gilhova - Network

But this is a reminder that there are times you may want to avoid developing your game too much. Be careful about making changes that reduce...

But this is a reminder that there are times you may want to avoid developing your game too much. Be careful about making changes that reduce the ceiling of your game, no matter how much they raise your floor.

/🧵

And I think of that unfortunate designer I mentioned at the top, with no north star to design to. It's impossible to make any informed...

And I think of that unfortunate designer I mentioned at the top, with no north star to design to. It's impossible to make any informed decisions about your game without that kind of direction.

And maybe someone will suggest a way to reduce the friction AND keep the beloved mechanism! Stranger things have happened.

Like: the beloved mechanism stays. I will accept the friction. I want to keep the game charismatic and distinctive. Maybe I would go in the...

Like: the beloved mechanism stays. I will accept the friction. I want to keep the game charismatic and distinctive. Maybe I would go in the other direction if I was aiming the game for a wider release.

This is a conclusion I never would have come to in my younger days as a game designer. In my earlier days, I never would have thought of it. In my middle days, I would have removed the mechanism, only considering the raising of the floor and not the lowering of the ceiling.

It's unlikely (though not impossible) that my not-a-train-game will be published through traditional means. That's not a bad thing...

It's unlikely (though not impossible) that my not-a-train-game will be published through traditional means. That's not a bad thing in my case. I'm actually designing towards that. It's giving me license to make particular decisions.

A lot of long-time game fans and designers mourn games that are over-developed. They play very smoothly and elegantly, but they have all...

A lot of long-time game fans and designers mourn games that are over-developed. They play very smoothly and elegantly, but they have all their grit and drama removed. Sometime that even causes a game to fail commercially. It's just not memorable enough.

There's no correct answer to that question. It depends entirely on your goals for the game. Are you pitching it to publishers? There are...

There's no correct answer to that question. It depends entirely on your goals for the game. Are you pitching it to publishers? There are a lot of publishers who would prefer the first. But there are publishers who would prefer the second.

This is an issue I've struggled with for a long time. It's related to a question I've asked before: Would you rather have a game...

This is an issue I've struggled with for a long time. It's related to a question I've asked before: Would you rather have a game that is enjoyed, liked, and played by tens of thousands, or a game that is adored and worshiped by a few hundred?

If I went ahead with this smoothing-out, I would be raising the game's enjoyment floor. That is, if you want to look at it from a...

If I went ahead with this smoothing-out, I would be raising the game's enjoyment floor. That is, if you want to look at it from a completely cold, mathematical view, the players' minimum enjoyment of the game would improve.

But the smoothing-out would also reduce the game's enjoyment ceiling! I'd be removing both extremes—both its lowest lows and its highest highs.

It's not that the mechanism is causing those issues. Rather, there's a cascading effect from removing the friction, and one of those...

It's not that the mechanism is causing those issues. Rather, there's a cascading effect from removing the friction, and one of those downstream effects is that the beloved mechanism goes away.

I thought about it for a while, and I came to a realization.

And I realized a way that I can remove the friction. And the gameplay would be simple and intuitive, and playing and strategizing would be a...

And I realized a way that I can remove the friction. And the gameplay would be simple and intuitive, and playing and strategizing would be a snap.

The cost? I would lose that beloved mechanism!

So I have a mechanism in my not-a-train-game that players LOVE, and is a source of enormous tension and joy. I also have a tiny bit of...

So I have a mechanism in my not-a-train-game that players LOVE, and is a source of enormous tension and joy. I also have a tiny bit of friction in the core loop. Not an untenable amount, but enough to keep a lookout for opportunities to streamline that friction away.

There was a fellow who used to attend our playtest group who would dutifully listen to everybody's advice, and try to implement them...

There was a fellow who used to attend our playtest group who would dutifully listen to everybody's advice, and try to implement them all. His games did not improve much from session to session, because he had no north star. Some feedback, despite being well-intentioned, will not be right.

I encourage new designers to be aggressive in terms of trying new things and not holding on too hard to existing elements of their designs....

I encourage new designers to be aggressive in terms of trying new things and not holding on too hard to existing elements of their designs. "Kill your darlings," as they say. But that doesn't mean you should be constantly switching things up with no guide.

One of the tricky things about game design, like any other artistic endeavor, is that there are no hard-and-fast rules, beyond maybe "a...

One of the tricky things about game design, like any other artistic endeavor, is that there are no hard-and-fast rules, beyond maybe "a recreational board game should be tested as many times as possible, by as many people as possible." And I'm sure someone might have found an exception to even that.

🧵

#boardgames

I'd be surprised if there were no solution for something like this. Surely this is a common use case? /🧵

I'd be surprised if there were no solution for something like this. Surely this is a common use case? /🧵

And of course there's Google Forms. Google Forms would allow a baker to enter and update info about themselves, but linking their cake...

And of course there's Google Forms. Google Forms would allow a baker to enter and update info about themselves, but linking their cake info would be hard and/or annoying to both the user and me.

I've looked at possible solutions like Airtable, Filemaker Pro, and Kintone, but they don't seem to allow the kind of custom access...

I've looked at possible solutions like Airtable, Filemaker Pro, and Kintone, but they don't seem to allow the kind of custom access for bakers that I want, where each baker can only see and edit their own cakes, for thousands of bakers.

Now that you know my requirements… is there an online turnkey solution that can do this with minimal fuss? I know I can do it with like...

Now that you know my requirements… is there an online turnkey solution that can do this with minimal fuss? I know I can do it with like MySQL and PHP myself, but I'm looking for some kind of platform that has the basic relationships down, and all I need to do is customize fields.

So:* Now I have a table of parties.* Each party can have multiple cakes, each of which links back to their baker.* Bakers can join a party...

So:
* Now I have a table of parties.
* Each party can have multiple cakes, each of which links back to their baker.
* Bakers can join a party with one of more cakes.
* Bakers can only edit their participation info up to a certain point.

Now, let's say I have a list of parties that bakers can bring cakes to. A baker can join a party, and bring at least one of their cakes...

Now, let's say I have a list of parties that bakers can bring cakes to. A baker can join a party, and bring at least one of their cakes to it. However, I don't want bakers to be able to un-join a party or swap out cakes after a certain time; that would have to be done with my approval.