For the people here who do make rpg's and get playtesters- How do you do it?  I mean, how do you know sifting through it all what is good criticism and what's just teeth gnashing?  Are there times when you just can't find any good playtesters?  Just curious about it.  I've helped proof read rpg's for folks, but never felt I was in a position to playtest one properly.

I like how Jason plainly states his position - and they ignore him and bash him, ironically a gay man with a self-admitted history of being bullied... then start attacking him.

Yes! It's true! They eat their own.

"I've literally taught BAZILLIONS of people how to make games!!! I am a Professor of Gaming!" - which might make her the source of all of Jason's problems. That's where all these shitty games are coming from!

OMG... she's the Boss of this level... /gasp!

Quote from: Necrozius;863176The 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...

He didn't, to normal folks. However...

Jason referred to approval of games without recognizing negative feedback as "another expression of 'everyone gets a trophy'".

Jason then said The Gauntlet "would have a larger following if we talked about, say, issues of social justice and diversity in gaming, but it's just not our thing".

And ended that paragraph with a repeated distaste for people that want to protect their friends from criticism so that "everyone gets a trophy and no one has to feel bad or less special than anyone else".

That's enough to set off the professional victims.

The "female" stuff is because Jason evidently indicated he wasn't comfortable being on a panel with a member that intended to be a pain. Again, to the professional victims this is due to the pain being a female, without any proof or even any reasons or reasoning.

So you mean there's an Indie Recreational Outrage Complex? Or are they just another wing of the normal Recreational Outrage Complex?

The only thing he said which could be stretched-- with strenuous mental gymnastics-- into him being a bigot is that he said:

"We would have a larger following if we talked about, say, issues of social justice and diversity in gaming, but it's just not our thing. "

Quote from: Necrozius;863176Now 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.

You are in fact wrong. Check his original post:

QuoteI talk a lot about creating a culture of play. It's kind of our thing at The Gauntlet, and frankly, it's a philosophy that is probably holding us back in the short term. We would have a larger following if we talked about, say, issues of social justice and diversity in gaming, but it's just not our thing. Gaming and the academy, so to speak, is for other groups. We are proud, blue-collar gamers who focus on the low and distasteful act of play.

This is the exact thing that the bolded thing from Jessica Hammer was talking about: Jason there is griping that other podcasts are getting more attention than his and seems to be straight-facedly claiming that his audience would be bigger if he made his podcast all about social justice and diversity, instead of play.

It's particularly odd because it's a swipe that has nothing to do with the bulk of his argument. You could delete it entirely and it wouldn't really affect his point, though it would probably help the reception because it won't have this blue-collar martyr complex going on. As it is, I can't blame people for finding it an off-putting aspect of the original post; throwing this sort of pointless, random tangent into a post makes you look like a grudge-saddled grump who's so pissed off at whatever the subject of the tangent is that they can't resist mentioning it, no matter how much of a non sequitur it is.

well, he did mention Metatopia, and this podcast is apparently closely associated with it:

http://www.genesisoflegend.com/category/rpgdesignpanelcast/page/3/

I don't know how popular this podcast is, but the comment fits.

Quote from: Warthur;863188You are in fact wrong. Check his original post:

Noted! I somehow missed that part. Thanks for the clarification: the accusations make more sense now (a little less out of nowhere).

Quote from: RunningLaser;863178For the people here who do make rpg's and get playtesters- How do you do it?  I mean, how do you know sifting through it all what is good criticism and what's just teeth gnashing?  Are there times when you just can't find any good playtesters?  Just curious about it.  I've helped proof read rpg's for folks, but never felt I was in a position to playtest one properly.

I usually ask people online, sometimes putting out posts asking for feedback. More recently I find I have people contacting me who are interested in play testing stuff which is helpful.

It can be tough because usually there is a bit of attrition. That is to be expected as people are doing you a favor unless you are paying them to playtest. So I usually figure for every 5 people who say they can run a playtest for you, 1 might get back to you with feedback.

Going out in public events is a good way to get feedback too. Especially places where people are there to game, not to playtest. For example we used to go to Boston Game day and events like that once our game was in shape for regular games (harder to do now, since that was Bill's role once I got sick). Now I do most of that stuff online or recruiting people to do it for me.

Ultimately I filter the feedback through what I am trying to do at my own table. That is what matters to me. Sometimes you get feedback that isn't aligned with what you are trying to do (i.e. your making D&D basic but someone is giving you feedback on how to make GURPS). In those cases it is still useful to know that there is a line there between what you are interested in doing and what might turn off certain types of gamers. The most helpful thing for me is just running the game like I would any other. If that isn't happening, and I am not running regular campaigns, then I am just not getting a full sense of what all the feedback means (and I might be missing important details, mistaking things that don't well in discrete playlists for problems when they actually smooth out in the context of a full length campaign).

I notice a big difference between the way I talk about ideas when I first come up with and playtest them, versus how I speak about them once I've incorporated them regularly into my gaming sessions (and I consider that last part the most important in really working out things).

Finding Beta playtesters - Alpha playtest is for finding faults in the rules, Beta playtest is for finding faults in the expression, and my play group consists entirely of experienced, fierce, and talented alpha playtesters - is always a nightmare for me. I am always poking around with weird-ass settings and game subjects few but me are interested in, so I understand that, but it doesn't make it any the less difficult. I advertise here, on RPG.net, and on G+ for people interested, and usually find a few, but out of any ten volunteers, two will only read the text, with one actually proofing rather than commenting, one will return some absolutely beautiful, precious, solid gold data, and seven will disappear, never even saying 'sorry, things didn't work out.

I am a professional tech writer, and am perfectly used to a review process. I treasure it profoundly, in fact. I have little to no ego, and cheerfully and eagerly submit my work to be chopped up, because it makes for a better product. Generally, my gaming Beta testers - when I do get some response at all - are far too gentle with me, too respectful. I'm not some sensitive artist! I want my work *pushed*! Unfortunately, it never seems to work out that way.

Still, I do the best I can with what I have.

-clash

Flyingmice - you nailed it.

/puts Devil's Advocate hat on...

So Jason's comment lemme quote it so I'm clear...

QuoteI talk a lot about creating a culture of play. It's kind of our thing at The Gauntlet, and frankly, it's a philosophy that is probably holding us back in the short term. We would have a larger following if we talked about, say, issues of social justice and diversity in gaming, but it's just not our thing. Gaming and the academy, so to speak, is for other groups. We are proud, blue-collar gamers who focus on the low and distasteful act of play.

First off - I've never been to "The Gauntlet" nor have I listened to a podcast. But consider this - he's on G+ talking to presumably a specific group of game-designers that happen to engage in the exact phenomenon he's criticizing. How many threads are started here and in Pundit's playpen that cause many to twitch at the moment "diversity" and "gender politics" and "criticism" get pulled into a discussion or it gets cross-posted from TBP/G+?

Hell, *many* of us are on this forum BECAUSE of the propensity of outrage at the moment one chooses to differ in opinion - even without personal attack.

But like it or not - these folks he's talking about are in this very corner of the business whose pigpen he happen's to share. I don't think it's too crazy to mention that bringing up these kinds of identity-politics would boost his profile - IN THE SHORT-TERM. Ironically, that's exactly what that crowd does (and has done in the past, and will continue to do so as a matter of course in order to perpetuate their outrage). So pound for pound - I think their reaction is making his point even stronger.

Because really - why *are* those things being used as discussion points that are more important than the games themselves? I don't wanna derail this thread - but I also don't want to lose sight of how tightly bound these two phenomenon are. Someone even asked - "What game designer doesn't play games?" in a way that implied it was somehow ludicrous... when there are several at the TBP who crapped out Exalted 3 that fit that bill pretty nicely. And that's no indie-project. Yet there it is. And YES it underscores Jason's point precisely because Exalted didn't get enough playtesting and editing either by the looks of it.

BOOM! I squared the circle, bitches!

/Devil's Advocate hat off!
/mic drop

Quote from: RunningLaser;863178For the people here who do make rpg's and get playtesters- How do you do it?  I mean, how do you know sifting through it all what is good criticism and what's just teeth gnashing?  Are there times when you just can't find any good playtesters?  Just curious about it.  I've helped proof read rpg's for folks, but never felt I was in a position to playtest one properly.

Personally I try to get playtesters in my target audience. I have seen far far too many games strangled in the crib when the designer took seriously criticizm from playtesters who were blatantly NOT the target audience.

As a playtester I do not accept testing for deckbuilding games, or games with zombies as both are a turn off for me and so past a possible quick glance for syntax errors I dont participate.

Where you garner your testers from is another factor. I know RPGGeek and RPGNet are about the last places on earth Id ever want RPG playtesters from.

Conventions are a good place to test a game. I've done that for a few that eventually got published. Barring that. Local gaming groups, and then gaming forums.

Quote from: RunningLaser;863178For the people here who do make rpg's and get playtesters- How do you do it?  I mean, how do you know sifting through it all what is good criticism and what's just teeth gnashing?  Are there times when you just can't find any good playtesters?  Just curious about it.  I've helped proof read rpg's for folks, but never felt I was in a position to playtest one properly.

Well, here is another approach, somewhat different from what others have said.

Make a game you and your gaming group like.  And like you are probably not the only people in the world who like ham and pineapple on your pizza, you are probably not the only people in the world who will like that game.

It's not a very scientifically rigorous approach, but it worked for Gary Gygax.

Though you may want to be a bit more straightforward in describing what you like and what the assumed play style of your game is.

Hell I would kill for some play testers just to see if my game idea is playable.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;863250Though you may want to be a bit more straightforward in describing what you like and what the assumed play style of your game is.

What and short circuit a few Internet slap fests and navel gazing blog posts. What would we do with our free time then?