Sandboxes and Skilltesting

Magic: the Gathering is an omnipresent game in the nerdy gaming space. It's been around for decades and shaped multiple other major games in the field, defining what customizable card games (CCGs) look like to multiple generations of players. Many of Magic's fans think of it as the best thing since sliced food tokens. My own relationship with the game is more complicated. There's plenty I appreciate about it, but I've also come to feel that it's more of a sandbox for doing things than it is an interesting game.

Card Counterplay: Interacting With Your Opponent

I get post ideas from some interesting places. Case in point, I was watching a gameplay video from Hearthstone streamer Firebat, which opened with some spicy takes on card design. You don't have to watch the video before you read this post (although Firebat is always fun to watch); I'll lay it out for you here. In a nutshell, he talked about cards that didn't allow for interaction, and how they reduce the game to hoping that you draw into your powerhouse cards that can't be countered. It's tied to a larger idea about "interactive cards" in card games, and while I think he has a point, hearing that bit got me thinking about where, exactly, I disagreed with him, and what you can learn about card games from it.

Loops, Journeys, and Single-Player Gaming

So, I've been thinking lately about "loops" in gaming. Not in terms of the "core loop" of a game, but in another sense. I've been looking at my gameplay habits, thinking about what it means to "complete" a game, thinking about my large backlog of games that I own but haven't finished, and thinking about where the bulk of my playtime goes. I pour a lot of hours into multiplayer games. A lot of hours. Hundreds of hours. It's got me thinking about how I spend my time, and about what I get out of that time. So, I've been thinking lately about "loops" in gaming.

Do You Have the Skills?

"ALL SKILL" promises the tagline of a high-octane shooter, but what does that even mean? Gamers love to talk about "skill", and which games test it. Unfortunately, what exactly they define as "skill" is one of the murkiest aspects of game discussion, and miscommunications about these definitions sit at the root of heated debates about the evolution of games, particularly when it comes to difficulty and accessibility. What is skill, and how can you think more clearly about the role that skill plays in games?

Puzzled: the Design of Conundrums and Puzzles

I've been thinking about puzzles lately. It's partly because I recently finished participating in this year's MIT Mystery Hunt, partly because I'm working on puzzles for the Galactic Puzzle Hunt, and I've been pondering the unique experience that puzzles provide, compared to tabletop RPGs and boardgames. There's an interesting satisfaction that comes from puzzles, but it can also be at odds with some of the ways that we engage in other types of play.

Game Stories: First-Stage Recap

This week, Game Stories changes things up a little.

DUN-DUN-DUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNH!

I've done six posts in the series, talking about the narrative elements of various games, and I think it's time for a bit of a refresher, because I want to move on to some big places here. Today, I'll go back over the first part of the series, summing up what we've learned so far about narrative in games. Then, I'll talk about where I hope to take this series.

Ludicrus Gaming: Why This is Ludicrus

Hello there! I'd imagine that most of you folks are coming here from my old blog, The Player's Side of the Screen. You might be wondering a few things. Most importantly, why a new blog (and name)? Of secondary importance, what the blazes does "Ludicrus" mean; am I just a bad speller? The answers to both of those are, unsurprisingly, linked. So sit tight, and let me lay it all out for you: what Ludicrus is, and why I deemed it necessary to shift things up a bit.