Is there a reference guide somewhere for the terminology used to describe board game components? Or how to look at an existing board game and work out how to describe -- usefully, to a printer -- what the components are made of, and thus guide them to providing a similar result? Not being clear about that stuff is probably the number one barrier to entry from my perspective, aside from the actual production costs.
Thanks!
Thanks guys. Good answers so far. I think my question comes more than anything out of this sense that there's no certain way to feel like I know what the range of vocabulary is, even at the basic level. Card stock, chip board, 9-up, etc -- terms I've learned somewhat osmotically, when I think I'd've done best with a flippin' *glossary* somewhere. :)
And it only seems to get worse once the basics are covered! What's the "good quality" card stock someone should be angling for? What makes it feel "flimsy"?
It's like with a recent pursuit of pricing on a linen finish: at first I thought I was talking about a single, discrete, reliable concept. Then it comes out that there's "embedded" linen finish, where the print stock itself has the finish inherent in it (didn't have the right feel of heft or sturdiness to me when I got a sample), and "applied" linen finish, laid onto the stock after the printing's gone down. (The latter produces more of what I'm after, and what I thought I was talking about all along.)
It comes to pass that the whole thing feels like digging into a fractal: no matter how deep I go, I don't get the sense that I'm reducing the extent of un-observed material that much. Hidden complexities live at every layer. That adds up to it all being pretty daunting to plan a product and feel like what's being asked for is even close to what you'll get.
Hence the desire for reference of clear, clearly understood, precise language for describing the pieces-parts of a project.
But it sounds like the big upshot here is that no-one's tried to build such a thing and, maybe due to the "fractal problem", it's unbuildable, or at least only buildable in the sense of building a track record of experiences that inform each future project. Which itself would suggest that any first project is an exercise in fumbling around in the dark. Pretty expensive way to fumble, though. :)
But I'm oriented, thanks to these posts, on making sure I go as many rounds as necessary with the manufacturer to get the idea clearly expressed, understood, agreed on, etc -- something which I'd be doing anyway even with a good vocabulary reference at hand, granted, but maybe I'd be sparing myself several extra rounds in that case.