Randomness in games

[keithburgun]

Hi guys! I saw someone posted my Game Shame article here last week, so I thought I'd drop by and show you my latest article on randomness in games.

In the article, I talk about some of the uses for randomness, as well as some of the pitfalls you should be aware of. Enjoy:

http://www.dinofarmgames.com/randomness-and-imagined-agency/

Interesting related discussion question: How much randomness is too much? 100% would be something like Candyland or War, where you have absolutely no agency whatsoever. 99% would be Monopoly, maybe 80% would be Risk, 70% would be Poker, etc. Where do you, personally, draw the line, and why?

 

[kingthrall]

myth 2 has randomness, my favourite game an RTS made 12 years ago.

For instance a dwarf can throw a molotov that can render 50% damage to nearly all light melle units. However during winter maps or heavy rain that can make the dwarf bottle snuff out almost 50% instead of 10% during good weather. Its completely random and the same with pus (which is like explosive pieces of a dead Wight that paralyses you)

Another Random thing is the bounce factor. Basicly when the dwarf throws the molotov it has a chance to bounce thus totally missing a charging melle force or missing and hitting another unit, perhaps a more expensive unit.

It is also interesting to point out that a dwarf costs 6 points and a warrior 2 points. So if the bottle duds and the warrior gets close enough the dwarf cant shoot and have lost a more valuable unit.

 

[Vault101]

Hi guys! I saw someone posted my Game Shame article here last week, so I thought I'd drop by and show you my latest article on randomness in games.

In the article, I talk about some of the uses for randomness, as well as some of the pitfalls you should be aware of. Enjoy:

http://www.dinofarmgames.com/randomness-and-imagined-agency/

Interesting related discussion question: How much randomness is too much? 100% would be something like Candyland or War, where you have absolutely no agency whatsoever. 99% would be Monopoly, maybe 80% would be Risk, 70% would be Poker, etc. Where do you, personally, draw the line, and why?

it was me.....

Im still hurt you called some of my favorites trash and Ive put you on my list of enemies *evil stare*

hahaha jsut kidding, I dont have a list of enemies..thats crazy...

...or mabye I do...you'll find out soon enough

OT: it depends, Mario party has a fair element of luck..but thats what makes it fun playing with freinds, though game skill does come into it..since I always won

 

[Esotera]

If a game doesn't require some form of player skill to win/be good at it, then it's not a game, it's just a bunch of stuff you're experiencing. A good example of this is the card game Ace's High, there's literally no point playing because it's entirely deterministic what card you're going to get.

With something like Monopoly however, you can approach different strategies, and some of those are slightly more likely to win according to statistics. The same concept applies to larger games that you'd find on a console/PC.

 

[Smooth Operator]

The more competitive/harder the game the lower is my randomness limit, I'm a huge fan of D&D but some of the things in there are just plain one hit bullshit, if every enemy move*luck can't be countered then the game plainly failed at the design level.