Use this thread to discuss and ask questions about the May 2005 Challenge (found at this link).
-Bryk
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Thu, 05/12/2005 - 11:49
Thu, 05/12/2005 - 13:18
#1
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Pictures in any quantity and size, or constraints of some kind?
Thu, 05/12/2005 - 13:52
#3
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
That's okay, I'll just include one picture, 12000x12000, covered with 4pt text.
Thu, 05/12/2005 - 14:00
#4
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Hamumu wrote:
That's okay, I'll just include one picture, 12000x12000, covered with 4pt text.
Each of those 4pt words count in your 800 word limit. ;-)
-Bryk
Thu, 05/12/2005 - 14:55
#5
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
I want to draw attention to the fact that I've added the following to the May 2005 Challenge announcement post ...
Quote:
Voting will work a bit differently this time around: When it comes time to vote, each voter will submit a list of their top 3 games that "best met the challenge" ... *and* each voter can submit which single game had the "best gadget".
:)
-Bryk
Fri, 05/13/2005 - 09:59
#6
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Can you clarify non-trivial when it comes to the gadget/device?
For example, how would you classify the pop-o-matic dice bubble from games like Trouble? If the Wallenstein tower would clarify, how about a dice boot? How about something gimmicky like the vertical board used in certain games, I.E. Sky Runner?
-Darke
Fri, 05/13/2005 - 12:05
#7
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
"Each player collects 3 gold and gets inside his or her personal helicopter"
Sat, 05/14/2005 - 20:31
#8
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
It seems to me that non-trivial means something like this:
1.) The item doesn't just replace another, more common device or use. So pop-o-matics are trivial, because rolling two dice by hand wouldn't alter the game at all.
2.) The role of the physical object cannot be easily and exactly reproduced by another means. So the doubling cube in backgammon is trivial, because its function culd be duplicated with card, a peg in a track, pebbles, or whatever.
3.) The physical characteristics or electronic capabilities must influence gameplay. So the vertical board of connect four is trivial, because the rules could just as easily designate one side as "down" without affecting play at all.
Sat, 05/14/2005 - 23:30
#9
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Sheesh, I thought "non-trivial" just meant that we couldn't use pie-shaped wedges!
Sat, 05/14/2005 - 23:44
#10
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
The human activities of buying, selling and manufacturing don't actually have to appear in the game, correct?
Could I have a wolf "buy" a rabbit from the bank by expending 100 calories in the chase? Could I combine a seed and water card to "manufacture" a flower?
Unrelated anecdote: I had this brainstorm that my gadget would be a laser pointer. "I've never seen that in a game!" Gosh, what would a laser pointer be good for? Line of sight! What a great idea. Pause. In fact, it's such a great idea, the wargamers must have had it years ago. Google google google. Oh yah. Gen Con rules for laser pointers, the whole bit.
Oh well. Back to Whirring Scythes of Death: The Board Game.
Yogurt
Sun, 05/15/2005 - 01:43
#11
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
You could do a laser surgery game, and have players bid to NOT get the surgery.
I'm sensing strange games approaching.
Mon, 05/16/2005 - 04:15
#12
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
I was working the night-shift from monday night till sunday-night this week, and last night (Sunday night) I found a gadget/device for my game!
I thought it was quite a hard restriction to have, especially combined with the business-theme/realistic-setting! (It's a lot easier to include a gadget to make galaxies colide or something...)
Now I have to write the down the game with less than 800 words. I think it will work...
Very nice showdown-assignment, Brykovian, congratulations!!
Cheese!
-Fred-
Mon, 05/16/2005 - 10:10
#13
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Darkehorse wrote:
Can you clarify non-trivial when it comes to the gadget/device?
Sure ... I tell you that I'm going cold-turkey away from the 'net for the weekend, and you throw this kind of question up here on Friday. ;-p
I think that if you satisfy what Hedge posted, you'd be way ahead of the game. My thought by using the term non-trivial means that the gadget is actually used for something "that matters" in the game. For example, a pewter "Throne of Vast Potency" statuette set in front of the player that will go first in a round is rather trivial. Same with decorative items, such as the character stand-ups scattered around the board in my copy of "Candyland Winnie the Pooh Edition" (isn't every edition of Candyland a "pooh" edition of some sort?).
If your gadget does something useful in the game -- especially if it helps to project the theme -- then it is "non-trivial", imo. During a chat last week, someone mentioned that the Star Wars edition of "Trivial Pursuit" uses an R2D2-looking thing to give a random number, which replaces the dice used for movement in the standard game ... that would fit fine in this challenge, but might not get you much for creativity points from the voters.
Hope that helps ....
-Bryk
Mon, 05/16/2005 - 10:16
#14
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
yogurt wrote:
The human activities of buying, selling and manufacturing don't actually have to appear in the game, correct?
Correct ... it doesn't have to simulate the traditional human activities ... the *players* are the ones doing the buying, selling, and manufacturing.
Quote:
Could I have a wolf "buy" a rabbit from the bank by expending 100 calories in the chase?
Assuming that calories was a resource that had to be managed by the player, then I'd say yes. For example, giving each wolf 500 calories at the start of the game that can be spent (and, maybe, replenished) throughout the game, is really no different than giving players $500 in fake cash to use for buying properties.
Quote:
Could I combine a seed and water card to "manufacture" a flower?
Definitely. Perfect example of what would fit for a "manufacturing process" in this case. Now, to fully fit the challenge, you would either need to "buy" the seed and/or water ... and/or "sell" the flower.
-Bryk
Mon, 05/16/2005 - 10:16
#15
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Hedge-o-Matic wrote:
I'm sensing strange games approaching.
As am I. :-D Can't wait to read them all.
-Bryk
Wed, 05/18/2005 - 11:40
#16
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
More on laser beams in games. Patrick Korner's blog on GameWire pointed me to Deflexion, a chess-like game with mirrors and lasers, where you're trying to arrange the mirrors to zap your opponent's king. Reminds me of the climax of Legend with Tom Cruise.
Thu, 05/19/2005 - 11:05
#17
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Urgh. Everytime I edit my entry to fit in 800 words, it gets longer!
Thu, 05/19/2005 - 11:07
#18
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Scurra wrote:
Urgh. Everytime I edit my entry to fit in 800 words, it gets longer!
lol ... from the movie "Planes, Trains, and Automobiles": You're GOING ... the WRONG ... WAY!
:-D
-Bryk
Thu, 05/19/2005 - 11:25
#19
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
My entry is in, the hardest part was cutting down on words. I ended up eliminating a bunch of smaller rules to keep only the main ingredients. It still +/- gives the feel that I wanted for the game, but a lot of the more tactical options are gone. (That's probably what the showdown is about: "giving the rightidea/feel of the game". See discussions in other treads...)
I only hope that people understand what I mean, as I'm not a native English speaker and some words/concepts were a bit hard to translate...
Cheese!
Thu, 05/19/2005 - 11:59
#20
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
I like the word limit. It allows for some hand waving over small details.
"What? You want me to explain how to WIN the game? I've only got 800 words!"
It was the manufacturing that gave me a hard time. My dumb brain kept making combinations that would leave one thing standing.
"Tree plus a Sawmill equals Lumber!" "So what happens to the Sawmill?" "Doh!"
Yogurt
Thu, 05/19/2005 - 12:41
#21
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
yogurt wrote:
More on laser beams in games. Patrick Korner's blog on GameWire pointed me to Deflexion, a chess-like game with mirrors and lasers, where you're trying to arrange the mirrors to zap your opponent's king. Reminds me of the climax of Legend with Tom Cruise.
I just checked out the website. Looks interesting. None for sale yet, but you can join the email list.
Too bad the demo is stupid and you can't really see the laser beam in action.
Thu, 05/19/2005 - 13:36
#22
Comments and Questions on May 2005 Challenge
Yeah, what's up with that stupid video? I want to see LASERS! :)
I suppose that "within reason" is too vague, eh? ;-)
I would think that an 800-word game description wouldn't need more than 5 pictures ... and that none of the pictures should cause problems to the layout of the forums. However, there isn't an actual limit set in stone.
The discussion after the last challenge showed people not wanting to work through a long entry write-up ... I think that stretching out the entry though excessive pictures would probably be unhelpful in the end.
-Bryk