Re: 6th PIECEPACK GAME DESIGN COMPETITION

[cdrodeffer@...]

--- In piecepack@yahoogroups.com, "Electronicwaffle"
<electronicwaffle@y...> wrote:
> This will be an interesting Competition. [...]

I certainly hope so! I encourage everyone to get together in groups
and brainstorm some new games.

> I think that his will be easier said
> than done. The imediate concern, is
> that the entries will be few, As the
> number of people, to be fully involved
> in each new game will be at least
> halfed. The time to create such games
> will probably also be twice as long.

I'm not concerned about the number of entries. In fact, I would much
rather receive 5 excellent entries than 20 mediocre entries. And
remember, there's no restriction on the number of games toward which
any one designer may contribute. "Designer A" could work on one game
with "Designer B" and on another game with "Designers C & D". And I
think four months is an adequate amount of lead time. If anyone
disagrees, please let me know.

> The converting process (for lack of a
> better term) this competition implies
> (...All entrants are invited to join
> the Yahoo Group...) will hopefully
> overcome this minor drawback.

While joining this Yahoo group is encouraged, joining is by no means a
requirement for entry in the contest.

> Previous competitions had low
> turnouts due to a complicated theme.

On the contrary, I believe advertisement had at least as much to do
with turnout as anything else. Contests 3 and 5 were very broadly
publicized in other venues, such as About Boardgames, Board Game Geek,
Spielfreaks, Board Game Designers Forum and so on. This 6th contest
has been widely advertised as well.

> I do not see a theme that is
> directly game-design related with
> this competition.

You're correct! This time around, there are no restrictions with
respect to theme, mechanism, number of players, game length or
anything like that. Just that the games must use a piecepack and must
be designed in groups of at least two people working together.

> These two factors combined will
> surely be the wrecking ball or
> cornerstone to this competition.

I sincerely hope Group Projects turns out to be a cornerstone of a
crop of excellent piecepack games.

> Perhaps a better name would have
> been Sibling Rivalry.

Just to be clear, groups of co-authors are not limited to brothers and
sisters or any other such pre-existing relationship. A bunch of
strangers could very well meet in a forum such as this, decide to
design a piecepack game together, and if it's good, they may very well
end up winning the prize.

> Conflicts will arise with the
> co-authors, I hope that they will
> all be worked out peacefully.

I agree. As with any group project, differences in opinion and
direction are inevitable. But it's my sincere hope that each mature,
thoughtful and considerate group will overcome these differences and
build upon one-another's individual strengths to create a wonderful
game. That would be good for the piecepack community, and is one of my
personal goals for this competition.

> I was going to ask what was to
> prevent one person from pretending
> to be two different people. But I
> see that the concern this competition
> invented, it also solves.

I did not spend much time thinking about this sort of problem, because
I believe the people in the piecepack community are, as a whole,
honest. I try to look at people in a positive light, and I hope no one
would be so immature as to try to cheat in this way. Anyone who would
consider cheating in this way is missing the point of the competition.
Sure, there are prizes, and those are part of the encouragement to
enter. But the biggest prizes aren't even listed. The biggest prizes
are really 1) the potential for building a strong co-operative spirit
among the piecepack community and 2) a bunch of very well-designed
piecepack games for all of us to enjoy.

> I guess this would be a great
> follow up to the Solitare
> competition.

I didn't have that in mind as a specific goal, but if it turns out
that way, wonderful!

> Personaly, given my current
> projects, I was hoping the next
> competition would be a source of
> inspiration for me. At the present,
> no idea comes rushing to my mind,
> like the other 3 competitions I
> have entered created. I know the
> due date is about 4 months away, I
> hope this will be enough time for
> me.

Inspiration is fickle, so just take your time. Four months is
generally in keeping with the design timeframes from previous
contests, but more importantly, it fits well with my own schedule as
Judge and with Karol's schedule as Mediator. Schedule alignment is a
very important factor that both Karol and I worked on to adjust, and I
hope the time given is adequate for each group to generate, test and
refine their games.

> Even if the competition was on
> a different theme, I feel that
> piecepack is ready to gain new
> members. Ideas, Comments, and
> Games seem to come out faster
> and faster than ever before.

Again, piecepack evangelism wasn't one of my goals with respect to
this competition. But if advertising this contest perks up the ears of
a few people who had never before heard of the piecepack, I welcome
them, whether they want to find a partner or two and work on designs,
comment on existing games and make suggestions to improve them, or
even if they just want to play. Welcome!

> I am involved with Icehouse
> and SLICK, but I think that
> after 100 games, the list added
> with lack of community, has
> entered a state of near stasis.

I am on the Icehouse list as well, and I think it's a great group,
very much akin to the piecepack group. All groups go through ups and
downs, but I think the Icehouse group is very much alive.

> Piecepack may seem to be taking
> one step backward to take two
> forward. Soon, the sheer number
> of members in the comunity will
> solve this problem. Where some
> members are not as powerful,
> other members will take up the
> slack.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean here, Eric. I don't see the
piecepack group size as a problem, nor do I see the group going
backward. What do you mean by "powerful" members and the need to "take
up the slack"? I've always thought of the piecepack group as a
friendly community where everyone is free to give and take pretty much
as they wish, not a sweatshop where peons have a duty to do their work
for the benefit of some tyrannical boss. Do we need any more law than
what we have with the group owner and moderator, who generously
volunteer their time to keep this group free from spam and off-topic
files and links?

> And now begins the the great
> silent period where other
> members inquire why everyone
> is so quiet.

Gosh, I hope not. The last thing I want to happen is for discussion to
stop. All the best to everyone!

Clark