All in the Cards - It's Triple Triad Talk Time

Alright.  I know I said last night that I would talk abut some games getting a release date and such tonight, but I just spent the last hour and a half save scumming Final Fantasy 8 on my Vita solely for Triple Triad-purposes, so I'm going to talk about that tonight.  Because I'm just gonna.  After all, as you all might remember or might have noticed, I have a whole little 'genre' of posts, I suppose you could say, that is dedicated solely to the discussion of cards and/or card-based games titled appropriately "All in the Cards".  As this post itself has that branding, I am furthering this idea and such, and just interested in really talking about Triple Triad tonight.  Even though it's my first time in a -long- time playing the game, I'm already getting some sense of 'nostalgia' sweeping back and after a rocky start, I've settled into a strategy that will generally have me win or, at worst, draw.  Defeats were few and far between when I started getting cards tonight at least, but again, I didn't keep those because I am a save scumming cheaterbaby.

Anyways, I'm up to 27 unique cards from the 7 you're handed at the start of the game should you chose to talk to the first non-story-important person (barring the three students in the classroom) you come across, with about three of those cards having duplicates to them.  (One of them, in fact, having two dupes.)  This is progress since that, in itself, means 31 wins, since the only winning rule I've encountered so far, what with being at the very start of the game is "One", meaning simply you pick -one- card from the loser's hand to take for your very own.  I cannot recall the other rules off-hand, but I suspect there's an "All" and then another rule that only allows you to pick from cards you actually 'flipped', but that's mostly conjecture on my part.  I don't remember the rules of Triple Triad so much as the very basic aspect of strategy I thought of years ago (which was not very strategic) and very basics as to how the game is played.

For those of you that don't know or don't remember how to play Triple Triad, I can offer a nice little primer here using the screenshot above as a basis.  As you can see, the playfield is a three by three grid, totaling nine squares in all.  Each player picks five cards for their hand which are revealed in normal circumstances, leaving it as more a game of understanding the strengths of your cards and the probabilities of how the other player is going to play his.  If you look at the cards, each one has four numbers (ignore the A) which reflects upon each side of the card.  So taking the Tonberry card on the right side, the top border is 4, the left border is 4, the right border is 6 and the bottom border is 7.  The goal is to use those numbers to 'flip' placed cards by being higher than them.  (There's another way to do it as well, but I've found it very situational and haven't pulled it off myself)  It's a quick and easy to understand game in that sense, but it offers a depth that's...rather deceptive.

So let's sort of visualize that game as it could play out, try to follow along if you would.  For the purposes of this, let's imagine Red won the right to go first and does so by placing their Tonberry in the upper left corner, playing on that cards fairly high numbers for the right and bottom borders, which are the only ones exposed.  Blue responds by throwing their Moogle under it, using the 9 on the top border to flip it.  Red retaliates by placing the 5574 thing (can't figure its name at the moment) to the right of the Moogle using the 4 of the left border to flip the Moogle since the Moogle's right border is 3.  At this point, Red is ahead since of the three cards on the board placed, two of them are his color.  Blue evens this up by throwing their Tonberry in the top middle since 7 > 5.  This is pretty much the precise moment that Red has lost, mind you, since Red does not have a card that can flip a Blue card that's on the board, yet Blue still has a few really strong cards in hand.  Buer, Anaconda (That's not the name, I don't think, but it's close) and Grendel can be flipped from just about any position playable by Ifrit and the soldier, so the only matter is placing the cards to see just how much Blue wins -by-.

Triple Triad is certainly a game governed by the cards where you can tend to win by overwhelming force.  It's all about utilizing which sides your cards are strong with when the situation calls for it.  Corner cards, as in cards that have two strong borders at a right angle are very good for defensive starts, since it ensures you can place a card down without losing one if you're so inclined.  Ifrit is a good example of this as with a border of 9 and 8, you could put it in the bottom right corner and not really worry unless your opponent has a card with a 9 or an A on the right border.  (A, I believe, is All, as in beats everything, even a 9.  Not sure about another A)  Regardless, higher numbers are better as Triple Triad is a game about putting down cards with higher numbers than the cards you put them down next to.  To that effect, I don't think there is a realistic scenario in the above screenshot where Red -could- win unless Blue....just...played like an idiot.  Blue's cards are just that much better.

Every card -does- have a weakness, however, as you can see above; cards with two considerably strong sides tend to have weaker edges to make up for it (more the Moogle than....say, Ifrit), so you do have to consider that when you're picking out your hand.  You almost have to visualize how you want to control the board before you pick to think of a strategy, and then it also relies on luck partially, depending on if your strategy accounts for you placing first or not.  The best-laid plans can be destroyed by this because you only have so many cards and so many places to put them where they'll make a real, honest difference.  Say Blue's strategy solely relied on throwing Ifrit down in the right corner to start (and didn't have super awesome cards on top of that, say Ifrrit is the best card Blue has) and Red goes first and does that instead.  If Red's Right corner card has a left border that is a 6 or higher, then bam, that strategy is potentially ruined.  You can still play Ifrit to the left of that card, as the worst that can happen is you -don't- flip it (and use its border as a corner to protect its middling 6) and you'll still have the 9 and 8 facing out, but that could very well be the first step to a Draw, depending on how it works out.

Fans have long joked that Triple Triad honestly kind of -needs- to be its own game and I'm certainly one of the folks echoing that statement.  It's...kind of perfect as a pick-up-and-play game, which would make it perfect in this sort of gaming culture we've crafted out for ourselves.  Release it as a relatively cheap 'hub' app, sell boosters as "DLC", though with the ability to earn cards through winning (both against human and computer opponents) and bam.  That, my friends, is a money farm right there that has yet to be sown.  Though, knowing Squeenix's practices, they'd sell the Triple Triad game itself (with like a minimal starter set of cards) for $30, price each card individually at $1.99-$4.99 and wonder why nothing's selling.  Still, we have the game itself as is within each copy of Final Fantasy 8, and for the price of $9.99, that's...quite a bargain.  I mean, I know I'm not alone in people who have loaded up FF8 -just- to play Triple Triad.  I'm far from an outlier in this, and that's kind of amazing, I think.

Sick Still, More Game Talk

So, it seems like I might be a bit on the decline rather than getting less sick but I guess it always gets worse before it gets better or somesuch other rhetoric.  Bottom line is, I'm still sick, there's still no news, I still haven't made enough progress in games to speak of (though this is mostly because my cooling ideas are falling through, meaning little to no real PS3 time) so why don't I just ramble about my card game some more.  I have a whole other facet at least somewhat realized in my head that I haven't brought up in the slightest and while it highlights one of my short-comings (the inability to draw people, hence not having concept pictures of them to share) it also gives a pretty good idea of what all I'm going for with the game itself, even if it might seem a bit scattered and/or more realized in my head at this point yet.

The entire facet that I haven't really gone into on here about is the actual 'Factions' of the game, of which I have sort of realized in my head, but I haven't put them to paper whatsoever for the reasons I've elucidated already.  They are a very rough realization of what I've envisioned so far, obviously, and I haven't worked out mechanics enough to know if they're viable/balanced with the 'perks' I've kind of figured on them having, but it's better than just not having anything at all.  Of course, considering the 'world' I've realized the game in bears an apparent resemblance to Mirror's Edge (that I am trying to figure -against- being since I'd rather try and stay away from 'rip off' comments if possible), I should preface things with a few facts here.  First off, I haven't actually played Mirror's Edge yet, but I've watched an LP of the game that I don't remember too much of despite it being highly entertaining.  (Both because of the game and the LPer)  Secondly, I know one of the factions is pretty much like Mirror's Edge, but I like it so whatever.

I'll go ahead and elaborate on that faction now, as it was the first, will likely be the 'hero' faction of the game (or protagonist faction or similar) and it's the one I've put the most thought into.  Of the four realized, this faction is classified as the "Runner" faction which does exactly what the name implies.  I don't have an official name for any of them as they're just concepts yet, but they all have a sort of descriptive title like that.  The Freerunners do pretty much exactly what you think; some of them actually try to do right by the city the game takes place in by delivering communiques and the like, where the others pretty much are just in it to run from the special army.  Adrenaline junkies, the lot of them, they still can offer a nice distraction for other runners who might be a little more 'professional' or righteous or what have you.  Their strength will be getting from Point A to Point B the fastest out of the groups, which will either be done through adding +1 base move to all their movements or those taken with Faction-specific cards, I haven't decided just yet.  With two movements possible in a turn, 2 extra squares will go quite a long way in the long run.

The second faction is decidedly the 'antagonist' faction, as they are the Special Forces militia put in place by the current head honcho.  I should've elaborated a bit earlier, but this sort of plays into the "I haven't played Mirror's Edge so I don't know if I'm ripping it off" thing.  Quite simply, after being elected into office (of some sort, dunno if he's actually the President or what) this high-up guy starts very slowly sinking his domain into a rigid, fear-based society, turning it from normal every day life to something more like V for Vendetta, what with the curfews, the possibility for random kidnapping, and other such things 'for your protection'.  Official crime is down by a bit (aside from those caused by the Runners and other factions), but at the cost of the bad dudes having free reign to cause problems themselves.  When playing as this Special Forces Militia or 'Gunners', you have the strength in numbers, since you'll be able to field 3 or 4 members of the faction (though they're individually the least impressive of all the factions because of this) at the start, and you -might- be able to call in reinforcements, I haven't decided.

The third is the first of the 'second-tier' factions, so said because I imagine if this were a game proper, this one and the next one would be dropped in favor of simply having the 'heroes' and the 'villains', but I don't operate as such.  The 'Modders' as I have dubbed them is a mainly co-op faction, since they get their strength from pairs.  As in, you field two at a time and one can augment the other, even from a distance, as they are kind of cyborgs.  The idea I'm running with is sort of Borg-ish experimental beings have been made by the head bad guy except two of them escaped with the technology used to make them and are now obsessed with bringing people into their 'order' to try and perfect their own design.  So their cards and the like will probably focus on equippable items mostly and either they can equip to their partner should they choose or they -share- equip slots, I'm not quite sure which.  Again, still not sure on the whole balance of things here.

The last faction is the faction that I'm sure none of you are surprised that I'm including and/or that I made an effort to actually fit this in.  The 'Brawlers' do just what you expect, and are basically just a group of streetfighters who cause problems among themselves and others for all sorts of reasons.  Some are trying to shake 'society' up with their fists to make everyone see that something is wrong, and some just want to punch people.  Regardless of the reason, they are very good at it and as you might expect, their cards/battle style is all about getting up-close and personal.  Because of that, however, in a world where guns exist, it's a dangerous venture, so I've had to think of how to make them equally dangerous.  My idea is, basically, either allowing them to equip up to three attacks (as opposed to two) -or- allowing them to chain attack cards.  Like, using an attack card and chaining that to an equipped attack card to decidedly increase their damage output.  Again, balance is probably going to step in here, but I like it as a base.

I like to think that I have, at least, a very definite cast of characters in the factions themselves, but I've also been thinking about individuals to fill those out.  Specifically, I've got about four people in mind for the Runners, five for the Gunners (which is easy, since you basically just have to pick names for the same base type, though there needs to be -some- variation of course), four Modders (two pairs) and three Brawlers, and while I'm sure it would be terribly interesting to describe designs, I'll save that for another time.  Or for a time when I can show you rather than describe them out.  Much as with the card concepts, at least I can put down something that shows I -have- put a lot of thought into this thing, even if it might not seem it.  With any luck, I'll be able to have more tangible proof sometime soon-ish.

Sick Post Because I'm Sick

Sometimes, Google.  Sometimes you do good.

So, as I have kind of alluded to in recent posts when I have actually posted, I have been fairly sick lately.  Thankfully not in the 'serious' sense, but enough so that I am in something of a haze for the better part of a day, or at least more of a haze than normal, what with it being Summer Spring (for a day yet) and all.  Which pretty much means I'm really in no condition to be writing even though I would love to.  I mean, I have tried the last couple nights, but I've had nothing really to work with and I feel like even if I had a giant two page -thing- about something really interesting, I wouldn't be able to do anything with it because I have just been 'derrrr' for the entirety of my down-time.  I also haven't been gaming all that much despite my recent acquisitions of Lollipop Chainsaw and Gravity Rush which burns me tremendously.  The brief bits of the former that I have played have been brilliant, but you'll hear about that soon enough in a format you might not expect.

I do have two bits of news here that I can talk about to try and get myself out of this little funk I'm in, since I feel like I am possibly on my way out of illness.  With any luck, I'll be back to throwing down posts that veer more verbose than a valiant victor verily vexing villains for a vendetta.  Said time is not tonight, however, so don't be surprised if I can only muster a couple paragraphs here for both bits of information.  Though, to be fair, there's not a whole lot to be said about either, one is pretty uniformly positive, and the other is Sega being Sega which means it is not positive whatsoever except maybe kind of a tiny little bit, but not really.  I should probably save that for the actual talking about it portion instead of here, but eh, I'm feeling all crazy wacky so who cares.

Why don't I just throw down the Goddamnit, Sega so we can have that done and move along, yeah?  Yeah, let's just go ahead and do that.  So, do you guys remember Valkyria Chronicles?  Well it's back!  In pog card form!  Kind of.  Valkyria Duel is a free-to-play, PC Browser-based card game that is, obviously, only available in Japan because shut up.  There's a planned Smartphone version of it as well, but that's not in the cards on the table just yet, though I imagine it will likely be fundamentally the same since it's likely not a very taxing game.  It will be, as some/most Free-to-play games are, supported by micro-transactions that I have no idea how they will play out.  I imagine you can either buy 'boosters' of people, or they'll have a special grouping of cards that are special enough to be paid-only.  I mean, it's a card game, there are not really all that many options here.

I.....well, I really don't know where to start here.  I'm sure you can imagine where I'm coming from before I even say it, but suffice it to be said that there is not enough "Goddamnit Sega" that I can say here.  I could say it til my already raw throat dries up and cracks and it'd still not be enough for everything that is wrong with this picture.  Now, do I personally care that this is a quick cash-grab for a franchise that I happen to enjoy despite every instance of Sega trying to prevent that?  Of course not.  In fact, I encourage it - who knows, if they rake in enough profit from this, maybe they'll feel confident enough in a PSN-only, no-dub version of Valkyria Chronicles 3 for us since, hey, they'd still be making money off of the whole thing from micro-transactions of the card game.  And maybe if they did that, they could release -this- game over here for smartphones/browsers in an attempt at the same, but expanded, cash-grab.  I imagine it kind of hinges on at least having the ability to play all three games, however, since all three games rosters are involved, as you might be able to tell.

The thing that bugs me is that this is Valkyria Chronicles, and it's a card game at the same time.  I kind of have a thing for card games as you have no doubt realized, and I would probably buy into one based on several franchises I love.  I bought into Metal Gear Ac!d -happily- and would buy it all over again if I could play it on my Vita, which I keep mentioning.  It bugs me because it's pretty much a non-zero chance at being able to play this despite what I said above making something resembling sense.  Sega doesn't do sense, apparently, and said lack of sense still gives me reason to wonder at what's going to happen with further instances of series that I enjoy from them, namely Yakuza.  I have said it before, but I will straight up cut a bitch if my only option for Yakuza 5 is downloading it.  Regardless, that's not Valkyria Chronicles, nor Valkyria Duel related (Note:  Would totally buy a Yakuza card game, totally serious), but there's not much else to say.  It's free, it's Japan-only, it's a friggin' Valkyria Card Game and it taunts me something fierce.

Less vexing is the existence of Okami HD as a real thing, which is something I'm sure will make you all happy.  Should make Chance happy at least, so there's something.  As for myself, I am also happy, but in a less-so, I-may-not-buy-this-game-right-off way because it's DD-only which, you know what, I'm not even going to say it again, you know why that takes it off my radar.  Still, I hope it's only my radar that it takes it off of, because I really, really want this game to sell.  If I could buy and play it, I totally would, and if it catches a good Playstation Plus sale, I might even go against common sense and buy it to download it at some unforeseen time in the future when I have non-shit internet and a PS3 that won't explode or at least convinces me that it will not, should I choose to download something more than, oh say, 300 MB in size for the sheer amount of time it will have to remain on in which to do so.

I don't have much of a story with Okami, but I do have -something- of one with it, so I may as well tell it.  Back in the days of GameCrazy, you see, when I was but a teenager, I walked into the store with a desire to buy and the dosh to back it up.  I didn't know what I was looking for, and honestly could've been sold just about anything because I just needed something to play, since the games at home obviously weren't enough.  Being a dumb kid and all.  So, with just me and the cashier girl in the store, I walked right up to her as she asked me "Hey, anything I can help you find today?" and said "Well, I dunno.  I'm just looking for a new game."  Giving me something of a weird look before going into contemplation, she asked me what system I preferred and as she moved out from behind the counter, I said "PS2", prompting her to head that way.  She obviously had something in mind when she grabbed a case as soon as she went to it.

Going back to the counter, she placed Okami down, a game that I had not heard of at that point, and proceeded to extol unto me the virtues of the wonderful art style and direction, as well as the quirky, brush-and-platforming based gameplay.  Sufficiently curious, I informed her I'd take it, she rang my up and the transaction was complete, just that simple.  I took it home, played it and had to admit that the game was absolutely wonderful, while also wondering just how I had not heard of it, or at least not remembered it had I read about it.  I did beat it and had quite a bit of fun with it, and suffice to say that the next time I saw her, I informed her about her good taste.  And it's kind of for that reason that I hope the game does well since it is very underknown, underrated, despite a good portion of the internet not likely giving you that impression, especially now with this news.  So I suppose that means that maybe you should believe the hype.  Or at least buy it to give yourself an excuse to look at some gorgeous visuals, maybe use that Move Wand you bought (though it's not mandatory) and/or just to get some trophies.  Because you can never have enough trophies.

My Game - A Thing Called Progress

You will never know the difficulty uploading this took.

So, I did say long ago that I had not only intended on having a slightly working prototype of a game made by the end of the year, but that I had an idea in mind.  And since then, it's more or less been complete silence on it as I took it behind-the-scenes as it were, and simply started working on it mostly in my own time.  And mostly in my own mind with tonight being not the first, but one of the few times I sat down and tried to concept something out for it.  Obviously tonight was the card design and layout (click Here for slightly bigger version) and with very general and broad strokes, since the mechanics are more or less still up in the air.  There are definitely two systems in place at the moment and they both offer their own strengths and weaknesses, so I have to pin down just which is the best of the two.

The two systems, which I imagine explaining prior to describing the cards above and the thought behind them is a good idea, are pretty simple and tried-and-true ones.  The first, which was more or less what the cards above were designed in mind with at the moment, is a cost system as most card-based games have.  All cards feature an Equip cost and a Use Cost (Why all?  You'll see.) which is admittedly partially taken from Metal Gear Ac!d as an idea, but it's not like it'd be the first nor last.  Ideas come from everywhere, etc. etc.  The gist of Use and Equip costs is that they make you think a bit more 'tactically' since you can keep a card to use if you think it will be useful or it might just be worth preparing by equipping it so you can chain it with something else.  Of course, not everything can be chained, but blah blah, details.  And the second idea is to simply have a number of actions a turn (2, for instance) wherein you can play a card however you want, but you only get two.  You can equip two cards, equip one and use one, move with both, etc.  The advantage here is the easier nature of it, since you don't have to track numbers and costs, but game balance is a concern, since with no cost or anything, some cards could easily become OP, all things considered.

That in mind, let's get a little bit into the cards and start peeling back what is simply visible to explain what it means.  Start with the left-most card that is, unfortunately, a little washed out because it's lightly sketched and glare happens, but I figure you can see it well enough.  It offers pretty much the simplest design that sort of looks like what most other cards design themselves after.  The Use cost in the upper right corner with the name of the card being up there as well, under that is the illustration, and under that is the description.  I have part of the description box taken up by a little space for an emblem that shows what affiliation the card is for (of the four 'Factions' as well as unaligned) for flavor and under that is the Equip Cost which is possibly a bit out-of-place.  But that is the point of doing roughs, of course, to figure this sort of stuff out and place things in a better place.

I know we're not supposed to play favorites, but I do think the middle card is the one I like the most in this group of three.  It's a fairly different spin on the classic design since it compartmentalizes the upper square usually dominated by the illustration for the card.  Since I want Affiliation to play a part in the game (I'm thinking bonuses for using cards affiliated with the faction you're playing, which is the simplest), it features that pretty chiefly and allows for flavor text and/or a reminder as to what bonus it might innately offer if I go that route.  (I'm thinking the Movement-based Faction gets an additional 1 to move for such cards and the like)  Then the Description is afforded a reasonable amount of space above the bottom bar which has a spot for Equip Cost, Movement Value, and Use Cost respectively, keeping everything fairly neatly in its own place.  The main problem is that it does cramp the illustration a bit and vertical space is generally trickier to work with than horizontal.

The last card, which kind of seems like a variation of the first is also a pretty strong contender.  Use and Equip Costs are featured at the top of the card on opposite sides, flanking the illustration and name, forcing it to the center rather than left to right.  The illustration still has plenty of room even with the triangles cutting into the space, the description has ample room, and the Affiliation Emblem watermark offers that distinction that I want to be very apparent.  The only issue with it is that it's a fairly basic design, and I honestly don't know where to put Movement Value, so I sort of just tossed it in the center at the bottom.  It has the benefit of keeping the 'triangle' theme, not only making a triangle with the other numbers, as well as them being cased in triangles themselves.  So it does have a bit of flow, which I like, but it still seems a bit lacking and/or thrown-together.

I just wanted to show that off to show that there was, indeed, work and/or thought being put into the project.  While I'm sort of doubting it being even a little bit workable by the end of the year, it's nice to have something a little tangible made up.  And writing this out has made it a lot more focused in my head as to how to rethink and/or refine certain aspects of the game as a whole, as well as the designs I thought up.  Of course, this is just one aspect of it that I have to cover, the other two being the characters/factions (which I have in mind, just haven't concepted them out because I am terrible with forms, as is obvious) and the ideals in place for making some maps to actually play the game out with and help me keep it balanced.  Everything sort of has its own facets which I'm realizing very slowly, and thinking out those facets will likely be the biggest challenge of the process on the whole.

My Game: Leaning Towards....

Despite having a more solid start with my Tabletop concept, the allure of the unknown and recent deluge of ideas I had for the Card game seems to be pushing me solidly in that direction insomuch as I've not been able to -not- think about it for the last couple days.  A lot of fleshing out has been done (comparatively speaking at least) for the concept, so I really think I can hit the ground running with that one if I think up just a few more base things for it.  I guess I can/should go over what little I have really planned out here, if only to help my thought process on it along some.  That (and talking to Saki-Chan) certainly seemed to help start fleshing this out to begin with anyways, so hopefully I can keep that creativity going.

The world I have envisioned, which I've kind of touched on already, is fairly Mirror's Edge-ish in my head, looks-wise anyways, in that it's going to be fairly super modern, but not futuristic with the most detail for that being in the very clean presentation ME offers.  The general atmosphere of the world might carry over as well in a sense, or at least how I've interpreted ME without playing it just yet; a world (or at least a nation) that's fairly ruled by fear and dominance, but in such a way that it's hardly noticed.  Nothing to fall into disrepair out of neglect because 'everything will be fine so long as you live like you're told' and that sort of theme which would obviously help where it concerns the -more- important factor of the game that I'm still working on:  The Factions involved that a player can control.

I have four main groups thought of at current, which is more or less all I want; I imagine a game involving four players would be rather chaotic enough if it's done right, but such is how tactical games go when more and more players are introduced.  Still, any more than that would likely be rough going and having it at that, with all four factions independent of one another means if you only have one other or two other friends to play with, you're not exactly losing out.  All four groups have their own uniqueness so far to make them appealing to several different playstyles.  One is mostly movement-focused which sort of cribs more from ME more than I would've liked but come on, it fits where another draws its strength from raw numbers, meaning the player playing them can field/control more than one person in a game.  A third faction is, in my head, sort of envisioned as a Street Gang/group of Street Fighters who are, obviously, more combat oriented and might even be able to chain together combat actions (to increase the overall damage somewhat) or perhaps be able to prepare a third combat maneuver.  And the fourth....well, the fourth more or less has to be a 'specialist' group, but specializing in -what- is what I haven't settled on just yet.

I think I said it before, but I envision the game being able to be carried around in just a few parts:  a deck for your chosen faction, your chosen figure (think a Mini-figure) with its necessary stats, and a couple folded maps for you and your friends to decide what to use for that particular round.  Every map will be marked for any gametype so you'll be able to pick one and just get right into it, or, obviously, make up your own goals if you so desire.  Like I said, the game is fairly designed (in my head, obviously) to have that low barrier of entry that card games offer, where you can just pull out a deck and start playing since you both know the rules already, or even if you don't, it's fairly easy to explain right like that.  The actual gameplay is at least a bit more complex, of course, but the hope is that it'll be a little more rewarding without being too overcomplicated.

There's plenty of other stuff I have at least initialized, obviously, but I can't help but feel like I need to keep some of it back for now.  I'm still pretty excited with it as I've got going through my head and if I can just really pull it out and put it down into something physical that matches it, I'll be really happy with what I end up with.  Here's to hoping I'll be able to start thinking up actual cards without hitting a wall relatively early!

Pros and Cons of My Game Ideas

As of the time of writing this, I have found that one of the harder aspects of achieving my New Year's Resolution will be simply deciding on just which project to pursue for it.  As I presented in the last post, my Resolution post, I have two different types of games that I have milling about in my head that one of which, with any luck, will be an actual thing by years-end:  A Table-top RPG system (akin to Dungeons and Dragons, Vampire:  The Masquerade, Exalted, etc.) with the lore and such, or a Trading Card/Tactics/Board-style hybrid game in the vein of Metal Gear Ac!d that would, presumably, also have a bit of lore surrounding it depending on what form it takes.  There's cons on the surface of either project that basically amount to "Making a game is pretty tough", but in thinking about it, each game has their own various drawbacks, but also their own rewards that the other probably can't replicate.  I imagine really parsing them both out here will help me make sense of which I should really go with better than not.

The Card Game:

The obvious first issue with making a Card game in the way I'm envisioning is basically that it already exists in the shells of Metal Gear Ac!d and Metal Gear Ac!d 2, which means that I have to design it specifically around not being either of those games as much as possible because 1) this has to be my own thing and 2) I don't want to 'rip off' anything.  Being able to say "inspired by" while people can acknowledge it's a different thing (beyond the fact that it'll use things that aren't Metal Gear) is the goal, obviously, but having kind of a restriction in that vein is a troublesome one.  If only because I can't remember a lot of MGA besides fun and grinding for more cards obsessively, so I don't remember the ups and downs of the system in place there.  This means that for every mechanic and idea I have, I have to make sure it's not a rip from the games in question, because, again, this has to be at least mostly original on my part.  Which also means that I also have to determine what would, theoretically be a 'straight-rip' and what's more or less just a viable open idea.  More or less the difference between figuring on 'numbers on cards = movement value' being 'okay to use' or 'nope, too much theirs' and the like.

The other big downside is obviously that for a card-based game to be viable, there has to be a lot of cards which I may or may not be able to really make up.  For one, I'm not much of an artist, so I couldn't do the visualizations and would just, instead, have a bunch of cards made up with a spot for images that aren't there, leaving me to have to have someone else make those.  Then again, that's mostly cosmetic and I should more focus on the mechanics of it all, but I have to figure out at least some of this stuff beforehand, if just for a mental picture.  Still, knowing that a lot of cards are necessary, possibly in the 100-200 range depending on how I take this, makes it a slight bit intimidating thinking about making any of them since there'll always be the looming "One down 132 to go" feeling hanging over me.  Maybe I'm overshooting a bit, or overestimating just how difficult making that many cards would be, but I'm not quite sure.

The last real big Con against this idea is the fact that it's whole concept in my mind is a bit nebulous, at least when it's compared to the setting of my RPG that is.  It wasn't until just earlier today that I really got a glimpse into the 'world' I would like to base the game around and I was fairly surprised by what I was looking at.  More or less what I've settled on is having it set up so that the lowest amount of players is 2, where one will control the 'Main Character' (of which there will probably be a few, each having their own pros and cons) and the other player will control the 'Opposing Force',  (which will probably work on the 'strength in numbers' philosophy as so many game 'armies' do) where the ultimate goal for the MC is to get to a certain point, pick up objectives, kill a certain person (or persons) on the board or whatever else they decide on, whereas the goal of the OF will generally be to wipe out the MC (though there are possibilities for other things).  Other players would be handled differently in sort of a Free-for-All basis where just because one person plays OF and two people each play an MC doesn't mean those two players are working together.

The upside here is that in just writing this and talking to Saki-Chan as I do so, I've expanded a lot on my original idea in various ways, so the last con there is less true, but only slightly so.  As well as that, just thinking all this up has me so excited that I can't keep my ideas straight and it's got my brain working overtime.  In general terms of viability, I imagine this would be the idea out of the two that's more apt for being more approachable; something where the rules are a little more set and concrete over a Tabletop RPG, and it leads more for quicker play sessions, though they could be as drawn-out as the players wished, depending on the objectives set and the factions/characters used.  So I guess the condensed version of the Pros section would be that it's more accessible, more portable (the idea in my head currently is being able to have a pack thing for one or two decks, a figure or figures depending on what you use, and a couple fold-out maps), and more flexible in terms of session time meaning players could determine their own level of time invested.

The Tabletop RPG:

The first and biggest issue with making a Tabletop RPG is that, by its own nature, you have to make your own world and lore which implies every little bit of detail you'd infer from that statement.  Every character has to be able to come from 'something', to have their own baggage by virtue of being one thing or another, and to have their own advantages for the same reason.  The world has to live and breathe before you hand it to players for them to shape their own portion of it in their image, because first it has to attract them with that life to convince them to create in it.  You have to offer your world as an outlet for them to plug into, not unlike a video game, whereas giving them enough tools and freedom to use as much or as little of what you've made for their own whims.  And in that same vein, you have to understand that some people just aren't going to like certain aspects, so you have to leave it flexible enough to work around those aspects or exclude them outright.

The con in itself is worth like five or so because it's the umbrella for every part of the game that you have to create which is an issue in itself.  Mechanics, characters, how enemies work, what is the world made of and what happened in its past, you have to make everything but a plot the characters have to follow because that's where the GM steps in, and they could want to step in at any angle, meaning you have to leave things open enough for them to do that easily.  I'm struggling to find ways to make that more apparent, but all I can think of to do is to just state that and reinforce it by saying it again in different ways.  You almost have to play a game with yourself of getting things to the point where a theoretical starting point for most campaigns would be (insomuch as 'the world looks like this, currently', where is where most GMs would take it from, since that point generally offers the most flexibility.  Where others will want to take a more 'changing/reinforcing history' route.) and by that point, you have to have everything else set in stone which might point out its flaws in doing so meaning you have to double-back on it all.

I guess the good part of this is that I already have some of this stuff figured out.  I have a world in concept already which is flexible enough to let me have a past, the moment things started happening and their 'end point' which is that theoretical starting point for most campaigns.  It's not perfect and it needs fleshing out, but it has more substance to it than the Card game since this isn't the first time I've really thought about it.  In truth, I've had this idea for upwards of....maybe a year, actually, and have only put small efforts into making it something more than it is.  Ideas for this and that have been put down on the overall map of the game, but I need to make them more than they are, to make them actually viable things rather than a 'neat idea' for a mechanic, or theoretical approaches to a certain action like crafting or something like that.  The fact that it's started is welcome, but the expanse of work is probably greater than I could expect with the card game, if only in the theorizing of everything.

Still, the overall reward would be greater in that I'll have made something that will always be more than it is; because it's a world incomplete on purpose the people who buy into it and get into it will always get more out of it than you could give them were it anything else.  You're giving them a means to create an adventure that they'll always remember and always associate with what you started and that's going to be a feeling you'll never really be able to quantify well enough.  Only if it's executed well enough, that is, as nobody wants to play, to make something, with shoddy tools when there are plenty of other more viable building materials out there.  While that's true for both game ideas I have, I feel it's moreso with this one, since I'll certainly be creating more for this than the card game, which means there's more to lose if I don't manage to get something good going.

I have my work cut out for me regardless of which option I go for.  The fact that I want to go after both, that I'm literally sitting here near-trembling in excitement at the prospect of creating this or that for either game just as willingly as the other is a good sign for me though.  I'm really ready to go at this with both barrels once I know what I'm going at, which means that I'm pretty optimistic about my chances here.  Hopefully that optimism helps actually create, instead of just getting me worked up about something I can't put together.  I'm pretty confident though, seeing as the last thing I decided to go at like this was this blog.

All in the Cards - My Obsession

I'm going to level with you guys.  Just in case you haven't noticed, I kind of have a thing for Trading Card Games of all shapes, sizes and forms.  And while I haven't played 80% of them (In fact, half of the above pictured), trust me, were the time, money, and ability to do so mine, I would be familiar with all of the TCGs.  I'm not really sure what it is about it, whether it's the strategy involved in deciding your deck structure, collecting better cards, just the way a match plays out, or some other thing.  But there's just something that makes every card out there something I want to at least see if just to try and understand its place in a game.

And while you might have noticed the beast that is my TCG-desire has been temporarily sated, that doesn't mean I'm not constantly thinking about them and how any game out there could be converted to a TCG structure of some sort without too much hassle.  I say some sort, because I have been schooled in the ways of Card Games, and I've learned that they're not always going to be a simple "Here's your field, here's your bench, here's your hand, GO" affair.

This is, of course, because of the above-pictured Metal Gear Ac!d 2.  (I don't know how to do superscript.)  Also the non-pictured Metal Gear Ac!d.  Now, a lot of people don't even know about the two Metal Gear Ac!d games, and I can't honestly blame them, as they simply are not only strange games, but games that weren't really mentioned a lot when they were released, which was several years ago.  But Metal Gear Ac!d (I believe) was one of the two games I got with my PSP and I never regretted it for the sheer amount of fun it ended up affording.

If you're unfamiliar with the gameplay of Metal Gear Ac!d as a series, think of any grid-based Tactics RPG you've played.  Final Fantasy Tactics, Disgaea, Jeanne D'arc, etc. etc.  Every character has a base amount of movement they can do on their turn and they usually get one attack before it's over.  Kind of turn-based, but with strategic movements.  Well, take that and add cards.  Metal Gear Ac!d (henceforth simply referred to Metal Gear Ac!d to cover both games at once) feature a few different types of cards, which, regardless of what you have, fuel everything you do.  To move, you use a card and pay the COST of it, which builds up as you perform actions.  That COST then determines how long you have to wait til your next turn.  (You can usually only play two cards a turn.)

Of course, it's not always that simply or difficult.  Using a normal card usually only affords a few blocks of movement (3 or 4, I think), but there are specific Movement cards that will almost always let you move farther and/or more silently than that.  Another type of card is Equip Cards, which will be your Body Armor and such and also some weapons that, when you have them equipped, might afford you a counter-attack if you're attacked.  (Which then uses up the card or uses the ammo, which you can replenish with another of that card.)  Then you have Use cards which are instant-use and usually encompass the other half of the available weapons, rations, and special abilities.  There are other types, but I'm sure that's confusing enough for one installment.

And if you don't believe I spend my time thinking about this, well, you are quite mistaken!  To prove that, I'm going to use inFamous 2 as an example of a scenario setter where the game could be adapted into a card game.  Now, while it would be fairly simply enough to just do a complete reskin of Metal Gear Ac!d (replace gun Use cards with powers, Use Ration cards with "Recharge Point" cards, etc.), I'm sure we could go about this the extra mile so that, while similar, it would be a different game from MGA.

Imagine a grid-based board like you'd expect from, again, a Tactics RPG or if you're familiar, a Metal Gear Ac!d level.  Fairly easy level; you have a few Militia men on the other side of the board surrounding a Blast Core that is your main goal.  You have, instead of a deck, two half-decks, (Or maybe one deck is smaller than the other, regardless you don't have a single 60 or so card deck like most card games) one stack is powers or actions, the other is your "support" cards; Support characters, special actions, and such.  Each turn, you draw one of each and get to use up to three cards in any combination of what you have, though you can't have more than three of either type of card at one time.

So, the main goal is to get to the other side of the board (which has water hazards, of course) to fight the Militia and recover the blast core.  How you accomplish that is simply up to how you use what cards you've decided to put in your decks to start with.  For instance, there'll be "Good Cole" and "Evil Cole" cards, obviously, which will confer the Karma-specific powers.  For this example, we'll use Good Cole's card set.  We draw three of each card to start the match and end up with an Ice Pillar card and two sticky grenade cards.  The support cards, for this example, don't matter, as our Good Cole is rough and tumbler.  Using the Ice Pillar card from his starting location, Cole is propelled a goodly distance across the board and is in range of the Militia.  (I'm also sort of condensing this for ease of imagining.)

With two more actions, we use the first Sticky Grenade card and target the closest Militia.  The attack goes through and successfully hits, dealing enough damage to defeat him.  The other two Milita aren't close enough to stick one, but we can hit the square between them, so that's where the other sticky grenade goes.  From not being a direct impact, both Militia members survive, but are staggered, which means they lose one action on their turn.  You've used three actions, so you're done.  Enemy turn, the Militia with one or two actions a piece only, vainly attack Cole for a little damage, but nothing too lethal.  Their turn cleared, we draw our Action card (but not a Support, since we still have three.  Or maybe we draw a Support card and have to discard one) and it's Ice Rocket.  The Militia are standing next to one another, so a direct hit freezes them both.  Then using a support card for basic movement, we collect the Blast Core.  Match complete!

So there you go.  Looking back on that, I'm...not too sure why I plotted that all out.  But at least to me, it sounded cool.  Hopefully I didn't go completely out of the box and confuse anyone who might not be as obsessed with card-based games as myself.  And hey, if anyone from Sucker Punch is reading this (hahahahaha) and liked it, I'm more than free to consult on such a project!

All in the Cards - Magic 2012

So, I may be tapping into the deepest reaches of nerd-dom here, but I just love love Trading Card games, and while Magic 2012 (Full name:  Magic:  The Gathering:  Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012) may not be the perfect video game form of a TCG, it's acceptable at its worst, and excellent at its best.  There's just something about the strategy involved in a card game like this that gives it an allure I can't resist, not to mention the inherent "Collection" aspect of the game.  I've made it fairly clear in the past that I'm highly susceptible to collecting in games and the like, so you'd actually think that a TCG with a full-range of cards that you can gather would destroy me absolutely.

...And, in all honesty, it could.  I remember staying up til all hours of the morning playing Metal Gear Ac!d 2, grinding battles for points to buy booster packs just to try and get cards I didn't have already.  But the point of the matter here is that Magic 2012 (Nor its predecessor) is not one of those games.  Which is a blessing and a curse all in one.

Instead, what Magic 2012 does is starts you off with two Pre-Constructed Decks (that likely actually just mimic the decks they created for 12th edition) that you can use to try and unlock the rest of the ten available decks through campaign mode.  And as you use, and win, with each deck, you unlock up to 16 more cards per deck that you can swap out with cards in the deck.  Bare minimum deck is 60 cards, so when you unlock everything, you can have a 76 card deck, but, for a more optimized experience, it's heavily advised that you pare it down to 60 again, using your own judgment to decide what you need and what you don't need.

Doing some quick math here, every deck starts with 60 cards, with about 25 of them being lands, and with copies of cards, you can generally take that number down quite a bit still.  So let's figure on there being about 20 cards per deck being unique, not to mention the unlockables (which are sometimes copies as well.)  Bump the number up to, being generous, about 28.  Times that by 10, you get 280, which seems like a good number.  That's the number of unique cards I'm figuring are in the base game, or something of a rough guess, at least.  Every deck is different of course, but it's a fairly simple guesstimate anyway.  $10 for 280 unique cards is pretty good!  Even though you can't really mix and match them like you can with physical cards.

....Getting back to the point, is that Magic 2012 offers a fair bit of bang for your buck (especially if you got it on the Playstation Plus sale like I did.  Sure it was only a couple bucks less, but, well, I saved a couple of dollars) considering the Multi-player is quite well set-up, and there is a rather full campaign.  Pictured above is the campaign path, or at least one of them, with each battle with a planeswalker (the dots with faces in them) offering either a new deck to use or a pass to one of the other two 'campaigns', titled Archenemy and Revenge.  While I haven't played those yet, I took a look at the Archenemy board and it, well, looks kind of like the campaign board.  So even if you don't have any friends who'd geek out with you in a TCG, you can still play it.

Or, if you do have friends to play it with, you can.  And possibly lose spectacularly.



So if you're looking for a TCG game and don't mind minimal customization, consider this an endorsement for Magic 2012.  Once you get used to the flow of the game, it really captures the essence of playing face-to-face.  And speaking of, apparently there's an option where you can actually use your Playstation Eye to sort of Video Chat during matches online like only a few other PSN titles that I can think of (Hustle Kings being one of them.  I think.) can do.  Which is actually pretty neat, if you're playing with someone you know personally, or if you're just not camera shy.