Thursday, May 31, 2018

Recent Screencasts videos) May 2018


Recent screencasts May 2018 (previous list is at http://pulsiphergamedesign.blogspot.com/2017/11/recent-screencasts-video.html, Nov ’17)
I rarely get around to posting individual links to my "Game Design" YouTube channel here, so I decided to list the most recent screencasts instead. Because there are so many (25) I’m not including the descriptions.
‏Confusions of Game Design: Context is not Modeling: http://youtu.be/cpowGrSc5Q0?a 
Dice: when to use them in a design, when not to: http://youtu.be/_bfflXCO9cw?a 
Part 2: 10 "Need to Knows" about RPG design: http://youtu.be/rStyeHv0BqQ?a 
 Pt 1, 10 "Need to Knows" about Role-Playing Game design: http://youtu.be/WFkB93QobgA?a 
How important are formal game reviews, part 2: http://youtu.be/ldHbTIwuHXE?a 
‏How important are formal game reviews, part 1: http://youtu.be/IyocARXjxq0?a 
Must games be fair?: http://youtu.be/sDVdl1eSXbQ?a 
‏The Need for Imagination in Game Play - and Other Entertainment: http://youtu.be/--utMVPI3k0?a 
‏CCG, TCG, LCG, Expandable Card Game - what are differences?: http://youtu.be/OnP5WUXBOgE?a 
10 "Need to Knows" about History: http://youtu.be/Gvp7oRau8T8?a 
Sunk Cost Fallacy can "Sink" Game Developers: http://youtu.be/Z4zQod2PuHc?a 
‏Is there an ideal level of chance randomness in games? Of course not: http://youtu.be/ORcDdhnyWlg?a 
‏Nine "Need to Knows" about (Strategic) Wargame Design: http://youtu.be/6gMG6OCbX0E?a 
RPGs: Meaningless Quests vs Missions that Matter: http://youtu.be/zG26_M5FPIk?a 
Six reasons why wargames have plummeted in popularity: http://youtu.be/EOBM3JD-sno?a 
Conspiracy theories are nonsense, part 2: http://youtu.be/2eXSv-JyHzs?a 
Conspiracy Theories are Nonsense, part 1: http://youtu.be/WK3VCL1LVFo?a 
Nuts & Bolts: The Worker Placement Mechanism: http://youtu.be/APQro4yXoss?a 
Gaming and the gambling instinct: http://youtu.be/wAPlz4yLHCI?a 
Violence in Games, part 2: http://youtu.be/X_FGDhKGsmI?a 
Violence in Games, Part 1: http://youtu.be/pstA6z2pNoE?a 
Crashing Suns Design Notes: http://youtu.be/48xXOY4Hnpk?a 
Nut & Bolts: Dead Cards and Losing a Turn: http://youtu.be/FoloOCKdeOc?a 
"Hasting 1066" Game Design Notes: http://youtu.be/5MfP7cb3GeM?a 
What part of play, is games?: http://youtu.be/b2CB2siLhbA?a 

Wednesday, May 23, 2018

Formal Game Reviewing


(This was written for ENWorld, and appeared there recently.)

Formal Game Reviewing

(I read a review at ENWorld that reminded me that many reviewers of games dont quite know what theyre doing! I reviewed games and related materials for Dragon and White Dwarf a long time ago, but almost never have the time to do so these days. Ive modified a handout I created over the years for various students (college and grad, computer or game development disciplines) to whom I assigned a game or book review.  Maybe this will help.  LP)

You have to play a game before you can review it. I have a great deal of experience with some kinds of games, but I will not review a game I have not played. Some years ago I gave my impressions of a Britannia-like game that I owned, but as I had not played it, I was careful to say it was not a review, it was more about design, because I wasnt familiar with the details of the gameplay itself. In the end, its the gameplay that counts.

(Ive encountered video game development teachers who graded student-made games on the basis of how good they were (or worse, fun) without (of course) having the time to play them. I just laughed. I graded primarily on the process of making the game, and sometimes seeing them tested, because I didnt have time to play dozens of games.)


Always keep your audience in mind when you write anything. Your audience for a review is not yourself: usually its someone who enjoys playing games but is not a hard-core gamer. (Does that describe you? Probably not.) This is, of course, the bulk of the gaming market.

The objective of any review is simple.  It should let the reader know whether he or she would like to read the book, see the movie, listen to the music, buy (or only rent) the game, and so forth. The review doesnt exist to make the reviewer look good, or to advance the reviewers agenda.

A formal review is not just opinion. Unless youre a well-known reviewer, readers dont care about your opinions because they dont know you. (I read enough Roger Ebert reviews to know what he preferred, so his opinion meant something to me. But that was Roger Ebert.) No, you have to explain WHY you think this or that about the game. Without that, youre just blathering like a typical yahoo on some comment site. Remember, comments on the Internet are subject to Sturgeons Law (90% [or even 99%] of everything is shit). (Varies by site and topic, of course.)


Any review, whether of movies, games, books, or magazines, ought to answer three questions:

          What is the author/creator trying to accomplish?  (Usually includes, who is the audience)
          How well did he or she or they do it?
          Was it worth doing? (which must include, Why it was or wasnt)



You've read or heard movie reviews that concentrate on the first point (the reviewer may recapitulate the entire plot), on the second point (ooh-ing and ah-ing about how good the direction or technical effects were--or how bad), or on the third point ("what a dumb idea" or "socially relevant!"). 

Which point(s) require the most detailed treatment is a decision the reviewer must make according to the nature of the work being reviewed. 

The most common mistake a reviewer makes is to try to recapitulate the entire contents/characteristics of the game in a short time.  Don't.  Listings of this kind are rarely interesting. It's not only hard to do, it's often boring, and it might annoy the person reading the review if you give things away.

The second most common mistake (amongst students), is to be very explicit and compartmental about these three questions.  Dont list a question, then answer it, then list the next question, then answer it.  The idea is to answer the questions in the course of a discussion without drawing attention to the fact that you are answering these questions.  When you read or hear a good movie review, the questions are usually answered, but youre not explicitly aware of it as you read or listen, are you? Reviews are essays, writing with a purpose, and as essays they need to be enjoyable reading.

Summary
  • Who is your audience?
  • Facts and reasons, not just opinions
  • Answer the Three Questions
  • Write a good essay that people can enjoy reading


                   Items often included in a review:

Title, author/developer, publisher, date of publication.

Background of the developer (and publisher).

Quotations from the backstory/setting.

What are the Best & Worst points of the game?


After I revised the above I discovered that I’d written a piece about reviewing specifically for gamers, published in The Space Gamer #45 in the early 80s (“Notes for Reviewers”). It’s longer and more specific than this. It will be in my books of reprints of my articles of yesteryear, sooner or later; or you can dig up that issue somewhere.

Lew Pulsipher