3 ms·

The problem with all these games is the theme they use. They use some real-world theme, make up real world map and refer to real-world things, but they aren't r

The problem with all these games is the theme they use. They use some real-world theme, make up real world map and refer to real-world things, but they aren't realistic enough, so it all gets a little stupid at some point, if you think about it. The best example I can remember is from one of the Civilization games (not a boardgame, I know, but it is the same), which had a "technology" you could "develop" named "Communism". It made your workers produce 10% more.

cableshaft 9y ago
The map is not the territory. Any model or abstraction will not be able to completely replicate the thing or phenomena it represents, as the real life thing is too vast and complicated and interwoven with all sorts of variables in time and space that there's no way to represent it all. Laws of physics, finance, chemistry, economics, medicine, etc. are all the same. Just models, not perfect. Convenient and useful models, but models all the same. Human brains just aren't capable of capturing anything in its totality, so at some point everything "gets a little stupid". That being said, I can understand what you mean about these euro-style games where often many of the things in them can boil down to 'go here to do this 'real world thing' which in this game really just means it gets you a +2 to this widget that will earn you an extra 6 points at the end of the game. So thematic :) I still really like these games, but I like learning and manipulating game systems and mechanisms.
- fiatjaf 9y ago
  I agree with you, and I also like playing these games, even though they are "a little stupid". But I think some abstractions can be better than others. The abstractions of Catan, for example, make sense, since they somehow capture the essence of the things: a terrain simply produces a good, goods can be traded, houses can be built from goods. Of course it is not perfect, but doesn't bug my mind. Puerto Rico, on the other hand, has so many types of buildings and actions, all referring to real-world things, that it is impossible to make decent abstrations. I guess I'm just advocating less detailed real-world themes, if you can't make simple abstractions that make sense.
  - falsedan 9y ago
    There's already way too many unfun abstracts, please don't encourage designers to not spackling on a loose theme.
Pxtl 9y ago
There are boardgames that seek to perfectly model the scenarios they describe. Almost exclusively they are wargames - multi-day affairs that involve sprawling maps, endless calculations, and incessant tedium as they attempt to model the greater water consumption of Italian infantry caused by their love of pasta rations. These "grognard" games are generally reviled by more conventional players as miserable and pointless. You can read the epic tale of playing such a game here: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/940888/life-altering-game-deserves-kind-session-report https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/940888/life-altering-game-d...
- falsedan 9y ago
  The Campaign for North Africa was never meant to be played straight; consider it a reference for other game designers to study. The consim/wargame split is more nuanced than you described. A game like Combat Commander: Europe attempts to replicate the chaotic unpredictability of small unit engagements: it's extremely unrealistic, yet is enjoyable + is commended for capturing the chaos. The crux of the distinction is, a simulation isn't a game (they're not fun). Most wargames aren't consims, and some of the best consims don't even attempt to replicate the level of low-level detail you describe.

cableshaft 9y ago

The map is not the territory. Any model or abstraction will not be able to completely replicate the thing or phenomena it represents, as the real life thing is too vast and complicated and interwoven with all sorts of variables in time and space that there's no way to represent it all. Laws of physics, finance, chemistry, economics, medicine, etc. are all the same. Just models, not perfect. Convenient and useful models, but models all the same. Human brains just aren't capable of capturing anything in its totality, so at some point everything "gets a little stupid". That being said, I can understand what you mean about these euro-style games where often many of the things in them can boil down to 'go here to do this 'real world thing' which in this game really just means it gets you a +2 to this widget that will earn you an extra 6 points at the end of the game. So thematic :) I still really like these games, but I like learning and manipulating game systems and mechanisms.

fiatjaf 9y ago
I agree with you, and I also like playing these games, even though they are "a little stupid". But I think some abstractions can be better than others. The abstractions of Catan, for example, make sense, since they somehow capture the essence of the things: a terrain simply produces a good, goods can be traded, houses can be built from goods. Of course it is not perfect, but doesn't bug my mind. Puerto Rico, on the other hand, has so many types of buildings and actions, all referring to real-world things, that it is impossible to make decent abstrations. I guess I'm just advocating less detailed real-world themes, if you can't make simple abstractions that make sense.
- falsedan 9y ago
  There's already way too many unfun abstracts, please don't encourage designers to not spackling on a loose theme.

Pxtl 9y ago

There are boardgames that seek to perfectly model the scenarios they describe. Almost exclusively they are wargames - multi-day affairs that involve sprawling maps, endless calculations, and incessant tedium as they attempt to model the greater water consumption of Italian infantry caused by their love of pasta rations. These "grognard" games are generally reviled by more conventional players as miserable and pointless. You can read the epic tale of playing such a game here: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/940888/life-altering-game-deserves-kind-session-report https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/940888/life-altering-game-d...

falsedan 9y ago
The Campaign for North Africa was never meant to be played straight; consider it a reference for other game designers to study. The consim/wargame split is more nuanced than you described. A game like Combat Commander: Europe attempts to replicate the chaotic unpredictability of small unit engagements: it's extremely unrealistic, yet is enjoyable + is commended for capturing the chaos. The crux of the distinction is, a simulation isn't a game (they're not fun). Most wargames aren't consims, and some of the best consims don't even attempt to replicate the level of low-level detail you describe.