Contemporary game assignment

Reflection:

What were the game's apparent design goals? Did it succeed at those goals? Why or why not?

The apparent design goal of the game was to make a fun and challenging turn-based strategy game with a compelling story. I think the designer's succeeded with this goal because the story of the game is interesting and catches the player's attention and the game starts the player off in a moderately challenging map, giving them units with different skills with which the player must learn and effectively use to clear the map.

What were the mechanics? What was the play experience? What is the relationship between the two? Did you find any strategies that were exploitable? Did the game seem well-balanced?

The mechanics of the game were to select your units, move them towards enemy units or objectives, attack the enemy units by selecting the desired weapon, use items to heal or increase stats of your units, and use your "lord" unit to complete certain objectives such as seizing a location on the map, thus clearing the map and moving on to the next stage. The play experience was entertaining and challenging, the mechanics though simple, are addictive and easy to grasp, balanced out with the increasingly difficult enemies and map lay-out lead to an overall exciting experience. Very few strategies are necessarily exploitable as each map requires a different one, some you may want to use your archers and mages to strike from afar before finishing off the enemy up-close, while in others you may want  your cavalry to charge ahead and take the brunt of the damage. Overall the game was very well-balanced and well-made.

What kinds of interesting decisions (and uninteresting ones) were you making throughout the game? What do you feel was the competitive differential of the game?

With command you make in the game you're making a decision, death is permanent in the game so if one of your units dies, they are gone forever. You as the player must decide which place is best for your unit by analyzing the enemy's range, analyzing your unit's defense capabilities and the enemy's attack capabilities. Throughout the game the levels get progressively harder with more enemies of different types and more map layouts, but you get more of your own units as well, learn how to use them correctly and the game will be challenging all the way to the end.

Modification Task Sheet:

Name/Publisher: 

Fire Emblem: The Binding Blade - Nintendo.

Core Mechanics:

In the game you must select your units and move them to your best advantage in a position in which they can effectively attack/defend against enemy units, and move towards the objective. The player does this while trying to keep all units alive and keeping their lord safe so that they may defeat the boss and capture the objective on the other side of the map. This can be difficult though as some enemies see certain units as a higher priority than others and the game starts making them more intelligent as the player progresses. These aspects of the game keep the player interested and attached to the game until the end with a good balance of difficulty and simple mechanics.

Design Goals:

I believe the designer was trying to make a turn-based strategy with an interesting and slightly mysterious story that flowed well with the game-play and objectives of each level. Throughout the game this goal is met and I believe the designer did an excellent job of sticking with their plan and delivering it to their audience.

Changes:

If I were to change one thing it would be certain filler levels in the game, for example your party is travelling from one castle to another to attack the main enemy of the game's story but on the way there, there are two levels in which you fight bandits, I feel that these levels were unnecessary and could be outright removed from the game without risking much, if any, loss in entertainment.