Email This Post    Print This Post

…without really trying. Yeah, right.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about what makes a game successful. Now obviously, the word ’successful’ is rather vague. What I’m referring to is simply the number of boxes that a certain game sells. This includes reprints, initial runs, and expansions.Basically, why does one game – X – outsell game Y when they both have more or less equal ratings on the Geek? I’m very aware of the obvious reasons as to why Ticket to Ride will outsell Die Macher. What I’ve been pondering is whether or not you could design a game deliberately to be a success. As in, ignore what YOU, as the designer really wants, and attempt to discern what the public will actually buy, en masse, and design the game to fit that mold. That’s obviously a pretty shallow idea, but is it completely implausible?

So, let’s look at the elements that (possibly) make a game receptive to the mass market. Please note that ‘mass market’ does not only include Wal Mart shoppers and people who browse games at Toys R Us. I’m talking about gamers here as well. The games I’m considering ’successful’ are ones that are not only sold in big box stores – Monopoly, Risk, Clue, Sorry, Life, etc etc – but those games that have been wildly successful both with non-gamers and gamers, like Ticket to Ride, Settlers of Catan, and Carcassonne. So what makes them uh… tick? Here’s my take:

(more…)

Email This Post    Print This Post

Well, it’s been over a week now since I got back from Dallas, so I guess it’s a good time to discuss what transpired. The long and the short of it is that I played lots of games. I taught Supernova a few times and played it a couple times as well.

Standouts:

Shark

Thebes

Gheos

Midgard

Vikings

Not too shabby: 

Buy Low, Sell High

Oregon

It’s Alive!

Blech:

Venus Needs Men!

El Capitain

Castle Merchants

 

Shortly after I arrived home, I ordered Shark (played) and Portobello Market (sight unseen). Once they arrive and I get a few more plays under my belt, I’ll do a review of Shark. A short review would be: very interesting with some potential for nasty play.

I can’t wait for next year.

Email This Post    Print This Post

…and about to get my (official) geekpass!

BGG.con, here I come!

Email This Post    Print This Post

Disclaimer: This comment comes from someone who not only has NOT played Titan and who is affiliated with Valley Games, as they are publishing my game, Supernova.

This post addresses the redesign of Titan, the redesign of the art of the game that has been posted on Mike’s blog and the backlash of the BGG community.

You can see Mike’s post HERE and read the response to his designs HERE.

This is obviously a touchy point for those who love this game and want to see it done as close to the original as possible. I understand that. However, I think some things are being forgotten in this kerfuffle (love that word :)) over round VS square and 3D CG art VS retro clean art. The things that are being forgotten and should be recognized are these:

• Valley Games are not a nameless, faceless corporation trying to screw you over. They are remaking these games because they LOVE them. I know these guys and they LOVE games. They hate the fact that great games like Hannibal, Titan, Big City, Die Macher etc, could not be played by the masses due to the fact that they were simply unavailable and incredibly expensive for people wanting them. They are trying to address this issue.

• Valley Games has listened to players’ requests from the beginning. Die Macher’s art didn’t go over well, so when moving on to their next projects, they took these critiques and went with more professional artists: Mike Doyle and Kurt Miller. Both of these guys are artists for their profession. They know all about color, contrast, light, print techniques, design… you name it, they’ve done it. In addition, Mike plays games a LOT so isn’t a stranger to board games either. I can’t speak for Kurt. What I’m saying is that VG and the artists as well are LISTENING to you, the players.

• Valley Games, due to their size, are not flush with cash. I don’t know their finances. I am not involved in their business except for the fact that I know them personally and they are publishing my game. However, I DO know that it takes a massive amount of capital to undertake something like what they are doing. They are simultaneously trying to publish and get ready for publishing, several games at a time. This means paying for artists, working with the printers, working with the distributors, reading posts on the forums, making sure their website is up to date, going over submitted prototypes, tweaking games for production, sending off parts/games, having full-time jobs, and a LIFE. They are doing a great job at all of these things, in my opinion. They, like yourselves, are unhappy when games don’t work out like they should. In fact, they are FAR MORE unhappy than you’ll ever be about it, as it costs them a huge amount of money to bring the game to you; and if it’s not nearly perfect, it affects their business and their livelihood. So you’d better believe this stuff is important for them to get right.

• As far as the current debate… You all have made your point. You like square chits. You prefer the older art. Some of these things may be changed before the final game comes out, some might not. Live with it. You’ll be okay. The game will still be fun. Recognize what VG is trying to do for the gamer and be understanding of some of the challenges they face. Buy the game anyway, in spite of the round chits (or even if they end up being square) and be happy that you’ve supported a company that is doing it’s damnedest to bring the most desirable games to the gamers. Not because they want to be rich.. but because they LOVE board games and the board game community.

I know I’ve ranted, but I am SO tired of these casually insulting comments … ‘if there’s round chits, I’m not buying it’ … ‘does anyone at VG even PLAY (emphasis mine) these games?’. These are ignorant comments and uncalled for. State your case clearly and plainly as to why you think square chits/old art is better and they will listen. Quasi-blackmailing comments like those mentioned will be ignored.

Email This Post    Print This Post

This is really just a reminder list for myself of games to seek out and play while at BGG.con. Some I own and are unplayed, some I might even want to buy…

I’ve heard plenty of good things about this one; it’s a definite must-play.

It used to be a train game? I’m in.

 On it’s way, but likely won’t arrive before BGG.con. Does anyone there want to teach me? I hear it’s deliciously nasty. Awesome.

 As mentioned in a previous post… I want to play this as it’s light (in more ways than one) and quick. Good opener/closer.

 One I’ve had my eye (just the one, mind you) on for a while. If there’s a used copy for sale, I’d definitely be interested in picking it up. It sounds right up my alley; light auctions with lots of nastiness. Makes me think of Santiago.

 This one is also on my to-play list. I like pickup and deliver. Plus, it comes with rocks. Sweeeeet.

 This is the old cover, but I’ll be looking for any version I can try. I love games that include dice where their use is not a completely random element.

 See comment on Mesopotamia, but remove the rocks.

 I already own it, plus it’s Stefan Dorra. Nuff said.

Email This Post    Print This Post

…that is not the question.

Often on BGG (for the uninitiated that found their way here and don’t know what I’m talking about, BGG refers to the BoardGameGeek, an extremely popular board gaming site) discussions will rage in regards to components, box size, quality, mechanics, rulesets, number of players.. and on and on. Virtually everything that is possible to discuss with relation to the board games, has been discussed. To death. And I mean to DEATH. These are people (yes, I am one of them too) that are passionate about board games. However, one thing that seems to come only in reviews is the discussion of choice.

In my mind, choice is the primary element in board games. Yes, games are about strategy. Tactics, sure. Theme? Of course. Colorful bits are great in addition to a game having a beautiful and captivating board. But that’s not really what makes a game fun.

Granted, sitting around for a time with your buddies is always good, even if its over a game of Risk or a game you dislike. (this might only be the case if there is much beer, depending on your preference) However, sometimes a game itself can be captivating.. without fancy pieces, pretty boards, or even much in the way of theme. Why is that? Is it simply the pushing around of wooden/plastic bits or the rolling of dice?

(more…)