Star Chamber's Indie PC CCG Goodness Probed

Thanks to Ferrago for their in-depth review of PC online collectible card game Star Chamber, praising the relatively unknown indie title as "an invigorating little game", and suggesting: "It's been a long time since this jaded gamer was so captivated by a game." The same site has an interview with the creators from Nayantara Studios, in which they discuss the genesis of the game (from "a love of well-balanced, simple-yet-complex boardgames and adding a CCG element to be able to produce a high-quality 'CCG meets computer boardgame'"), and the future of indie gaming ("I do think that with the big publishers and teams focused on producing massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs, and especially with the consoles starting to dwarf PC sales, I think there is a significant window for the smaller, independent studios to take back some of the PC market.")

Tried it..

[CashCarSTAR]

Didn't like it.

Couldn't really say why. I felt as though the cards were too..vanilla, if that makes any sense. Nothing that really shifted the game outside of the strategic roots. Nothing that shook and rechanged the balance of the game. And once you had an advantage, it was hard to come back.

Just my opinion however.

Re:Tried it..

[Txiasaeia]

Couldn't disagree more, but I HATE the concept of having to buy cards in order to play. If it were a standalone game with built-in cards (a la MTG comp games, or yu-gi-oh for consoles) and cost $30-40, AND had a decent single player component, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. MUCH freaking better than MOO3.

Re:Tried it..

[dswensen]

AFAIK, you can play the "simple" game with a small deck of common cards for no money... just to get a feel for it, or play a simple game. Sure, it's a bit stripped down, but no cost involved.

A starter pack is like $15, roughly equivalent to what something like Bejeweled would cost. And buying a ton of cards doesn't really net you much (I know, I blew a wad on this game when I first started playing, and it hasn't given me a commanding edge by any means).

Re:Tried it..

[Txiasaeia]

I guess I just don't like online games. What am I paying for? The pleasure of gaming against another human? I can do that already with MTG or yu-gi-oh, and at no additional cost.

When I play comp games I want to play against a kickass AI - my schedule is crazy and sometimes I only have 5, 10 minutes to play before I'm out and about again. I suspect that a lot of people are like me too.

Re:2 things

[Cosmik]

Awww, heck. HTML would be useful. Here you go:

"I do think that with the big publishers and teams focused on producing massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs, and especially with the consoles starting to dwarf PC sales, I think there is a significant window for the smaller, independent studios to take back some of the PC market."

2 things:

1) Big publishers are defined as having big money, and therefore, naturally, they are going to make "uber-budget" games. Big publishers aren't interested in small budg

Re:2 things

[gabec]

1) Big publishers are defined as having big money, and therefore, naturally, they are going to make "uber-budget" games. Big publishers aren't interested in small budget - that's how indie came to exist. It's nothing new. You can't take back something that you are.

Since we're being anal here, they said take back a hold on the PC gaming market, not take back small budget game creation.

2) If PC sales are being dwarfed then that means relatively, less PC games are being sold. That means with a smaller wind

Re:2 things

[Cosmik]

Since we're being anal here, they said take back a hold on the PC gaming market, not take back small budget game creation. *Looks around* Anal? Nah, looks like you're the only one being anal. I was being ostentatious. :p

But yes, looking back at that quote, I did lose my point there with the last sentence and you picked up on my mistake. Teach me to surf Slashdot at work.

I was merely pointing out that big companies have never tried to look anywhere else but the big budget titles. The quote says they are

Re:2 things

[Cosmik]

Ok, that's it. Surfing Slashdot at work does not equal good HTML skills.

Re:2 things

[Dave_21-6]

A couple of things here of my own:

The big publishers are focused on a couple of things currently. First is licensing properties and making games using those properties. Second is producing sequels of games that have done well in the past.

There is a large gap between freeware games and these large budget titles that an indie developer can actually compete successfully in. They might have to use online distribution to get to their customers, but those customers ARE out there - I can attest to that. Ther

Re:2 things

[Rallion]

Does that really make sense, indie games 'taking back' a piece of the PC market? What happens is this: a small developer makes a game worthy of great praise. Small game developer becomes big developer practically overnight. Small companies still have negligable hold. If they stay small, they at least cease to be indie, saddling up with a bigger company.

Besides, I'm not sure anybody has a significant hold an a portion of the PC market. It's too volatile to make such a claim. The only thing faster than a sma

It's only ok

[Apreche]

I played it when Tycho mentioned it. It was ok, but like most CCGs he who spends the most money and has the best cards wins. Skill in playing the game is not a major factor in winning. Luck and money are the primary determiners. It's pretty neat because it plays like a simplified Master of Orion. But its really just another CCG in disguise. They didn't fool me after I played it 3 or 4 times.

Re:It's only ok

[dswensen]

I don't know that they were really seeking to "fool" anyone at all. The game is pretty up-front about what it is as far as I could tell.

I disagree that skill and strategy are not major factors. I personally spent a lot of money on the game (more than I should have), and have been beated by players with inferior decks who play very cleverly.

One of the best online games out there...

[Xemu22]

This game is *definitely* worth a look. The synergy between the boardgame and card mechanics is some of the best pure gameplay I've ever seen.

This positive Gamespot review:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/starchamber/ index.html

... is pretty accurate, IMO. Given that it's a small download, with a lot of free content, what have you got to lose? I became totally hooked on the game when I first played it.

Disclaimer: I'm a player of the game

[InfinityWpi]

I've got a soft spot for online CCGs (Chron X, Sanctum, With Authority, etc), and Starchamber ranks up there as one of the best three I've seen. If there had been a game this good to slap the Star Trek license onto, maybe (that trek CCG) would've survived a bit longer. The game's a little simplistic right now, but most CCGs start that way when they only have one expansion... let's face it, Magic used to be just 'who gets the Shivan Dragon out first: The CCG'. There's a good, solid base there to build on, and I'm hoping this game stays around for a while.