brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony) (08/24/90)
Actually I really enjoy boardgames, and I generally don't enjoy computer games nearly as much. Probably the interest in boardgames is the interaction with other human beings? Anyway I would like to see computerised boardgames retaining as much of the feel of the boardgame as possible. Primarily I would want the computer to enforce the rules. This would save so much of the boring work that games like War in the East would actually become playable. Other advantages would be derived from easy save and retore of positions, the board being inviolate to accidental corruption, perhaps even the ability to replay games and study the strengths and weaknesses of moves. Essentially I want computerisation to add to the fun of boardgames, whilst retaining the essential flavour. 1. I can't see very many boardgames being playable on a 13" screen with a single input device. A screen the size of a desk is required, preferably in a horizontal orientation rather than the usual vertical. Player dedicated input and output devices would also be useful, to allow some privacy of planning and diplomacy where a game would benefit. Yes I want a dedicated device, though it might also double as a wall video screen between games. CRT's probably can't do the job conveniently (ie better than a physical mapboard) but I expect that appropriately sized LCD's are not far off. 2. The idea of the of the computerisation is to provide a "living" model of the game, as specified in the rules book. The players should have full access to the rules, and should understand what is going on in the game. Where mechanics are not fully specified the distribution of allowed results should be specified. If a XXX counter usually loses to a YYY counter then I should know this and be able to plan strategies around it. The computerisation should fully enforce all specified rules on all players (including computer players). 3. Computerised players would also be useful, both to provide opponents for friendless losers like John Farrell and to fill in for players that are missing for a seesion or quit the game. Computerised players should be seperate modules, and not have any "special" relationship with the host game simulator. I should be able to buy new ones, with different abilities or to program my own. For instance I may wish to try out the effectiveness of a new strategy by programming it into a computer player and then palying against it. If it is felt that the computer needs "special help" to be competitive, then you are playing a new game with different rules, and the new rules should be available for perusal. Of course this would not necessarily apply to the strategies used by the computer player, you might even want to have tournaments between various computer players! Like in chess. -- Brendan Mahony | brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz Department of Computer Science | heretic: someone who disgrees with you University of Queensland | about something neither of you knows Australia | anything about.