Definitely *more* aimed at industry insiders, academics in the space and very devoted hobbyists by nature, but I don't think its only of interest to designers. It is very much what it purports to be though: an enclyopaedia of all known game mechanisms with examples. And that's pretty niche!
One trend I like is the game mechanics from non-games, if that makes sense.
I'm thinking of the where's waldo elements of MicroMacro, the escape room games, and the Kabuto Sumo game with the coin pushing.
I think every possible mechanic has been mixed at this point. I just kinda glaze over a description like "dice placement hidden movement engine builder." But the idea of introducing non-games mechanics really opens up a whole new front.
Yes definitely - there's still a lot of room for innovation outside "mechanics soup". Infact, I find that way of understanding games not especially useful after a while. You can take several games that have exactly the same list of mechanics that play vastly differently: it doesn't tell you much about how and how well they come together. Unfortunately a lot of designers are still working in the soup paradigm where chucking these together in a pot is what they think innovation is: its not been helped by that description of games as mechanics list among hobbyists has become so common and therefore it appears to be a strong commercial strategy too (although I think it actually isn't... but that's another story!).
The reason I am a huge advocate of theme-first design is because the creative constraint is not defined by mechanics. When you then have to devise mechanics that fit around theme you find oblique solutions that you would not discover if you started with your existing mechanical toolset.
I think one place games can start are with victory conditions. Too many games end with what I call the spreadsheet phase, where everyone tallies the victory point value of a bunch of different stuff. Did you read my piece on lost ruins of arnak?
I was a big fan of the game, to be clear, but it seemed so close to living up to it's potential. I mean, the theme is clearly exploration/research, why not end with the first person to discover the Import Thing? You could slightly re theme the game as universities trying to be the first to discover, I don't know, a Rosetta stone that would translate their language. I think that would be a much more satisfying ending than a spreadsheet.
And not every game has to be a race either. Like, a game amount making coffee could be won by whoever makes the most coffee after 10 rounds. That's not the most creative thing ever, but it's just more thematically satisfying than "well ethiopian beans are worth 4 points, Arabica beans are worth 2 points, unless you have the bonues card that grants an additional points per factory blah blah blah..."
Definitely! It' something of the hallmark of the "point salad" that they do this. It can work but its quite passe now.
I did not read it. I was going to actually get round to playing Lost Ruins first :D
I think part of the issue is definitely that these games do not have a great deal of interest in disguising that they are spreadsheets with veneer of theme applied. I would say though that as you adventure outwards, you do find games with more vigor. Ever played Aeons End? That's a good example of something that has a ton of tracks, essentially but it feels so satisfying when you take down the boss: A big part of that is just because it feels like it really has a point that's well aligned to theme. Not "be the best by some loose metric" but "stop this horrifying creature from obliterating where you live"
Really good introduction to this subject and a nice overview in general! This book is a bit pricey but useful if you're interested in exploring more of the space: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Building-Blocks-Tabletop-Game-Design/dp/1138365491
Is this a book for game designers? I haven't really thought about making a game. I think my tastes are too basic and I don't have much to add
Definitely *more* aimed at industry insiders, academics in the space and very devoted hobbyists by nature, but I don't think its only of interest to designers. It is very much what it purports to be though: an enclyopaedia of all known game mechanisms with examples. And that's pretty niche!
One trend I like is the game mechanics from non-games, if that makes sense.
I'm thinking of the where's waldo elements of MicroMacro, the escape room games, and the Kabuto Sumo game with the coin pushing.
I think every possible mechanic has been mixed at this point. I just kinda glaze over a description like "dice placement hidden movement engine builder." But the idea of introducing non-games mechanics really opens up a whole new front.
Yes definitely - there's still a lot of room for innovation outside "mechanics soup". Infact, I find that way of understanding games not especially useful after a while. You can take several games that have exactly the same list of mechanics that play vastly differently: it doesn't tell you much about how and how well they come together. Unfortunately a lot of designers are still working in the soup paradigm where chucking these together in a pot is what they think innovation is: its not been helped by that description of games as mechanics list among hobbyists has become so common and therefore it appears to be a strong commercial strategy too (although I think it actually isn't... but that's another story!).
The reason I am a huge advocate of theme-first design is because the creative constraint is not defined by mechanics. When you then have to devise mechanics that fit around theme you find oblique solutions that you would not discover if you started with your existing mechanical toolset.
I think one place games can start are with victory conditions. Too many games end with what I call the spreadsheet phase, where everyone tallies the victory point value of a bunch of different stuff. Did you read my piece on lost ruins of arnak?
https://klaussimplifies.substack.com/p/does-winning-a-euro-game-matter
I was a big fan of the game, to be clear, but it seemed so close to living up to it's potential. I mean, the theme is clearly exploration/research, why not end with the first person to discover the Import Thing? You could slightly re theme the game as universities trying to be the first to discover, I don't know, a Rosetta stone that would translate their language. I think that would be a much more satisfying ending than a spreadsheet.
And not every game has to be a race either. Like, a game amount making coffee could be won by whoever makes the most coffee after 10 rounds. That's not the most creative thing ever, but it's just more thematically satisfying than "well ethiopian beans are worth 4 points, Arabica beans are worth 2 points, unless you have the bonues card that grants an additional points per factory blah blah blah..."
Definitely! It' something of the hallmark of the "point salad" that they do this. It can work but its quite passe now.
I did not read it. I was going to actually get round to playing Lost Ruins first :D
I think part of the issue is definitely that these games do not have a great deal of interest in disguising that they are spreadsheets with veneer of theme applied. I would say though that as you adventure outwards, you do find games with more vigor. Ever played Aeons End? That's a good example of something that has a ton of tracks, essentially but it feels so satisfying when you take down the boss: A big part of that is just because it feels like it really has a point that's well aligned to theme. Not "be the best by some loose metric" but "stop this horrifying creature from obliterating where you live"
I saw a twitter thread about where does the period go? And tho you're wrong, I think you are right.
I'm not sure what you mean haha
We’re getting into bird games, and this is very illuminating.
Are you playing Wingspan????
That would be a bored game
zing
Lol
Lol I meant board games. But I’ve heard of Wingspan!