Why Great Games FAIL - Board Game Design
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- A potential purchaser comes to your product with preconceived ideas, biases and their own frames of reference. When they first encounter your product, they look for clues, however tiny - to place the game into a predefined box: to pigeonhole the product based on past experience.
This poses a problem for game designers who are attempting to rise above the crowd in a saturated market. If you innovate, you risk confusing potential purchasers; but if you stick with familiar concepts, how are you ever going to stand out?
An effective product designer controls the context in which their product is seen. A brilliant game in the wrong context is always going to fail.
Yet another important topic presented so brilliantly.
As a recently published designer I found this extremely relatable!! Totally understand that mix of enthusiasm and anxiety over a newly released game.
Once again you’ve expertly described the pitfalls and potential issues ….while offering up insightful and really useful tips on how to navigate a way into the industry. Thank you!
this video is super insightful... it would be fun if we had apart 2 in the form of "why bad games succeed" enjoyed this one a lot dude! Stay Hexy!
Yes, I will give it some thought!! 😅
What a great idea, would watch
@@AdaminWalesDo it, Adam.
Hey Adam, this video was mentioned in today’s Board Game Design Lab’s (BGDL) email /podcast! 👏👏👏
As both a small publisher and a designer I'd say the responsibility of product design falls squarely on the publisher. Sadly many publishers just don't have the insights for proper product development. (Wiz Kids is a prime example, with their near zero marketing strategy and brutal sink or swim mentality.)
Well done. I really like the imaginary stories you invent and make yourself understood through the power of example.
Glad you enjoyed it :)
I'm always drawn in by these 2nd-person intros. Love'em!
The biggest reason is one you touched on but didn't explore: time. Any work of art has the potential to sit around for years or even decades before anyone cares about it for some reason, and designers have to look at what they're creating as 'art'. But for anyone to care about it, it has to be available to purchase, and a lot of these games simply aren't available to purchase for long enough to gain traction. Catan, for instance, came out in 1995, but it wasn't until years later in 2008 that people really paid attention to it, and people forget when they talk about it that it was essentially a throw away design for more than a decade after release, and it never would have sold the 40 million units it has sold if it wasn't available for purchase when people started paying attention to it.
It’s a really interesting observation. I wonder how many (modern) games have had a mediocre immediate response, but become massive much further down the line. Pandemic has certainly been on an upward trajectory (although it was pretty big on initial release). I can’t think of too many others though.
@@AdaminWales I'd say it's more than we think. Catan is just the big game example I have of it. It's far more common I think for books and music albums to go through such a process.
Adam: We can't disguise a bad product by dressing it up in fancy marketing and manipulating people into purchasing.
Monopoly: Like hell we can't!
Haha. You might have me there…
Though I’d argue Monopoly is a bit of a special case…
Mannnn! Some hard truths to swallow here. Great video. Lots to think about.
Great stuff. One thing I did not get. If a publisher has published a game, why would they choose not to promote it properly? Have they changed their mind about it in the process, or what else would be the reason? I mean, even if I as a designer don't know about the market and marketing, they ought to be experts at it. So once they have taken over, I thought my selling talents should not be needed any more.
Well, the truth of it is that they’re often not experts in marketing… just as we designers aren’t. Some publishers are very new to the industry, and they may have no background in marketing. Publishers have often taken the “throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks” approach… big catalogues of games, then focus all effort on the titles which are getting attention, forgetting about the others. Many publishers have moved away from this strategy in recent years to focus on fewer games which truly stand a chance.
You’re an absolutely outstanding communicator - were you a teacher in a past life? I’d have done a lot better at school if you’d been one of my teachers 😂
Thanks! Very kind :) I am actually a lecturer (dentistry) and my main subject is communication skills. So it’s gratifying to hear that I’m doing OK! Practising what I preach 😅
Vídeo and audio quality are awesome !
Fantastic! That’s a relief 😅 Been working hard on my audio!
This was interested!
Wow, it took sooooo long to get to the point
Are you ever worried about your ideas being stolen?
Not really! Here’s a video I made on the topic of “Will someone steal my idea?” :)
th-cam.com/video/oTbHvDb8DHg/w-d-xo.html
@@AdaminWales Thank you!
I would say that 99% of modern boardgames are like Jazz music - expecting a current chart listener to appreciate them or even want them is asking too much
Great video, it's always awesome to hear the experiences of published gamers with the humility to admit their failures and share them so others learn from those mistakes.
Adam, 452 unread BGG notifications is unacceptable.
UNSUBSCRIBED
It’s a tiny percentage of the games I’m actually subscribed to!!! 😅
Video starts at 4:30
Great insights mixed with honest self reflection as always. As someone looking to Kickstart my first boardgame later this year, I'm soaking up these insights and trying to take them to heart. I always look forward to a new Adam in Wales video!
Glad to hear that the videos are helpful to you :)
So I write novels, and one common refrain is "novels make promises to the reader." Are you promising goofy fun? A cozy mystery? Epic fantasy? And then you must *keep your promises*.
This reminds me a lot of what you're saying in this video. If any element is promising something different from what the game actually IS, you create friction that leaves people dissatisfied.
We are designing a game at home. A capital ship, witha complement of 2 fighters,v2 boarding ships. Two capital ships fight, one wins. But it is a time of economic crisis so none of the ships can afford to have enough personnel to man all stations.
Decisions pile up and have consequences a few turns in the future. There is no absolute winning strategy. So player smarts play a role.
It is not a tactical game but worker placement game.
The concept is simple. But unlike most of worker placement games, timing matters. It is not like put people here and mine resources immediately.
And players can disrupt each other plans. But unlike mean games where you can directly sabotage opponent, luck and some level of opponent smarts intervenes in the plans to ruin the other player plans. Everything has a cost, even being mean.
So even if it is the mean goal to destroy each other capital ship, you cannot be mean easily. You need to be strategic, because there are ways to stop or delay mean moves.
And amazignly, combat does not rely on luck and it is not deterministic either. It also is a duel of smarts.
Monopoly is very popular, but it teaches to be mean. There is a way to destroy all the fun of Monopoly and win. It is about being mean to destroy a mean game. As fun is destroyed you can propose a more constructive and fun game.
The strategy is simple. There is a limited supply of houses. So your game is about hoarding houses as fast as possible, but do not buy hotels.
As houses are depleted, the game becomes an attrition gsme where the opponent grinds and loses money.
And players are lucky of not having rules to liberalize property prices because the game could be meaner and unfun.
As people get bored of grinding without any chance to recover and persistently and slowly lose, boredom hits sooner or later.
And this is when you propose a game that has fun. If they think you were lucky, tell them to start a new game, rinse and repeat, until they see how flawed Monopoly is.
Can't fish without a hook. The hook gets people in.
Money corrupts everything it touches. We need to really think about that. Just because something's been done a certain way for a long time, doesn't mean it's the best or only way it can be done.
Man, I feel so seen.
I think the issues highlighted in this video apply to MANY designers (and publishers) … including myself! Considering how much strategic thought we put into playing games, we don’t tend to spend much time strategising when we’re designing and positioning games! 😅
Economic success is quite related to good matching with the context indeed!
Have you ever considering playtesting prototype games and making videos on the good and bad feedback? As an aspiring creator, I would certainly watch that to learn from your experience.
Thanks. I don’t tend to share too many details about my prototype games online.
While I subscribe totally to the very wise advice not to be afraid of people stealing your ideas, I also think it’s just common sense to be slightly cautious about WHO you show stuff to! Hence, I’m happy to playtest freely within specific groups and forums, but not to throw stuff out into the ether with no idea who is watching! :)
I’m assuming that you’re talking about my own prototype games. But you might mean playtesting other designer’s games and giving feedback. To be honest, between my day job (dentistry); my own game design; and making TH-cam videos, I really don’t have the time to invest in other people’s designs outside of scheduled Playtest events.
"who's the creepy guy with the bowtie" 🤣
Wow, that was really an impressive video. And very honorable to stay to your mistakes which were made in your early game designs. 👍
It's like investing in your own, brand new business. There's a very low rate of success in any one company just starting out. At least with games, you can pivot and diversify, and hopefully make a variety of tickets for the jackpot.
Startups usually start with one or two people. But they need to produce the product, be accountants and salesmen. And this is the first place where they fail.
The second place where they fail is pricing. Too high and customers will not buy. Too low and customers will despise it thinking it has poor quality.
The third level of mistakes happen when poor marketing, poor administration or low commitment of members of the startup take place.
Only companies that survive these pitfalls will survive, provided that there is no external factor that ruins success.
External factors can be problems that reduce number of customers, hurt supplies, damage business contacts or alters credit markets. The world is full of that.
Wow, Adam, I didn't know you spoke Polish! Pjona! Łąźćżńóśę!
Sorry - I don’t! 😅 But I can use Google Translate!
Wow, really excellent video, Adam.
Speaking of trends, anyone else notice this:
2013-2014: Zombies & Cthulhu
2015-2016: Vikings.
2017-2018: Mars & Escape Rooms
2019-2020: void due to covid
2021-2022: Animals & Nature
Oh … and Cthulhu never left us, it’s always there
I am a weird customer.
* I do not like Deckbuilding games. Just not my alley.
* I love miniatures
* I do not like horror themes. Not my alley.
* Simple games for starters do not make me feel the way they did. Some say I became an advanced player. I do not know.
Strangely, for an "advanced" player, I enjoy The Clone Wars and Downforce which are very simple and casual, but Catan and Ticket to ride and Monopoly do not click anymore. So I have doubts about the label if advanced players.
There are simple but amazing games like Space Aces TNG The New Guidebook, which is a simple solo light hearted retro scifi RPG. It is so cleverly designed that with one D6 you can have a wide variety of adventures.
Also The Captain Is. Dead is one of those hard to win collaborative games where you enjoy no matter if you lose. It is intellectually challenging and for moments you feel you can win. And you slowly learn from your mistakes. It is simple but hard to master.
I love How you crafted this video! I felt that I was there in the journey.
Thanks! Glad it was engaging :)
Would Doodle Rush benefit from an expansion pack of cards with kid-friendly words?
Or has that ship sailed and you’re looking at new ideas rather than patching games already published.
I think a re-release is a possibility with some changes, but nothing confirmed.
The real problem with Doodle Rush is availability! As soon as I saw a review of it, I knew that I wanted it! I checked my FLGS, and then my main online stores. Not only was it not available, there weren't even any search results for it. I figured that it was too new, and put it out of my head. Sometime later, I saw another review, remembered that I wanted it, but still couldn't find it for sale anywhere! The THIRD time I saw it mentioned in a video somewhere, I checked one last time, then finally gave up.
Yes, it’s been unavailable for some time now. I’m hopeful that it will have a second life at some point in the future :)
I do recall in a previous video where you said that the big companies may spend more effort and money promoting their most popular titles and less so on their other games. That's what I was assuming was happening when you presented the scenario at the convention where the designer's own game was being overlooked.
I do think that can be part of the picture - publishers are business people. It makes sense that they would prioritise the products which show the most promise.
A game should be easy to learn & hard to master. The play testers in the story repeatedly told the designer the game failed the first requirement: it wasn't easy to learn.
This is true of some markets (certainly the biggest markets) but there are also plenty of examples of games which are very complex to learn but still sell well & are highly regarded. They just occupy a different corner of the market: the key thing is working out what you’re creating & direct it towards a market that’s up for it!
@@AdaminWales To some extent I agree, but I tend to think of simple games as prerequisites for complex games. Chess is hard to learn, but if you already know how to play checkers, chess is becomes a bit easier to learn. If you already know how to play chess, Stratego becomes a bit easier, etc.
I'd assume a designer would try to get play testers who already understand the type of game he created; if the testers don't get it without a long explanation, that tells me that there's a problem with the game.
Acting, writing, sound, everything was great! Thanks a lot, watched it 2 times already
Thanks! Really glad you enjoyed it :)
Wonderful video, as always Adam!!
Thanks Taylor. Much appreciated.
Very insightful and well-crafted video. It was a delight to watch. By the way, I’m a big fan of Kompromat and hope to see it get more attention.
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed the video (and of course Kompromat!)
So much insight an heart put into your videos, it's grand! How long do you usually work on such a video?
Thanks - yes, I do put in quite a lot of effort! 🙂 I tend to work on the script on and off over several days or weeks. Filming and editing probably takes 5-6 hours for a video like this.
@@AdaminWales and let me tell you we cherish every minute of it
I feel this
Great food for thought Adam
Thanks Tim!
Great video, as always!
Thanks! :)