> From: James Hamilton <spamcan210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> games that play well, and that have been played
> many dozens of times before. And honestly, how
> many games like that are on the wiki?
If more folks participate in IGDC, most new games will fit your criteria
above.
Let me reverse that: how many of the IGDC games this time around were
really unsatisfying to play, due to "brokenness"? Not preference, not
rules confusions (bad diction, easily fixed by *ahem* FEEDBACK)...
actually a bad, broken game? I didn't notice a single one. Same last
IGDC.
Now, go do a rough count of non-competing new(ish) games on the wiki
that aren't even finished, let alone playable or (more so) fun.
I posit that the IGDC has driven the creation of more complete,
playable, and fun games than two years of non-competitive, elective
creation.
> publish more well-tested games in a physical,
> paper medium so people have something to put
> in their hands.
I tried to suggest a new POD pyramid game book about 18 months ago. I
offered to do all layout, editing, image creation, print-provider
liaison--the works. With designers' permission, I was going to make a
book of the top 20 games for demoing (I was also going to make a book of
all single-stash and -set games; might still). Basically, the Looneys
need only give me permission to post to Lulu on their behalf (or do
their own uploading) and the book would be available indefinitely,
checks rolling in. It was a no-go ("we're swamped with a billion things
to do, and I don't know that we'll have time to put into such a project
in the next year").
This lead me to think that there was something else going on--it would
be the work of a few hours reviewing and then uploading, for indefinite
long-tail income--and, further, it basically took all of the wind out of
my sails for doing the scut-work of building up front and back matter
and doing a diction edit of every game, only for credit in a
free-download PDF. (silly me: I ultimately wanted a physical book, TOO,
for convention-use, not to mention a professional credit on a printed
work. Oh, well.)
Perhaps you should take up the mantle and see if you can get such a
project rolling again? Maybe their opinion on POD-provided publications
has changed?
> I'm just saying there are probably many
> people like me who don't know many games
> and therefore feel no interest in helping
> create MORE.
The IGDC is, obviously, not for those who fit your demographic.
Its purpose (I repeat) is to get eyes on new designs, refine designs,
increase the breadth and depth of IGH.org offerings, and stimulate
progressive collection of pyramids by new adopters. Quality, Diversity,
Sales.
It is a labor of love, a volunteering to help others be better, a
promotion of the whole Icehouse System throughout the gaming community.
As with any creative endeavor, some stuff works, some don't.
If you only have time for finished games, I direct you to Existing Games
and encourage you to try out one new game a week, until you've found
something in those 160-odd games that satisfies you the same way the 15
print-published games do.
David