Re: [piecepack] Suggestion for future design contests.

["Ron Hale-Evans" <rwhe@...>]

Hi all,

A few comments.

1. I would love to see what Gary Pressler will choose as the new
contest. He should be good to go. He has most of his prizes now too,
including the Trophy Cloth, so he can pass that on. I owe Gary some
feedback for his game, but it's really hard to get hold of him on the
phone, not least because he lives three time zones away and seems to
go to bed when I'm getting home from work.

2. I owe Jorge some feedback too, but since he lives in Spain, he's
/really/ hard to talk to on the phone! :-) So having rejected sending
a detailed email to everyone who participated, and since I'm having
trouble reaching people on the phone (only about two people sent me
their phone numbers), why not try Plan C: please send me a way to
contact you via instant messenger, such as Yahoo, AIM, Gmail, and so
on. I'll add you as a buddy and ping you when I see you online, OK?
Then we can talk about your game.

3. I agree that publishing the games from Good Portsmanship is
extremely desirable. However, if I recall correctly, I promised the
contest entrants I'd give them feedback so they could fix their games
first. Consider this a poll. What should I do if I never hear back
from the contest entrants? Should I just go ahead and publish the
games anyway? I can add them to the Piecepack Wiki, no problem.

I welcome feedback.

Ron

On Dec 27, 2007 8:15 AM, Jorge Arroyo <trozo@...> wrote:
>   You're right, of course. I can't speak for other participants, but My
> second submission requieres some fixing before I want to make it available.
> I was waiting for Ron to give me all his feedback before fixing the rules,
> but he seems to be very busy. I'll try fixing the problems that are obvious
> and posting the rules to the wiki...
>
>   Talking about the contests, I think the community would benefit from a
> contest like those organized by the Icehouse community (One is currently in
> progress, btw) with open voting by the community. It certainly would be an
> incentive to play some new games :)
>
>   Cheers,
>
> -Jorge
>
>
> On 12/27/07, Aaron Waters <aaron.waters@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Perhaps this is not the best way to introduce myself to the group,
> > especially seeing as how I'm not likely to ever be a participant, but...
> >
> > In the last two design competitions long, long after the results have
> > been posted many of the rulesets entered into those contests are still
> > not available to someone like me, who's interested in finding more
> > games for piecepack. For the mesomorph contest only 10 of the 14
> > entrants listed have rulesets available and there were 17 entrants
> > altogether. For the Good Portsmanship contest, 9 months after the
> > fact, we still only have access to 3 of the ten entries. For a wannabe
> > piecepack user like me, this is very frustrating.
> >
> > It seems to me that at least one of the goals of these contests is to
> > get more game designs out there so that the piecepack system has more
> > potential "value" to gamers. To this end, it seems to me like it might
> > be better to have as part of the contest rules, a stipulation that
> > entries will be posted either here in this forum or on the wiki as
> > soon as the results are finalized. Entrants could of course still
> > modify those rulesets after receiving comments from the judge, but in
> > the meantime at least there would be some version of the rules
> > available. After all, if a designer thinks a game is good enough to
> > enter into a design competition, shouldn't it be good enough for the
> > general public to at least see? Now I realize that perhaps the judge
> > found some horrible loophole or something and a designer's game might
> > in their opinion turn out to be terribly flawed, but couldn't they
> > then just mention that in the ruleset. Perhaps then someone else might
> > find a fix for the problem long after the original designer abandoned
> > the whole thing. I'd think it'd be better to have more rules
> > available, even if some are flawed, than it is to have lists of
> > interesting sounding games for which there are no rules available.
> >
> > Anyway that my $.02. I hope my comments are taken as the constructive
> > criticism they are meant to be. I am definitely not the game designing
> > type myself, so my comments come from the perspective of one who wants
> > to use piecepack, but is unlikely to ever be entering one of these
> > contests myself.
> >
> > In general, I'd like to thank all the people who have already come up
> > with and posted the various interesting rulesets that are already
> > available. I love the concept of one box, hundreds of board games. For
> > those who can design, please keep up the good work.There are players
> > out there that have enjoyed your games, even if we're not very good at
> > letting you know.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
    Ron Hale-Evans ... rwhe@... ... http://ron.ludism.org/
Mind Performance Hacks book: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/mindperfhks/
	   Center for Ludic Synergy: http://www.ludism.org/
(revilous life proving aye the death of ronaldses when winpower wine has
		   bucked the kick on poor won man)