A game designer's perspective

[Nachtfischer]

A game designer's perspective

Hi community!

I recently put together an article looking at Gwent from a sort of high-level design perspective, placing it on a spectrum ranging from mathematical calculation to sheer chaos (especially as compared to Prismata and Hearthstone).

Maybe give it a read over at Gamasutra sounds interesting to you. I'd love to read your opinions!

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/FabianFischer/20170305/292859/Gwent_Braving_the_Storm.php

 

[4RM3D]

The article gives a decent overview of what kind of game Gwent is and which kind of strategies are involved. However, comparing it to Prismata seems to be a mistake (IMO), no matter the similarities with Gwent. The reason is twofold. First of all, only a handful of people have played the game, meaning most people will not get the comparison. Secondly, because of that, you actually have to explain quite a bit about Prismata, before you can make a meaningful comparison beyond it being a mathematics game. You don't really want to waste time on this because it's not about Prismata, it's about Gwent. So, for me, the inclusion of Prismata had no added benefit of better explaining what kind of game Gwent is.

Another point to note is that you haven't listed any downsides of Gwent. That's beside the F2P model. But that's not something exclusive to Gwent. Just mentioning it, would have been enough. And I personally don't think it's a "catch".

Finally, the article feels a bit cold and analytical. This is more of an observation rather than a criticism because I don't know what kind of vibe you were going for. Personally, I always like articles with a bit of flair; a personal touch if you will.

PS. "Gwent definitely has the potential to become one of the best competitive strategy games ever made." is a bold statement.

 

[Nachtfischer]

Thank you very much for your feedback, 4RM3D!

You're right, I should've linked to a more basic article about Prismata probably. Although I think I mentioned the most important aspects that differentiate it from Gwent enough for everyone to get what the comparison is about. Personally I do see Prismata as a (very good and thorough) exploration of one end of the spectrum whereas Hearthstone falls more or less on the other. And the core thesis of the article is to position Gwent in between the two, which basically means balancing on a "razor's edge" (that's by the way also why it doesn't go too far into detail on other aspects, potential balancing issues etc., the goal was rather to make a broader statement of classification). After all it's also a question of your perspective regarding the art form. I see game design as a kind of (soft) science, so building off of everything that came before, and especially the state-of-the-art works (whether they are well-known or not), is important in terms of progressing the craft.

Also, didn't I "just mention" the F2P model? It's barely one paragraph. I guess you're saying I shouldn't mention it "as a negative", but I think most people would agree it's a "necessary evil", especially within game design circles.

I'll take "cold and analytical" and "bold statement" as compliments, because that's exactly what I want to see from game design articles.

Thanks for reading and taking the time again!

 

[LadyAly]

DId read your blog and I missed 2 points:

1.) GWENT is also a game for bluffing your opponent with moves he may surprise him. You can do this even with the unavoidable META. SInce I do not know the other Card Games I can only speak from my view as a Beta Tester of Gwent.

2.) and far more important - GWENT is far from F2P. You get a lot of ore and scraps with every won round. You get free kegs / cards for reaching lvl / rank/ etc. You really don't need to buy anything. You can Mill the cards not needed/wanted. Grind isn't the word for it I have to say - If CDPR keeps the flow of tossing out scraps / kegs / cards as it is now it will be just fine

And a last word = I doubt it is a good thing to write this article as if the game is already hammered in stone. GWENT is still in Beta. So a lot can happen in game-design before release.

 

[Nachtfischer]

Hey LadyAly, thanks for reading!

GWENT is also a game for bluffing your opponent with moves he may surprise him.

Absolutely. But that's not what the article was meant to be about. Also you kind of have that in every card game where you don't see the opponent's hand, I'd say.

and far more important - GWENT is far from F2P.

Actually what you describe in your second point is the definition of F2P. You get stuff for free through playing the game, but much slower than by spending money. That's how this business model works. I'm not saying Gwent uses a particularly unfair version of F2P or anything like that.

I doubt it is a good thing to write this article as if the game is already hammered in stone.

I specifically mentioned it's in beta. But apart from that, that's also the reason why I chose to write a rather high-level article, because I think the aspects it's talking about, the position on the "chaos spectrum", the basic gameplay structure etc., will not change. Leave the more detailed articles for later on!

 

[LadyAly]

About the F2P : The games I know in this F2P spot are fake F2P. They are a money-sink - you really have to pay money or no chance to play it properly. GWENT feels very different from this - I never had the feeling I am behind because I didn't pay for a keg - so absolutely no GRIND, that was the main aspect I wanted to highlight - But, oh well, my english knowledge sometimes has a lack of words to describe complex stuff

 

[RickMelethron]

PS. "Gwent definitely has the potential to become one of the best competitive strategy games ever made." is a bold statement

a pretty empty one as well... "has the potential to be" can be said about anything in the world... and gwent isn't a strategy game as far as i know.

 

[Nachtfischer]

RickMelethron Well, as the saying goes, predictions are difficult when they concern the future.
Obviously I'm actually saying it is "more likely" for Gwent than on average. Otherwise the statement wouldn't mean a thing.

Apart from that, I think Gwent is clearly a strategy game by any commons definition of strategy. You're making plans (given imperfect information) and have to make difficult decisions about what exactly to do in which order (and e.g. not just execute the controls perfectly). Why wouldn't it be a strategy game in your book? Or rather, what is a strategy game to you?

 

[RickMelethron]

Apart from that, I think Gwent is clearly a strategy game by any commons definition of strategy. You're making plans (given imperfect information) and have to make difficult decisions about what exactly to do in which order (and e.g. not just execute the controls perfectly). Why wouldn't it be a strategy game in your book? Or rather, what is a strategy game to you?

can say the same thing about world of warcraft, overwatch, and basketball...

a strategy game is a game where you build and control units (generally involving resource management); clear examples being starcraft and civilization.

a game where you play cards on the board is (drum roll...) a card game.

 

[Nachtfischer]

Well, you're just looking at it on a different level. Card games is a more specific category than strategy games. Most card games actually ARE strategy games though. Overwatch puts strategic elements around an action-based core. The term "strategy" doesn't have a necessary connection to "building and controlling units" at all.

 

[zantclick]

It's a... strategic card game.

 

[RickMelethron]

Well, you're just looking at it on a different level. Card games is a more specific category than strategy games. Most card games actually ARE strategy games though.

you can't just say "this game involves strategy, therefore is a strategy game"; that's like saying skyrim is a first-person shooter because you can shoot a bow in first person...

The term "strategy" doesn't have a necessary connection to "building and controlling units" at all.

the term doesn't, but the strategy genre refers to games such as a starcraft and civilization; where you build and control units/armies to defeat the opponent; usually with an emphasis on resource management and timing.

otherwise, you can call (nearly) everything a strategy game.

Overwatch puts strategic elements around an action-based core.

gwent puts strategic elements around a card-based core.

 

[Ringlin]

Hi community!

I recently put together an article looking at Gwent from a sort of high-level design perspective...
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/FabianFischer/20170305/292859/Gwent_Braving_the_Storm.php

Nachtfischer, I enjoyed your article, even as a non-Prismata player. I found it interesting and thoughtful.

I especially appreciated the observation that while Gwent places high value on skill, a little randomization breathes life in to the game, as with this comparison

• 'The deeply mathematical nature of [Prismata's] core system in combination with a total lack of hidden information, can easily and regularly lead to oppressively stressful situations. And in those, intuition and strategic consideration take a backseat, and the raw calculation of the best possible sequence of actions dominates the gameplay.'

 

[Nachtfischer]

RickMelethron You're still talking about different levels of abstraction. I'm talking about fruits and vegetables, you're talking about fruits and broccoli. I.e. one of the sides is too specific. Anyways, we don't need to discuss this further in this thread since it's not the topic at all. Just going to leave a couple articles here to give a feel for what level I'm talking about, which I guess can be unfamiliar for non-designers:
http://keithburgun.net/arcs-in-strategy-games/
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/FabianFischer/20141201/231243/Criteria_for_Strategy_Game_Design.php

Ringlin Thank you very, very much!

 

[Rawls]

Anyways, we don't need to discuss this further in this thread since it's not the topic at all.

Agreed. Back on topic.