[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DotGNU TCG (was: Re: [DotGNU]A webservice game project ((TODO)))

From: Ian Fung
Subject: Re: DotGNU TCG (was: Re: [DotGNU]A webservice game project ((TODO)))
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 14:03:23 -0500

I've looked things over and the only thing i want to remind you is that one of the reasons that magic: the gathering was such a popular game was because of the limitless possibilities and using cards in new a clever ways. if you simplify the rules and structure of the game enough such that the complexity is gone, then you're in trouble. what you have so far looks like a good beginning. make sure your rules and card types are cover a good range of purpose and functionality and leave it up to the player to decide what is clear and how something should be interpreted.


On Friday, January 24, 2003, at 12:54 PM, Peter Minten wrote:

Ian Fung wrote:

ok, that's sounds good. i didnt know you were planning to roll out a
new game. i just thought we were trying to get people to use DotGNU. if
you want to be ambitious, you have my full support. if you want any
help with the process, i'm offering my assistance. back in the day i
was really into CCG's.


Thanks. I've attached my current codebase, the most interesting part is the doc directory where most of the rules are stored. I also did some coding, mainly
data containment and helper classes, no real action code yet.

Anyway I was thinking across the following lines for the code:
* The whole game and rules logic is put into one module.
* Interface and networking code is put in another.

The basic idea behind that setup is to make reuse of the game engine easier. For example: the game could be released in 2 editions: a webservice version and a
frontended version for the DotGNU Jabber Client.

I personally think the aignments system is a little better than that of Magic, for a beginning Magic player it's often not really clear what's the difference between for example Red and Green. The differences between Bear (powerplay) and Fox (trickery) are evidential however and it's the same with Leopard and Turtle. There is also little confusion possible between for example Fox and Turtle,
since Fox is about trickery and Turtle about durability.

What do you think about this?



PS: You don't happen to know a good name for the game, do you? DotGNU-TCG is a
little boring.<dgtcg.tar.gz>

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]