next »

[Clockwise]

(Hi, this is my first post around here but I've been following these forums for a few months now!)

I've been thinking about creating a math-based puzzle game, and I'm curious if there is any interest outside of my own. I am a fan of game series like Dr. Brain and Professor Layton that are more like puzzle books compared to games like Braid, Antichamber, and Portal (although I do love these just as much.) The former tend to provide a more "modular" puzzle-solving experience--similar to doing math exercises at the end of a textbook chapter--complemented by an overworld and story of some kind. Generally, these games don't rely on player reflexes, and players are free of external pressure (such as time-restrictions or enemies.)

My aim would be to create a game that offered the same experience, but with a focus on interesting and fun math problems. At the moment I'm thinking about narrowing the scope of math problems to ones related to probability. Probability questions are easy to pose and understand, but at the same time may be excruciatingly difficult to solve--perfect for a puzzle game in my opinion!

With my current vision for the game, it is likely that a player would need the equivalent of at least an introductory-level university course in probability, although I'd also like to include detailed solutions and supplementary theory so players could learn as they need to.

Let me know your thoughts!

[SirNiko]

I think there'd be a lot of interest in something of this sort. As a lover of Professor Layton and logic problems in general, I'd certainly pick this up if it offered an interesting enough overworld and story.

Don't forget Spacechem, which falls somewhere near the Layton / Dr. Brain games.

You may also consider a tutorial intended to introduce a player to the concepts necessary to take the leap from high school mathematics to the difficulty in your game since it'll buy you the coveted "edutainment" designation.

The explanatory texts after some Layton puzzles may be especially useful here, since you can include notorious problems and explain unusual exceptions as you go along, in addition to the possibility of an "endless" mode that just randomly generates problems of different skill levels.

I think this thread would go better in the "Design" subforum, unless you have the ability and time to make the game, in which case you might graduate directly to devlog and start putting together some sample problems and work on the right GUI to make it appealing.

[J-Snake]

There is very little interest in it, from what I can tell. I have created a game called TrapThem. You can take a look at it below. It is probably one of the closest math-puzzle games which doesn't look like one. I have come across some very few logic and puzzle enthusiasts, and they truly appreciate it for that. But I let it playtest by a lot of students at a local university. And the students felt like they are forced to solve a math problem. Most of the people simply don't expect that from a video game.

But the big clue is on the internet. If you look around what games are played and how they are played you might get disappointed.

On a related note, it may be that most people are not used to understand what they are playing because of 2 reasons. Most games offer much freedom to solve a situation the way you want. And/or they have glitchy designs so that even when you don't understand how the game is supposed to be played you can always find a way around it. Most video games are inefficient in being games, so to speak. Now imagine a game which is serious about formal rules and concepts: the average player is like "Damn, I don't understand this shit!".

But I potentially can imagine a math-puzzle game to work as an alternative way to actually teach mathematics. Math books are often dry. One can turn teaching into a rewarding adventure and also make it more comprehensive. Imagination is the limit.

[Terrytheplatypus]

The game that I've played so far that is probably the closest to figuring out math problems is  English Country Tune by increpare. It doesn't have math per se, but, like actual math, sometimes you can find the solution simply through exploration and trying different things, but sometimes, solving a puzzle involves a more rigorous understanding of how all the rules work. I would love to see more games like that. It has some text that lends certain feelings to elements of the game, but mostly it's just pure puzzles. So far I haven't made any pure puzzle games, but I want to try at some point, maybe my next game.

Honestly, for a game that actually has math problems, I probably wouldn't want to play it, I'd rather just look up problems on my own in a book like the art and craft of problem solving by paul zeitz, though I can't do that many of them .

[valrus]

I like this kind of stuff, too; one of my other gigs is making educational puzzles for secondary students.  But on that note, who's your target audience, specifically?  The trickiest part of educational puzzles, in our experience, is finding the match between audience and level.  You might be able to target a puzzle to a specific audience, but this audience doesn't exist or you can't practically access them, or the audience that you can actually reach isn't at the right level for the puzzle.

We were talking recently about probability, actually, when we had a booth at a big science fair and wanted to explain some probabilistic methods in a way the general public could understand in a five-minute visit.  One of our ideas was to present it using a "gambling" theme, as a way to talk about the methods in a more concrete way.  It'd be kinda neat to have a game where you're solving probability puzzles to build your own casino, or something like that.

[Clockwise]

Thank you for all the responses so far--more than I expected! Also it seems an unintended side-effect of creating this discussion was receiving some excellent puzzle game recommendations so I'm grateful for that as well.

...
You may also consider a tutorial intended to introduce a player to the concepts necessary to take the leap from high school mathematics to the difficulty in your game since it'll buy you the coveted "edutainment" designation.

The explanatory texts after some Layton puzzles may be especially useful here, since you can include notorious problems and explain unusual exceptions as you go along, in addition to the possibility of an "endless" mode that just randomly generates problems of different skill levels.

I think this thread would go better in the "Design" subforum, unless you have the ability and time to make the game, in which case you might graduate directly to devlog and start putting together some sample problems and work on the right GUI to make it appealing.

Thanks for the suggestions. An optional tutorial section is a great idea because it works as both an introduction or refresher to the topic, depending on what is needed by the player. It would definitely decrease the entry barrier and wouldn't require the game's actual puzzles to compromise any difficulty.

An after-puzzle explanation is something I had in mind already for the reason you listed. Even after spending hours trying to solve a problem and failing, a good explanation of the solution can be extremely enlightening and satisfying.

I am starting to agree that this thread belongs in the Design subforum! I will probably start a new topic there soon.

There is very little interest in it, from what I can tell. I have created a game called TrapThem. You can take a look at it below. It is probably one of the closest math-puzzle games which doesn't look like one. I have come across some very few logic and puzzle enthusiasts, and they truly appreciate it for that. But I let it playtest by a lot of students at a local university. And the students felt like they are forced to solve a math problem. Most of the people simply don't expect that from a video game.

But the big clue is on the internet. If you look around what games are played and how they are played you might get disappointed.

On a related note, it may be that most people are not used to understand what they are playing because of 2 reasons. Most games offer much freedom to solve a situation the way you want. And/or they have glitchy designs so that even when you don't understand how the game is supposed to be played you can always find a way around it. Most video games are inefficient in being games, so to speak. Now imagine a game which is serious about formal rules and concepts: the average player is like "Damn, I don't understand this shit!".

But I potentially can imagine a math-puzzle game to work as an alternative way to actually teach mathematics. Math books are often dry. One can turn teaching into a rewarding adventure and also make it more comprehensive. Imagination is the limit.

I'm not surprised by your story. I wouldn't expect a math-puzzle game to come close to competing with the popular games, but my hope is that if word was spread well enough, there are enough people like me whose interest would be piqued.

It certainly wouldn't be advertised as anything but a math-intensive puzzle game, so hopefully that would prevent the crowd of gamers expecting to aimlessly click through every challenege!

Your last point is also something I've thought about a lot. Textbooks, by their static nature, are quite restricted with respect to creating engaging (and therefore educational) experiences. For the instrinsically-motivated person this is not an issue, but I think most could benefit from a more interesting presentation. As you said, the game medium offers limitless potential in this area and I'm looking forward to exploring it.

...
Honestly, for a game that actually has math problems, I probably wouldn't want to play it, I'd rather just look up problems on my own in a book like the art and craft of problem solving by paul zeitz, though I can't do that many of them .

I understand your point. At its core, there's no denying that this game would just be a spruced-up collection of mathematics exercises; the gameplay's integrity rests upon the puzzles being so. However, I am hoping that a game would provide more tools to engage a player and entice them to continue solving problems. It could never replace a textbook, but would certainly be a great supplement.

I like this kind of stuff, too; one of my other gigs is making educational puzzles for secondary students.  But on that note, who's your target audience, specifically?  The trickiest part of educational puzzles, in our experience, is finding the match between audience and level.  You might be able to target a puzzle to a specific audience, but this audience doesn't exist or you can't practically access them, or the audience that you can actually reach isn't at the right level for the puzzle.
...

I appreciate your insight. You make an interesting point about finding a level with an accessible audience. The level I imagine for it now would probably have a target audience whose majority is made up of those with at least a year of experience in a math, science or engineering-related program at university (not to mention a love of problem-solving.) I suppose one difficulty would be in reaching the subset of this group that has the interest in the topic but does not regularly play games. (But I am getting far too ahead of myself now!)

[tok]

the thing is all games are math puzzles. so like, treating it as a black box:

you the player touch the game
[a puzzle appears]
you touch that puzzle
[the puzzle responds your input]
you touch it some more
[the puzzle responds some more]

its important to say whats going on here, which is feedback, which is the thing games are for. so like - if your puzzle has good feedback or the type of feedback your player is used to, then the player will be interested

youve had that experience of returning to a professor layton game and not remembering what bit youre up to and you cant remember if this puzzle works /this way/ or \that way\, right? you want to mimimise that feeling for the returning player, but yu als owant to minimise it from one frame to the next, from one puzzle to the next

so like, all games are math puzzles. its just different players respond differently to different kinds of math

the other thing is specific puzzles are not very replayable, like once you know the answer you can just do the same thing again.

like, in a zelda game where theres three blocks in front of the door, so you push the blocks on either side in and then you push the block immediately in front of the door to one side

theres no need for that puzzle weve all already played it in zelda. but its still kind of fun to just see it again. like, oh, this puzzle, this old friend

but a space like chess or go or poker or crawl is more ambiguous because its not the same puzzle each time, in the same way that word games (edit: and tv game shows and poker machines) are not the same puzzle each time, just the form is the same from one session to the next

[Clockwise]

the thing is all games are math puzzles. so like, treating it as a black box:

you the player touch the game
[a puzzle appears]
you touch that puzzle
[the puzzle responds your input]
you touch it some more
[the puzzle responds some more]

its important to say whats going on here, which is feedback, which is the thing games are for. so like - if your puzzle has good feedback or the type of feedback your player is used to, then the player will be interested

youve had that experience of returning to a professor layton game and not remembering what bit youre up to and you cant remember if this puzzle works /this way/ or \that way\, right? you want to mimimise that feeling for the returning player, but yu als owant to minimise it from one frame to the next, from one puzzle to the next

so like, all games are math puzzles. its just different players respond differently to different kinds of math

the other thing is specific puzzles are not very replayable, like once you know the answer you can just do the same thing again.

like, in a zelda game where theres three blocks in front of the door, so you push the blocks on either side in and then you push the block immediately in front of the door to one side

theres no need for that puzzle weve all already played it in zelda. but its still kind of fun to just see it again. like, oh, this puzzle, this old friend

but a space like chess or go or poker or crawl is more ambiguous because its not the same puzzle each time, in the same way that word games are not the same puzzle each time, just the form is the same from one session to the next

You are correct in that feedback will be an important concern in designing a game like this--with too little it might as well be a PDF document full of math exercises. At the same time, I do anticipate that problems will require the player to sit with a pencil and work with paper for a while; this is the nature of a good math problem. The majority of player-game interaction would need to take place between puzzles. I'm not expecting this to appeal to the average gamer who requires instantaneous feedback and gratification, but more to this kind of person: http://xkcd.com/356/.

Barring any type of puzzle-generation, replayability is not likely; this is fine to me. I think most people understand that puzzle games are, for the most part, good for only a single run (unless puzzles may be skipped the first time around or something similar.)

[tok]

ok yeah. i am that type of person. i am your target demographic.

but the other thing is youre chasing grognards - like you want to make the kind of game where you draw your own map, this is fine, but there will be fewer of them, players.

like im gonna advocate for procedure on here because im obsessed with these procedure problems and you dont have to listen to that part of my argument (re whether to be static or procedural) but you do have to listen to me because im on your side and i take your questions seriously

[Clockwise]

For me, the big question mark for procedural math problem generation is creating problems in such a way that each one feels unique rather than a simple randomizing of numbers. My vision for this game depends on a set of puzzles that each present distinct challenges to the player, as it's assumed they have the fundamentals down.

For math exercises, procedural generation is useful; if I was writing a game to help someone practice addition, it would be beneficial and presumably enjoyable for the player to repeat X + Y for some different X and Y as many times as they liked. I just don't see this as a set of exercises. However if there was a way to generate interesting problems more varied than simple number swaps, I would certainly be interested.

[tok]

alright - so there's three math concepts id like to teach

they're related to grids which are related to sets which are related to discreet logic (discreet, meaning ints not floats - well, floats are discree too, tbh, but not infinite spaces, these are continuous. we dont want to talk about infinite spaces because they dont work on the computer)

SUBDIVISION, or TEMPLE GENERATION
is what this dude is doing in this tutorial --> http://www.roguebasin.com/index.php?title=Basic_BSP_Dungeon_generation
this gets you structures that look manmade, empty square sections you can fill up with whatever. but the way they're connected is gonna be different each time - remember also that you can split it into three sexctions instad of two or four or whatever. the thing with optimising your cellular automata is you can ignore those cells that you know won't change.

CELLULAR AUTOMATA, or CAVE GENERATION
cellular automata is a big name for what is really a small idea. this is how you get caves like in worms maps. each turn, look at all the cells on your grid, apply some rule (if it has n white partners make it white otherwise make it black is classic, thats like one line of code) and then display the result. over time rectangular structures decay and become round, in most cellular spaces - but theres lots of room for variation.

FLIPPING AND ROTATING, or SYMMETRIC GENERATION - gets you symmetry. symmetry looks nice.

there was another thing.... do you want me to talk about game theory? like, the military one, not the theory about arcade games - the one that is concerned with - like, what the player is gonna do, higher order thinking (if htey do this i do this so theyll do that)

[iDev]

What platform are you considering for this type of game? Web, mobile or even both would be a good idea for this game. Or even Wii U if you have a licence.

Don't see this as a good idea for the general PC market to be honest.

[Clockwise]

alright - so there's three math concepts id like to teach
...

Thanks for the rundown. The concepts are interesting but I still don't see how they can be applied to generating probability problems that I want.

What platform are you considering for this type of game? Web, mobile or even both would be a good idea for this game. Or even Wii U if you have a licence.

Don't see this as a good idea for the general PC market to be honest.

You make a very good point about web and mobile; these platforms are likely necessary to target because the game's target audience has a significant portion of non-gamers. On that note I'm curious as to why you think it would make a better fit on the Wii U rather than PC. I would guess that the average person with an interest in this kind of game will almost certainly use a PC but may or may not even own a console.

[tok]

sorry i couldnt be more specifically useful. hopefully one day it becomes the time for these ideas, so that the effort wasnt wasted.

[baconman]

A Game A Week's last release last year, "Alpha Collexion;" featured a game called "Numbing Numbers," where you basically shoot away numbers until whatever remains hits a goal total. It's simple, but pretty fun, and very math. There's also a Yahtzee Tetris kind of thing, too. Well, more like "Yahtzee xx Puzzle Fighter."

[Clockwise]

Interesting, though that seems more arcade-y than I have in mind, it's nice to see people are still interested in incorporating math as a more explicit part of a game's challenge.

Also, I've created a topic in the design forum: http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=46082.0