Game Development Reference
In-Depth Information
type of game, in which the player faces one or more opponents (even artificial
ones), is called a player-versus-player (PvP) game. The second type is a player-versus-
environment (PvE) game. As you look at the techniques for balancing a game, note
how they differ between PvP and PvE games.
A well-balanced game of either type, PvP or PvE, possesses the following
characteristics:
The game provides meaningful choices. If the game allows the player to
choose from several possible strategies for approaching the game's challenges, no
strategy should be so much more effective than the others that there is no point in
ever using a different one. If such a dominant strategy exists, it indicates a poorly
balanced game. When a game gives a player a choice of strategies, each strategy
must have a reasonable chance of producing victory. The later section “Avoiding
Dominant Strategies” discusses such strategies.
The role of chance is not so great that player skill becomes irrelevant. This
does not mean that a player cannot have bad luck, but in the long run—over the
course of a long game or over the course of many short games—a better player
should be more successful than a poor one.
A well-balanced PvP game also possesses the following qualities:
The players perceive the game to be fair. As Chapter 1, “Games and Video
Games,” explained, the exact meaning of fairness varies among different players.
The later “Making PvP Games Fair” section addresses this further.
Any player who falls behind early in the game gets a reasonable opportu-
nity to catch up again before the game ends. The definitions of early in the game
and a reasonable opportunity vary depending on how long the designer expects a
game to last. If a player falls behind in the first 10 minutes of a 2-hour game and
the rules give him no chance to catch up, most players would perceive that game as
unfair, and a game designer would describe that game as poorly balanced. Similarly,
a game that the designer intends to last 2 hours but that someone invariably wins
in 15 minutes also gives other players no time to catch up or even to test their skill.
These imbalances often indicate problems with positive feedback, a game feature
that the later section “Understanding Positive Feedback” discusses.
The game seldom or never results in a stalemate, particularly among players
of unequal ability. A stalemate disappoints players because their efforts produce no
victor. If stalemates occur frequently among players of unequal ability, the game
violates the principle that player skill should influence the outcome more than any
other factor. Chess, though a well-balanced game, can still end in a stalemate, but
this seldom happens between players of unequal ability. Other games, such as back-
gammon, make stalemates impossible. “Understanding Positive Feedback”
addresses this.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search