Bibliography Task - Gender in Games

Bibliography 

~ Introduction to Critical Game Studies Task ~

 I've decided to do my bibliography based on gender within the games industry and games in general. I find this subject quite interesting as there are so few female games designers working within the industry and on our course itself. I wanted to know more on why there is such a huge divide between the numbers of male and female game designers and hopefully get a better understanding of why females don't get more involved in it.

Studies have shown that both female and male sexes show the same amount of interest in games at preschool age but as they get older females tend to lose interest where as males become more involved or as involved with games.

Its thought that this could be because most games are tailored for the male market or at least mainly focusing on the male market over the female. Its also noted that males are more competitive in nature than females and find games more rewarding in the sense of achieving a goal where as females are more complacent with just playing the game more than actually beating it.

This isn't totally accurate for everyone that plays games, male or female. But on the wider scope of things this is the general consensus of the games industry and the players themselves. Through my many years of playing MMO's I've met many people from all over the world, both male and female and I have to agree that there is a clear difference of play styles between the two genders within games. Understanding that every ones style of play is different is key to this research but the scales tip more towards male by a large margin when we looking at how many male vs female gamers there are and who plays the most.

Is this by design? Do we really tailor games to a male audience by default that push female's out of games from an early age? or is it just human nature?

 References :

Cooper, J. & Weaver, K.D. 2003, Gender and computers: understanding the digital divide, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (NJ).

Ivory, J.D. 2006, "Still a man's game: Gender representation in online reviews of video games", Mass Communication & Society, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 103-114.

Kafai, Y.B. 2008, Beyond Barbie and Mortal Kombat: new perspectives on gender and gaming, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.

Ray, S. G. (2004) Gender inclusive game design: expanding the market. Hingham (Ma): Charles River Media.

Wang, H. & Wang, Y. 2008, "Gender differences in the perception and acceptance of online games", British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 787-787.

"Gender and computer games: Exploring females' dislikes", 2006, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 0-0.

Natural Funativity

Natural Funativity

~ Noah Falstein ~

The Natural Funativity article written by Noah Falstein found here explores what makes a game fun by means of researching into how fun has developed throughout human evolution, technological and social advancements.

We begin by looking back to our evolutionary history and how we today still share our survival and reproductive natures with are ancestors, along side our need for social interactions. All these natural instincts establish and maintain our place in our community and the human race. It is widely agreed that most of our underlying instincts were shaped during the time of our hunter-gatherer ancestors and their predecessors.

Understanding the basic instincts of humans might sounds far fetched from what makes a game fun but they can be closely linked with one another at a deeper level than simply enjoyment, entertainment or pass time. Play goes deep into our human history and in other species, for example dogs and cats play fight at a young age to prepare themselves for hunting and fighting later in life. Maybe not a skill they need anymore as most dogs and cats are domesticated these days but it was a important skill to learn for their ancestors that would have to hunt and fight in order to survive.

Its this natural instincts to play to learn that humans and other species share which develop us and prepare us for later life. Due to the human brain and complex social structures we have, this causes us to extend that play well into our maturity.

"Anyone who thinks there is a difference between education and entertainment doesn't
know the first thing about either."
- Marshall McLuhan, Communications Theorist

Learning in the fashion of play has been long thought to be the safest and most efficient way to learn. When we put it into the context of our hunter-gather ancestors its fairly simple to see that by going out and hunting is very dangerous and if you have not prepared yourself prior you can easily be injured or worse. By play fighting or simply practice throwing or tracking in a safe environment (and usually in forms of simple games) it will enhance you hunting skills without ever putting you into the danger of actually going out to hunt in the wild.

Physical Fun

The simplest place to see a connection between our evolutionary heritage and games and entertainment is in the physical arena. Our primary urge is the survival instinct. Anything that directly threatens our survival automatically commands out full attention. Its not surprising that games, and in fac most of entertainment use themes of survival to similarly capture the attention of players.

Physical fun also covers the instincts to gather, there are a huge number of popular entertainment that involve gathering. Casinos (money), collecting items E.g cards, art, cars. In video games, ever since Pac-Man started gobbling little dots, we've moved on to collecting hearts, coins, stars and Pokemon.

Exploration and use of tools or mastering our tools is another instinct humans have inherited from our ancestors. The desire to see exotic places or a more local exploration, finding the best places to get specific resources (food, shelter etc). Mastering out tools which we now associate with keyboard and mouse, controllers and hardware. Learning to use a bow & arrow or a fishing net to our hunter-gather ancestors hold the same value but in a different form.

Social Fun

Evolution focuses not just on the survival of individuals, but also the issue of reproduction and all the associated matters of meeting and attracting mates. Online multiplayer games and the persistent popularity of playing single-player games in group settings have brought about a new social aspect to games and reinforce our natural instinct to socialize, form groups and interact with each other.

Humans are tribal in nature and and use the skill of language to not only socialize but to learn from one another. Either it be through straight forward information or through storytelling, its a key factor in our need to survive. The uniquely human ability to pass on stories and thereby learning important practical, moral and social lessons has been invaluable to us.

Mental Fun

Our intelligence is what links all of the physical and social instincts together and has made us evolve over time through learning. Its what makes us capable of learning and understanding what we just learnt, its what seperates us from all the other animals and makes us human.

Learning patterns within games and then mastering them is linked to our need to survive. This is because we are using our brains and working them out to better understand the task or problem at hand. It helps us solve problems, differentiate one thing from another and then act upon our understanding.

The more you know and understand within a game the better chance you have of beating it, this holds true to our hunter-gatherer ancestors when applied to their need to survive by hunting, tracking and mating.

My Thoughts

 I'm a big fan of psychology and human nature. I don't think a day goes by when I don't think about what makes us all the way we are and more specifically myself or the people around me. Either it be what we say, do or act I find it really interesting. This article does a great job of explaining how our natural instincts have a direct affect on out concept of fun and the need to play to learn, or in other words having fun to survive. Even though we live in an age that we don't necessarily have to go out and hunt deer with a bow & arrow anymore, its plain to see how our need to learn patterns in a game and the tools we use in and out of them creates the state of play and learning.

I know we touched on patterns within games and how we can use them to influence the player within the game and I though it was great how the two articles linked together like this. The Space of Possibility and Pacing in Casual Game Design paper can be found here (last paragraph).

MUD's & Player Types

Players Who Suit MUD's

~ Richard A. Bartle ~

 This article is the result of a lengthy discussion of MUD players that was sparked by the question "What do people want out of a MUD?"

Players of all play styles and walks of life contributed to the thread and was used to break down what types of players there are within MUD's and games in general. The thread was then broken down to better understand what people seek within the game.

First we break down players into four different types of users, which means different play styles, goals and experience in the game. These are achievers, explorers, socialisers and killers.

Achievement within the game

Players give themselves game-related goals, and vigorously set out to achieve them. This usually means accumulating and disposing of large quantities of high-value treasure, or cutting a swathe through hordes of mobiles (Ie. monsters built in to the virtual world)

Exploration of the game

Players try to find out as much as they can about the virtual world. Although initially this means mapping its topology (ie. exploring the MUD's breadth), later it advances to experimentation with its physics (ie. exploring the MUD's depth).

Socialising with others

Players use the game's communicative facilities, and apply the role-playing that these engender, as a context in which to converse (and otherwise interact) with their fellow players.

Imposition upon others

Players use the tools provided by the game to cause distress to (or, in rare circumstances, to help) other players. Where permitted, this usually involves acquiring some weapon and applying it enthusiastically to the persona of another player in the game world.

Often players can be a mix of different types as we are all different but generally speaking most players have a primary style of play and mix with other styles to advance in their primary style or goal.

Achievers usually set goals for them self, like high-score boards or achievement points. Explorers like to find new things and explore the unknown. Socials are generally more casual and like the interaction with other players more so than the game itself. Killers set goals of killing other players.

The amount of each type of player within a MUD varies depending on the game itself as the player needs the tools to do what they want to do as their primary goal. For example a achiever probably wouldn't play or enjoy a game that has no scoring system he can show off to other players. A killer wouldn't enjoy a none PvP game that was for socializing and exploration.

                               ACTING
               Killers            |               Achievers
                                  |
                                  |
                                  |
                                  |
                                  |
       PLAYERS -------------------+------------------- WORLD
                                  |
                                  |
                                  |
                                  |
                                  |
             Socialisers          |               Explorers
                             INTERACTING

Group Decision and My Thoughts

This article was written regarding a MUD back between the late 80's and early 90's which at the time was a relativity new game concept using the newly found internet. As this was a very early paper on MUD's the player base was significantly smaller than what we see in today's MUD and MMO games. Its important to remember that this is just a basic taxonomy based on a small amount of users within the game and as today's games have a lot larger player base it brings about different player types and styles depending on the game.

The most important thing for me that I've taken from this paper is the idea of balancing a game depending on your target audience and how each player style can directly and in-directly effect one another. For example how socialisers like achievers as they can help create a social environment and start talking points or how killers like explorers because they can find things within the game to will help the killers kill more.

I personally see myself as more of a achiever within games but find myself crossing over to all aspects at one time or another but for only one reason, to achieve more.    

Group Project S2+S3

Group Project

~ Sprint 2 & Sprint 3 ~

So in the last two weeks of the group project we have done quiet a lot to the game and its really coming together, some might say it resembles a game.

We've now started to work in one weekly sprints to break down the work load over the month before the big presentation with all the tutors. I feel this system is working well for us as we can see improvements and bug's as we progress through the sprint instead of adding almost 4 weeks worth of work in one go then finding something is wrong in the last minute. 

Our group managers have organized a play test sessions today for the general public at the Uni and I'm very much looking forward to getting a lot of feedback from people that haven't played the game, provided its constructive feedback of course.

Due to feedback from tutors and other students that have already play tested we've made a lot of adjustments. Here just a small list of what has been changed, added, re worked and needed testing so far :-

• Two Play Versions 

                       ( X & Z phase controls)
                       ( Space on & off phase controls)

• Levels 1-10 implemented
• Phase Power Bar Resets Upon Re-spawn
• New Character Model
• New Walking/Jumping Animations
• Cloud Animation
• Shooting Stars Animation
• Tutorial Animations & Adjustments

Overall very productive so far over the last two weeks and I think our whole group feels the game is ready for public testing so we can start building upon what we have already and improve were needed. Please just remember this is a VERY early build to the game and we still have many more months to complete the project.

I leave you with the level art done within these two sprints for levels 5-10.

                                                                                  

< Level 5                           Level 6 >

                                                               Level 7

< Level 8                           Level 9 >                                      

Level 10

you can play test our game and leave feedback at www.waterfrontgames.com

Space of Possibility and Pacing in Casual Game Design

 Marcos Venturelli

As causal game design is a large discussion, only aspects relevant to pacing are emphasized in this paper. This paper aims to help understand what makes casual games so special and help understand what makes up a so-called "casual" game, and also build upon a vocabulary towards them.

Casual games have been labelled as “games that generally involve less complicated game controls and overall complexity in terms of gameplay or investment required to get through the game”. but for the purpose of this work "casual games" will be considered "Games that offer the possibility of pick up and play and experiences that can be enjoyed in small bursts and interrupted by players without penalty or perceived penalty". This is because not all "casual games" are less complex in terms of mechanics involved and can become increasingly difficult over time.

Pacing - The rhythm of the game, the relative speed at which the different moving parts of the system are put in motion. by indirectly crafting the player experience - through mechanics, aesthetics and dynamics - to create relaxation, tension and repetition, the designer "paces" the game.

Restricting the Space of Possibility - Designing a game is designing a space of possibility. It is the creation of a structure that will play out in complex and unpredictable ways. It is the collection of all possible actions and outcomes inside the design space of the game - all actions and outcomes artificially made possible by the system.

Player Experience - When playing a game, the player is trying to figure out patterns within it, to make it easier, we do with naturally as humans in all aspect of life to help us understand and overcome. According to Koster [2005], “the natural instinct of a game player is to make the game more predictable because then they are more likely to win”. Taking the definition of “fun” as being “pleasure with surprises”[Schell 2008], when there are no more surprises, there is no more fun. If all the patterns have been figured out, the game becomes uninteresting.

Concepts of  Pacing

Movement Impetus - Movement Impetus, is the will or desire of a player to move forward through a level. Most importantly, it determines how willing the player is to make “advancement decisions”, thus representing his interest in keep playing.

Tension - Tension is the perceived danger that a player might become the weakest side on the conflict. Aesthetic resources such as graphics and sound can be used to increase or decrease Tension.

Threat - Threat is generated on the level of game mechanics, existing as the power struggle tips in favor of the system or the player's opponent(s).

Tempo - Tempo is the “intensity” of play. It is the time between each significant decision made by the player.

 A game that is too simple will get boring fast – players will quickly figure out the patterns and move on to other game or activity. This is what happens to most casual games available in PC flash game portals. However, making it complex will require more time for the player to master its patterns, consequently slowing down Tempo, which reduces Player Impetus. Maintaining this approach will lead to an inevitable Catch-22 while trying to find a “right balance” or a “sweet spot” between small and large spaces of possibility.

Perceivable Pattern of Continuous Learning - A player must be seduced to agree with his or hers entrance on the game experience, but it is also necessary to continuously seduce him or her to stay there. A game can be presented in a way that  new patterns can be quickly absorbed and mastered, and allowing the players to realize that there will be new patterns to be learned in the near future. There should be a time to learn and time to play.

Dramatic Game Dynamics

Tools for Creating Dramatic Game Dynamics

~ Notes on Marc LeBlanc ~

 The power of games as a story vehicle is not a new idea. Many acient games (such as Senet) tell a story of passage through the underworld to the land of the dead. In some cases of these games they are perceived to be divination which tells you your story or possible outcome via the game. This was covered in the Royal game of Ur studies as a possible starting point of the game and maybe continued tradition throughout its life cycle.

Creating drama within a game is compounded by our limited control over the game we create. This is because we don’t know or cant see how our game will play out in precise detail each time it is played. We can only implement mechanics and dynamics within a game to which create drama. You could also say some aesthetics create drama and/or enhance its dominance within a game such as Challenge in FPS games or Expression & Discovery in the Final Fantasy series.

In order to discover ways in which to make our game more dramatic we must understand how drama usually works and how we see drama in stories, computer games, movies, cards games etc. We use the dramatic arc for this which visualizes the rising and falling of a well-told story. 

The drama starts with conflict which creates tension that will accumulate as the story builds to a climax and then dissipates as the conflict is resolved. This diagram is only used to explain how drama within a narrative works, we cant actually measure tension but it is important to get a idea of how it increases over time till the climax and then resolves shortly after at a much quicker pace than the tension was built.

We can break down the dramatic tension into to uncertainty and inevitability to better understand how we can create tension, climax then resolve throughout the narrative.

Uncertainty

Feedback System as Sources of Uncertainty -

The game state is all the information you would need to put in a save file for the game. This includes scores, positions, location, items, health, bullets left etc., anything needed to be known to continue the game in the same state as it was when saved.

The scoring function is the sensor of the cybernetic feedback system. This could be the score of kill/deaths in a FPS game, or the distance between player 1 & 2 on a racing game. Its a means of measuring who is winning and by how much.

The game mechanical bias is the actuator of the cybernetic feedback system. This rule determines which player gets an advantage over the other. For example giving the losing race car a small speed boost to help catch up or giving the lead scorer a bonus as reward.    

The controller is the comparator of the cybernetic feedback system. This rule chooses which player receives the game mechanical bias and bases its decision on the scoring function.

We can use this system to create dramatic tension by driving the scoring function closer to zero or a tie as this creates uncertainty and tension on the way to the climax. The ultimate goal of this system is to keep the game as even as possible to create the drama and tension throughout the game and used as a safe guard against one player totally dominating the game.

We can also use this system in a positive way to aid the climax of the game. Due to the mechanical bias used throughout play it can stagnate who is winning or losing and we can ensure the climax is reached by giving the mechanical bias to the leader to dispel the uncertainty of the end result. We see this in many forms such as RTS games where you get more resources if you win the battle over it or you get to pick up all the speed boosts in Mario kart if your in first as no one is in front taking them before you. This process dispels the dramatic uncertainty and creates a sense of closure, preparing you for the win and the losers to lose.

Pseudo-Feedback 

 Quite frequently, these sorts of mechanism create game dynamics that appear as if the game were being driven by a negative feedback system when one player takes the lead but quite frequently the other player(s) will catch up. This is just a perception of a cybernetic feedback system as there isn’t one.

 

Escalation - This mechanic is when the score changes faster and faster over the course of play, so that there are more points at stake at the end of the game than at the beginning. This is best explained using game shows were questions answered by teams are worth less at the start than they are at the end. The lead team by half time may of answered more questions and have more points but in the second half the behind team answer only a few question correctly but draw scores or go ahead.

Hidden Energy - A example of this would be a power boost you can use at your command which is hidden from your enemy, much like nitro boost in racing games or a absorb shield in fantasy shooting games. The lead player may be ahead but that could be down to he/she has already used his hidden power and the currently losers have not. This gives the illusion of the leader winning until the other players use theirs the outcome is uncertain. 

Fog of War - This represents a way of creating dramatic uncertainty by limiting the information available to the players. At the beginning of the game, players cannot predict the outcome of the contest because they aren't given enough information. As the game progresses, more and more information becomes available and the outcome of the game seems more and more certain.

Cashing Out - This is a game mechanic where the score of the game is reset to zero. Best described in games such as bomberman where you have to win a set amount of games to be declared the winner. Each time a new game is started all players start on a even playing field and have just as much chance of winning as each other. The only thing taken over from each game is the score to the last winner of a game like a tally.

Inevitability

 Uncertainty alone is not sufficient enough to create dramatic tension, we also need dramatic inevitability, the sense that the contest is moving forward towards a conclusion (resolve). We can use mechanics to measure the progress of a game as well as give a sense of how far away the end might be, The players will feel propelled towards the conclusion of the contest. Using timers or clock to measure time or count down time is a example of this. Other mechanics that convey inevitability are a ever increasing crowded game board, a dwelling deck of cards, decreasing health bars or diminishing resources.

All of these give a sense of progression through the game, warning us that the end is approaching. We look at these as a type of ticking clock and the time it is counting down is the resource that’s non-renewable. These mechanics are a non-reversible processes which bring the game to its conclusion while at the same time prohibiting backward movement. Its important that for a ticking clock mechanic such as these to be perceived as one, its must be apparent and understand as one by the player(s).

 

 Resolving Dramatic Tension

The climax of the game should occur at the moment of realization, when uncertainty is dispelled and the outcome of the contest is known. Given this, the climax should happen as late as possible to let tension build to make a more dramatic climax occur. We need to ensure that the climax is meet and all players know this otherwise it can be see to be left unresolved at the end of the game. A clear winner or condition needs to be meet.

 My Thoughts

Great read, very in-depth and informative. I found it fairly easy to relate a lot of games and movies to this essay, especially the ticking clock and resources mechanic to give a sense of inevitability and progression. This reading made me think about the quote "it's not about the destination, it's about the journey" and I think its partly true in the sense you need to build up the tension along the journey to feel satisfied with the end result and using tools like this to create a more dramatic dynamic/aesthetic to the game you can balance and shape it depending on what play style you are going for.

Group Project - S1 - Pt2

Group Project - Sprint One .Pt2 

So over this weekend I'll be getting on with some group project work that I've been assigned by my group managers (Bradley Smith & Joe Easter). Haven't honestly done much over this week for it so I've got quiet a bit to catch up on for the MVP (Minimal Viable Product) presentation on Wednesday.

One of the tasks I've kind of been avoiding a bit has been the animation of the character, there’s two reasons for this. One, I've never animated anything before and have no idea where to start other than doing it in flash. Two, I dislike my character. Nevertheless I'll give it a go.

After reading up on animating and watching a few tutorial video's I started to break my character down into sections in photoshop to link them up via the skeleton tool in flash later on. This task was tedious as the character wasn't really built to be broken up like this so I had to do a lot of aesthetic mending as I did it. What I'm walking away from this with is understanding that to animated characters in flash your better off either doing the character in flash itself or doing the character in PS and making the sections as you go (hands, arms, body, waist, legs etc.). This will ease the process later on. I'm also thinking doing a character in Illustrator would be another easier way as it works like flash in terms of vector art but has a lot more tools than flash does.

Once I’d imported the PS file into flash I started to assemble my character and linking them via the skeleton tool. After a few hours of simply messing around with the character and learning how to use the key-frames I was able to make a semi passable walking character for the MVP. The full length of the walking cycle is 24fps so that’s 1 second long but looped.

Note : Unfinished, this was totally a test of animating

 You can find the animation here : CLICK ME! Or here : CLICK ME!

Truth be told, it wasn't completely smooth sailing. I encountered a lot of issues when importing the character via PS because there were small painted pixels in the sections that were making the image selection area a lot larger than the body part so I was forced to go back to PS to clean the art up. Found a good way of cleaning the art up quick as well with the cut selection tool so should prove to be useful in future.

The skeleton tool took quite a few hours to get the hang of as well but think I’ve learnt enough to feel comfortable in doing small animations like this and maybe with a easier and a in proportion character, make it a bit more realistic. Despite spending a good 6-8 hours on this animation I’m hoping we will redo the character design at a later date which means this is all in vain but at least it will show I've tried my hand at animation for the sprint and MVP.

Refine, Refine, Refine

If you haven't read the first part of my blog regarding the group project you can find it HERE. In the post I gave you a preview of the finished art style we will be using in the project, but alas I've found a few flaws in its design when implementing it into flash and a lot of the platform angels were off which will course issues later on in the game as the levels becoming more complex in design. So I've done quiet a bit of tweaking to the platforms and added a few more details into the background to really enforce this mysterious dark environment feeling.

Another thing that made me go back on my work was the adding of new techniques and learning how some tools work in photoshop that I wasn't previously aware of. Horrible feeling having to go back on work you previously thought to be complete but as the sprints almost over I've decided to do the changes now rather than have to do it in another sprint which may course issues.

In addition to the changes I've also done the 4th and final level of the sprint & started to compile a assets folder containing all the images I've used and designed for the game. This will enable anyone to make a level within the game graphically but of course you will still need the coding and knowledge of how we constructed the game.

< level 1                                              Level 2>

< Level 3                                            Level 4 >

While I was refining the levels a bit I kept in-visioning shooting stars random appearing across the sky and the birds flying off into the distance. Would be awesome to do something like that but will have to discuss this with the managers but even if they agree to do it I doubt we would do extra stuff like that till really late into the project as its just extra work that we may or may not be able to do.

Royal Game of Ur

Royal Game of Ur

The Royal Game of Ur was excavated from the Royal Cemetery of Ur by Sir Leonard Woolley between 1926 -1930. The tombs at Ur date from around 2,600BC which are located in southern Iraq.

The board is best described as sections with a larger body of squares (4x3) and a smaller body of squares (2x3) joined by a narrow neck with 2 squares in it (2x1).

This board type is recognized as the 3rd millennium BC version, the original version that all the later are based upon. Over time the game has changed shape but kept its fundamental race mechanic and rule set. 

This version is the second millennium BC version. but by straightening out the smaller body of squares (2x3) into a straight line it changed the game into a more aggressive and faster game. but still keeping the basic rules and mechanics as the original.

For this blog post I'll be using the original first millennium BC board as means to explain the rules and how they work with one another. I wanted to introduce you to the board first so you would see how it worked visually as I talked about it because sometimes trying to in-vision the game itself around the rules is very difficult, especially when the rules are complex and there may be multiple pieces involved during play.

The game is played by 2 persons, each controlling there own pieces around the board. The original game had white and black pieces (7 of each), each player would control a colour. For the sake of simplify this a little I'll refer to these as "units"

To determine how many squares you move we use four 4-sided dice or "d4". Each d4 has two marked corners and you will roll all four at the same time. The result of the rolls are how many of the marked corners are faced up added together.

We enter our units into the board from the lower right square of the larger body from this point of view or from the bottom left from the opposite point of view (see picture below) as the first square. Each player starts on opposite sides of the board. Once you have made your way into the board you have to share the middle lane and neck of the board with your opponent.

Now we have a means to move and the units we move around the board we need to understand how the pieces interact with the board and the board with them. I'll begin with the Rosette squares. There are 5 rosette squares on the board placed 2 in the larger body, 1 along the neck and 2 on the smaller body. When you land on these squares you are granted an extra turn as reward.  They have always been called rosette squares despite all the changes through the years and I thought I would keep that tradition with my board here. 

You are also aloud more than one unit on the board at a time. So in essence you are able to have as many units on the board as you like but they cannot inhabit the same square as each other. When you have rolled and you can choice which unit you wish to move. This includes moving a new unit onto the board.

The next mechanic we are introduced to is the capturing of your opponents pieces. If for instance your opponent has a unit 3 squares ahead of yours and you rolled a 3 you would land on the same square as them. In the event of this happening you would capture their unit which would mean that this unit will be returned to the player and would have to start from the beginning again. This can only happen in the middle lane of squares.

The last mechanic which is common among these types of games is the need to get the exact number to move the units off the board via the exit / finish. So if you are on the last rosette you will need to roll a 1 to exit or maybe if your on the first square entering the smaller body of squares you would need to roll a 4 to exit. the last square is not the exit but 1 over that square taking you off the board.

The end goal of the game is to get all of your 7 units through the board first.

A Brief History of Ur

• Excavated from the Royal Cemetery of Ur by Sir Leonard Woolley between 1926 -1930 
• The rules (written on tablet) were excavated in 1880 but unrecognized as this till 1956
• The clay tablet is the oldest known set of game rules in the world (dated 177bc)
• Has also been referred to as "the Game of 20 Squares" in various forms (you can guess why)
• The Second millennium version was played with only 5 units (original was 7)
• The Second millennium version was referred to as "Pack of Dogs" 
• Throwing stick were also found at the excavation at Ur. Thought to be used as a type of dice

Tactics & Game Play

Given the fact this game was made sometime around 2600bc the mechanics within the game are very in-depth and bring about a lot of tactical play by means of the dice rolls and which unit you move depending on your roll, how many squares there are, sharing the middle lane, taking of opponent pieces, having more than one piece each on the board at any given time and the rosette squares.

For example if you rolled and you could move a unit in front of your opponents unit you had to way up the odds / chance of them rolling the number needed to land on your unit (See Dice Diagram) or maybe this is the plan as you have a unit behind that would be 2 squares behind theirs if they got so lucky therefor putting one of your units in harms way to get rid of one of theirs.

By far the safest way to play is to not put your units ahead of your opponents but that wont win you the game. Your forced by the need to achieve the win to be more aggressive and tactical in your approach towards the game. The best tactic I can think of is to get each unit through the board as fast as possible before you bring another one one. 

Its easy to see why this game has been labeled as so many different types as it includes so many different dynamics. 

Different Types

Theres many different iterations to the game which is understandable since the game is so old. There are a few iterations I enjoy and understand why they would be into the game. Here just some of the changes that have been made to different types of the game.

• Having to go around the last smaller body of squares (not doing directly down on the last in the middle lane sqaure)
• Making rosette squares safe zones (units on rosette squares cannot be captured)
• Changing the shape of the board itself but keeping the same rules
• Different amount of units
• Different amount of dice rolls
• Not needing the exact number to exit
• Needing to roll a certain number to enter a new unit