Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
"One bad move nullifies forty good ones" (Horowitz)
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
I've been utterly seduced by negative feedback game mechanics of late. I realized last night that there may be a simple way to add it to two of the greatest abstract games (IMO): Y and Poly-Y. I discuss the idea on my blog:
http://nickbentley.posterous.com/negative-feedback-y-and-poly-y
What is meant by "negative feedback" games? Is it a case of the "rich getting poorer"? Also, it looks like on-the-fly handicapping in a game, if this is what it means.
Several aspects to what you describe need to be noted:
* How does a game not be what is considered a "basketball game"? This comment references to the observation that a lot of basketball games come down to the last two minutes to settle. So, you end up with most of the game not mattering.
* Does such an approach cause players to not play all out for the win? Would they rather "draft" in second behind the leader, and then jump in front?
* Is it possible to have the comment so that there is also a "knockout" (Checkmate) condition where someone can win suddenly?
The approach sounds interesting, but has pitfalls. I believe it is better than "rich get richer" in a game though.
Here's a snippet of from my post to explain:
<blockquote>By negative feedback I mean: the closer you get to winning, the weaker you get.
I've now played 3 games featuring negative feedback, all delicious:
Yinsh, by Kris Burm.
In this game, you have 5 pieces to move, and every time you score a point, you must remove one of your pieces.
Beat it or Eat it, by Bill Taylor.
A trick taking game in which the goal is to get rid of your cards, but the more you get rid of, the fewer you have to play and more your opponent has.
Ketchup, by me.
The goal is create the largest island of stones on a board by the time the board is full, but the player who has the largest island at any given time in the game can't place as many stones on the board as his opponent can.
Negative feedback ensures that a lot of contests will go down to the nail-biting wire between evenly matched opponents. It's like running a footrace through air that gets increasingly dense as you near the finish-line. Even if you get 10 yards ahead of your opponent early, she has a chance of catching you at the end. It adds a *ton* of endgame subtlety especially. </blockquote>
Although I haven't played any negative feedback games I like the sound of it. Do games feel more competitive even when players are somewhat mismatched?
My current answer: yes and no. Between players who are not experts in a game, it seems to make the game feel more competitive. I think this is because inexperienced players have more randomness in their moves, on average, and so the game tends towards a close finish (because that's where the negative is pushing the game).
On the other hand, if a really expert player is involved, she can use the subtleties that negative feedback introduces against her opponent. I'm thinking in particular of Yinsh, where a good player will sometimes let an inexperienced player score a point, and thereby get her into a bad position. The trade-offs of scoring that extra point are hard to evaluate due to the negative feedback (loss of a ring), and so the inexperienced player can't see what's coming.
Cool. I'll check out Yinsh and the other games you mentioned on your blog (after work). I'm interested in non-random dynamics that might lend to "poker optimism" - that any table could be won, regardless of my playing strength and the others I'm playing against. Negative feedback seems to have some potentials here.
Yes, definitely, I think that negative feedback goes some distance to "poker optimism", but not the whole way. I'm also interested in poker optimism because it seems to make games more exciting for people who don't identify as die-hard games players. That's important if you've an interest in publishing games.
But I've found it very difficult to generate that feeling with a perfect information game. I suspect that an important part of poker optimism is just knowing that chance can determine the outcome.
btw, you'll soon be able to play one of the games I mentioned, Ketchup, at the ig game center
I'll post again here when it's available.
Richard,
Answers to your questions:
First question: this problem seems pretty easily avoided by implementing negative feedback that isn't very strong. Not that I have a ton of experience designing these types of games.
This also speaks to your second question: with sufficiently weak negative feedback, there will occasionally be opportunities for "drafting" and occasionally not, and that will lend a sense of variety to the choices that a game offers. I don't think that strategically-timed drafting can't really be considered "not playing for the all-out win". To my mind it's a shrewd way of a playing for the all out win. The popular non-abstract game Power Grid, centers almost entirely around this kind of timing, and the game really kicks as a result.
Third question: I think knockouts are still possible, though it does seem you have to be very careful in the design. Again the feedback can't be too strong, but in addition, the number of feedback "steps" should be few. Here again, Yinsh is a good example. As a player needs only to score 3 points to win, you can frequently feel that your opponent is not too far from victory. But Yinsh isn't perfect in that regard, since, if you're opponent hasn't gotten a single point yet, you know that he will not be able to do it in one or two surprising moves, and this deflates the tension a bit.
In the game that I just finished designing, Ketchup, there is only 1 feedback step: either you're in the lead, or you're not, and the number of stones you can add depends on which it is. As a result of that, decisive blows sometimes happen in Ketchup. Which is good and exciting and the way I like it.
Agree with your comments about chance and poker optimism. Pretty tough to re-create randomness without actually introducing it. Still negative (or positive) feedback is attractive, and may go part way. I'll keep an eye out for your Ketchup post :)
Yinsh is a very interesting game, as are the other games in the Gipf series of games.
In regards to "drafting", it becomes an interesting metagame aspect to multiplay, where you avoid getting attacked if you aren't the leader.
In other related gaming news, we are looking to get a ranking and rating service up for different IAGO Clubhouse partner websites.
1 to 11 of 11