to make it much fun. Lots of us like to claim we
like detail, but, I can bet you, you will play the easier game more
often. If the game comes with a BOOK for a manual, don't expect casual
to be a relevant term. If the game takes years to master, it might
also not be safe to call it easy.

Ideally a game that is solo is unable to be anything else, and a game
that is multi player has little worth if you can never seem to find
one opponent let alone several. I suppose that's why 2 player games
inherently out do in success anything else. The perfect game is able
to play solo, but plays hotseat well thus allowing quasi solo (if you
play both sides) and is capable of being multi player just as well.
Great example of this is Civilization IV as it plays solo, and multi
player equally well.

Portable is nice. I think it's just a matter of time till we have a
decent hand held that is capable of playing an acceptable game other
than mainly just solo. I likely could get an acceptable micro computer
that could play all my wargames.

In more recent times, I have found myself telling publishers to
effectively drop dead if their product features any sort of convoluted
intrusive DRM process. Which explains why most of my purchases now are
primarily from Matrix Games, as they use only a serial and an
installer. They sell as digital download, and buying from them is
effortless (not to mention pleasant). Alas board games have ALWAYS
been niche, and they have become so expensive that just casually
buying one takes quite a dose of faith. You need to really want a
board game once it breeches the 100 dollar mark.

Quality of materials. Normally only a board game thing, as digital
data is really not much of a physical item. I generally won't buy
unmounted wargames. Alas, I don't think anyone other than Avalon Hill
ever mounted their game maps.
I have been buying the 4th edition D&D game books partly because they
are well written and also well made as a physical item. 2nd edition
books fell apart at light speed.

[Patrick]

On May 28, 2:54 pm, Sukunai <sukunai.ni.y...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Portable is nice. I think it's just a matter of time till we have a
> decent hand held that is capable of playing an acceptable game other
> than mainly just solo. I likely could get an acceptable micro computer
> that could play all my wargames.

Every time one of my handheld devices goes on the blink, I get fed up
with the darned things. That just happened to me today, when my Palm
died. I had just installed cribbage and domino games on it, and now
it's useless.

Maybe it just needs a new battery or something; I don't know. But I
do know that a deck of cards never needs a new battery and never needs
to be recharged. Might need replacing if it wears out--but a box of
dominoes can easily last a lifetime without needing any attention at
all (other than some periodic cleaning).

Of course, then I'm back to having to do without an AI. Stuck with
designed-for-solitaire games, which often aren't nearly as much fun as
two-player and multiplayer games.

Seems I can't win for losing sometimes.

Btw, your comments on replay value are right on. I missed that one
(this time, though I've no doubt rambled on about it a hundred times
before in other threads).

--pc

[Sukunai]

Can't relate to your hand held charge retention troubles.

I do know this much, my DS sucks back on the charge when running from
my R4. If I want extended play duration I am better off using a legit
game cart.

But that is just a DSL and I have no background with other devices.

Very few games of notes though can match simple parlour games for
'pick up and travel with them'.

My game of UpFront is a very rare beast for this. You can play it
anywhere you can play cards, and is really just a simple single box.
Limited duration and limited set up and limited clean up.
Not easy to beat.

With some thought well ahead of time, a person limiting themselves to
original Squad Leader can likely get in a decent portable wargame if
they limit themselves to known modest scenarios. But forget not
needing a table.
Hand held rules for playing a game in a lineup, in the car, or on a
train though.

Since the creation of Advanced Tactics, Panzer Tactics, and more
recently Commander Europe at war and now even a game in the Roman era
called The History Channel Great Empires Rome (it's a European release
though, so get out the thinking cap), it is increasingly hard to
justify dragging around all but the best wargames. As I see it, I just
need a squad based DS game. Would be nice to see Squad Battles get
ported over, but I am not holding my breath the under interested in
breaking out of the mold HPS is suitably interested. Maybe Mark
Walker's Lock n Load might make it. He has links to Matrix Games, and
Matrix Games has links to Slitherine.

I have faith that Slitherine will port over their Nappy release that
uses the same engine as Europe at War.

[Patrick]

On May 28, 6:36 pm, Patrick <p55carr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 28, 2:54 pm, Sukunai <sukunai.ni.y...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Portable is nice. I think it's just a matter of time till we have a
> > decent hand held that is capable of playing an acceptable game other
> > than mainly just solo. I likely could get an acceptable micro computer
> > that could play all my wargames.
>
> Every time one of my handheld devices goes on the blink, I get fed up
> with the darned things.  That just happened to me today, when my Palm
> died.  I had just installed cribbage and domino games on it, and now
> it's useless.
>

> Maybe it just needs a new battery or something; I don't know. . . .

Turned out OK. I noticed a little hole on the back marked Reset, so I
poked a pen into it, and the Palm magically started up. It's running
fine again now.

But now there's another annoyance: the last two times I've bought
software for it, I failed to get a registration code. Had to beg for
one for a couple weeks and almost ask for a refund. It turned out the
developer had been on vacation and was slow to respond.

Right now I'm waiting for a registration code from another developer.

In addition, I tried two trial downloads, and both times I got a
message that my trial period was over (before it had even begun!).

So, there are glitches in the online ordering of Palm software.

It's much easier with the DS; you just buy the game and pop in the
cartridge. (Or pirate the game, in which case you don't have to deal
with nonsense like registration codes.)

I like my Palm Z22, though. It's smaller and lighter than the DS, and
it was cheaper too. I can also play high-quality versions of classic
games (e.g., cribbage, chess, dominoes, gin rummy, checkers, nine
men's morris) that I can't get for the DS--not with a decent AI,
anyway.

[Sukunai]

It's been my experience though Patrick, that games for a hand held
device either suck a lot, or suck entirely :)
It's rare the game is actually great.

For every game like one of the Final Fantasy series, or a wargame like
Commander Europe at War, or a compilation that is as thorough as
Clubhouse Games, there will be absolutely tons of games that deserved
to be downloaded as free, as they were never well enough done to be
taken seriously as products. A good example of that would be the
release DS Paint. It could have been so much more, and was such a
total dismal cop out waste of cash.

Sadly your preferred range of games which I refer to as 'parlour'
games, rarely get made with anything a person could take seriously as
an opponent. Those really need to be played against another person
over wifi to be taken seriously.

[Patrick]

On Jun 4, 6:51 am, Sukunai <sukunai.ni.y...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It's been my experience though Patrick, that games for a hand held
> device either suck a lot, or suck entirely :)

> It's rare the game is actually great. . . .

>
> Sadly your preferred range of games which I refer to as 'parlour'
> games, rarely get made with anything a person could take seriously as
> an opponent. Those really need to be played against another person
> over wifi to be taken seriously.

Often that's true. It's certainly true of Clubhouse Games for the DS;
of the forty-odd games in that collection, only a few make a good
single-player challenge. The backgammon and dominoes games are so-so;
chess, checkers, and rummy are pitifully weak. But I've yet to win a
game of shogi (Japanese chess), partly because I'm a beginner still
learning to just recognize the pieces.

Many of the Clubhouse Games titles just aren't very fun to play by
yourself. Many card games feel all wrong on the computer: bidding
and bluffing just don't work when you know the computer is programmed
to respond one way or another. But that's OK, because I tend to
dislike games that involve bidding or bluffing anyway.

I have found some very good games for the Palm, though. They're not
easy to find, but they're out there.

One is HIARCS, a chess program with most of the bells and whistles
you'd find on a good PC chess game (like Chessmaster or Fritz). I
also have a game called Triples, which is nine men's morris; and I
have to dumb it down quite a bit if I'm to have any chance of
winning. The checkers game I have is nearly impossible for me to win,
even on the easiest setting. Also installed is a very nice gin rummy
game. My most recent purchases are cribbage (plenty strong with a
number of options, but a little slow--and there's no option for
counting and scoring the hands manually, which is the practice I
mainly need) and dominoes (I bought the five-up version from
ccdominoes.com in Texas, which is the game I've had on my PC for
years; it's excellent and can challenge the heck out of me).

I need to find a better backgammon game for the Palm. The one I have
is very dark on my screen and has no doubling-cube option (it plays a
strong enough game, though).

IMO, games like this are ideal for handhelds. They don't take up much
screen space, so no scrolling. And they're small and straightforward
enough that a smart programmer ought to be able to devise a
challenging AI. After that, it's just the interface--coming up with
an attractive, user-friendly look and offering the right amount of
customization options.

The only downside is that buyers like me are in a minority. Why play
some old-fashioned game when there are all these glitzy-looking video
games around with music, animation, sound effects, and all? Most
people are out to be entertained, and traditional games aren't very
mesmerizing. Often they're a lot of hard work.

--pc

[Sukunai]

"Most people are out to be entertained, and traditional games aren't
very mesmerizing. Often they're a lot of hard work."

That's correct while also being wrong though.

It's true a large swath of today's youth will just look at you funny
when you try to make Chess sound exciting.
Chess isn't exciting for a reason though, it's never meant to be
'exciting'. It's Chess.

The thing is, you have to sell to the correct audience.
You can't sell an eskimo ice cubes.

I'm a wargamer in my case in some ways. But, I'm not the sort of
wargamer that worships games of detail loads that would gag a lawyer.
I recently learned that Slitherine is releasing a 3d tactical turn
based WW2 game. I've seen the screenies for it. It will be on the PC
as well as the PSP and the DS (the DS likely won't have the same level
of 3dishness logically enough).
The thing is, the Nintendo DS has been long considered a 'kids toy'
and no surprise the wargaming publishing world has been pretty much
convinced they can't make wargames off the PC.
Well that line of thinking is dead, deader n a doornail too.
Slitherine has made it plenty apparent that line of thinking is full
of crap.

The Nintendo DS is just a device. And you won't be selling to many
adults until you give them a reason to want the bloody thing.

But some games are just what they are. Asking them to be more than
what they are is just asking for disappointment.
Chess is just a dull thinking person's game, and it will always be
that.
And my wargames will always be seen as equally dull overly complicated
games until wargaming stops making nothing but.

Of course Chess is not so flexible. It's either Chess or it isn't I
suppose.
I suppose the only way to make Chess a decent hand held offering, is
to make it VERY easy to connect to another Chess player to play a
game.
Providing an AI opponent is likely hard to escape, but, the game
should be released with no illusions that the AI opponent is NOT the
proper opponent.

I think the same needs to be done for wargaming. Stop making games
with AIs and expecting the AI to ever matter.
If you are playing a wargame, and expect to always play the AI, and
expect to be given a decent challenge, well then you deserve to be
called a fool.
This is the reason I heap scorn on wargames made as RTS designs where
playing the AI is all but mandatory.
Because the state of AI in this day, is worthless.

Wargaming will be more accessible the second wargame publishers ditch
the obsession with accuracy at all costs, and an AI made to run a game
a human can barely understand.
A good wargame is one that is simple, easy and very accessible to play
it against other people.
And that is not currently the case with most wargames. They are NOT
simple, or easy or accessible. No surprise wargamers are such a small
niche community.

And Chess players are not much different, although it's at least not
the fault of their game of choice.
If Chess is ever to be 'exciting', it's going to have to drop the
elitist look and evolve beyond the look of the board and the standard
inflexible never changes array of pieces and set up locations.