Comments on: The future is not our’s you see

By: J C Lawrence

J C Lawrence — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 17:56:14 +0000

I agree. Speculation can take many forms from probabilities of card draws to dice, prediction of other players or any system uncontrolled by the player that can affect the player’s position. At a larger level this is what distinguishes trivial/tactical games from the more interesting strategic games. The more interesting games force players to make decisions into an uncertain future.

By: Peer

Peer — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:26:56 +0000

For me a game were you try to deliver something now, its a game were you just try to optimize a route etc. An economic game must have an element of speculation

By: J C Lawrence

J C Lawrence — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 08:50:34 +0000

Currently I'm not intending to represent market distance/FoB, just time. Rather the geographic element will commit players to a specific pattern of advantaged investment opportunities (ie extensions of their current pattern) while representing disadvantages for moving on an unfamiliar market. None of this is cast in stone -- it is still very early days and the basic game shape is still incoherent outside of a few principles.

Unfortunately I've not played any of the games you reference.

By: ToddD

ToddD — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:48:47 +0000

Do the players also have the ability to begin moving the market to the desired location(s) of their impending futures contracts? (Naive example, trying to move Fische Fluppen Frikadellen's market up for goods you already possess...)

I like the idea of setting up contracts to fire in the future (sort of like MtG's cards with Suspend, or WoW:tAG's time Rondel, if I've read the description of it correctly).

I don't know if you ever played Final Fantasy Tactics back in the day, but it was fairly common to be firing off abilities that weren't going to resolve immediately, leading to a delightful sequence of turn order adjustments.