JPH0422600B2 - - Google Patents

Description

[Detailed Description of the Invention] [Industrial Field of Application] The present invention provides a control processing device for producing a game that creates many obstacles, especially for advantageous players who play thinking-type games. In addition to calculating and controlling the probability of failure occurrence so that fewer failures occur for disadvantaged players, we also calculate the value of points that are given unconditionally to players and the corresponding The present invention relates to a control processing device for producing Hakuchu, which is configured to control the probability of giving points.

[Problems to be solved by conventional technology and invention]

Conventionally, existing so-called educational games generally train reflexes, such as shooting down a fast-moving flying disc with a ray gun or the like. In contrast to educational games for training reflexes, there are so-called thinking games in which the player uses his or her own thoughts to make and execute appropriate judgments while progressing through the game. For example, there are games for training thinking, such as shogi and Othello. In this thinking game for educating and training thinking, if there is a difference in advantage or disadvantage between the players, there is a chance to turn the game around, but the game generally becomes one-sided. The problem was that it was a win, but it lacked fun.

[Means for solving problems]

In order to solve the above-mentioned problems, the present invention creates many obstacles for those who are advantageous while playing a thinking game, and creates fewer obstacles for those who are disadvantaged. In addition to calculating and controlling the probability of occurrence of an obstacle, the score during play is calculated sequentially so that neither player collapses before reaching the goal, and the score of each player is calculated. By calculating the difference, etc., and controlling the score value and probability that are given unconditionally, it is possible to create a thinking-type game. Therefore, the control processing device for producing Hakuchu of the present invention dynamically controls the game so that the game is Hakuchu in a manner that follows the advantageous or disadvantageous situation of the player playing the thinking-type game. In the processing device, a failure occurrence probability calculating means calculates a probability of occurrence of a failure in a manner corresponding to the score at the time of the trial in the process in which the players alternately repeat the trial; A mutual fall prevention score calculation means that calculates points to be given to each individual player in a manner that compensates for the reduction in the player's score when the player's score decreases in the process, and a mutual fall prevention score calculation means that calculates the score calculated by the mutual fall prevention score calculation means to the player. comprising at least a co-collapse prevention application probability calculation means for calculating an unconditionally given probability based on the scores of each player, and generating a failure based on the failure occurrence probability calculated by the failure occurrence probability calculation means, The system is configured to allow the player to try, and to unconditionally give the player the score calculated by the co-fall prevention score calculation means based on the application probability calculated by the co-fall prevention application probability calculation means. It is a feature.

〔Example〕

An embodiment of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 1 is an overall configuration diagram of one embodiment of the present invention, FIGS. 2 to 4 are configuration diagrams explaining the configuration of one embodiment of the present invention shown in FIG. 1, and FIGS. 5 to 8 are diagrams of FIG. 4 to 4 show specific configuration diagrams to which the configuration of one embodiment of the present invention is applied.

3 in Figure 1 represents the state in which the parameters for preventing "co-collapse" are set, and 7 to 14 in Figure 2
Express in detail using . 4 in Figure 1 represents a state in which one trial is performed, and 15 in Figures 3 and 4.
30 to 30 in detail.

FIG. 1 shows a configuration diagram of a thinking-type game, and 1 in the figure shows a state in which the processing of the game itself is started. This shows a state in which preprocessing is completed and processing for starting the game is executed.

Here, the basic settings necessary for the control processing for producing Hakuchu used in this embodiment will be explained.

(1) Two players play and the score is given in advance.
Compete to reach a predetermined ``Goal'' while increasing or decreasing the amount.

(2) In order to achieve a “goal”, some kind of “trial” is required.
Players repeat this in turn. This results in
Thinking-oriented education and training will be conducted.

(3) In the process of repeating “trials”,
Provide a case where an ``obstruction'' occurs that prevents the ``trial.'' The probability that the "obstacle" will occur is dynamically set in accordance with the "score" that the player possesses, and is controlled to produce a successful match.

(4) Control is performed to prevent so-called "mutual collapse", where the "score" of the players decreases and all players are unable to reach the "goal" together. The "co-falling" control is dynamically set according to the player's score. The following will be explained in order.

2 in Figure 1 is one trial until everyone reaches the goal. 3 to 6 in the diagrams described later.
Indicates a state in which the characters are played alternately.

3 in the figure shows a state in which the parameters of the "co-collapse" prevention measure according to the present invention are set. This is to set parameters to prevent a situation in which both players (hereinafter referred to as players) cannot reach the "Goal", and will be explained in detail using FIG. 2.

4 in the figure indicates a state in which one trial is executed. This indicates a state in which the player attempts a thinking game once, and as described later using Figure 3, obstacles are created in a dynamic manner that corresponds to advantageous or disadvantageous situations to produce a match. The probability of occurrence is controlled.

5 in the figure shows a state in which the conditions for "Goal" are checked again.

6 in the figure indicates a state in which players are replaced. This means that multiple players alternately try states 3 to 5.

By executing the control processing as described above, simultaneous collapse is prevented and the probability of occurrence of failure is controlled in response to favorable or unfavorable situations, so that a thrilling game development that is always in full swing can be produced. I can do it. The configuration and operation shown in FIG. 1 will be explained in detail below using FIGS. 2 to 4.

FIG. 2 shows a configuration diagram for setting the parameters of the 3 "co-collapse" prevention measures in FIG. 1.

In the figure, when the score owned by the player becomes "negative", a value with a different sign is set as the value of "score to be given" as shown in state 8. For example, if you have "-30 points", set it as 0-(-30)=30, that is, 30 points. in this way,
If the score owned by the player becomes negative, the set score is dynamically given based on the probability specified by states 11 to 14, which will be described later, so that it is possible to prevent the players from falling down together. On the other hand, if the score owned by the player is "positive" in state 7, it is set to a predetermined fixed value as shown in state 9.

When there is a significant difference in scores between players within 10 in the figure, the player with the lowest score makes an attempt as shown in state 11.
Indicates a state that increases the probability of taking preventive measures. As a result, the probability of points being unconditionally given to a disadvantaged player with few points increases, giving him an advantage, so control is performed so that a match is produced.

When the opponent has already "Goaled" in 10 in the figure, a state that increases the probability that a player who has not yet "Goaled" will take the measures to prevent "collapsing together" as described in State 7 when attempting to do so, as shown in State 12. shows.
This allows players who have not yet reached the goal to reach the goal quickly and prevents them from losing interest.

In the figure, when the score is large within 10, as shown in state 13, it indicates a state in which the probability of taking measures to prevent "co-falling" is lowered. As a result, the score is controlled to be reduced, and as a result, the score is controlled to be low.

When the score is small within 10 in the figure, state 14 indicates a state in which the probability of taking measures to prevent "co-falling" is increased. As a result, the probability of being given unconditionally is controlled to be high, and "co-falling" is prevented,
It is controlled so that Hakunaka is produced.

As described above, as a measure to prevent "mutual defeat", a score calculation means for preventing mutual defeat is provided that increases the points given when the score becomes negative, and the probability of giving the score is reduced so that the difference in scores between multiple players is reduced. Since the application probability calculation means for preventing mutual collapse is provided, it is possible to produce a match for players of the thinking-type game.

FIGS. 3 and 4 each show a block diagram for executing 41 trials in FIG. 1, respectively.

If no measures are taken to prevent "co-collapse" in 15 in the figure, the probability of failure occurring when reaching the "Goal" is set as shown in state 16. At this time, state 16
The probability of occurrence of an obstacle is set in such a way that when a player has a large number of points, the probability of an obstacle occurring (probability of obstacle) is increased as shown in state 17, and control is performed so that a match is produced. On the other hand, if the player has few points in state 16, the probability of failure is lowered as shown in state 18, and control is performed so that a match is produced.

19 in the figure is a case in which no measures are taken to prevent "co-collapse" in state 15, and when "goal" is not achieved, a trial to "goal" shown in state 20, that is, a trial shown in FIG. I do. On the other hand, state 1
If the player has "Goal" within 9, the player has already finished and there is no need to try further.

Reference numeral 21 in the figure indicates a state in which a predetermined "score" that has already been determined is given to the player when measures are taken to prevent "mutual collapse" in state 15.

As explained above, in state 16, the probability of occurrence of an obstacle when reaching the "Goal" is controlled according to the "score" possessed by the player, that is, the probability of occurrence of an obstacle is increased for a player with a large number of points, On the other hand, since a fault occurrence probability calculation means is provided to control the probability of fault occurrence to be low for players with low scores, a match is created between the players.

FIG. 4 shows a block diagram that describes in detail the trial for achieving 20 "Goal" in FIG. 3.

In the figure, 22 indicates that when a failure occurs during an attempt to achieve a ``Goal'', the ``score'' etc. are increased or decreased in a case-by-case manner as shown in a state 23. First, state 23
If the player overcomes an obstacle within the game, his or her score increases as shown in state 24, and the opponent's score decreases, and further attempts can be made as shown in state 25. Although not shown, sometimes it is also possible to directly interfere with the opponent. Second, if the failure is avoided within state 23, one can simply try as shown in state 26. Thirdly, if the player is unable to overcome the obstacle in state 23, if the player's score is "correct" in state 27, the player's score will be reduced as shown in states 28 and 29, but the player can try again. Furthermore, if the score of the player in question is "negative" in state 27, no attempt can be made.

If no failure occurs within 22 in the diagram, state 30
You can try it out as shown below.

As described above, the system is configured to make thinking work to overcome the obstacles. The score is controlled to increase or decrease depending on whether the obstacle is overcome or not.

FIGS. 5 to 8 show the configuration of a so-called "seaplane game" to which the configuration of one embodiment of the present invention shown in FIGS. 1 to 4 is applied. The "Kaimono Game" is a game in which players given money in their possession shop for predetermined products quickly and cheaply. At this time, ``natural enemies'' and ``probability games'' are prepared as the aforementioned obstacles. In addition, ``happenings'' are being prepared as a measure to prevent ``collapsing together''.

1 to 6 in Figure 5 are 1 to 6 in Figure 1
correspond to each. The setting of the probability and amount of "happening" shown in 3 in FIG. 3 and 4 in FIG. 5 will be explained in detail below with reference to FIGS. 6 to 8.

Figure 6 shows the probability of ``happening'' in Figure 5.
This shows a state in which an amount is set, and corresponds to FIG. 2. 7 to 14 in FIG. 6 correspond to 7 to 14 in FIG. 2, respectively.

7 in FIG. 6 indicates a debt, and as shown in state 8, the value of the "happening metal" is the metal in question. For example, if the person owes 300 yen, the loan will be deducted and an additional 300 yen will be given. In this way, when a player runs out of money and borrows money, the amount given by the "happening" is set dynamically, so it is possible to prevent both players from going under. On the other hand, if the player does not have any debt in state 7, the value becomes a predetermined fixed value as shown in state 9.

Assets between players within 10 in the figure (total amount of money held and the price of purchased items)
When there is a significant difference between
Make it easier to get out. As a result, the unfavorable player with less money becomes advantageous, and the game is controlled so that a match is produced.

When the opponent is already ahead within 10 in the figure, "happening" is made easier to appear as shown in state 12. This allows players who haven't progressed to move up quickly and prevents them from losing interest.

When there are many assets in 10 in the figure, "pupping" is made less likely to occur as shown in state 13. As a result, assets are controlled to be reduced, and in turn, a poor relationship is produced.

When there are few assets in 10 in the figure, "happenings" are more likely to occur as shown in state 14. This increases the probability that you will receive the amount set by state 8 or 9 unconditionally, so it is possible to
controlled to prevent

As mentioned above, due to the "happening" that was established as a measure to prevent "mutual collapse", a score calculation means for preventing mutual collapse is provided which increases the amount of money that can be obtained when borrowing money. Since a means for calculating the application probability of preventing mutual collapse is provided to control the probability of occurrence of a "happening", it is possible to prevent "mutual collapse" for players of the thinking type game and, in turn, produce a match.

FIGS. 7 and 8 each show a block diagram for executing the 41 trials in FIG. 5, respectively.

15 to 21 in FIG. 7 correspond to 15 to 21 shown in FIG. 3. 15 in Figure 7
If no "happening" occurs within the store, state a shows a state in which the user chooses whether to go to the store, make a phone call, or return home. State 16 sets the probability of a natural enemy or a good master. Here, the natural enemy corresponds to a bad owner, and if you enter a store run by that owner, you will be forced to play a ``probability game'' that will be described later. At this time, if you have a lot of money in state 16 (if you have a lot of points in state 16 in Figure 3), the probability is dynamically set so that there are more natural enemies and fewer good masters, as shown in state 17. be done. Here, a good host is someone who, when leaving the store, gives you a ``tasu ticket'' (to be described later), that is, a ticket that can improve your winning rate in the ``probability game''. As a result, the advantageous player is placed in a disadvantageous position, and the game is controlled so that a match is produced. On the other hand, if the amount of money in hand is small in state 16, the probability is set so as to reduce the number of natural enemies and increase the number of good masters, as shown in state 18. This puts disadvantaged players in an advantageous position.

In the figure, reference numeral 19 indicates a state in which when the user returns home, it is checked whether the user has done any shopping as shown in state b. This means checking the "Goal" state in 19 in FIG. On the other hand, if the user does not return home in state 19 but goes shopping, a trial as shown in FIG. 8 is carried out in the store shown in state 20.

If an "happening" occurs in state 15 in the figure, a predetermined amount of money that has already been determined is given to the player unconditionally, as shown in state 21. This can prevent "collapsing together".

As explained above, in state 16, the probability of encountering a natural enemy or a good master is controlled according to the amount of money a player has, that is, the probability of encountering a natural enemy is increased for a player with a large amount of money. At the same time, the probability of encountering a good master is lowered, and for players with low scores, the probability of encountering a natural enemy is lowered, and the probability of encountering a good master is increased. Because of this, a friendly relationship will be created between the players.

FIG. 8 shows a block diagram that describes in detail the trials in 20 stores in FIG. 7.

If the owner of the shop is a natural enemy (bad owner) in 22 in the figure, the player is forced to play a ``probability game'' with a winning rate of 1/4, as shown in state c. On this occasion,
As shown in state d, the winning rate of the ``probability game'' can be increased by inputting ``tickets to win''. for example,
If you input one card, the winning rate is 1/3, if you input two cards, the winning rate is 1/2, and if you input three cards, the winning rate is 1/1.

If you win the "probability game" in state 23 in the figure, you can take goods or money from the other player as shown in state 24, and state 25
You can shop as shown below. Also, if you win by using 3 "Otasu Tickets" within 23 in the diagram,
In other words, if you input three "tasting tickets" in state d, the winning rate becomes 1/1, and you can win the "probability game" unconditionally, so you can make the specified purchase as shown in state 26. .

On the other hand, if you lose the "probability game" in state 23 in the figure, if you have an item in state 27, you will be taken away from it as shown in state 28, and you will not be able to shop as shown in state 29. can.

If the store owner is not the enemy in 22 in the figure, the user can go shopping as shown in state 30.

In the figure, if the store owner is good, e will give you a ``tasu ticket'' as shown in state f. On the other hand, if the shop owner is not good, he won't give you a ``tasu ticket.''

In the figure, when the number of coins paid and the number of coins given as change match, g will issue you a ``tasu ticket'' as shown in state h. On the other hand, in other cases that do not match, the ``Otasu Ticket'' will not be provided.

We set up a ``probability game'' like the one above, and if you have a lot of assets/little assets, the probability of encountering the ``probability game'' is high/low, and the probability of meeting a good master and being given a ``tasu ticket'' is low. / Since the probability is controlled so that it increases, it will be produced as if they are close friends.

〔Effect of the invention〕

As explained above, according to the present invention, the probability of encountering an obstacle is calculated and controlled in a manner that corresponds to the advantage or disadvantage of the person playing the thinking game, and also In order to prevent players from collapsing before reaching the goal, the score during play is calculated sequentially, and the value of the score awarded and the probability of awarding the score are controlled, making it easy to play a thinking game. It can be performed in this way. In other words, the probability of encountering an obstacle and the value of the so-called penalty when encountering the obstacle are controlled in a manner corresponding to the points owned by the player, and the loss of interest due to players collapsing together is prevented. for,
Since the value and probability of points that are unconditionally given when the number of points in possession is running low, it is possible to let the player try out the thinking-type game in a friendly manner and continue without losing interest. can be done.

[Brief explanation of drawings]

FIG. 1 is an overall configuration diagram of one embodiment of the present invention, FIGS. 2 to 4 are configuration diagrams explaining the configuration of one embodiment of the present invention shown in FIG. 1, and FIGS. 5 to 8 are diagrams of FIG. 4 to 4 show specific configuration diagrams to which the configuration of one embodiment of the present invention is applied. 3 in Figure 1 represents the state in which the parameters for preventing "co-collapse" are set,
This is shown in detail using numbers 7 to 14 in FIG. 4 in Figure 1 represents the state in which one trial is performed, and the third
15 to 30 in the figure and FIG.

Claims (1)

[Scope of Claims] 1. A control processing device that dynamically controls the game so that it follows the advantageous or disadvantageous situation of players playing a thinking-type game. failure occurrence probability calculation means for calculating the probability of occurrence of a failure in a manner corresponding to the score at the time of the trial in the process of repeating trials; A mutual defeat prevention score calculation means that calculates points to be given to each individual player in a manner that compensates for the decrease in the case of a loss, and a probability that the score calculated by the mutual defeat prevention score calculation means is unconditionally given to a player. at least a co-collapse prevention application probability calculation means that calculates based on the scores of the players, generates a failure based on the failure occurrence probability calculated by the failure occurrence probability calculation means, and allows the player to try, The present invention is characterized in that the score calculated by the mutual collapse prevention score calculation means is unconditionally given to the player based on the application probability calculated by the mutual collapse prevention application probability calculation means. Control processing unit.