Quote from: Omega;863119Getting people to playtest and getting the right people to playtest can be the tricky part.

Agreed.

That's why I like the game designer's Meetup. It's supportive, but not bullshitty. We focus on what works, what doesn't work, and what is confusing. There have been several times the designer went "oh shit, this is crap" and brought a new version back that really rocked...or was still shit. That happened too.

What kills alot of indie games is that most amatures have really no concept of the huge amount of cost that can go into making a game and the little profit mage back if you tally it up. Many have it in their heads that the publisher just sits back and gets fat off the designers hard work. When the onus of most of the real hard work and risk is on the publisher side.

PNP/PDF may cut out alot of that. But if you go physical copy then research the costs all down the line.

User testing is an under appreciated concept in many, many fields. To ensure a quality product, and to reduce costs in the long run, test your product early and test it often. Like, have people review each and every draft.

You should only assume that it's "your precious baby" after going through the terrible pain, sweat, blood and tears of birth (when it's out in the world, on shelves).

Skipping the rigorous testing and rewrite phases is cheating, in my opinion, and risks a flawed work.

Designing and making games is work like anything else. Revenue is isn't everything, it is the only thing.

The dilettante game designing is rampart in TTRPGs because anyone can (and does) claim to be game designer and/or invent some theory about it. These "theorists" do not usually bother to actually read any books about subject of game design at all. Since we do have good books about game design it boggles my mind...

Second thing that bothers me is the sheer ignorance concerning play testing. When people whine about having tough time with strange people playing their rules it is good to remember that those strange people are your actual buyers...

I teach game development as a day job and the reason why I do not have these kinds of problems is that people I teach are typically unemployed. They start from day one with the goal of making money which means making games that are fun and pondering how to market them to make sales. It is wonderful how impending poverty concentrates one's mind to essential...

Yes, I am ranting.

Reading that page I have a question.... What does #threeforged. mean?

I think play testing with new people is important, but I think one of the most overlooked things is people running the game in a regular campaign of their own. I mean making that the game they run every week so they fully understand it. Play testing gets you lots of good information about how different types of gamers feel about your mechanics. But it can't inform you as well about how the game holds up over long term play in your natural style of running a game. If you don't know how the game works at your own table, chances are it won't work so well at other tables.

Quote from: Spinachcat;863121Agreed x1000...BUT the low barrier to entry in the POD/PDF market means that loads of noob designers who don't expect real sales can put their "pure" baby on the market without any risk of "failure."

I am a thick skinned mofo, but DAMN playtesting can be rough on the soul. The worst is when you realize your brain had the right idea, but the page doesn't explain it in plain language and now the good idea is getting shit upon (quite deservingly) at the play test.

.

I've seen some real meltdowns at playlists.

Quote from: Phillip;863091It seems that fewer still do the blind testing -- testing by people with no prior involvement in the project -- that goes a long way toward cleaning up problems that otherwise might not even be noticed.

This is true--blind testing and even reading by people otherwise not involved is necessary. Kind of like having someone other than the programmer test some code. I know what it does; I wrote it; of course my "tests" work.

I'm giving feedback on one group's RPG and getting feedback from another person on one I'm writing. It was obvious (I think) from the one I read that the writers had walked people through character creation, as that section had a lot of out of order or scattered information. A quick rewrite made it actually usable.

It was painfully obvious from just a single person reading what I'd wrote (albeit a very rough version) that the way I was trying to explain the core concept of the game was never going to work the way I was going about it. The new way I like a lot better so far.

I may have misread the intention of the post, but I think the main gripe is people designing stuff without actual play experience as a guide (as opposed to theory-wank I infer).

edit: Oh boy, get the popcorn out:

Quote+Jason Cordova Then I suggest you avoid framing "the academy" in opposition to play, and that you avoid shitty little comments like "a whiff of academia," because we're already doing the things you care about and in many cases we are doing it better than you. 

QuoteI got your message +Jason Cordova.  I'm sorry you feel too uncomfortable to be on my #threeforged panel at Metatopia anymore.  I suppose it is uncomfortable to have women disagree with you in public spaces, no matter how politely we do it.  I'm sure that we will be fine without your assistance.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;863161I may have misread the intention of the post, but I think the main gripe is people designing stuff without actual play experience as a guide (as opposed to theory-wank I infer).

I think you are correct. A paragraph or two after the quoted one from the original post talks about how they've only had one game designer take part of any of their sessions.

I'm not sure if that's meaningful. I've never heard of The Gauntlet until this thread, so I'm not sure that's a good metric to use. I see people online asking for or talking about their playtesters all the time.

The idea of it being self important but meaningless talk is reinforced by Jason's post the following day to disable reshares of future posts.

I don't disagree with the TLDR version he posted

QuoteI don't think people should stop designing games, but I do think they should start playing them. 

Those conversations have de-evolved into accusations of racism and sexism.

I think I'm going to quit G+.

Quote from: Necrozius;863169Those conversations have de-evolved into accusations of racism and sexism.

I think I'm going to quit G+.

Do you have a link? I am curious about how that happened.

Quote from: Necrozius;863169Those conversations have de-evolved into accusations of racism and sexism.

I think I'm going to quit G+.

That's less an issue of G+ than with the type of people that are always looking to invoke racism and sexism. The G+ groups I'm in don't seem to have those problems, but they also don't seem to have those kinds of people in them. But then, I'm in game specific communities for the most part and I tend to get disgusted with overly PC written (IMO) games and quit reading the rules, which probably also skews the demographics.

It's like quitting The Internet because TBP exists.

The Gauntlet's community from the few posts I read seems OK. The people actually in that community that had personal questions about the post evidently addressed them directly and what seems politely/professionally with Jason.

Quote from: Spinachcat;863121Agreed x1000...BUT the low barrier to entry in the POD/PDF market means that loads of noob designers who don't expect real sales can put their "pure" baby on the market without any risk of "failure."

Yep. This is the front-end (and the largest part) of the problem.

Quote from: Spinachcat;863121I am a thick skinned mofo, but DAMN playtesting can be rough on the soul. The worst is when you realize your brain had the right idea, but the page doesn't explain it in plain language and now the good idea is getting shit upon (quite deservingly) at the play test.

Man I feel you on this. But that's the process of polishing your work for consumption, unless you're going for Heartbreaker status, or worse, this is what unintentionally lands you in Heartbreakistan despite our conceptions. Which is why playtesting with a lot of people and getting as many *good* eyes on the project is crucial.

Quote from: Spinachcat;863121Workshops can suck necrotic leprosy dick.

I find half the people show up just to shit on other people. In LA, screenwriting "workshops" are a breeding ground for two kinds of fucknuts - idiots who praise anything and scum who think cutting apart another writer gets them closer to a job.

Writers need to find editors/readers who can be trusted to be honest and direct, but not cruel or fawning. Sadly, those are rare.

Workshops in LA - having done my share of shit-swimming in workshops in LA I can attest to the Shitlords that congregate there. It's LA afterall... everyone has a script in their pocket, and everyone thinks they have the next Big Thing. That said... even among the Shitlords of a workshop, you can find a peanut and corn-kernal among the shit-flow that is a good piece of criticism. The goal is to get eyes on it. Often it's what is not said that as equally important as what is said. Especially in craptastic workshops.

As for Editors you're spot on. You *must* find an editor that understands your goals and intent for the project. I have never met an editor that "fawned" on a creator that was worth a damn. Editors, the good ones (my wife is one of the finest editors around, right alongside Deanna Hoak), are point blank but not cruel but their intent is always to serve what's best for the project so it can be consumed. Noobs find "point blank" often too abrasive for their little darlings

And yeah.. they can be hard to find. Word of mouth is the best bet.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;863170Do you have a link? I am curious about how that happened.

From this reshare: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+PaulCzege/posts/JnsFDCi5yUv

Quote from: Vivian SpartacusI got your message +Jason Cordova.  I'm sorry you feel too uncomfortable to be on my #threeforged panel at Metatopia anymore.  I suppose it is uncomfortable to have women disagree with you in public spaces, no matter how politely we do it.  I'm sure that we will be fine without your assistance.

Quote from: Jessica HammerPlus, let's talk pragmatics. You know who benefits from lowered barriers to entry? Women designers. Black and Latinx designers. Queer designers. Designers who are parents. Designers without a lot of formal education. Very young designers. Old designers. Basically everyone except Mr. Blowhard Dude who is going to share his crap game no matter what - and a whole lot of those games that come out of the lowered barriers to entry will be wonderful and would never get made in a different design culture. This is not theorizing, here. This is experience from, as I've said, helping hundreds of designers (~50% women, ~40% PoC/international non-Western) make their first games.
...
That said, I should probably bow out of this conversation - because the longer I'm a part of it, the more insulting and disingenuous I find +Jason Cordova's post (yes, we get it, you are resentful that people who talk about diversity get more attention than you), and I should probably not be here by the time people start valorizing the Forge. Have a good discussion without me!

Quote from: Matt Weber...I've definitely had the interaction with people trying to design games who clearly, really, truly knew nothing about the medium of TRPG and lacked the humility to take people's advice about which games to read and play before proceeding with their ill-fated heartbreakers.

Those people have, to my knowledge, always been able-bodied, white (and presumably straight) men. I've literally never seen a female game designer reject a piece of honestly-given advice about a different game that might provide a useful perspective if she checked it out.

The thing is... I can't find anything that Jason posted (nor anything from those who agreed with him) that complains about anything related to diversity, gender, ableism etc... His critics have brought up those accusations: not only do they disagree with Jason, but they insinuate that he's ableist, racist, sexist etc...

Now I could be wrong: I've never heard of ANYONE in this discussion before, and there could be something else going on from past interactions between these people.

And for the record, I don't wholly agree with Jason or anyone else, I just thought that the discussion got real ugly all of a sudden.

EDIT: I WAS wrong, actually. oops