Soulcaster

Soulcaster is an Xbox Live Indie game that takes plays like Gauntlet and a Tower Defense game combined.  Monsters spawn from certain points and rush towards the player, whose only method of defense is to summon immobile warriors – a melee blocker, a powerful ranged character with many limitations, and a bomber with area-of-effect attacks.

It builds on that very human desire to build the most efficient killing machine found in tower defense games and adds the spice of direct vulnerability that a player avatar provides.  Monsters spawn unpredictably and the player is forced to react quite quickly, setting up hasty defenses from new angles.  It works well, it’s aesthetically exactly where it should be, and it’s a lot of fun.

So what would I play around with in the design?

  1. I’d like to experiment with the pacing.  It’s extremely fast right now – tables turn quickly, and monsters spawn in unexpected directions.  The game isn’t overly hard, but I felt less in control than I would have liked.  If the game were slowed down, and a player had another second or two to react, more complicated strategies might come up.  It’s the decision Chromehounds made, and in that game it was the right decision, though they were criticized for the restraints it put on the single-player game.  A smarter campaign would have de-emphasized that aspect or made it more similar to the multiplayer, the reason Chromehounds was balanced the way it was.  If Soulcaster was slower, would it be more friendly to some players?  Would it still be challenging?
  2. There’s no good way to reorient your forces once they’re placed.  Right now A, B, and X lay down one of the fighters, you have a maximum number you can lay down at once (3-5), and they are recalled into your inventory when they die or by pressing Y.  Y returns them in the order they were placed.  What this means is that if you want to reorient your forces when the front of the battle changes you may have to pull them up by taking away your strong warrior first.  A proposed solution: a contextual button that allows you to pick up a warrior you are touching and facing.  This would run the risk of exposing players to too many control options at once, of course – but the benefit might outweigh the cost in complexity.
  3. I can imagine an evolution of the game that combines the sliding block pushing with the current system – summon warriors, then a push sends them moving in one direction until they hit an obstacle.  Some interesting fighting puzzles could be devised from that…

Soulcaster makes a strong case for integrating action elements into traditional strategy gameplay.  By putting the player more directly into the mix, the player shifts from a dispassionate observer to one fighting for his or her life.  Of course, it could be seen as adding strategy elements to an action template as well.  Either way, it shows the value in engaging different thought processes at the same time.  It’s the same as adding RPG elements (smartly!) to an action game – a game can provide challenges on multiple levels, if it is able to wrangle the designs effectively.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *