Reply To: Is it time for some more critical analysis of rule sets

[piersParticipant 25489xp 0]

How do we say it has hit its mark? Is it well done if it’s historically and or simulation accurate? Is it well done if it’s technically tight with little room for player interpretation? Or is it well done if it’s fun? Or is it well done if it gels the eco system it’s there to support? Not all the above are mutually exclusive but all come at cost (either capital or complexity)

 

I’m not sure any of those things have to add cost or complexity frankly, and always seen lack of them, and the thought they add more complexity and cost, as an excuse for why they ain’t present. Why does being more historically accurate in a games feel have to add more complexity and cost? I’m not convinced it has to add more cost or complexity… now adding  more time to design and playtest (and thus adding more development time and cost…) – yes – but that depends if your budget already built in such development.

Games appeal for many reasons, one is  most certainly the style of game. A game designed more for ‘tournament’ use will be more popular as games such as Warhammer and 40k built that as a core expectation of a rule system for those outside historical gaming. Add to that widely placed advertising and it can be a huge success. I agree it’s not solely advertising, but you have to agree it helps focus the minds.of those who the advertising is paid too. I wonder though if most players are those moved from sci fi and fantasy to try out a historical game as its character is more familiar.

Perhaps it’s as simple as appealing to your targeted audience. Perhaps certain audience groups require certain things at the expense of other facets. To some players the historical aspect may be of less importance than the ability to construct tight tournament lists.

I work in the opposite sphere, where historical feel takes precedence over tournament balance or such a requirement, but gameplay always remains a constant first denominator in system design. The game has to play well… otherwise what’s the point. Hence the months of playtesting.

So @warzan is correct a games character and it’s intended audience is indeed important considerations. Bolt Action could be great, but I’ve never played it as its not aimed at me, despite a few of its players moving to Battlegroup lately. I suspect, like most things, some people like multiple things, while others like only one thing…

What we should be grateful for is variety, and that there exists an outlet to see games, in however limited format, on channels such as this site.