Syracuse Game Lab

Games are great educational tools, and I'm not the only one who thinks so!

Yes, there are others out there, and if you are looking for resources to make your own case for board games (or games in general), one possible starting point for you is the Syracuse Game Lab.

Thank you to Scott Nicholson for commenting on our earlier blog post sharing with us about his research project at Syracuse University, which is an initiative to increase the use of games and games events in the libraries.

There are also a number of publications on the topic at the Game Lab Web site, so head over and check it out!

Science and Board Games

Greetings board game enthusiasts! I have just stumbled upon a website that fits like a puzzle piece into the mission of this blog. The website is boardgamestudies.info, and it's produced by a group "dedicated to research on board games and the history and development of board games around the world."

I took a quick look at the first journal they published, and it's just that; it's a scientific publication in proper journal format. Fortunately, the writing seems pretty accessible. I plan on expounding upon some of these articles in my next few posts, but go ahead a have a look; the first article in the first journal is on the history of mancala and board games with a 2x5 grid layout. In the next few posts, I'll try to pick out some good nuggets of information from this article or others, so check back next Monday for some research-backed board game discussion!

Catan vs. Monopoly

As I was exploring cyberspace today, I came upon this blog post about Settlers of Catan. One of the first things I noticed is that it's by a baseball writer for ESPN.com, Kieth Law. Ooh, I thought, board game news from ESPN! Unfortunately, the article has no drawn out comparison between sports and board games besides a short economic comparison at the top of the article. Law does, however, go into a nice history of Settlers, including it's relationship with games America had to play before Eurogaming worked its way to the US. Indeed, The Settlers of Catan was the first German-style board game to become popular in the US.

Law mentions in his article two aspects of the Euro-genre of games that I believe are too important to pass up. First, the games are competitive and fun from start to finish, although they rely WAY less on luck than anything that had been popular in the US before. Second, and related, there is no elimination from a game as there would be, for example, in a game of Risk. Allow me to make a quick note of my own on each subject.

First, I'll address the competitive nature of the games. Klaus Teuber, the designer of Settlers, hit this nail on the head, finding a perfect mechanic to keep everyone interested in the game. In Monopoly, once someone has landed (by a roll of the dice) on the correct spaces and made enough money, his victory is eventual, almost all the time. In Risk, once someone has a big enough army (and rolls 5's and 6's), there's little stopping her. In Settlers, however, the roll of the dice is far from the final say. Trading is an integral part of the game, and I've played plenty of games where a player is in position for the victory and the other players then boycott all trades with this person. The best player and the robber often become well acquainted by game's end, oftentimes only to see someone else pass him up for the victory. In other words, the game is designed to let players who fall behind make the ground and even snatch up a victory. Many (though not all) of the Eurogames do this, which make each game interesting from start to finish.

The other subject of note is the lack of elimination. As I said, it is related to the discourse above. It's importance is this: previous to 1995, when American board gamers wanted something of more heft than Monopoly, they had to resort to war games. War games take hours to play, and often a person will be on the brink of elimination and lose interest, else they will be fully eliminated and have to wait hours until they can get involved with the group again. Eurogames are not only played in a significantly shorter time span, but there is, as I mentioned above, involvement from start to finish.

In conclusion, that is why Eurogames are way better than American games. Just kidding; that's not what this post was about. But I do hope you found my rant in favor of Settlers of Catan to be helpful.

Serious Games = Applied Game Mechanics?

Have we finally found a term for "applying board game mechanics?"!

I was "reading" on a German game Web site, spielegilde.org, and out of the cloud a term appeared.

"Serious Games"

It struck a chord, and I struck it back by doing a little research of my own.

Wikipedia describes a serious game as any game that is "designed for a primary purpose other than pure entertainment." Sounds like Pinebars to me. Here at the blog we seek to highlight as many different applications of board games as possible to everyday life, whether teaching or management or amazon farmers.

Dig a little deeper.

Seriousgames.org, a Web site I Googled, listed their objective as to find "uses for games in exploring management and leadership challenges facing the public sector." Seriousgames.org focuses on the application of video games, which seems to be the general focus of groups interested in serious games.

Apparently there is a Serious Games Summit (this year its held in San Fransisco) to discuss the development of serious games and related issues. I encourage you to check out their Web site.

Although focused on video games, aspects are inclusive to all gaming types. According to the Serious Games Summit Web site, the second major point of discussion at the summit will be "gamification," which is "[the] debatable term and sometimes questionable process of building game-like incentives into non-game applications, to address issues like productivity, health, marketing, and so forth."

Board game mechanics should not be left out of a discussion about gamification. Rather the incentives built into board games are probably stronger and more suited to gamification than video game mechanics. After all, board games mechanics are developed en lieu of technology and more closely focus on player decisions.

Perhaps all this goes to say is that applying board game mechanics already has an identity in the study of serious games.

Not the most insightful conclusion to a blog post I'm sure...though I hope not the most vapid either.

-Dennis

The Game of Kings

Chess is probably the most proliferative game in the world. Probably having originated in the ancient far east, it is played in every country by millions of people. A game with such history and longevity undoubtedly has much to teach us, both about the game and about ourselves. This blog has already addressed part of that aspect of chess, but naturally, we have not come close to covering it all. Recently, I came upon this article, written by a man, R. M. Moore, who uses chess as a tool when he is asked to teach children.

Mr. Moore claims that chess is "the only game where luck is never a factor." While I am not in total agreement with that (I make my exception with other simple classics like Go and Checkers), I do agree that, more so than any other game, one is forced to out think one's opponent. (And check out his paragraph on video games! He is by no means putting them down, but I myself draw from it a sense that this is why video games just don't have the same value that board games can have). Therefore, studying chess certainly makes you a better thinker. Secondly, and just as importantly, studying the way a person plays chess is a great way to analyze how that person thinks. That's where Moore comes in.

Moore says that any time he's asked to mentor a child, he begins by teaching the child to play chess. He plays them, not to win, but to teach, and gives two good examples of this in his article. It's worth a read, and I won't spoil it for you, but it's obvious that Moore knows what he's doing, and that, properly used, chess is an invaluable tool for helping kids to improve themselves - to learn lifelong lessons at a young age.

Read that article, and also check out this linked website on the history of chess (it's where I took that graphic from). It's totally worth a read, and not just for that sweet background before the content loads!

Massively multiplayer...run around the park!

What do you call a group of people that come together to participate in massively multiplayer live action strategy games. (I'm not sure what you call it.....think massive scavenger hunt, not live action role-playing (LARPing) for Dungeons and Dragons)

Apparently they've gotten some press. And here.

The games come from a book written by Leigh Anderson and published by Workman Publishing called the Games Bible, which has been on store shelves for about a month.

I love it.

This is game design unashamed. And its got to be tricky stuff!

Imagine designing a game for 350 people (as in their game "Ministry of Silence") . It can be hard enough to play test a game for 4 people! That is what I love most, and why it relates to APPLYING BOARD GAME MECHANICS.

Most of the time, any game mechanics that are applied to real life will involve an above average number of "players," which makes play testing tedious (impossible really), and increases the risk that ANY ONE player could really screw everything up!

Increase the number of players and you increase the level of uncertainty that the game system will NOT FALL APART. (Refer to a much earlier post I made about the economy...)

I haven't played Ministry of Silence, or any other game from the Games Bible, but props to Leigh Anderson and Co. for applying some game mechanics to 300+ people (and they at least seem to enjoy the games). This is one book that might have to go on my HOLIDAY WISH LIST.

Now, to link Holiday Wish List to an actual wish list...

Build Your Own Board Game

I could not let us go on any longer without addressing a relative newcomer on the board game scene; last year, LEGO put out a baker's dozen's worth of "board" games, and, naturally, I was intrigued as soon as I heard about them. If you're like me, you just flashed back to a childhood full of brick-by-brick building, sometimes by the manual, sometimes letting your creativity take total control. I still have quite the soft spot for LEGOs, and, considering my love for board games, I was quite excited about the possibilities. I have played one of the games and will give you a short review.
The game I got my hands on (literally) was Ramses Pyramid. This game is unique among the LEGO games in that Reiner Knizia helped design it. If you are familiar with German games, you'll know that Knizia is a popular designer and makes quality games. There are some positives to this game; for one, you get to build it! Awesome. Also, the game allows for some memory challenges and offers the potential for strategic thinking. Unfortunately, it stops at potential, at least in the rule book. Like many kid-aimed games, the game hinges on the roll of a die. Guess what the condition for winning is. Go ahead, guess!

You have to be at the top of the pyramid, and then you have to roll a 3. AHHH! Very anti-climactic. Knizia must have been passed out or asleep when they came up with that one. He must have been...

So much for gameplay. HOWEVER... The rulebook is seemingly intentionally vague, and even suggests the creation of your own set of rules. This seems perfect for LEGO, and also perfect for anyone interested in game design. Start by tweaking the rules a little, maybe add your own LEGO bricks, and, eventually, why not start from the ground and build (hehe) a whole new game! Why not take two games and combine them? So, like I said, a lot of potential. It makes me even more interested in playing LEGO's take on Pictionary: Creationary. Imagine playing this one with that huge box of old bricks. Oh... I'm the only one with a LEGO surplus? You can borrow some of mine.

Interested in Board Game Mechanics?

Looking for some good-ole analysis of board game mechanics?

First, I recommend you linger here at Pinebars, but second I would recommend you take a peak at The Journal of Board Game Design.

Although somewhat dated (the most recent post is from December 6, 2008), the journal has several intelligently written articles about board game mechanisms, that I'm sure you would find interesting.

Check it out here.

Board Games for Couples 2: Hive

Hive is a unique and finely-crafted game by John Yianni that my wife and I have found especially entertaining. For two players, this game is an excellent chess-like game that can be played in under ten minutes. Try to trap your opponent's queen bee by completely surrounding it with other insects in the hive. The trick is, the hive has to stay completely in-tact at all times!

We love this game because it is easy to learn, and has multiple levels of strategy. The pieces are strong and durable and they come with a carrying pouch so you can bring the game anywhere with you without having to lug around the box. Hive has tremendous replay value and you will find yourself playing over and over again trying to perfect your strategy and beat your opponent over and over again--if your opponent happens to be your wife (or husband) than the feeling of victory is especially satisfying.

Most recently we played this game over a cup of starbucks coffee and some homemade begnets (thanks wife!).

Thats one hungry beetle!

Highly reccomend: A

PS. Hive has two expansions "The Mosquito" and "The Ladybug." Check out board game geek for insights into how these two add-ons benefit the game!

Collect the stars! Meta game!

Need an idea for a team competition?

Think, METAGAME.

That means: game within a game.

This past year for RA training the meta game I made was themed "collect the stars." It utilized a board game mechanic known as SET COLLECTION.

Teams competed in various activities (such as scavenger hunts and other physical events) as well as in leadership and spirit to earn stars (see the picture at the top of this post).

On the back of each star I wrote either an "M" "S" or "U". Instead of a traditional point accumulation scoring mechanic, in this meta game a team's score is their total of complete sets of M, S, and U. Thus, a team with 4 Ms, 2 Ss, and 2 Us would have a score of 2.

When stars were awarded, they were awarded at random (a mechanic I will call HIDDEN BENEFIT) so that no team was able to see what letter they were getting. In addition, teams were not allowed to trade stars with one another, and each team's name was printed on the stars they received so it would be obvious if there had been cheating.

How to win?

The winning team was the team with the most sets of MSU at the end of the week. Second place went to the team with the most stars overall. Thus, both teams with few sets and teams with many sets were encouraged to continue to compete in every daily activity.

Of yeah, and the winning prize included a significant portion of "time-off" for the winning team.

The plan worked! (For the most part). Competition was consistently high throughout training and I believe it helped teams to grow and develop as they worked together to collect the stars.

And it was fun!

That is, I think it was fun. Every day, teams were excited to draw their stars from the stack (I handed out close to 100 throughout the week), and there were both cheers of excitement for good draws and groans of agony for that 15th "S."

And lastly, THE ULTIMATE BEST THING about this META game is...

You always have something to give as a reward, at little cost to you, but relatively great value to those involved.

Ok, maybe thats not the ultimate best thing, but I liked it.