[TiGD] Player goals 2: Race games

Most race-games have a clear objective and an open method of tracking progress towards it, often with pawns on a track (whether a "real" track or simply a scoring one - first to 100 wins, etc.)

[As I referenced in my previous post, I love "Careers" for the mechanic of allowing players to determine their own winning posts and then allowing them the freedom to pursue that target in a variety of ways (my mother will insist on going after 60 hearts and nothing else and keeps taking the luxury cruise to earn them...)]

One problem that race-games are prone to is ensuring that players don't get completely left behind. In a board racing game it is vitial to include ways of ensuring that this doesn't become a game-breaker.

One of my favourite race-games (dunno why, as I'm hopeless at it :-) is "Mississippi Queen". The approach taken here is to require players to stop during their race to pick up passengers, leading to some nifty manoevering as the boats try to time their acceleration/deceleration properly. However, because of this feature, players who spend time early on picking passengers up have a chance to catch up later. In addition, later boats have a better chance of steering an accurate course, given the semi-random board layout.
Another game with a slow-down mechanic is "Ave Caeser!" in which the chariots must stop on one of their first two laps to pay tribute to Caesar, but it is possible to take a risk to try and make up some ground.

Neither of these truly allow the back-markers to make a proper challenge for the lead since they too have to follow the same delaying procedures, but they certainly help.

Another method of "fixing" direct race games is to inject a healthy dose of chaos into the proceedings. The classic example of this is "Robo-Rally", and the way it does so is to remove the whole concept of tracks and allowing players to go where they like (within reason.)

And yet another method is to give the player more than one piece to move at any time. This is what makes Ludo/Parcheesi a game (albeit a relatively unsophisticated one.)

In general, all of these approaches are intended to widen the player's goal from simply "get to the end first" to "is it better for me to impede another player now if that will help me later on? (or even, simply, "can I impede another player?"!)

In passing, I note that I have got a race-game design in which the end condition is determined in a random fashion (rolling 2 dice), but where the players have a bit of control over how "random" they want that condition to be when they get there (by affecting the dice roll.) So there is a trade-off between making a mad dash for the goal but probably failing, or taking a more considered approach and risking being beaten to it. The difficulty has been in balancing the end condition such that it is sometimes achieved through the mad dash but not often enough to make that the best approach. This has probably been the aspect that has taken the most time to get right.

I think race games are probably among the oldest forms of gaming in the history of man.

I believe most race games started up as rolling dice, and through cumulative rolls to obrain a certain number to be a winner. Then there was a transition where physical pawns were used to effectively represent the player's score by moving them a number of spaces on the board.

The simplicity of race games and its universal appeal makes them probably one of the most popular genre of games out there.

I think some of the most common problems with race games is the runaway leader and the lack of interesting decisions inherent in the simple premise of finishing first by going the fastest you can go.

I think Scurra outlined some techniques to add an extra dimension to race games to make them more interesting. A lot of the methods are designed to limit the possibility of the runaway leader and/or add interesting decisions to the game.

Another problem I have encountered with the more realistic racing games: Formula De, RASC, Motorchamp and so on is how to deal with the simultaneous movement aspect if desired. In other words, how to you handle the order of movement, and if you want to make it realisistic how do you handle players making choices at the same time.

This is one area in my chariot racing game that I'm trying to make a break through in. If I could come up with a neat way to handle this, then blocking, passing and ramming maneuvers would work great.

--DarkDream

Interesting topic....

Based on the statement

Would this mean that various card games such as Dominoes, Rummy, Phase 10 or Uno fit into the race area? Maybe, I guess so, be the first person to lay all tiles, be the first person to have no cards in your hand, be the first person to complete X different sequences, be the first person to acquire Y points. Hmmm.. never really thought about it this way.

As with almost any game, people enjoy beating another player. People like to compete and win. I feel this is the foundation upon which race games are fun.

From a player angle, there is always Runaway Leader but what about lack of game variation (the same game over and over and over again). What makes this play of game Z different then the next playing of game Z?

When targetting "true" race games, get from point A to point B first, I think designers will have their biggest problem, being original. There are so many race style games around, so besides theme, what can a designer do to be different with their own race game... new mechanics might be the way, but I am not sure.

Why do so many true racing games have a runaway leader? Because they often mimic real life races, which also often feature a runaway leader.

If you are in the lead in a race you have an empty road ahead of you, making it easier to navigate the "perfect" course. Competitors behind you have at least one extra obstacle to deal with (you), making it harder for them to take the lead.

So, in an abstract sense, the leader of a race has more, or better, resources at his disposal than followers, making it easier for him to keep his lead and this leads to a runaway leader syndrome.

It can be fixed, of course. For example, in "Turf Master" the leader may move less spaces forward than players who are a bit behind in the pack. This leads to a situation where you actually often don't want to be in the lead until the final turn, when you try to win the game with a sprint. I'm not sure if this is such a great solution, though.

Perhaps a nicer solution is to seperate the resources from the winning condition. For example, moving ahead costs resources, but to gain resources you have to move backwards, or skip a turn, or simply move a bit more slowly. This means the players have to find a balance between accumulating resources and spending them to move ahead. A player who is behind on the track may have more resources to try and make an overtaking move later in the game. This tones down the runaway leader syndrome a bit.

Just some thoughts.

- René Wiersma

I feel the same way. I mean when I heard about cooperative games It tought that might change, but I think it change but a spin on it. Games to the best of my understanding are about winning. In one way or an other, the goal is to be the player that wins...

I think if we say this, we can get into the dangerous over analysis mindset. For example, I could say that all games have a random factor, even games like chess or go because you can never predict what you're opponent is going to do or someone's performance may be hindered by the events in their lives leading up to that point.

Of course, I think we tend to have an unfounded obsession with categorization, and it sometimes hinders our thinking, but that's just me.

-Darke

BTW, welcome aboard Simon, I've thoroughly enjoyed your insight and humor thus far.

This topic is about Player Goals, and what we're talking about are the mechanisms by which we (as designers) can get players involved in our games. And a "race game" is a very simple way to do this, since it is easy for the players to see what the aim of the game is: to get to the end first.

But, as stated elsewhere, I also think there is a distinction between a true "race game", in which there is a clearly defined finishing line that is not under the control of the players, and other sorts of games. Although it's true that any game with a scoring system can be considered a "race game", I don't think that what is driving the players is the desire to be first past the post, since in many games there isn't a real finishing line (for example, Puerto Rico has three different ones), and in other cases, there are mechanics that kick in only when that finishing post is reached that can cause positions to be reassessed (for example, Ticket to Ride has the tickets.)