Bart de Jong

Went to a concert by the Nits tonight. Three men, well in their seventies, still experimenting and pushing themselves with their music. I can only hope I'll still be as actively engaging with my art at that age.

Cole makes a very important point. My only addition here would be that I personally believe what turns people off about the traditionally complex Euro-style games I think Eric is referencing here is not the complexity itself but the lack of connection players feel. Mini 🧵

To quote Geoff's law: "Your game is more complicated than you think, even when you take into account Geoff's law."

The Game Changers by @timclare.bsky.social definitely feels literature coded. The whole first chapter is a delightful praise of the magical experience that is rolling a die.

Should ask my wife if she would still love me if I was a brain in a jar

I'm not saying there's a causal effect, but I designed 4 new games (and wrote concepts for 2 more) in the less than two months since getting rid of the old appendix. Makes me wonder how prolific I would become if I gave up one of my kidneys too.

I didn't think I could have more respect for Rodney Smith than I already did.

A player not realizing they are in kingmaking position is less of a problem to me. That's usually down to a lack of experience, and if I'm playing with new players I'm prepared for a less satisfying game arc.

I think so. Kingmaking is awesome when the player goes "You stabbed me in the back last turn, so I'm not gonna help you win!" If nothing happened over the course of the game to inform their decision, it becomes arbitrary or personal, which both break the magic circle.

Option C: tactical error on my part.

But out of the two, definitely B. I don't mind A at all as long as the kingmaker can make their decision based on the course of the game.

I had the choice between finishing a project (boring) or starting a new one (exciting), so I found a compromise and now I have two new projects.

Maar hij houdt ook van dieren dus dat compenseert wel ongeveer

Het feit dat het bedrijf vernoemd is naar een extreem gevaarlijk voorwerp uit LOTR dat misbruikt wordt door de Big Bad Evil Guy om te spioneren op de Good Guys was misschien al wel een beetje een hint achteraf

You had me giggle at 'dead serious'

Just also remembered Spy Dogs from when I was a kid

Okay, going a bit on a limb here:
- classic cluedo vibes
- totally spies
- spy kids
- bomb busters comic style

Are we talking Austin Powers level satire or Johnny English level?

This is great advice. I've found that a game's setting itself actually matters less than the vibe it gives. If you can present the setting in a way that vibes with the experience, only then does it enrich the game.

Puzzles are just games with a perfect solution. Also, games are just puzzles with imperfect information.

Tunic want nostalgie voor toen je spelletjes speelde en nog geen Engels lezen kon, Chants of Sennaar want puzzelen met taal, en Q-Up want totaal flauwe e-sports persiflage maar toch ergens ook wel een goed spel ofzo

Gotta playtest that layout though

Actually 3 could work for 2 as well.

1) "I could just as well say that simple games are easier to design - just remove rules. You're oversimplifying the difference between the two."

2) "It doesn't matter what is or isn't a game by any of our personal definitions."

3) "Your dislike doesn't invalidate the enjoyment of others."

That's exciting news, you're very welcome here!

The great delusion of our country is that rightwing governments can fuck us over in whatever way they want because somehow people will blame the left for it anyway.

We ought to switch minds sometimes.

That's a fair point. I guess if you look at intentionality as a critic, you're critiquing the (presumed) design process rather than the game itself.

Meanwhile I look at your designs and think "damn that's so awesome, I'll never be able to make something as good as that" 😅

As the design grows those leaps left and right get smaller, until I eventually end up (hopefully) somewhere in the middle. I've come to like it this way, as it forces me to switch viewpoints a lot during the design process.

For me it ping-pongs a lot. During the ideation phase I'm usually thinking this is going to be the next Spiel des Jahres winner. Then after the first playtests I only see everything that's wrong with it. Then when I think I fixed those problems it's back to Spiel des Jahres again.