It can work, the question isn’t really whether it’s a good idea, it’s more about whether you like it or don’t like it.  For the most part, I am not a fan as it runs contrary to one of the main reasons I enjoy games.  There’s so much technology in pretty much every walk of life but I enjoy the opportunity to disconnect from it whenever I can.

I’ve built a game with technology and tablet/smartphone as integral parts and was surprised at just how well it played. There are all kinds of reasons for adding tech to tabletop games – and not just the obvious AI opponent. Sound effects, ambient background audio, character stats tracking, really fast combat/results resolution to name a few.

My own game even got as far as pre-production prototypes (I sent out a few hand-made mdf boards and then went down a multi-piece stuff-it-in-a-12″-box route for retail distribution) and just as I was in talks with PCB manufacturers in China, covid hit. Lockdown wasn’t the blessing I’d hoped it would be for development and now, post-covid, we (in the UK) are faced with the double-whammy of a tanking £ and all kinds of issues surrounding CE compliance/non-compliance thanks to Brexit, the gift that keeps on giving.

So I’ve no plans on making a retail game any more. But slowly working on an open source build-it-and-they-might-come kind of kit (since I took on a new job at the start of this year, time to spend on side-line ideas is pretty limited). But I think where the problem with tech and gaming lies is that nobody seems to trust companies with the future of their own products.

GW has a history of dropping titles, only to pick them up again after the community has supported it through the “barren years”. But if tech is integral to your game, there’s no way of allow the community to keep it running long after you’ve given up on it yourself. Maybe if companies laid out a clear “exit strategy” to any tech-based game, they might get a bit more traction? Even if it’s just making the apps configurable, to work with alternative servers, should the need arise.

My own game relies heavily on tech for piece tracking, movement recording, playing turns over the internet etc. but also enables gameplay that would otherwise be impossible to create without it – such as true hidden movement and organic, unpredictable map generation.

Too many people get so hung up on having their idea/tech “stolen” they forget that it’s as much work for someone else to “steal” the idea and implement it, as it is for them to get the idea off the ground in the first place! It’s a good few years ago I posted my own demo prototype on this very site, explaining exactly how I did it. Yet nobody (sadly) stole my idea and made it a reality (basically, so I wouldn’t have to!) So handing stuff over to the community to support would actually be a boost, not a threat to any kind of business model.

I love tech in games and strongly believe in it. I don’t actually care if it’s necessary or just “with knobs on”.

Who doesn’t love a bit of background ambience? Or a few killer sound effects just at the right moment? Or triggering some LEDs embedded in your terrain – preferably all in response to actions played out in the game? Given how few times we actually play the games we spend hundreds of pounds/euros/dollars on, why is it only ones with “tech” embedded we get hung up over turning into a waste of money – we’ve all got games made of cardboard and plastic we’ve blown too much time/money on that are now defunct.

All I know is that my brother-in-law in Sicily and my nephew and I play “battle royale” type games over a 2ft square area (16×16 grid) sneaking into and around buildings on a map, sending turns to each other over the ‘net, jumping out and genuinely surprising each other with ambush tactics, and have great fun doing it. Every now and again we’ll interact with an NPC and get some nice character-acted cut scenes and a new objective.

When done correctly, tech in tabletop games is awesome.

One day I might get around to releasing something, and you can all have a go!

But release it to the OS community and they will build upon it in ways you (the dev) might not have even imagined

I’m working on it 😉

Really interesting discussion, I’d love to one day see what you’ve been up to @blinky465 and generally agree that technology in games is awesome!

Also share the concerns of @sundancer being in the same business, software and its longevity for me is very questionable, its hard to manage with a full time team at a tech company. Having Open Source projects that people can contribute would certainly make me feel better but it would need a seriously committed community and given that people often struggle to play the same game for a few years, never mind agree on things I suspect it could struggle. Having a defined exit strategy published would also be beneficial, particularly if that resulted in it being open source.

I think there’s an important difference between technology as a whole, and specifics like software/app’s. A “blinky box” (with flashing lights and all) for want of a better example, that you take out and turn on whenever you play a game should continue to work effectively forever. An App, you’d be lucky to have last 5 years before Apple/Google updates and general progress in devices render it useless, unless it has regular updates.

All round though I’m in favour of technology on the tabletop, it just needs to be supported, done right and give me confidence in its longevity.

On top of obsolescence, another risk of “technology” being used as part of games is the current global trends towards software as a service.  That is, you don’t really own anything, you pay a subscription.  It’s a phenomenon that’s creeping into every walk of life, even the automotive industry.  You could end up with an app that you have to subscribe to.

I am actually concerned that is the path D&D is going with D&D One and I would be entirely unsurprised if GW don’t end up going that way with rules and codices as well

Spam bot alert!

arthemeder

please review that users posting history!

@tgu3 @nakchak