Wargamers routinely play games that take 15~45 minutes to set up. Because the games they play are worth the value (learning about historical choices made by the leaders who were there, etc.) of such set-up times; other games, not so much.

Well Arkham Horror can take up to 2 hours for setup alone, but still worth it

Depends on the type of games

If I want setup to be part of the game(or even the game itself), I'd rather play LEGO instead

Yeah That is why Eldrich Horror was such a failure.

Take my money!!!!!!!!

I am waiting for the legacy version.

meh. needs more miniatures.

it's a deck building, dice rolling, free for all dungeon crawler.

Vikings lead to Wars, Wars leads to Zombies, and Zombies lead to Chthuuulu. Don't worry young whatchama-call-it, the farce will be with you.

This!!! It's insulting when someone makes a stink after the Kickstarter and think they speak for everyone. If there are 1000 backers not complaining and only one person has a problem, _maybe they should consider that THEY are the problem._ Instead of making demands and manipulating everyone's copy of the game, they just should've not backed in the first place.

Donald Macleod YES. That goes with too many variables. this game was originally all players against each other, but now we added teams and solo and Co op because people asked. If this is what they want, maybe they should get a different game. If you force options, it makes me feel they'll be no good.

....Or because of 3 vocal top-ten listers. Zing!

Be vocal during your Kickstarters. Designers are often looking for feedback since the game is often in the prototype phase. If two people are being vocal and there is no dissenting opinion then why wouldn't a designer listen to them? As a back you are not just a consumer you are a investor. You need to make your opinion heard. Wake up , get up and get out there.

@@jgtogi6839 Not when you aren't offering your copies as retail copies. In that case, consumers and "investors" alike have no choice. If you are sending an already designed (mechanically) game to kickstart, changing it for someone who has never played it is ridiculous

Yeah, I really thought that was the standout moment of the video. It's a very incisive point phrased in a very simple manner.

How do you get to be a play tester? Do you have to be a well known person in the community?

Not at all, every designer is looking for play testers, since its the most important phase of design. Here's a BGG forum for people looking for testers. boardgamegeek.com/forum/1530034/boardgamegeek/seeking-play-testers

I think you're telling the truth.

They are making money from KZfaq ad revenue

@@parkertownley-smith6109 So lunch is covered you're saying.

I don't think there is a lot of money in board games and probably even less in selling ebooks on making board games, no matter the quality of what you're saying.

You mean green screen light? :)

Not a green screen. It's the covered porch at the Dice Tower HQ :)

Huh! Still looks weird to me )

I was going to say the same thing. I love this new setting.

That is just because there is direct sunlight hitting the ground behind them. They should experiment to find the time of day when there is enough light, but it doesn't create the effect where it almost looks like two layers.

bronzedivision This, unfortunately..

The main reason why designers won't look at this is this is now how games are designed anyways. Most game designers will never have their games published good or bad. For one big publishers don't often take on random submission. Most game designers will never make much on their game anyways so most who do pursue publishing their game must have egos of some sort to see that their idea gets published. In fact most game designers don't publish to make money they publish because they want to see their idea published. The truth is you will now if you have a good game or not by play testing to your target demographic. A designer then usually chooses a publisher who publishes games for that market. Some publishers are willing to sometimes broaden their horizons. Idea, theme, mechanics that bring out theme, play test towards target group, publisher experienced or willing to target that specific group. But most of all expect failure and rejection and try again. Few ever get published so you have to believe in your idea if you really want it published.

I'm designing my First boardgame, a 4x with heavy resource management Focus, and thank god i'm making a Lot of research, because i broke like 7 or 8 recomendations they gave...

@@LookAtTheBacon fortunately, people who do look for & accept these kinds of input would likely find them helpful

@@revimfadli4666 that's true, absolutely. Glad there are these people :)

I've got friends who do game design (started with a tabletop RPG, and moving into card games). The biggest favor I did for them (since I'm good with technical writing and have read TONS of rule books) is ripped their rulebook to shreds with red ink. Sure, they're my friends. But if I want them to succeed, they don't need their ego's praised. They need their rules fixed. And thankfully, they are wise, and thanked me for my harsh critique. They took it to heart, and spent the time to update it again. The next blind playtest they did had significantly fewer questions by the GM/players.

If you know that your mom/friend/whatever is capable of doing that, and won't sugarcoat it because of you, that is totally fine, but you need to be shure that said person can do that. I am for the most part always trying to avoid conflicts and such, and I rather not give my opinion to persons who I know won't react to it gladly, UNLESS those persons clearly ask for it and use keywords such as "be honest" or "seriously", in which case they will get just what they asked for.

I got quite late into dev and started playing with my friends. One of them said, "It would be better if your game was any fun." Gotta admit, that stung for a bit but I got back to the pen and pad and made a version that was way better lol

Good for your Mum, TheEpinema. The bane of my gaming experience is rules which, as stated in the rule book, are unclear, ambiguous or otherwise inadequate.

and it works so well so we'll see it in tabletop games as well

What core mechanisms have been left out of video games for an expansion? lol

Loved it. Was counting in my head as he said it.

Def. more than 10: AB AC AD AE AF BC BD BE BF CD CE CF DE DF

XShrike my guess is they didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings

Super Dungeon Explore I love painting the minis but they never developed the rules properly. Too clunky, too long, unclear rules...

XShrike I think the video is based on self-published games and stuff that they've had demoed to them by wannabe designers directly, at cons, or sent to them by mail. Basically, it's all the advice based on seeing unpublished and shouldn't-be-published games. You would never have heard of any of the examples, if they said a few names, and I doubt they have any specific games in mind anyways, because they're talking about things they see over and over. I've never encountered half the things they mention, as a player (40 variants in the rule book, etc.), so I'm pretty sure that, like I said, they're talking mostly about games that can't be found anywhere in the world except for one copy that a guy keeps in his basement and pulls out once a year to pitch at cons.

XShrike yes I think they should do a video on that

This video is almost worthless without examples

Or at least a developer

Stefano Crespi they rolled for order, not movement.

1 and 2, 1 and 3, 1 and 4, 2 and 3, 2 and 4, 3 and 4. 6 combinations with 4 variables.

MasterdoMagic combinatorics!!

Hurray for people who stayed awake during maths classes!

I actually show that segment to my students, as an example of what an educated person should know. It's simple, but I like the ease with which Tom answers it!

1 and 2, 1 and 3, 1 and 4, 1 and 5, 2 and 3, 2 and 4, 2 and 5, 3 and 4, 3 and 5, 4 and 5 = all combinations

anubis243 Cthutes and Ladders

what have you got against snakes?

Instead of snakes and ladders, it could be tentacles and ladders.

@@bobthemonitor9697 Cthandy Land.

I design and create art work for cards and books and I don' t know how many times I tell people you don't really need to waste your money copyrighting the art work. One once I draw it and create the art its copyrighted. I then give them a license or the rights to the art work. That all they really need. Oh and not all text covered by copy right including much of the text on cards. It has to still be unique language and original. But yes you don't need to copyright especially unless you have the money to waste to have it officially logged.

AB AC AD AE BC BD BE CD CE DE Combinations. Not Permutations. I don’t wear a hat. But hat’s off to you Vassal.

Ah, so I wasn't the only one who did that.

And he was totally checked out of what Sam was saying as he mentally worked on the puzzle

/facepalm

Days of Wonder has published first time designers as codesigners on their two most recent games. Look esoteric publisher.

Exactly. Copyrighting your game may or may not be useful, but writing good copy will probably improve your sales.

Good games don't work at that player count. You need to stop inviting 5-6 players over unless you own 2 tables.

@@benanderson46 Do you know or understand my situation? It's a FAMILY of five gamers.

MrTravolta7 oh have you never tried vanilla with other flavors added? Because vanilla is a base, not a standalone.

The vanilla extends life. The vanilla expands consciousness.

That is all too true. I designed all the artwork to a client who was making a card game. I first sent just sketches so they could play test their game. Waiting for me to finish the art and printing up full color versions to demo to people would costed them a ton of money. It also proved how good their game design was. Playtesters were not blinded by the pretty art and loved the concept. Art when done was displayed on their website for those interested to critique for final changes. Surprising some of the feed back wanted the art work scaled back on certain components and simplified. Yes sometimes the simple black and white (which it had different colors not black and white) is works better for function. lol

I thought I was the only one who felt this way!

The designer agrees with you, but the publisher changed the rules...

I haven't played Sheriff of Nottingham, so I do not know if there is a meta game involved. If the majority of the players lie and smuggle but get caught, probably someone trading legal goods can win. But my question is this: If majority now starts dealing in legal goods, can someone cheat the system by occasionally smuggling? Perhaps the phase where everyone cheats is just the beginning, and real game starts to happen when most of the players start trading the legal goods?

There is a meta game to it, exactly what you described but the payoff for trying to bring in contraband doesn't make sense mathematically. I feel like even if you get only busted 20% of the time, you'll still be worse off point wise than when bringing in the legal goods only.

Zoran Vujcic sorry but this doesn't make sense. If at the end of the game you have 100 chickens vs 100 chickens + 20 contrabands the contraband wins. Instead of smuggling 4 chickens, you smuggle 4 chickens and a crossbow the contraband guy wins

I agree. The vast majority of designers ideas are rejected. Doesn't matter if their game is good or bad. In the end best advice it to try, try again and play test your game to death. If players like it they will play and buy it no matter if its just another zombie game and it will become the exception to the rule. After all if its good its good. Who cares if its like another Mars game.

Pretty much what I wanted to say.

Monopoly is also popular. Being popular isn't equal to being a good mechanics in a game. And it's not always a matter of die. When there's a chance of always not gaining anything, because of that chance and nothing else, then that's a bad mechanism. If in Talisman the 1 is the better one, nothing has really changed about the fact that die is choosing your faith. It's not adding randomness, it's THE randomness. If you have something to remediate that, that'd be cool. If you have the choice of not rolling that die, that'd be cool. But if you should roll each and every turn and you might roll the unlucky one, that's not cool at all.

It's not just if they're or not emotionally attached to you. It's because you don't get enough variation of personalities or thinking. I usually play with the same group, and we tend to do the same strategies from game to game, also, we get used to ourselves, then we adapt our way to victory and maneuvers to what we think our partners will react. , And then, when it happens that I play with a differeng group, the others approaches the game in a different way, that surprises me, because it can be totally different. And then it's like playing a new game, not for the mechanisms or the game itself, but by the players.

Yes! I can't stand KS projects that are bloated and expensive but make their goal because of a bunch of whales, who are attracted to that niche.