So I know a thing or two about high-level programming -- enough that I'm a lot closer to becoming capable of making a full game, complete with graphics and a running gameplay engine, than a beginner would be. For instance, I successfully completed a barebones version of Tetris a couple years back when I was high school. Anyways, I also have what I think is a great idea for a mobile game that I think would motivate me to learn more about programming (not too passionate about programming in general right now) and help to rake in some dough as well.

The idea, which I've deemed "Power Chess," is it's chess, but with a variety of twists added -- I'm not going to specify for multiple reasons, but picture concepts inspired by games like Battleship and Checkers -- so as to add the element of luck and quicken the flow of the game. These two factors, among others, I think would make chess more appealling to the general public. And since the majority of people out there know what chess is and so many know how to play it, I can't see why it wouldn't be popular if it had proper backing and if it were really that great of an idea.

So as part of my early stages of research -- so I don't waste time making a game that would end up in failure -- I'm just wondering, assuming the game was generally good quality, who here would play Power Chess at work? Who would play Power Chess on the bus or at a cafe amongst friends? Who would play Power Chess when they have nothing better to do? Etc., etc.

You guys make for a great forum, so I'm hoping to get some good feedback.

Honestly I'd probably never play this game.

Why wouldn't I just play a different game instead of some derivative of chess?

There are so many different games (including video/pc games) that I doubt this "idea" of yours would become successful.

I honestly would need more details to give you a better reply than this but something tells me I wouldn't want them anyway.

Hi tcm,

Just from reading over your OP, I imagine casual chessplayers (i.e, know how to move the bits, play with friends sometimes, but never in tournaments) would be your most realistic target audience. Personally I doubt I would ever play this game, but that shouldn't discourage you; I don't think people like me (tournament chessplayers) are your likely market in the first place.

If the game is well done and makes chess more accessible to the average person, I don't see why it can't succeed.

Yeah, there's no reason this idea can't work, and be a good game, but this is probably the wrong place to look for feedback. Your target audience will be people who aren't serious about "real" chess. Most of the people in this forum probably won't be too interested, because most of the people here already play chess and don't need what they will consider a weird variant like this. Don't let that discourage you, though, because it sounds like something that probably would appeal to a lot of people, you just have to find the right audience for it.

if you put this on a mobile platform it might work, I don't see it ever taking off on PCs

How about Gamble Chess? This game is very popular in South Eastern Luxembourg.


Before each move a player is allowed to pull a random card from a standard playing card deck. You get 3 single card draws during the game. The penalties and benefits for each card are as follows:


Ace- You can choose to move your King anywhere on the board you please. You cannot move into check or on a space that another of your pieces currently occupy. You can take any of your opponents pieces as long as it does not put you in check.


King- Your opponent shall lose all the King's defenders. Every piece adjacent to opponent's King will be removed from the board unless removal of one will result in a check.


Queen- Your opponent loses Queen.

Jack- opponent loses a Bishop, opponent is able to choose which one to lose

Ten- opponent loses a Knight, opponent's choice.


9- opponent loses pawn on the 8th rank.

8- opponent loses pawn on 7th rank, etc.



Note: as the game moves closer the end game the luck element decreases as there are less pieces on board to be "hit" by a card draw. So an expert should still defeat a novice unless the novice gets lucky enough to draw a couple of the high face cards. This game is also easily handicapped in that an expert can receive less "draws" if he craves more loose action.

I'm actually designing it right now with the intention of appealling to casual players and people who may not otherwise be interested in chess while not alienating enthusiasts. If it works out, the luck aspect alone would be enough to change the tide of the game between amateur and beginner, but not enough for a good player who's clearly winning to suddenly start losing. I doubt grandmasters would ever want to play it seriously because it would eliminate the significance of those very small edges in position (hopefully, it wouldn't eliminate the very small edges they'd have in material like an extra pawn), but I can't imagine it discouraging everyone who's serious about chess.

Once I get the copyright office or whoever I need to speak to (don't know who yet, I'll look into it when I get to that part) to acknowledge my idea as my own intellectual property, I'll elaborate on my concept so that you can understand much more easily what I'm aiming for.

I need to hear more about it because I only have a vague idea what you may be talking about but it could be cool.

The reason I enjoy chess is that it's 100% skill based, aside from the clock which is just a necessary evil imo. So I would not really be interested in any variations that try to muffle the impact of skill in any way.

QFT^1,000,000

I'd get to this part sooner, since I think its going to be very tough to protect an idea. Its one thing if you just intend it to be a computer game, then you of course have the rights to the code etc - but its really hard to restrict someone from creating a similar game.

If your talking about a game which can be played on an actual chess board then I think you are even more screwed. I suppose you could trade mark the name and get royalties from products and tournaments or whatever. But I think protecting an idea will be very difficult, so maybe you should shell out a few bucks on an attorney who specialises on immaterial rights to see where you stand.

I hope you're a game designer and not just a programmer, because if you're not you will fail to create a balanced game that has just enough luck and just enough skill while retaining the qualities that make chess a beloved game.

Seriously, look up game design. Don't waste your time on something you aren't going to be able to do well.

Damn, thought this thread was going to be about the existing Power Chess game out there (wild 18 on ICC, where both sides start with seven queens on the back rank instead of the other pieces). That's an excellent game, which really emphasizes board control and pawn involvement.

There's a 1001 and "improved" chess variants. And none of them have become very popular.

I wouldn't bother. Making another, or playing another.

Can't say I'm aspiring towards that field, but I've played video games regularly since I was like 3 or 4 years old -- IMO, more than long enough to know what makes a good video game and to know what gamers want. Aside from factors such as technical hindrances (much like what Kojima Productions experienced with Metal Gear Solid 4), the process of learning to understand what goes into brainstorming game designs is very similar to the same respective aspects of writing an original screenplay or fictional novel (namely, one that is intended to be shown to a renowned publisher). But since we aren't making MGS4, but rather a variant on a existing game that is relatively simple to code provided you know enough about object-oriented programming, game design will also be relatively simple. And I aim to do a good job by asking a variety of demographics about this to start off my research.

Even if people didn't end up going crazy about the whole idea, I enjoyed being able to finish the last major project I did, and I never really even shared it with anyone. With that said, no regrets, really.

I still don't think you really know what I'm talking about.

I think chess could be speeded up by agreeing to start at a set position a dozen or so moves in.This is not a new idea but it might get the club games finished in a single session.The trouble with creating variants of chess is that they all tend to be worse than the original version.

This is vacuous. DUCY?

Unless you're flaming me for my skills in something that you haven't even seen from me yet, I'm pretty sure I do. Care to clarify?

I'm not flaming you. I said that I hoped that you understood game design, and you responded with this:

Game design is not like writing a screenplay or a novel. Game design is also not about OOP or any other programming paradigm. By game design I mean, well, game design: creating a set of rules that leads to good gameplay, regardless of storyline, graphics, or implementation.

tcmNOWAY sounds more like a game maker than a game designer.

Just as you would create a set of characters and a setting that make for a good fictional novel. My comparison here is pretty obscure, but hopefully you get what I mean.

To be fair, when most people compare designing games to producing fiction they are under the mistaken impression that a game's storyline is its most important aspect.

As long as you know what actually goes into designing a good set of rules (one that doesn't lead to dominating/dominated strategies, doesn't have too much negative or positive feedback, etc.), then you're all set.