• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Carcassonne confirmed for the XBLA this week

platypotamus said:
How do they work though? The tutorial doesn't explain how they are scored. I put a dude in one, and I never got any points for it when it completed. I never got my dude back either. He was laying there like he was dead. Are we sure they are farms and not cemetaries?

You get points for any completed cities that the fields you own touch at the end of the game. Basically, claiming "farms" is a bit of a gamble, because you can never technically complete them and get your follower back, but you have the chance of making a lot of points at the end of the game shooting you to the top of the pack. The gamble is whether or not your field will actually end up touching ANY completed cities. Also, whoever has the most farmers servicing a particular city will be the only one to get points for it. Let's say you have a farmer that services a city, but someone else has two farmers in the same field, or two farmers in separate fields that nonetheless touch a city on different sides. Because they have two and you only have one, they get the points.

Farms are far and away the most complex part of scoring the game, though being computerized and having the area you'll occupy highlight when you put one down helps a lot in this version of the game. Use them wisely, though, and they'll be your best friend, especially when you need that extra boost to shoot past your opponents in points at the end.
 
Belfast said:
Let's say you have a farmer that services a city, but someone else has two farmers in the same field, or two farmers in separate fields that nonetheless touch a city on different sides. Because they have two and you only have one, they get the points.

Whoa there. Is this correct? We've always scored it as each field that services a city gets points. If a city has 3 seperate fields that are occupied by farmers, each field gets the points.

Is it supposed to be only the person with the most farmers? So, if there are three fields on a city, and all three are occupied... two fields have one farmer each, and one has two, only the field with the two farmers gets the points for the city, and the others get none?

If they all had an equal amount of farmers, do all three fields get points?

I dunno.. this doesn't sound right...
 
Having not played the board game or anything similar I guess kinda went into it blind, that said though its surprisingly fun.

Not sure I like the relative randomness of the tiles (a similar frustration you might have in Tetris, "I just need one straight piece", etc) and the devilishly good AI, but really what are you gonna do? :D I'll have to spend some more time with it, but so far a worthy purchase.
 
Gowans007 said:
dude you'll love it,

just been in a game with Jube3 and Besada, closest game ever, I thought I had it in the bag too then the positions swap round :(

Yeah, and I've figured out how to play since then. Been online whoopin some player ass. Farms rock.
 
After just playing through 5 single player games, I'm asking myself why I've never played the actual board game. I know some people in my board game group have the game. I've seen it in their collection. Why have they been holding back like that?

This game is great.

I've been alternating between river and non-river play, and I don't see too much of a difference between the two, other than the fact that having a farm at one end of the river or the other can be really powerful (last game I had it at both ends, and got 21 points from the two of them).
 
FlyinJ said:
Whoa there. Is this correct? We've always scored it as each field that services a city gets points. If a city has 3 seperate fields that are occupied by farmers, each field gets the points.

Is it supposed to be only the person with the most farmers? So, if there are three fields on a city, and all three are occupied... two fields have one farmer each, and one has two, only the field with the two farmers gets the points for the city, and the others get none?

If they all had an equal amount of farmers, do all three fields get points?

I dunno.. this doesn't sound right...
Yep. From this link:

Farm Valuation Simplified

There have been three versions of the farmer scoring in the game of Carcassonne.

A farm is a piece of grassland enclosed by road, city, river or non-existing tiles. A farmer farms all the land he can walk to without leaving "the green" no matter how far away, as long as he doesn't cross a road or a river. He supplies all the cities which his farm touches.

Rio Grande Games (who publish the English-language versions of Carcassonne) have chosen to stay with the original rules, which state that for each completed city the player with the most farmers supplying it gets 4 points. Tied players all get 4 points each. Each city only provides one score.

The current (as of September 2005) rules only give 3 points per city, but each farm adjacent to a city gets full points even if that means one player gets multiple scores thereby. The rules were changed firstly to a 3 points per farm basis, and secondly to allow one player to score more than once for the same city.

All the current English versions of the boardgame uses the original rules as stated above. Which ruleset does the XBLA version use?
 
XiaNaphryz said:
Yep.
All the current English versions of the boardgame uses the original rules as stated above. Which ruleset does the XBLA version use?

3/city, multiple scores allowed. Though in my experimentation, through custom game, you can actually change that.
 
I highly enjoyed the demo so I decided to pick this up. My first ever XBLA title. :)

I love the atmosphere and the music, and I also love the tempo of the game.

So far I've only really played with one or two AI players - I wonder how it will play with five. Oh and online of course, I'm sure that's a blast.
 
Hmm. So, my first game was the worst beating I've ever recieved in a videogame, so far as I know. I got BEAT very badly. Like, 130 to 12. But I have improved.

Game is a bit too random for my tastes but I guess thats just how it goes. It'll certainly be fun to play with Gowans and the lot.
 
i like this. i think i like Catan a bit more, but this seems to go a lot quicker and there's still a good deal of strategy involved.
 
The only thing I dislike, even though its expected, is being able to play with our own group's old house rules. Instead of drawing one tile, we'd draw three at the beginning and keep a hand of available tiles the whole game. It made it a little less random and a little more strategic. Of course, with that, there'd be no local multi, either.
 
One rule that my friends and I made up is with the river. We have 1 River expansion and 2 River IIs. We take out the springs, place one and then go around taking turns placing the river until it's capped off. With two forks it can get big or sometimes just 3 tiles. Makes the game a lot more dynamic.
 
Phthisis said:
Yeah, I love the animated watercolor backgrounds on the menus. The character designs are great, too.

I think the 3D game board for Catan is butt ugly, but it works here and doesn't detract anything from playability. I'd like them to offer a "Rio Grande" add on so you can play with exact game pieces, though. Just because I'm a dork.
 
Hey, is a controller required for each player to play?

It's really not cool not being able to map all players into one controller and just pass it along during the game. I thought I could play it with 3-4 friends but it seems each player needs a controller...

...which sucks. Come on, it's a board game, not TMNT. :lol
 
Flynn said:
I think the 3D game board for Catan is butt ugly

The biggest crime of Catan's 3D board is that it covers up the numbers. I know, I know...you can look at the numbers by holding in the trigger but it's distracting as hell imo. Old school board FTW.


And I still can't get myself to buy Carcassonne. I was all set to instantly purchase it Wednesday but when I went to buy some points I forgot that I needed to update my credit card info 'cause my old one expired last month. Being the lazy ass that I am, I didn't want to get my wallet so I just downloaded the demo and fooled around with it but I'm still not sold. It just seems too simple....I don't know. I desperately want another board game that'll grab like Catan did (and still does) but I don't think Carcassonne is it.
 
Hitler Stole My Potato said:
After playing it, I think I prefer Catan over this.

I'm the opposite... I'm enjoying this one a lot more. I'm not exactly sure why I like it better... maybe I like the quicker play and the randomness of the tiles. Things can turn on you or for you very quickly.
 
Hitler Stole My Potato said:
The biggest crime of Catan's 3D board is that it covers up the numbers. I know, I know...you can look at the numbers by holding in the trigger but it's distracting as hell imo. Old school board FTW.


And I still can't get myself to buy Carcassonne. I was all set to instantly purchase it Wednesday but when I went to buy some points I forgot that I needed to update my credit card info 'cause my old one expired last month. Being the lazy ass that I am, I didn't want to get my wallet so I just downloaded the demo and fooled around with it but I'm still not sold. It just seems too simple....I don't know. I desperately want another board game that'll grab like Catan did (and still does) but I don't think Carcassonne is it.

The simplicity is deceptive, especially when final scoring comes in. Playing with multiple players also changes the game quite a bit. I've been have a great time playing this with friends.
 
Belfast said:
The only thing I dislike, even though its expected, is being able to play with our own group's old house rules. Instead of drawing one tile, we'd draw three at the beginning and keep a hand of available tiles the whole game. It made it a little less random and a little more strategic. Of course, with that, there'd be no local multi, either.
I think you'd still be able to do local multiplayer with that. You get to pick your tile and the other two get returned to the pool.

In fact, we'd considered that and several other modes but they all came with the expense of additional UI; most of which was non-trivial. For example, if you look at some old leaked screenshots , you can see that we had been planning for a "Next Tile" display since many groups allow the next player to draw a tile before it's actually their turn to help speed things along. However, this could lead to problems when a tile that was displayed suddenly had no valid placement option. So we tried a series of messages and whatnot but it just got confusing to users. Ultimately we chose polishing the core game over "non-standard" play modes when the schedule hammer began to fall.
 
PilotPrecise said:
I think you'd still be able to do local multiplayer with that. You get to pick your tile and the other two get returned to the pool.

In fact, we'd considered that and several other modes but they all came with the expense of additional UI; most of which was non-trivial. For example, if you look at some old leaked screenshots , you can see that we had been planning for a "Next Tile" display since many groups allow the next player to draw a tile before it's actually their turn to help speed things along. However, this could lead to problems when a tile that was displayed suddenly had no valid placement option. So we tried a series of messages and whatnot but it just got confusing to users. Ultimately we chose polishing the core game over "non-standard" play modes when the schedule hammer began to fall.

Nice to see a dev in here.

I've got a minor gripe about multiplayer. Let's say you make a three player game, then your third player begs out. Maybe he'd rather play Overlord or something. There isn't an apparent way to drop the match to a two-player game rather than play with one seat taken over by AI. Am I missing something or do you have to drop the match and make a new one to change the total number of players?
 
PilotPrecise said:
I think you'd still be able to do local multiplayer with that. You get to pick your tile and the other two get returned to the pool.

In fact, we'd considered that and several other modes but they all came with the expense of additional UI; most of which was non-trivial. For example, if you look at some old leaked screenshots , you can see that we had been planning for a "Next Tile" display since many groups allow the next player to draw a tile before it's actually their turn to help speed things along. However, this could lead to problems when a tile that was displayed suddenly had no valid placement option. So we tried a series of messages and whatnot but it just got confusing to users. Ultimately we chose polishing the core game over "non-standard" play modes when the schedule hammer began to fall.

Is there any way to play with only one controller? I would hate the idea to buy more controllers so that I can play with 2-4 players.

Great adaptation btw, I really look forward for the expansions like the Dragon and the Fairy ;)
 
Flynn, about multiplayer you are correct - once a number of seats has been selected you have to start a new game to change that.

suikodan said:
Is there any way to play with only one controller?
When I first came onto the project, this was the second most important thing to me - right after getting a tutorial into the game. Once the state of the project became clear, this began to get demphasized because so many other things needed to be fixed first.

So first, we are really grateful for all the nice things being said about the game and we are very proud of what we have relseased. But let's back up...

We began as a small startup, Secret Lair Studios, building a casual MMO (actually two! but they were interrelated) and arcade titles on the side. Many of us had experiences at places like WildTangent but we even kept the arcade team separate from the main company as Grumpy Ninja.

We had board games in our plans all along. Jason Robar, who was our studio head and chief founder, is an avid board gamer. He'd gotten me turned onto board games several years earlier.

Microsoft had negotiated a bunch of boardgame licenses (Catan, Alhambra, Carcassonne) and we had a really good relationship with them owing to Robar's history. So we had, in some sense, a pick of the litter. Catan was being done by Big Huge but it wasn't on the top of our list anyways. It's really a great game - one of our favorites - but has some dynamics that are just a bit too hardcore for the audiences we wanted since we'd a very family-oriented outlook. (Fortunately, I doubt we could have done any better than Big Huge's XBLA version and we're glad to see it done so well.)

We'd had a lot of wrestling internally about what games to do. There were a couple of false starts (in fact there are still some screenshots to A_ different game that got floated around at the same time the first leaked shots from Carcassonne surfaced - we had been working on both). A couple of us had basically been arguing that just the lack of hidden information (no hand) was rare and valuable. When the dust settled, Carcassonne was all go.

But we made a mistake: placing a single producer/designer across three different arcade titles. This is really an unreasonable task for anyone to tackle. One game was being developed in our studio, one in our Shanghai studio, and one with a partner in Chile. As you can imagine, the two projects being run externally took up most of the producer's time. Carcassonne was kind of the red-headed stepchild for a while. "How hard can turning a board game into a video game be?" :)

Along the way we, our Shanghai studio, and even our Chilean partner (Wanako) were bought by Vivendi and re-branded "Sierra." The MMO I'd been working on was canceled and a new MMO project (that adopted many of the ideas from its predecessor) was spun up. I worked on this just briefly before being asked to move to Arcade to work on Carcassonne. "It's coming in for a landing and we just need you to guide it in." This may have been true, there was only a month left in the schedule, but someone had forgotten to put the landing gear on. This project was going to have to pull up and do a flyaround.

When I came onto the project, I had two Big Ideas™ that I felt would make this game kick ass. 1) Hotseat (one controller shared) local multiplayer. 2) An interactive tutorial. My views changes in the first two days.

Most of the core game was there - structures building, etc. - and it looked really good but there was a bunch of stuff that was in a sorry state: menus, UI, HUD, tutorial, lobbying, etc. Basically everything that supports the experience of playing the game.

Shortly after joining the project, I had a list of work items that looked something like this:
1. Menus (not optional)
2. Sounds (not optional)
3. Tutorial (not optional)
4. Controls (not optional)
5. HUD (not optional)
6. Lobbying (not optional)
7. Everything else...

The first order of business was killing our babies. There went my plan for "hot-swap" local multiplayer controls - using a single controller for multiple players - just not enough time to resolve the profile sign-in/out issues. Next, we shelved the additional, non-standard game modes and the cascade of problems/challenges they introduced.

I tackled menu flows, sounds and a tutorial design with the help of a writer. From the designs an artist created the menus, an outsource team the sounds, and an engineer the tutorial. But even at this point, we didn't have enough time in our schedule. Fortunately, Sierra and Microsoft were both very supportive and we were able to get some extra time; this was much less painful than it could have been.

Then we discovered that the tutorial we'd just finished, while completely thorough, required too much reading. (During a focus test, one guy actually set his head down like he had been beaten by an SAT!) Rather than redesign the tutorial and have an engineer rebuild it (and possibly get shivved when my back was turned), we added a script language (Lua) to the game and I scripted the tutorial myself.

That's the short story. Like any development project, we had to chose which battles to fight. But if we had to do it all over again, most of what we would do would be the same, just in a more efficient way. In the end, we built an excellent game with a new team and in less than a year. Of course, it helps to start with one of the best board games of all time; thank you Klaus Jurgen-Wrede! :)
 
What a great post and read Pilot, I'm sure I speak for all us fans when I say thankyou for your transparency and little peek into the XBLA development world.

Again love the game and the speed you can pick it up and play with your friends, yeah it has its little annoyances (party size, making private space, not able to extend the number of titles etc.) but once your playing its quick and easy to play (no unplayable cards etc).

I was playing with a guy who played the original board game allot and he loved the speed and ease of use of the XBLA option.

Also its self and catan are very different games, tho I love the stats viewing in Catan and at first was looking for this depth in Carc but then I realised that working out the points for farms etc is a good part of the game.

Hope this sells well and you guys can get a project to bring some more expansion packs to the game.
 
Gowans007 said:
What a great post and read Pilot, I'm sure I speak for all us fans when I say thankyou for your transparency and little peek into the XBLA development world.

Again love the game and the speed you can pick it up and play with your friends, yeah it has its little annoyances (party size, making private space, not able to extend the number of titles etc.) but once your playing its quick and easy to play (no unplayable cards etc).

I was playing with a guy who played the original board game allot and he loved the speed and ease of use of the XBLA option.

Also its self and catan are very different games, tho I love the stats viewing in Catan and at first was looking for this depth in Carc but then I realised that working out the points for farms etc is a good part of the game.

Hope this sells well and you guys can get a project to bring some more expansion packs to the game.
I really enjoy the game as well. I just hope it can get some more exposure soon. I feel it should be marketed more like Uno than like Catan, since it is really easy to learn and play.
 
SapientWolf said:
I really enjoy the game as well. I just hope it can get some more exposure soon. I feel it should be marketed more like Uno than like Catan, since it is really easy to learn and play.

Yeah I think a XBLA Board Game pack retail disc would also work,

the thing is with board games there a really nice change of pace that everyone can play and very social just the battle is getting people to know that they're there and to give them a good try out.
 
Thanks for the insight into the game-making and decision process. Your efforts show. The game looks and plays great. A friend of mine, a huge board game geek, called this the definitive version of Carcassonne.
 
PilotPrecise said:
Huge reply

Whoa, I didn't expect that kind of answer for sure. ;)

Come to think of it, I don't think that we'll be 3-4 players very often anyway BUT if there is still work being done for this game, like the expansions and stuff, I request it! :lol

I don't know for how long I'll play it this often but as of now, a quicky game before leaving to work is mandatory.
 
Belfast said:
The only thing I dislike, even though its expected, is being able to play with our own group's old house rules. Instead of drawing one tile, we'd draw three at the beginning and keep a hand of available tiles the whole game. It made it a little less random and a little more strategic. Of course, with that, there'd be no local multi, either.

This is the only way to play Carcassonne. It's common amongst most Carcassonne owners, and any other way is incredibly inferior.
 
I'd like to vote for a patch that let's people share controllers for local play.

Other than that tiny flaw this game is brilliant. Great job porting this. Even the net code seems flawless. Thank you.
 
Hey, can I add something. The tabletop, character and title screen art are lovely. Whoever cooked that stuff up deserves a bonus.
 
Gowans007 said:
Ok guys now we have practiced im ready for a gaf leauge :D

It seems like the Worms league has died (and I only got to play one match!) but I would be up for a Carcassonne league. Anyone else? It's a great game.
 
I absolutely adore this game. Much better suited for me than Catan. If anyone wants to play, hit me up (same Gamertag as user name).

It's too bad that it got lost in the Catan buzz because I think it's a much better pick-up-and-play game, it's much easier to learn, and it's much faster to play.
 
Flynn said:
Thanks for the insight into the game-making and decision process. Your efforts show. The game looks and plays great. A friend of mine, a huge board game geek, called this the definitive version of Carcassonne.

The fact that it keeps score for you is reason enough to play it over the tabletop version. The game can become a real accounting nightmare at the end. It also prevents misplayed tiles, which can plague casual Carcassone games.

After getting this, I may as well toss the tabletop game in the garbage.
 
Gigglepoo said:
It seems like the Worms league has died (and I only got to play one match!) but I would be up for a Carcassonne league. Anyone else? It's a great game.

I'm in. I have liked this WAY more than I ever expected and I spent countless hours just trying to get that good enough game to get the +150 achievement. go figure the following two games after that were way over +150.

get rocksolidaudio in on this too, he owes me a rematch.
 
I own 2 360's and I actually bought two copies of Carcassonne, so I could play a "local" multiplayer game. I can't wait for the expansions... please let there be expansions.
 
Hitler Stole My Potato said:
It just seems too simple....I don't know. I desperately want another board game that'll grab like Catan did (and still does) but I don't think Carcassonne is it.

I don't mind the simplicity, but it just feels too random for my liking. It's not even cheap randomness like Catan where if you have more than 7 cards you're 90% going to roll a 7.

I guess I need to get better with farms.
 
Downloaded the demo, seems pretty cool.

iapetus said:
Maybe if you play... the farms tutorial?

(They're scored at the end of the game. You never get the dude back, and at the end of the game you score 3 points for each city touching the farm if you control it.)

AI doesn't seem great on the default settings - got almost all the single-player achievements on my first game on the default settings, and whupped the opponent by over 100 points.

Farms tutorial is not available in the demo.

Flynn said:
Hey, can I add something. The tabletop, character and title screen art are lovely. Whoever cooked that stuff up deserves a bonus.

YES, the interface shits on Catan (which I'm trying out now)
 
Top Bottom