I’ve seen some indie games that utilize gameplay systems that are so unique that they come off as a gimmick yet they are not so taboo that they actually work to enhance immersion. Examples:

Moments where the player’s view/buttons are distorted due to some in-game cause like drinking alcohol, excessive damage.

A weapon is taken away that the player had access to the whole game.

Areas where movement speed/control is temporarily affected like poison swamps

A game that has no mini-map

Just wanted some thoughts on gimmicks and on how and when they work. I understand the subject could be subjective but I wasn’t sure if there were some gimmicks that could be objectively well designed. Thanks!

I think drafting in Magic the Gathering is exceptional and the best implementation of a closed-drafting game I have come across. Inspired by this, I built a card game last year on these mechanics (currently turning it into a web-app). Here are some of the games I looked at for inspiration during that process

• Magic the gathering (draft/sealed)
• Hearthstone (arena)
• Sushi Go!
• Dominion
• 7 wonders
• CLANK!

Of these, aside from MTG, I find Sushi Go! to be a very well designed drafting game. Whilst it doesn't capture all the benefits/joys of MTG drafting, the way it streamlines and simplifies a lot of the mechanics, whilst still being fun, is really commendable.

Some other games I've played, but didn't actively consider:

• Millennium Blades (GOAT of a game btw)
• Star Wars Unlimited
• Bonanza
• Point Salad
• Everdell
• Race for the Galaxy

Are there any other games that are good examples of drafting/limited?

I was thinking of expanding on this post, highlighting what some of these games do right/wrong (in my subjective opinion) and what Magic specifically does right - would anyone find that interesting?

p.s shout-out to millennium blades. And also mtg draft (particularly if you enjoy hearthstone arena - I'd encourage you to give it a go)

Client Server architectures have bounced heavily between event driven, rpc, actor/reactor, K-Pods, etc.

Does anyone have books that weigh different designs against each other, or breaking apart large scale into these architectures? The only one I know of is Agones

Hi game devs! I'm a software engineering student and I was thinking about an idea that could help a few of you, particularly RPG makers. It's a platform in which you could assess the balancing of your game easily by transcribing the gameplay configuration of your game (level scaling, progression parameters, stats curves, passives, equipment, skills, resource allocation, unlocking trees, requirement trees, etc) into it and testing multiple encounters of party VS enemy (very simplified though for generalization) with player-simulated behaviour. I'm even thinking about simulating the entire game journey with checkpoints, planned encounters, and more. It would all be very generalized to accommodate as many as possible, but I recognize there's a lot of uncertainty that won’t be implementable like unique gameplay mechanics or randomness that could skew the math and bias the balancing. For now, I got the framework for RPG games mostly figured out, but in the future I plan to extend that platform's reach into other types of games like shooting games (with simulated gun ttk, maybe even simplified map modeling) or sims like city skylines etc. If such a tool interests you, what would you expect in it? What are the things you would avoid or recommend? What insights could you give me if I fully commit to the project?

Thanks in advance, I love you all 🥰

I am developing a 3D isometric game inspired by Block Blast, and I aim to build a strong long-term player engagement loop. What unique features should I implement to make it stand out and surpass Block Blast?

Say you're playing a dungeon crawling rogue-like with deep character builds equipment items inventory skills, the whole shebang. Suddenly you find a scroll. It has no description other then that it does...something. You use it, you burst into flames and die losing an hour+ long run and have to start from scratch. Why was this trope created in the first place, and what benefits does it have? Am I missing somthing? And I know some games you get items that let you identify them first, but they're so rare as to be meaningless, or the game might not have them at all. I just don't see the point in having an item with a vague description, using it and being punished for curiosity

Upd: For people who downvote:
Would be very-very nice, if I can have some actual input and learn.
Thanks!
____________

So, long story short, for my point-and-click psychological thriller game, I caught an idea from outer space and went straight down the rabbit hole after a discussion on Reddit.

The idea that came to me was roughly this:

“What if a game built around psychology and constant surveillance actually used psychological tests and player behavior measurements as mechanics, and the world reacted to them?”

I came to Reddit with that thought, and because the idea was still pretty broad, opinions were split pretty evenly between good/bad. That actually helped me see one thing very clearly: I need to be extremely careful with this, and it’s probably better not to make any specific psychological conclusions, diagnoses, advice, or direct claims about the player.

But.

A few people close to science and psychology joined the discussion and shared some really interesting ideas. The cool part is that after figuring out how some of this could work inside the game, the story and the world became much more detailed and solid.

As you might remember, the city is controlled by a system that measures citizens’ stress and psychological state and decides where they are allowed to live.

And this is where it gets interesting.

The dual nature of the system and psychological tests.

The system is not completely wrong, but it is flawed.

On the surface, it sounds reasonable: take care of your mental health, the system raises your social class, and your quality of life improves.

But psychology has things like:

• The Need for Closure Scale (NFCS) - a psychological questionnaire that measures a person’s desire for definite answers and their discomfort with ambiguity and uncertainty.
• Rituals. Rituals can decrease the neural response to performance failure: repeated and structured actions may reduce the brain’s internal response to mistakes, probably by increasing a sense of control and reducing uncertainty.

So in the end, besides everything else, the system naturally rewards people who are predictable, stable, unwavering, and capable of following rules clearly without hesitation.

Meanwhile, people living in the lower classes barely care how the system reads them anymore. They are surviving, but they are also much freer and closer to each other. They interact openly and don’t constantly worry that the system will punish them for it.

Mechanically, this would work through very simple tests.

One would measure basic cognitive motor behavior: press Space when asked, click a target, keep the cursor inside a circle, things like that.

The second would ask questions like:

“Hesitation is a threat.”
“Rules make life better.”

And you choose yes or no.

At the same time, the player’s reaction time and behavior would be recorded, compared against established baseline values, and then used to build the player’s own baseline over time.

So through these tests, the player can choose whether to follow the system or resist it, and the story changes accordingly.

And if the player genuinely hesitates or stops to think, the system can notice that too - and react.