Looney Labs Icehouse Mailing list Archive

Re: [Icehouse] The IHG Wiki

  • From"Jorge Arroyo" <trozo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateWed, 20 Feb 2008 00:58:58 +0100
I didn't say so before, but I'll do it now: I also think the contest should stay. It's great for stimulating creativity and refining the games.

About the 2.0 features I think they'd be a bonus. A site like BGG is too general and the small things get lost in the multitude of content. A better database for the wiki would be beneficial to the community, although I wouldn't say it's a necessity right now. I wish BGG would add a way to group games from gamesystems and have the gamesystem page offer a list of games, ranks, etc...


On Feb 19, 2008 8:15 PM, Avri Klemer <avri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Personally, the IGDC provides a structure which "forces" me to
design/complete a new game.  Without the contest, Martian 12s would have
stayed as the germ of an idea in my head.

Game design falls down my priorities list until I'm worked up against a
deadline.  My guess is that my situation is far from unique.

Glad you're keeping the IGDC active, David.


----- Original Message -----
From: "David Artman" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Icehouse Discussion List" <icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 2:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Icehouse] The IHG Wiki

>> From: "Jorge Arroyo" <trozo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Maybe it would be easier to migrate to a more modern code base that
>> already
>> incorporates those Web 2.0 features...
> Hehe. That's a good one, Jorge! "Migrate" the wiki.
> Dude, I can't even get an admin to add ONE LINK to the navigation panel;
> you think we're gonna get the whole thing smoothly migrated with no
> losses, when a minor _javascript_ tweak takes a year?
> Tilt at that windmill if you like; but I'm gonna go with more BGG
> promotions and cross-linking. In the end, do any of us need another
> "community portal," just for one game system? Better the wiki stay
> stable, provide a repository (or an aggregator: I maintain my own site
> for my games), and be the place where folks focus commentary on rules
> and game play not chat or popularization/promotion.
> As for the seminal comment that kicked off this thread--the competition
> is "archaic"--I think Jim missed the point. I see the IGDC as a way to
> do the following:
> 1) refine new games by having many playtesters' (i.e. judges') eyes on
> each submission
> 2) expand the breadth and depth of game types on Icehousegames.org (we
> got WAY too many "board" games!)
> 3) promote progressive accumulation of complete Icehouse pyramid
> collections (hence 2HOUSE, 3HOUSE, 5HOUSE, etc....)
> 4) leverage pyramids as gaming devices that are distinct from playing
> cards, building blocks, or existing board game pieces (need more
> pointing and capping and such)
> Making new games and getting solid playtesting and feedback will
> accomplish 1 and 2 and, to the extent that the new games build upon
> collectibility and pyramidness, 3 and 4. Doing stuff at BGG and other
> major sites will accomplish 3 even more. The IGDC all-but-forces folks
> to make new games (it compels the hell out of ME!). If it were gone, and
> we did all kinds of social networking and ranking and such... what's to
> fuel NEW game design or design refinement? Peer pressure or something?
> Anyhow... the IGDC is here to stay, so long as I have the time to
> promote and organize it (and it really don't take all that much, each
> comp). If someone can and wants to expand the wiki functionality, be my
> guest; but take the notion of ending the comp off the table. Iron Game
> Chef grows every year, in spite of there being thousands of RPGs
> available....
> My $2 (2¢ is for peasants!)
> David
> _______________________________________________
> Icehouse mailing list
> Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse

Icehouse mailing list

Current Thread