I like limitations. They force me to focus my ideas and be selective, which I think results in more elegant design choices.
With that in mind, I am considering "designing" a component set(s) that I would use for several games. Essentially, for me it would act as a cap on certain types of components in my design. The Bits. And therefore allow for maximum focus.
The core idea as a product being something I could sell for *hopefully* around $20 to $30 that would work for any number of "play sets". That is to say rules and elements that can't be classified as universal. Like unique game boards or aids for example.
The component set would likely also include several play sets as well as the universal components but the real crux of the idea is to reduce the price point on a game by game basis by sharing components between numerous games. If I design ten games that all use some subset of the same components, why charge for those components ten times.
What I am currently thinking should go into such a component set:
- 50 cubes in six colors (say red, blue, green, yellow, white, and black). That is 50 red cubes, 50 blue, etc.
- 10 wooden discs again in each color.
- 10 meeples in each color.
- 10 "roads" (ala Settlers of Catan).
- A deck of playing cards and,
- 54 sleeves for the cards.
- a few standard "boards" Checkers/Chess, a Hexgrid, etc.
- Rules and nonstandard boards/aids/mats for 5 playsets.
All told that is 300 cubes, 60 discs, 60 meeples, 60 roads, and 54 cards with sleeves. And 5 yet to be designed playsets. Basically rules and any boards/aids that don't fall under the standard board category. I have no idea how much this would cost to produce so my numbers are pure fantasy at this point.
Any thoughts welcome?
Comments
I think your cubes alone
I think your cubes alone might exceed the price cap already
Since you would be selling for profit, the price you should be concerned with is cost price, not sale price. Depending on your profit margin, you would push your price cap down by 1 or 2 dollars
Cubes
Yeah, 10mm x 10mm plastic cubes are like $0.02 each when purchased in bulk. Maybe you could get 300 in your game for $5 from the printer, but that already puts your MSRP(4x - 5x the print cost) at $20-25.
As for the deck of cards, I'd like to see cards ranked 1-15 in five or six suits.
As for the idea of a "multi-game" (what my buddy and I called "our" idea 4 years ago) has been around for a while. It would be pretty swell, but ultimately it doesn't seem to have that much market appeal.
I already have all of those components (more or less) in my prototype kit. Having several sets of rules to play with those components would be fine, but who wants to play generic, replaceable-theme games?
Same idea, different path
I asked the same question on reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/2ccrp2/would_you_pay_a_small...
I was thinking a dynamic board (like Catan) with either 2" square or hex tiles and a frame. The tiles could be double sided to achieve more variety to game play. Enough tiles would be same color to play classic games like chess/checkers. The frame would be expandable so buying additional board sets would work together.
Additional/needed bits would come with rule sets which would be priced at $5-10. Otherwise, rules could either be downloaded free or charge $1-5 depending on complexity. Rule sets could be combined into genres and printed on demand with additional art for those who need art for theme.
As I said, numbers are pure
As I said, numbers are pure fantasy and component counts will change to meet the cost I want as I investigate further.
As for cost I know from experience if I order around 80k cubes I can get the cost down to $0.02 each. I don't know about the cost of any of the other components yet.
Also might be something I sell as a "loss leader" essentially breaking even with each sell so I can make money on the individual playsets. Think of the Videogame model. Every Xbox that went out the door cost more to make then they charged. They made the money on the games. Granted I'm not microsoft so I can't afford to lose money. But I could potentially afford to break even.
My real question is, if this existed (and maybe it does and I just don't know, which would answer the question) would there be interest? Is it worth my time to develop?
I was thinking 8 mm cubes but
I was thinking 8 mm cubes but my pricing is similar. I don't know the cost per unit of anything else yet.
I don't know if I would sell this via distributors so I don't think I necessarily need to have an MSRP that is 4 or 5 times cost and to me the real money in concept is to be made from the actual games, via playsets. Think of this idea as a console and the playsets as game discs. All real graphic work would be in the playsets. All the theme, etc. The Component set just gives a universal set of tools to work with.
I was thinking standard playing cards because it gives a good range of numbers and suits and is well known by pretty much everyone. Familiarity is a good thing. The Sleeves are included for expandability. Using the playing cards for firmness and a playset could include cards that are placed in the sleeve in front of the card. Also the cards are something relatively easy to replace for the user if they buy a lot of games(playsets) and need to make more than one component box worth of cards for those games.
Can you share a specific example of an existing "multi-game"? It could be useful to look at what they did before moving forward?
I'm certain most gamers have most of these components from amongst their games. Thats part of why I chose them. They are commonly used. If someone has the ability to build their own kit. Awesome. What to buy a playset for it? I'll be very public about what is actually in a component set so the frugal amongst us can do just that. Since the money is in the playsets, the more component sets out there the better. Even if they don't get them from me.
Similar, yes. But is seems
Similar, yes. But is seems like this approach would be more limited in terms of theme. It assumes a required board and the art for each game is basically limited to the existing boards/tiles (as I understand the idea). My approach is to give the players all the non art/theme components in a set. The playsets include whatever is necessary to give the game theme. I think both our approaches have merit and would allow for an essentially infinite number of games. I think my approach would allow for more thematic games, as my boards are part of the playsets generally.
There is a lot to read in that reddit thread so I haven't read it yet. Starting now...
So you are asking for
So you are asking for interest in the product. Its all about marketing IMO.
If you are marketing your games, like a X games in 1 able to be played with all those components, it reminds me of the "Action52" or "cassette50" from video can computer game's past, Shovelware is the term for such quantity-over-quality software. There might be an assumption of bad quality and the product would be badly received from that point of view.
If you marketed the product as a board-game developer's starter kit however, with a reference book of games to learn how rules interact, a multitude of components to experiment with for when you choose to design your own games, with some additional tips on copyright laws. Now that would get some budding designers excited. But if you consider this to be scamming then forget it.
Point is, the way you describe your product, affects the customer's judgement. Notice that the components have not changed much, just the description.
But the perception is that there's a difference between "A bunch of games", and "A learning experience" from my examples above.
The bunch of games doesn't attract attention because the customer probably already has a bunch of games. But a product which teaches him how to make games feels not only different, but benefiting to the customer as well.
Thank you. That's what I
Thank you. That's what I wanted.
If I'm reading you correct, as a designer there is interest but as a gamer there is not. That may be part of why the idea resonates with me so well, and being close to it I'm not seeing it. That's what posts like this are for. Perspective.
I'm not sure how viable a product targeted at designers is. I assume its to niche to really be worth the time from a financial standpoint, or that I would have to charge more to make it financially viable.
I supposed I could market somewhere in the middle. "Not only does it come with 5 games, with numerous other games available to extend the system, but it is also a great tool for learning principles of board game design!" I just don't know if its a good idea to divide focus like that in marketing. I'd almost need two separate campaigns, and I don't even know enough to run one.
But, then again, focusing on designers first might be great for seeding the principle. Especially if a few started making their own playsets and releasing them.
In any case, I've a lot to think about.
Okay just to be clear, I was
Okay just to be clear, I was using my previous comment as merely an example. If you yourself have no experience with publishing games, you should not be selling advice about it. Or unless you indeed have published your own games it would be a nice deed to share your experience
And to be clear, I wouldn't
And to be clear, I wouldn't consider making a product designed to help budding designers if I didn't feel I had a good amount of experience to draw from.
I personally have six published games, seven if you count an expansion, and 2 that are currently in final development with my publisher. I am also a developer and have developed at least as many. And I acted as the producer at a board game company for several years, coordinating all development. That last bit has allowed me to meet a large number of designers and developers, some rather prominent. If I do this and focus it on new designers rather than gamers in general, I'll be able to put together a rather worthwhile bit of information for them, probably with perspectives from several designers, and not just myself.
The design and development side I certainly know. Marketing has always been something I recognize as important, but have no idea how to make heads or tails of.
Hey no need to spill your
Hey no need to spill your resume here, was just saying what i felt was right is all.
Well if you have that much experience, then marketing it as a teaching tool should be no problem if the information is good.
I don't claim to be a marketing expert myself, but a simple way, at least for me, is thinking about service:
- What do you believe, your product can do for the consumer, and present it.
All in all, good luck with this project
Sorry if that came across
Sorry if that came across wrong. My intention was simply to state I may have sufficient experience for the concept of making a product focused on learning game design.
Thanks for all your feedback. Its been very enlightening.