Getting feedback during play testing is central to board game development. I’ve found the feedback from play testers comes right after I’ve played my budding new game myself for awhile.
Once I’ve got sufficient feedback I’ll move onto graphic design, which in my case means hiring someone to do that. But, how do I know when I’ve had enough feedback, or when the feedback is no longer contributing to making the board game better.
My dad designed a game when I was pre-teen. I remember riding along in the front seat of his yellow AMC Javelin. We were going to pick up an order of little plastic injection molded ships on the east side of Detroit. My dad drew the playing board out by hand since there were no graphics art software packages in the late ‘70’s.
Environmental awareness first entered into my consciousness after a few years into University: the mid ‘80’s. Nuclear and ozone were environmental topics most discussed in my circles, LGBT circles.
Ozone was successfully addressed by an agreement of all nations. That condition found a place on the game board of my two-player co-operative game: Climate Change 2030: Running of of Time. Ozone is presented in this board game as a dangerous global condition that we, as humans, have collectively resolved through mutual agreement.
The board game I’ve moved furtherest along the development track is a two-person cooperative game. Set matching is the central mechanic. The sets are used to remove/replace blocks on a circular grid. The circular grid is actually a doughnut where players try to stay in a ring
away from the centre of the doughnut, but not too far away from the centre: the sweet spot of the doughnut.
What makes a game fair? Cards are random. Dice are random. Sometimes even the choices other players make are random. How do I know if the win/loss scenario at the end of the game is appropriate for random outcomes along the way?
