• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

114 Neutral

About derech

  • Rank
  1. @plethora - thank for the tip, this is an interesting direction that can do the job, the only minus to that is that it happens after the abuse was made. I'm trying to thing also in the direction of creating the conditions in which the wanting to abuse won't arise as much in the first place.   @Swiftcoder - I agree with you on the restriction on Journey, it was an example to show a good experience with strangers... I won't be going this direction of constraining though. WAY is less constrained, since there are more communication options in the game play, mainly through gestures. I don't really know of free communication as part of the core game play (chat/skype in games like MMO's are a supportive channel, not the main thing). Can it be that allowing free conversation as the main gameplay is a big NO-NO? otherwise, why it hasn't been done yet (as far as I know). A free conversation is one the peaks of human experience - can it be put in a game? In card games there are examples of great design for freedom without abusing ("Once upon a time" is a great example) - but in the digital realm I don't know of any. Draw Something is the closest I know - and it's communicating with drawings, not text...
  2. Thanks for the great replies!   @YrjoP - I like the idea of the performance based match making, but isn't it more effective on the long run, after the player has been playing a while? I totally agree with you that I don't want to prevent anything, more to design an environment in which people can feel comfortable and engaged enough to just play without thinking to much on how to cheat or abuse the system. As for matching asymmetrically - do you have an example or reference? I'd love to see how it manifests...    @swiftcoder - I agree with you that playing against your friends is much easier than to play the rest of the world. Still - don't you think that playing with strangers has a lot of advantages as well? I want to believe that the abuse option is a risk factor that needs to be carefully addressed and designed. Playing games like "Way" or "Journey" is a good example in that manner.   @japro - this is a great example! that's why I'm looking more into the psychological direction, rather designing some rigid constraining feature that will cost a lot and won't hold long.   In short, I believe it can be done, when less focusing on building constraints, and more focusing on allowing the right conditions...
  3. Hello everybody! I'm struggling for days now with a design issue, maybe you can help? I'm trying to build a Q&A game, in which people can type freely their answers (instead of choosing from predefined answers). The problem is that giving freedom to type can open possibilities for abusing the system (i.e for the question "what's your favorite movie?" someone can answer "I love cock"). I came up with these solutions, but they don't feel right: - use report / block button - rating features - use auto-completion to help steer the answers - use algorithm that prevents the use of "bad words" - focus on asking interesting questions, so people won't get board and consider abusing - having random players play with their Facebook profile name revealed - or just do the most engaging game, and trust people   Can you think of design elements/ features/ psychological elements that can lower / eliminate this issue of abuse without damaging the freedom of expression?   For me, It would be great if the abuse level will be like in Draw Something, but it will be a disaster if it will look like Chat Roulette"   Any thoughts or directions will help a lot. Thanks a lot!