 |
| "Man Writing" by Oliver Ray |
It's been over two years since my last
game design journal post. But don't mistake the gap for inactivity . . . games are often on the mind (maybe too often), and my children are starting to get ideas of their own. Today's post is inspired by my kids and looks at balance and duration.
To be successful, games must have appropriately-balanced elements and be of appropriate duration.
Appropriately-balanced elements comes down to meaningful choice- a key element in engaging games. If a game enables choice at the beginning- and I think of collectible games in particular, like
Magic or
Star Wars Miniatures- those choices must be balanced such that they are meaningful. The powerful cards and miniatures must cost more or have a notable weakness; otherwise, all players will always choose certain elements and neglect the others, leading to boring and predictable outcomes. Let's look at an example.
My children recently designed "Lego Miniatures," a close derivative of
Star Wars Miniatures (if you know that game, you'll instantly understand ours). We used Lego minifigures of Star Wars, Marvel, and other licensed characters and had them fight an epic battle on a
Star Wars Miniatures game board. My son designed stat cards for each character and asked me to do the same. I did so while unaware of his choices. Here are some examples:
My son's characters (top row) had tremendously more Hit Points (HP) than mine, meaning his could take many more hits before dying. My characters had slightly higher defense, making them harder to hit, but it wasn't enough to create balance- his characters were clearly superior. If this were a published game, nobody would want to play with my figures. In addition, he included no 'cost' on his minifigures- instead, he wanted us to play with an equal number of characters- so you couldn't address the balance through costing more powerful figures accordingly. Whenever a game involves such choices, balanced options- each with their own pros and cons- are key.
Games must also be of appropriate duration (read: keep it short). There was a time in my life when a 8-hour game was possible- even desirable- but those days are long gone. There is a niche market for such contests, but by and large, most games are much shorter. We have limited attention spans, busy schedules, and many demands. Lego Miniatures failed on that front as well.
The above photo shows the game in progress, largely towards the start (though some characters have already been eliminated). Since my son didn't cost his characters (
Star Wars Miniatures games feature squads of an agreed-upon cost, like 150 points), they're not just overpowered- they're way too numerous for this to be a fast conflict. In fact, it lasted the better part of a week. We'd play for a time each evening until I couldn't take it anymore. Each round could last an hour as each character activated, moved, and attacked. The large number of characters plus high Hit Points was a disastrous combination for anyone preferring brevity. Long before the end of the game, I just didn't care anymore- though the cross-license character interactions were bizarre enough to hold some interest.
My kids did not mind this game's length- in fact, they excitedly demanded to play again immediately when the first was over- but any reasonable human with a job and/or even mild responsibilities would find this unbearable. Not all good games need be played in one hour, but not many successful games take eighteen.
Balance and duration are two important elements in game design; do the former well (this is often identified only through extensive play-testing) and be transparent about the latter (which is why most games list expected duration on the front of the box).
