Why am I playing a match-3?

[arcadetown]

Me playing a match 3?! Started playing 7 Wonders and man it's cool. Thought I just liked shooters and so forth. Mumbo Jumbo's done their homework again. The polish is great, graphics and colors excellent, action is good, and they've introduced some decent new items. Example of just one great touch, if a piece drops on one of those cute characters at the bottom he falls then 2 guys with a stretcher pick him up.

Definitely some great items worth looking at and examining here.

Edit: link here (http://gamehouse.com/gamedetails/?game=7wonders&navpage=downloadgames)

[soniCron]

No link? :)

[Leper]

Its in the Real Arcade top 10 I think (isnt it #1 right now?)

[soniCron]

Its in the Real Arcade top 10 I think (isnt it #1 right now?) Pardon. I hate having to load up that bloated RA client just to check out a game on their site. Any web links? ;)

EDIT: *un-lazies self* http://www.gamehouse.com/gamedetails/?game=7wonders

[DFG]

Hot Lava Games is the developer - http://www.hotlava.com/

[arcadetown]

Oh of course, didn't mean to pass over Hot Lava's great job. I imagine like any good publisher MJ and HL worked together to make the best possible.

[Grey Alien]

sigh, I'd better check it out. After the usual 1 good game drubbing I didn't bother to download it.

[Savant]

After the usual 1 good game drubbing I didn't bother to download it.
Owned. ;)

[berserker]

I downloaded because I saw it bashed @ 1goodgame so I thought it might be good. I liked graphics and especially music, but controls wasn't smooth enough for me and if I remember correctly you can't swap other gems while you have chain reactions. Overall - quite good, but not as fun as Jewel Quest or Big Kahuna Reef.

[Grey Alien]

can't swap other gems while you have chain reactions pah, that's pretty crap. I nearly didn't put it in min cos of the Christmas time constraints and I knew it was going to be a bitch to program, too many opportunities for bugs. But I knew it was a good thing to have and when I was making and testing the levels I was annoyed because I couldn't make swaps during chain reactions, so I added it in. Advanced players really like and expect that feature, someone even mentioned that they were pleased it was in my game in a review.

[edit] OK played it. It looks nice, but it's too slow. The inability to make matches during chain reactions is a pain. Also they have 6 shapes on the grid not the common 5, this makes it harder to complete the level and drop the blocks down etc. It's also not totally clear when you ahve clicked a bonus ready for swapping as they don't spin like the runes, they do highlight in some way, but it's not obvious. My 2 cents, anyway.

For the record, I prefer Jewel of Atlantis.

Beserker: Did you ever play Xmas Bonus, the later levels have a lot of ice and it works very much like your smashing of temple blocks etc. e.g. satisfying for the user.

[berserker]

Beserker: Did you ever play Xmas Bonus, the later levels have a lot of ice and it works very much like your smashing of temple blocks etc. e.g. satisfying for the user.

No, actually. I believe there are lot of good match-3 games worth checking out but I tried to limit my sources of inspiration to Bejeweled 2, Jewel Quest, and Big Kahuna Reef.

Speaking about number of jewels - I have 4 in first 5 or so introductionary levels. Then it is increased to 5 for almost whole game, then it increased again to 6 on the second part of the final map and few last levels has 7 and even 8 jewels on the same board for ultimate challenge.

[James C. Smith]

7 Wonders is a great game. The thing I noticed about it is that it doesn’t fix some of the standard definitions of "casual" games because it is not completely “accessible” to newbie’s. It is much more complicated than the typical match 3 games and it built on many previous games. If you have played Jewel Quest, it is just like that plus more which is just like Bejeweled plus more. This is great for the experienced match 3 players who want to take it to the next level. But at some point this trend will make games become less accessible to newcomers and require more prior knowledge. I think we are witnessing the creation of starting a generation of hard core match 3 players.

I am not saying 7 Wonder is too hard to learn or too hard to play. I just find it amusing that “casual” games have evolved to the point where they no longer fit the original definitions (http://www.gamasutra.com/features/gdcarchive/2003/Meretsky_Steve.ppt) about being accessible with no prior knowledge and being played by people who don’t self identify as gamers.

[soniCron]

Interesting you should mention that, James, because I'd recently been riding that same train of thought. I think we're going to be witnessing a new group of core gamers grow and evolve, not unlike what we saw in the 80's. In fact, I suspect most portals will eventually drive their content toward these new core gamers and huge segments of the population will again remain unfed. The first time it only took 10 years for mainstream gaming to identify its core audience and lock out the rest, and we may see a similar trend here. Be on the lookout for a new casual gaming market in the future! :)

[Grey Alien]

Beserker: Yeah I stuck with 5 all the way through. I did consider less, but it takes too long to compute a starting level with no matches at random on older PCs (maybe I need a better method). Also 6 was playable but 7 was a plain pig, so hard. Let alone 8!!!

James: Interesting, I made a post in another thread about beta testing how I am making my new game have the elements that experienced match-3 players want and expect because they are the core market really. New players would be nice as well of couse, but the bulk will be gamers who kinda know what to expect. I don't rate 7 wonders as a hardcore match-3 game though, yes it has some non-standard elements, but without the option to make matches as shapes are falling down, this will put a lot of players off - it put me off. It's not the only one though, quite a few are missing this vital mechanic.

[soniCron]

I did consider less, but it takes too long to compute a starting level with no matches at random on older PCs (maybe I need a better method). If I understand what you are saying, here is what I do: As I'm iterating through the playfield, I loop the selection of a color while the color equals the color of the two before or after, above or below it. For example:
for (i = BOARD_WIDTH; i < BOARD_WIDTH; i++) {
for (j = BOARD_HEIGHT; j < BOARD_HEIGHT; j++) {
do {
jewels[i][j] = RandomColor();
} while ((jewels[i][j] == jewels[i - 1][j] && jewels[i][j] == jewels[i - 2][j]) || (jewels[i][j] == jewels[i + 1][j] && jewels[i][j] == jewels[i + 2][j])
|| (jewels[i][j] == jewels[i][j - 1] && jewels[i][j] == jewels[i][j - 2]) || (jewels[i][j] == jewels[i][j + 1] && jewels[i][j] == jewels[i][j + 2])
}
}
It's sloppy and lazy, but it does the job every time. Let me know if this helps. (You weren't creating a board, clearing matches, filling, repeating... were you?)

Back on topic: I think it's great that we're starting to see some of these gamers blossom into maturity. (As far as gaming is concerned, anyway! ;)) And the success of 7 Wonders shows this isn't a tiny segment of the market, so it may be possible to fully explore these new core gamers. It's interesting to note that we're finding overlaps between traditional core gamers (Brian Fisher) and these new core, casual gamers. Perhaps we'll see some sort of marriage of the two gamers in the future?

[tentons]

I just find it amusing that “casual” games have evolved to the point where they no longer fit the original definitions (http://www.gamasutra.com/features/gdcarchive/2003/Meretsky_Steve.ppt) about being accessible with no prior knowledge and being played by people who don’t self identify as gamers.
Is it that they don't self identify as gamers, or is it simply that there didn't used to be many games that appealed to their personalities? Ie, less goal-oriented, less competition-based, less male fantasy centered games.

It's an important difference because not knowing you like games implies you stumbled onto it, happened to like it, but may not play another game again--which fits the non-gamer customer who would indeed not have previous knowledge. Whereas wanting games but not finding any that appeal to you implies there are game styles that need to be invented to fill an underserved demand--which fits what may become a "hardcore" gamer of a certain style that appeals to different sensiblities and preferences that AAA games don't fulfill.

Well, I know what I mean. :) Sorry if I'm incoherently babbling.

[Bmc]

Is it that they don't self identify as gamers, or is it simply that there didn't used to be many games that appealed to their personalities? Ie, less goal-oriented, less competition-based, less male fantasy centered games.

I'd say casual games are more goal oriented, not less...

[James C. Smith]

The point is that it is changing. Three or four years ago it was more true that these people did not self identify as gamers. You could debate the reasons or the semantics if you want. But my point is that it seems less true today than it was a few years ago. Now many of these people are actively seeking out games similar to their favorites and reviewing the games in terms of each other. Now they seem more likely to admit that they like to play games.

“Back in the day” the casual game players were finding lots of games that they liked to playing them many hours per day. They plead the hell out of computer games like solitary, collapse, cubis, and bejeweled. But if you asked them to list their hobbies and interests, they almost never listed computer games. They never called themselves a gamer even though they played games for hours per day every day. I feel like that is changing now. But I guess I don’t have any evidence. The games getting more complex, and building on past experiences, is not necessarily changing how or if the customers identify themselves.

[arcadetown]

Ask me it's a good thing as games from 3 - 4 years ago absolutely lacked any depth and felt like done that way simply to smash something out on a shoestring budget (whether done for that reason or not). Judging by latest releases don't think we're to the level that games have become too complex yet as innovative new features still seem the exception and not the norm. A good game should have proper self help features such as popup help bubbles where appropriate anyhow.

[Coyote]

I was musing about this phenomenon just last month:

http://www.rampantgames.com/blog/2006/02/id-like-more-casual-in-my-hardcore.html

A couple years ago I was referring to casual games as "entry-level" games. I was shot down a few times on using that term on the basis that your average Bejeweled player is not going to graduate or progress to Unreal Tournament 2004.

It does make me wonder a bit. Right now "casual" games are synonymous with "action-puzzle" style games, with the match-three style games leading the pack. But will those become more hardcore, and will a new genre of game end up becoming the "new" casual game? I have a tough time imagining it, but who knows?

[Leper]

Why am i playing a match3?


I was just going to ask you the same thing!! Uninstall that game right this minute, you are in big trouble Mister. :p

[tentons]

A couple years ago I was referring to casual games as "entry-level" games. I was shot down a few times on using that term on the basis that your average Bejeweled player is not going to graduate or progress to Unreal Tournament 2004.
I'm not sure that necessarily follows, though. The gameplay in UT (intense pressure, skill-based, beating someone through direct competition, very obvious win/lose condition) satisfies a very different taste than many casual games (relaxing pace, no direct competition, vague win/lose condition). I think we have to learn to create gameplay that caters to different sensibilities rather than try to "convert" people (or hope they convert themselves) to a particular style of gameplay.

Maybe we'll eventually see "casual" games differentiated from "mass market" games, with the difference being the casual players are indeed casual (want a way to relax for a few minutes) and the mass market players are more hardcore, albeit toward a set of mechanics not found in current AAA games like UT.

Whatever the case, I agree with all who say it's a good thing. I'd love to see simple/pure gameplay stacked a little deeper and taken in new directions but still succeed financially.

[Andy]

removed comment - don't want to start flames again!

I mostly write the message but don't press Submit Reply button Paul. Helps a lot... :D

[Bmc]

I mostly write the message but don't press Submit Reply button Paul. Helps a lot... :D

haha :) I do that alot too.

[tentons]

I'd say casual games are more goal oriented, not less...
I agree that was a poor choice of term. Maybe I meant Lazzaro's (http://www.xeodesign.com/about.html) "Easy Fun" type of gameplay that many casual games offer.

[Sharpfish]

I mostly write the message but don't press Submit Reply button Paul. Helps a lot... :D

I go through stages. last year I just posted anything I thought of. Then there was the great "signal to noise ratio" debate, after that I also would type things in.. edit them, reword them then think "oh forget it!" and just not bother replying.

Though of late my posts per day have risen again I am trying to curb it as I am entering a critical stage of my game's development, the "stop messing around on the internet and get it done" stage ;)

And now, I've added once more to the SNR I appletize and I'll leave. :)

[Grey Alien]

(You weren't creating a board, clearing matches, filling, repeating... were you?)

uh ... noooo .... (looks guilty) ... whatever made you think that ... /shuffles away to modify code. cue sniggering and finger pointing from other forum members. Actually it was a case of I had a routine to fill the board at random, and another to check the entire board for matches and not wanting to write more code I just fill/check in a loop until it's OK, normally after <5 times.

[Leper]

drop the mouse and turn away from your computers slowly.

[Grey Alien]

gotta lol at that Matt :-) Hmm this is a one liner post, not usually allowed, but it was funny.

[Leper]

ROFL Grey I cant help myself xD