Choices and Candyland

When it comes to board games growing up, I remember playing many games, Life, Go Fish, Candy Land, Snakes and Ladders, and Mouse Trap. Hundreds of hours were spent with friends and family playing these games. I remember them fondly and as such I was excited to play some again for nostalgia’s sake. However, after attempting this I found that many of these games are less than I remembered. Whether it be win-more mechanics, or simply randomness these games are better left as a memory. They simply in general don’t hold up to a replaying after learning more about game design.

However, I was very dismayed at the state of Candyland. I had spent hours playing this with my family. I would feel the intensity of waiting to draw my next move, the excitement of taking the Rainbow trail, sneaking past lord licorice. Seeing the candy cane forest with Mr. Mint. And who could forget getting trapped with Gloppy in the molasses swamp? Unfortunately for me I had an epiphany: after the game starts, the result is already determined. Once the last card has been shuffled you the player are no more then a mere viewer of the game. Candy Land has no interaction at all.

That feels weird right? Usually even simple games such as Go Fish offer decisions. There is some element of skill involved. However, Candyland doesn’t. Is Candyland really a game or is it more of a toy or show? Well, yes. It is, a game is defined as a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck. (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/game) Candyland is a form of play, that has rules and is decided (solely) by luck. So, a game by definition. And really, it’s a good game for the intended audience. It introduces small children to the concepts of luck, turns, drawing cards, and learning to accept losing.  It is an excellent introduction to gaming.

Yet as I’ve grown out of the stage where I am the intended audience for Candyland I find it interesting to examine the game to learn what matters in game design. Candyland is objectively fair. This is an appealing design, everyone is on an equal footing. Rolling dice or flipping a coin are similarly fair, but less interesting than games such as Chess. Chess is an example of a game that begins in a fair manner. You have the same number of pieces, however if you play chess over and over the win rate of a player with more skill will become distinctly higher than that of a lesser player. Candyland however you should expect to see all players converge on the same win rate in the long run view of things. Candyland gives equality of results in the long run and chess gives equality of opportunity that leads to differing results. Is one of these objectively better than another? That’s a complicated discussion that gets political. But probably not, it depends on what you want in a game. I value games that reward skill and wit, whereas others may just want to win occasionally.

I think my greatest complaint about candy land is that there isn’t any impactful interaction. Candyland could be played against a pretend player with no real impact on actual gameplay. In fact, Candyland could be used as a simulation simply enter a number of players shuffle the order of the deck and you’re done with the game. Record the results. Repeat. The game doesn’t need you present at all. Which when you think about it feels kind of disappointing. You are nor connected to the game and you have no control over your result. Failure is just that. It doesn’t reflect on you, nor does winning. Instead the game happens, then it’s over. It’s an almost nihilistic result, in the end it doesn’t matter. The competition is an illusion. You aren’t playing so much as watching things unfold. Which upon realization is an unsettling result that makes the brightly colored board feel more fake.

Can something be done? Perhaps, maybe try playing where you deal a hand of cards and allow the players to chose how to play them. Does the game need to be fixed however? After all it’s a stepping stone game that can raise many more children to learn how to play games. Personally, I think it serves its purpose of a tutorial well, but would like to see some adjustment that requires the players to have some level of input.