Skip to Content
 

[GDW] Format evaluation

10 replies [Last post]
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008

Hi all,

Ok, we've made it about 6 games into the Game Design Workshop, and have a nice backlog of games that will take us into the next year. I think this is a good time to ask whether people are happy with the format, whether things ought to change, etc.

The one thing I would probably be most open to hearing proposals on is whether 2 weeks still seems like a good length of time, or whether going to 1 week would be more appropriate. I think we have enough games that for the near future, we could handle going to one game per week; this would give all of us a chance to put second games into the rotation, which might be nice for the more prolific designers among us. And since new members are joining the site daily, and asking to have their games workshopped, I think we can handle the pace. Whether we want to go that fast, though, is another matter. I think the 2 weeks gives people enough time to have a thorough discussion of the games, yet in practice, it seems that most of the discussion happens in the first week.

So, I welcome your suggestions and comments, and as always, we'll let majority rule.

-Jeff

phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
GDW thus far

First let me say thanks Jeff for taking on this project. You have done a wonderful job and I think that the GDW forum is one of the strongest features of the forum right now. Kudos to you!

Second, let me apologize for not contributing any feedback thus far. I have been reading the threads, but I just don't have the time to reply. There have have been some wonderful games that have been showcased here.

I don't think one a week is a bad idea, although one week is sometimes very short. I would fire off a reminder to the whomever is due to come up the next week to remind them so they can get their game in a ready state. I've noticed in the past it sometimes takes folks 2 or 3 days sometimes to get their games compiled and uploaded somewhere where it's accessable to everyone.

The other option is to keep the two week schedule and perhaps stagger the workshops. So you start one, wait a week, then start another. At that point the first game would be in it's second week. The next week, start a third game, since the first game would be finished, the second would be in it's second week, etc.

At any rate, good work!

-Darke

Brykovian
Brykovian's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
[GDW] Format evaluation

I think that darke touched on something with his staggered-weeks suggestion ... only that it could simply become a week-by-week thing, with the understanding that you can continue to talk about a design for longer than 1 week.

You're right in that most chatter dies down within the first week anyhow ... but it might be a good thing to encourage designers to go back and revisit their designs after the initial discussions, re-edit, re-post for follow-up feedback in the weeks following. This might lead to several threads in the GDW being "active" at the same time, but I'm sure we'll be able to follow. Perhaps start each new design thread with a "Week #" to help keep them in order in our brains somewhat. (For example, "Week #7 - {author}: {game title} ...)

The reminder -- maybe 1 week in advance ... or mid-week previous ... would probably be a good thing. But, then that adds to your administrative duties, which might not be such a good thing for you anyway. ;)

-Bryk

IngredientX
IngredientX's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/26/2008
Re: GDW thus far

Darkehorse wrote:

I don't think one a week is a bad idea, although one week is sometimes very short. I would fire off a reminder to the whomever is due to come up the next week to remind them so they can get their game in a ready state. I've noticed in the past it sometimes takes folks 2 or 3 days sometimes to get their games compiled and uploaded somewhere where it's accessable to everyone.

I'd second this... I'm coming up on the list, but I'd like to know a firm deadline about when my game rules are due up. If I knew a week or even a few days in advance, I'd be sure to have everything ready by the time my turn came.

But jwarrend's work has been real good... I've enjoyed seeing everyone's ideas, and hopefully I'll be helping a little more than I have in the past!

hpox
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
[GDW] Format evaluation

Seth was a visionary : :D
http://www.bgdf.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=313

At the time we didn't think it was necessary, but now I agree that two weeks may be a little too long or rather too short. For example, I'm in the process of editing the rules of my "Futuristic Ball Sport" game based on the helpful comments I received from the GDW. During that time, there's a "lag" where no discussion take place because everyone is waiting for an update.

I like the stagger idea but it wouldn't solve the "lag" issue I've been seeing for almost all games (some did keep the discussion going for nearly the entire 2 weeks!).

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
[GDW] Format evaluation

I told you so ! :P :P :P

Quote:
For example, I'm in the process of editing the rules of my "Futuristic Ball Sport" game based on the helpful comments I received from the GDW. During that time, there's a "lag" where no discussion take place because everyone is waiting for an update.

Exactly why we should start the next one.

Quote:
I like the stagger idea but it wouldn't solve the "lag" issue I've been seeing for almost all games (some did keep the discussion going for nearly the entire 2 weeks!).

I don't see how it doesn't solve the lag issue. During the lag we begin discussion on the new submission. Then whenever the first one is updated, post it and discussion on that one can continue as well. Basically at any given time we might be talking about 2 different games, and I don't see anything wrong with that.

Perhaps we should look at it slightly differently though. Since some games generate more discussion than others, maybe give each one about 10 days, and if the discussion peters off then we can start the next game early. Pros: Less down time, as the next submission starts when the fist one begins to lag, rather than possibly a week later. Less waiting for everyone in line. Cons: No definite schedule, some people might feel like their game got less time than someone else's.

I am in favor of less downtime, be that because we just start people when the lag hits, or because we only give a week or 10 days instead of 2 weeks.

- Seth

P.S. Before long we may get the CGD project into this workshop!.. Or would that be sort of counterproductive- would the same people be commenting on it?

P.P.S. the game that began in the Investment/Rail thread is now in the queue for the GDW... if you aven't been following that thread it might be really interesting as it takes a game from conception of concept, through about the whole design process, and turns it into a game that's ready for the GDW and playtesting.

jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
[GDW] Format evaluation

My personal opinion is that maybe a "lag" is overly complex. Why not just have a new game come up every week, and if you want to comment on an "old" game, you can? I know that even though my slot is over, I am perfectly willing to continue talking about my game if people would like to do that; I'm sure that's true of everyone else as well. I don't really think the approach of "I'll have a revision up after week 1" works or is desirable. But I do like to hear updates about how people's playtests have gone, and what changes they've made, what problems have come up with the suggestions we made. No need to try to lock that in to a 2 week schedule.

I don't think going to 10 days is a good idea. It's much easier to keep track of a fixed day of the week then a fixed day of the month. If it's "every Sunday, a new game comes out", I think that's a much better approach than "a new game comes out the 1st, 11th, and 21st of the month".

One thing I want to emphasize yet again is that this is a collaborative process, not a charity service. If your game is going to be Workshopped, PLEASE make an effort to give some input into other people's games. It is not necessary to follow the entire discussion that a game will generate; it's ok if you duplicate someone else's comments. Just read the game rules, and fire off a couple of paragraphs telling what you think about it. This is not a big commitment we're asking for, and it's only fair if you're going to ask people to do that for you that you'd extend them the same courtesy.

Finally, if you guys want to workshop the CGD it's ok by me, but I think that given that that one is a collaborative project anyway, and that people who are interested in it are already involved in it, I'm not sure how much feedback you will really generate. But, you could take a vote and decide if it's something everyone wants to do...

Anyway, I'm willing to make the change if there is a little more support. In fact, let's have one more day of discussion, then I'll place a vote up here and we can decide by the weekend whether we want to go with 1 week workshop sessions, or stick with 2.

-Jeff

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
[GDW] Format evaluation

Jeff said what I was REALLY thinking... Just move to 1 week per entry, and people should be encouraged to come back with updates and comments after revisions and playtests ... even if their time is up. I know I did that, and I know others did too.

- Seth

Brykovian
Brykovian's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
[GDW] Format evaluation

Brykovian wrote:
it could simply become a week-by-week thing, with the understanding that you can continue to talk about a design for longer than 1 week.

You're right in that most chatter dies down within the first week anyhow ... but it might be a good thing to encourage designers to go back and revisit their designs after the initial discussions, re-edit, re-post for follow-up feedback in the weeks following. This might lead to several threads in the GDW being "active" at the same time, but I'm sure we'll be able to follow

I guess I agreed with Jeff's latest comment too ... even before he'd written it! ;) :roll: :D

jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
[GDW] Format evaluation

Brykovian wrote:

The reminder -- maybe 1 week in advance ... or mid-week previous ... would probably be a good thing. But, then that adds to your administrative duties, which might not be such a good thing for you anyway. ;)

Unfortunately, I am not reliable enough to be counted on to send a reminder to people before their session starts, but I'll try.

The schedule has been in a constant state of flux due to unforeseen circumstances like cancellations, etc, which are understandable but which make it necessary to bump some people up, some people back, etc.

So, if we indeed ratify a change to the schedule, we'll hopefully have a more rigid schedule and perhaps there will be less lead time before one's game comes up, thus people will better be able to gauge when to sign up for. But the schedule will continue to be the most reliable way to know when your slot is up, and I'm afraid it's going to have to be up to everyone to remember when their game is scheduled for, so that they can maximize the use of their Workshop session by having their game ready to go in time. I'll try to get out reminders, but don't rely on them!

-Jeff

FastLearner
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
[GDW] Format evaluation

I suggested this in the poll thread, but I'll add it here.

What I would have really liked for Everest was two one-week periods, so the schedule looks like one week each for A B C A B C D E F D E F etc. That gives you two weeks to create an updated version based on previous comments plus it allows for overlap.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut