Making a FUN board game

Can you give some details on a game that's not fun?

No, lol, I meant specifically. I think you have a general grasp of things that a game needs, so the question becomes whether or not you have a blind spot for your own games.

Can you post the rulebook for a game that's a problem for you?

Surprisingly with my prototypes, I'm always SHELVING them because my OWN playtests reveal them to be "uninteresting". But "shelving" doesn't mean that the design is "dead"... It just means that it goes on the back-burner while I work on another design instead, all the while, thinking about that design in the back of my mind... To see what I can think up which will take that game in a NEW and "exciting" direction.

So yes, this is a "real phenomenon" that occurs: game works but is boring.

I usually have this problem when a game is "TOO SIMPLE". And then injecting more elements to the game proves to be a challenge (What to add???). I've had this with "Battle Card Games" (Duals) where the game didn't have enough content to make it a VIABLE game.

My advice is either: A> continue to work on the design by ADDING more elements to the "core" game OR B> shelve the game for a bit and work on another one of your designs. See if you can get new and fresh ideas for your shelved designs!

Fun is VERY "subjective"... But we ALL know what it is. Even if it is different to each player... Having a game to be "FUN" is essential if you plan on selling the game commercially.

Cheers!

Note #1: BTW you should be able to figure out if your game IS "FUN" during your OWN "playtests". It's like "TradeWorlds": every time I sit down for a playtest, I am amazed how GOOD the game is and how much I ENJOY the game, even if I am playing all 4 Players (depending on what it is I am playtesting).

Same goes with a 1 Player "Adversity AI" game I just played about 1 week ago... I enjoyed the experience, even if I was not 100% certain about the rules... Since the AI was developed by our Developer (Joe Pilkus). Anyway I took it for a spin ... and even if there were some elements that needed clarification, OVERALL I had "FUN" playing against the AI.

Even if "FUN" is subjective, you can pretty much realize when playtesting that hey, "This is enjoyable" or "Haha Take-That" or "Aha this is how this works", etc. You'll find moments which surface something deeper in the strategy of the game.

Note #2: And don't get DISCOURAGED when a design fails to impress. That too happens all the time: an IDEA for a game sounds AMAZING... If you do a QUICK prototype and playtest it and ... it's crap. Happens all the time too! (LOL)

Just give some of your designs time to "mature".

What this means is that from Pool "A" of ideas, wait until you have a Pool "B" of NEW ideas to replace and/or add the old mechanics or elements.

You'll see ... I'll give you an "concrete" example.

Example: I have been working on a "new" design, while I await latest corrections for "TradeWorlds". And this design was supposed to have 2 clear and distinct Phases. The first Phase was supposed to be a "Dungeon Crawler" with "Game Tiles"... So far, so good.

Phase 2 was supposed to be a BATTLE with a Level Monster.

Well my "Game Tiles" just didn't work... How do I choose the letter I need??? Searching a pouch for a Letter ("Game Tile") would be tedious. So I shelved the design for a few months.

Then I started thinking about "Player Boards"... To track points, etc. And that's when the IDEA came to me: Use a Player Board to TRACK the "Game Tiles"!!! This was fantastic because instead of SEARCHING for a "Game Tile" (Think Letter), I just add +1 on the Player Board and it is DONE!

Look for SMALL "Victories" in the design, re-shape it slowly... With NEW ideas that give your game more "depth"...

That's why I SHELVE stuff... sometimes for years. But still if I want to take a look at that design, I just open up the Excel Spreadsheet or the Text Document, etc.

It's a process... creating a game. Things don't just magically WORK together... You are the Master, it takes time to hone your craft, and in this case a specific DESIGN.

Cheers and again don't be discouraged... Work on something NEW, maybe!

Update: Usually there is one or two GREAT components in a design... Things that are like real good... But somehow the design doesn't work as a whole... This is like SPARE PARTS in a Car Garage... You can try those "Mag Wheels" and see if they fit on this Design and sometimes you can BORROW elements from other designs and make a "mash-up" of several designs together...

I find that some elements are so cool... I expect to use them at some point in the future... On some other design.

I had an awesome Mini-Mech game ... with five (5) missions. Now while I can find the "mission cards", I can't find the TXT document with the missions or the Cardbacks to the Mission cards. It's really frustrating, because I REMEMBER DELETING the folder... Or what was in it.

And right about now, I would like to take a second look... But like I said, I purposely delete the folder... thinking: "Meh, those are not files that I need!" DAMN IT!

I can't tell from your descriptions how the mechanics provide for interaction or competition between players. But there should likely be some way for players to attempt to have more of something than the others, or be more effective at something than the others. If it's a co-op game, then there must be something that prevents players from succeeding at their task and/or overarching goal.

If you're seeing this as an issue, there may also be a lack of tension due to the winner being determined long before the game has ended. If there's no chance for competitors to be in competition against one another, then there's no uncertainty as to the winner of the contest, and therefore no tension. Shorten the length of the game if necessary. Or limit resources of some kind. Or sand-bag the leader. Or find some way for a last-place player to stay competitive (this is called "rubber-banding," as in that player can "bounce back" from distant last place).

Beware "kingmaking," however: the ability for a last-place player to essentially choose who wins a game between the first- and second-place players. That's not seen in a positive light, since the winner ends up losing the victory not because of their closest competitor, but someone not even in the race.

Lack of tension could also be caused by lack of control. If players don't feel like the choices they're making have some kind of impact on their success (or that of other players), then it's as if they just randomly threw the dice, or drew a card from the deck in Candyland.

Maybe you need a time limit. Are players permitted to accept a leisurely pace in the pursuit of their objectives?

Is there progression, maturation, or growth (not just in moving closer to the end of the game)? Do players feel a sense of becoming more powerful, or have more options available, because of their previous actions?

If this line of thinking seems to be heading somewhere, then I recommend you prioritize tension instead of narrative regarding your players and the way they interact.

To me, most euros feel like they "lack" in risk/urgency. Your villager game sounds like the a-typical euro. Now we all know that most "island" game end with a fiery volcano or something similar.

Maybe you could make it a bit "different". Like say that Icelandic Villagers populating a small island in the norther seas. Resources are rare during the "Winter Season" (Second Season). During the First Season (Fall Season), players try to "gather" sufficient resources to "survive" the Winter (like the Harvest). With the remaining villagers, you go into a "rebuild" phase (Third Season) during the Spring.

All that to explain that during the "Summer Season", your small island gets INVADED by Viking Hoards and you must protect your island from them.

Win condition: the player with the "most" villagers left is the winner.

Now each player CARES about his villagers and will do the best to PROTECT them during the summer assaults and as well through the harsh winter.

Again just a idea... You may want to DROP the "Seasons" and ONLY use the "Viking Invasion"... That too could work.

Cheers!

Note #1: This would amount to creating a AI that could handle how the invaders behave where they disembark, etc. It's not easy but will definitely "SPICE UP" your Island Villager game...

Note #2: If you LIKE the "Seasons" idea, well then you don't necessarily NEED the Viking Invasion. You could make the game about surviving a YEAR and the game starts in Spring and continues until Winter arrives... Because of the harsh conditions, you will lose villagers during this season... And you need to wait until the Spring season arrives to determine the winner.

Again the player with the MOST "surviving villagers" is the winner...

Another plausible outcome...

Remember the type of Audience you are targeting. What some people would call "fun" others would not. Fun is a subjective term. Many folks in Gaming forget that.