Re: [piecepack] Re: Suggestion for future design contests.

["Jorge Arroyo" <trozo@...>]

As this thread seems to be more active :) I'll add it here.

My suggestion is to participate in the review competition that is currently
running. You could win some nice prices and contribute feedback to unknown
games that could then become better games. Also, reviews in BGG get the
attention of many more people than just the piecepack community, and many of
those could eventually join us too, meaning more games and possibly, more
reviews/feedback.

I've got three confirmed entrants, two of which will be making 2 reviews.
That's too few people, so c'mon, it's not that difficult to write a review

Here's a link to the list of entrants:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/29294/

Cheers,

-Jorge

On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 10:52 PM, littlebrothertimmy <
littlebrothertimmy@...> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm fairly new (less than a week) to this community, but I think I
> might have some useful suggestions about the unpublished games.
>
> 1.      Add an "unfinished games" category to the wiki. You can place all
> the unfinished games in here. Even if the author has given up on
> refining the design of a game, maybe other people (or gaming groups)
> might find it challenging to find a workable ending for these games.
> People could even add their adjustments to the wiki. Who knows this
> could inspire the author to finish his game at last (maybe with an
> addition of one or some of the suggestions).
> 2.      If you want people to become even more involved in the whole
> piecepack experience, you could turn it into a contest: who will be
> able to come up with the best adjustments to make the unfinished games
> workable? Maybe the author is so stuck in his own ideas that he/she
> can't find a way to make it work better. Criteria such as "staying in
> the spirit of the theme and gaming mechanism" and "smallest adaptation
> needed to make the game workable" could count for judging results. The
> judge's original feedback (minus the improvement suggestions, if
> available) would have to be available to the new contestants, so
> everyone has the same starting point.
>
> Whatever option would be best, I think this will emphasize the public
> domain-character of the piecepacksystem even more.
>
> Another thing that I would like to see, is the addition of different
> variants to the already existing games.
> Especially:
> ?       Solitaire variants of multiple player games (using some kind of
> artificial intelligence such as in "Piecepacking pirates" or the old
> solitaire war games of Victory Games).
> ?       Two-player variants for 3 or 4 player games (using an imaginary
> player like in Alhambra for 2 players).
>
> Who knows, people might find it a challenge to adapt a game or two.
>
>
> Greeting to you all,
>
> Roger Meertens
>
>
> In piecepack@yahoogroups.com, "Ron Hale-Evans" <rwhe@> wrote:
> >
> > snip
> > > 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.
> > snip
> >
> > I think you can already guess what I think here, but for the record I
> > think you should post them anyway. On the other hand, I wasn't a
> > participant, so my opinions about your handling of other's people game
> > designs probably shouldn't count for much.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]