Handling "Hidden" Public Knowledge

[Fletcheese]

Games often include mechanics that revolve around remembering what's in your opponent's hand or what has been previously revealed but now face down. Examples from games I often play are reserved cards in Splendor, all the cards in Abyss, and resource cards in Little Factory, but there are many more. Whether this is a "good" mechanic or not is outside the scope of this post, but in the interest of full disclosure I am not a fan. If a card was ever public knowledge, let it stay that way face-up.

With that being said, due to the game log on BGA, memory is effectively no longer a factor. You can simply take notes or scroll back through the log to find the piece of info you want. However, this is tedious and in cases like Splendor, the ability to hover over the log and see a reserved card is desktop-only. Why not simply "rewrite" the game and make these things face up? Or at least provide a way to play in this manner? I can see purists rejecting a change at that level, but the log is really already doing it, just in a more tedious manner.

Discuss.

[aesche]

In The Crew, you can chose to play with visible discard, which is an additional box to the log that tracks the cards played already. I wasnt a fan at first thought, but if ppl/me then scroll back through the log anyway if they need to remember something, you might as well make it easy for all, as you say.

[RobertBr]

I can see purists rejecting a change at that level, but the log is really already doing it, just in a more tedious manner.

Using your memory does this in real life just in a more tedious manner than playing with open information.
To be correct on the terminology you are not talking about *hidden* information, you are talking about *trackable* information. Whether trackable information is a good idea or not in game design is a long stranding problem. Most (but not all) experienced players think trackable information is a bad design choice, unless your game is genuinely intended to be a memory game. To be honest, in a lot of real world games (No Thanks is a good example) I encourage players to play with open information because the advantage I gain from having more practice at memorizing the info is too large to be overcome.
I would make that the judgement. In the real world a player who makes the effort has an advantage. On BGA a diligent player has the same advantage. If you found that advantage acceptable in the real world then it is odd to condemn the same advantage on BGA.

[Fletcheese]

Trackable is definitely a better word to use than hidden. But I don't agree with the analogy to the real world because our brains are not written logs. Most people cannot review in perfect detail every event that took place throughout a game like anyone can in the BGA log. In real life this "diligence" comes from your natural memory abilities. On BGA it comes from tediously reading and compiling log entries into a format easier for your brain to process. Given the availability of the log, it makes more sense to me to skip the tedium and make the same info more readily available in the UI. Especially when it's as simple as having previously face down cards instead appear face up as it would be in all of the listed examples

[fruktansvärt]

At a guess, many publishers want their games to be as close to IRL as possible. Making information, that is hidden IRL, open on BGA would result in a significantly different game experience. Should we instead consider hiding the log, for items older than the latest round?

For example, in Alhambra it is possible to keep track of what each player has in their hand — but only if you note what their initial hand is. This information is revealed at the start of the game, but is not stored in the log.

The log would, of course, be revealed after the end of the game.

[ufm]

Trackable is definitely a better word to use than hidden. But I don't agree with the analogy to the real world because our brains are not written logs. Most people cannot review in perfect detail every event that took place throughout a game like anyone can in the BGA log. In real life this "diligence" comes from your natural memory abilities. On BGA it comes from tediously reading and compiling log entries into a format easier for your brain to process. Given the availability of the log, it makes more sense to me to skip the tedium and make the same info more readily available in the UI. Especially when it's as simple as having previously face down cards instead appear face up as it would be in all of the listed examples

Most players don't track every necessary info, because it is so tedious as you said.

At a guess, many publishers want their games to be as close to IRL as possible. Making information, that is hidden IRL, open on BGA would result in a significantly different game experience. Should we instead consider hiding the log, for items older than the latest round?

Yes. 'trackable but hidden' applies even on BGA implementations.
Even there are exceptional requests from the publishers: in BGA Jaipur the game erases logs as the game progresses.
However, erasing every log except the last round will make turn-based games absurd. IMO the status quo is the best.

[Fletcheese]

Most players don't track every necessary info, because it is so tedious as you said.

If you're not notetaking all the relevant trackable info, then you're at a severe disadvantage to the players that are. So if you're trying to be competitive then taking verbose notes becomes a necessity. As I've already said, I'd rather eliminate the tedium and just make the cards face up.

[Jest Phulin]

In a physical game, you could also take notes or request trackable information be revealed. Most likely, neither would be acceptable by other players. The game designers will specifically state if revealing trackable information is allowed.

Since people want to change the game, they should be forced to have the tediousness of tracking it how they want. The game designers want it pure memory, so BGA should not implement anything beyond that.


Think of this. Could you go to a casino's blackjack table, and request that all dealt cards from the shoe be available for inspection all the time? if you have a good memory (or other mental card-counting technique) you will have this trackable information. Using any other method will get you banned from the casino.
(Note, this is based on information for Las Vegas, USA, casinos. Other casinos may vary.)

[Fletcheese]

Think of this. Could you go to a casino's blackjack table, and request that all dealt cards from the shoe be available for inspection all the time? if you have a good memory (or other mental card-counting technique) you will have this trackable information. Using any other method will get you banned from the casino.
(Note, this is based on information for Las Vegas, USA, casinos. Other casinos may vary.)

This is a good point for RL games, but (a) not enforceable for online platforms and (b) not even feasible with the nature of turn-based games where hours or days can pass between turns. Remembering all the cards over the course of 30-60 minutes is hard enough.

[Jest Phulin]

Even though it is not enforceable, that doesn't mean that the platform should provide a way around it.

But then, this begs the question of if there is an inherent difference between modes of the game. IE, is a physical real-time game different than an online real-time game, and is that different from a turn-based game? I think BGA has the policy that all are the same, so games should be as close to the physical game as possible.