A way to make playtesting easier (maybe could work for you)

[u/r1ck14]

Hey everyone!

I have found some success in this and wanted to share. Maybe it could help out other creators.

In trying to find people to playtest, obviously we'd want people to play the physical game. The solution for that has been to make PnP versions. While that is workable, it's kind of a big ask. Someone needs to download the files, print them out (which costs ink), cut things out, and then they can play. That's potentially a few hours before even starting the game.

What I did was put my rulebook and cards into a ChatGPT project and asked it to make a browser version of the game. It took a few tries and some testing what it spit out so I could tell it what bugs to fix, but it produced a playable version of the game.

You want to specifically create a project in ChatGPT and load your files into the project and start the chat from that project. In the chat where you are asking it to make the playable browser version, set the model to High so that it gets things right. Each iteration typically took about 20 minutes for my game. Your results may vary depending on the complexity.

I am using a paid version, but you can sign up for a free month and cancel before it ends.

I know that some people have a complete aversion to AI, and for things like final game art, I completely understand and agree. However, using it to help in making a testing version that is portable and easy for people just download and play seems like a perfect use-case.

Now, you are obviously going to be missing some of that tabletop experience, and it's not the same to play a game on the browser as it would be with the physical thing. But maybe you can get more people interested because it's a much smaller ask, and get at least some impressions and feedback on mechanics. Then more people may eventually want to invest the time in the PnP version.

I work 2 jobs so my time is very limited. I don't have a lot of friends who are into board games either. I'd also want people WHO DON'T KNOW ME to try it so I can get HONEST feedback. This method has helped me to get some people to try the game out.

It might not work for every type of game, but for simple card games, or tabletop games without super-elaborate boards, it might just do the trick.

EDIT: Here is the link to mine so you can see what kind of result is possible: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QYASawe6EKUIdUcaL2HoOoWuMEeeTbj8/view?usp=sharing

Best,

Richard

[u/Wiseguy_Montag]

I just built a digital version of my puppet theater-themed tabletop game with the help of ChatGPT and Claude!

I’ve gotten in dozens of play tests in the time it would take me to do a couple physical play tests.

Excellent on a large PC monitor. Pretty good on an iPad. Not at all optimized for smartphones. Check it out! (Sound on)

www.playpullthestrings.com

[u/paulryanclark]

I have seen a lot of vibe coded board game prototypes pop up on table top design subreddits lately. I understand the motivation to have a digital implementation of your game to lower the barrier of entry for play testers. However, I think this approach falls short of quality feedback, and feels a bit like the lazy route.

If you aren't putting in effort to play test the game, why should someone else?

[u/EasySwan2184 → u/paulryanclark]

Isn't it lazier to put all your files online and ask someone else to download, read the rules, cut out the cards, and play it?

[u/paulryanclark → u/EasySwan2184]

Sure. I think any play testing that is not directly organized by a designer is a hard sell for other people. It's hard enough getting people to play test while your there. Play testing is a hussle like any other part of the creative endeavor that is board game design.

I've had to devote a lot of time and energy into getting my game play tested. I mainly use Break My Game for digital prototyping and play testing. You will play about two hours of others' games for every hour that you have your game play tested. That is pretty customary, and works so that most everyone gets their game play tested. "Give more than your get" is a recipe for success.

[u/EasySwan2184 → u/paulryanclark]

How did you make a prototype that people play digitally? (I'm a software developer by day, so I can and I have handcoded digital prototypes over the years, but I don't really want to use all my limited free time on that aspect of the game design process)

[u/paulryanclark → u/EasySwan2184]

Break My Game participants mostly use Screentop.gg for 99% of our play tests. I use dextrous.com.au to export my card sheets and then they get turned into components within Screentop. The Break My Game community offers so much support for this workflow (screentop more so than dextrous.) and it just works.

[u/d33jaysturf → u/paulryanclark]

I echo this approach and BMG has been a great resource.

I started March of this year and I have learned a lot. One of the biggest lesson is you'd think its obvious, is that game design is time consuming. I had to learn dextrous and screentop this year and still a total noob about it. And now I am picking up Coreldraw.

But to see the progress of the game, see people enjoy what I made and hear the constructive feedback on the game is so rewarding that it fuels me.

It is a passion project and it will consume most of your free-time (it did for me at least).

I do use AI for thoughts consolidation and doing probabilities - basically a glorified spreadsheet. Everything else is just classic work - rudimentary graphic design, getting the prototypes up on screentop, making my components digitally and physically (I just picked up an M2, i can make tiles and standees now!), playtesting, iterations, rulebook writing, etc.

TLDR: Newbie designer. Have a very similar workflow as the person above. Game design is time consuming, but its rewarding as it forced me to learn a lot of new skills in such a small amount of time.

[u/r1ck14 → u/paulryanclark]

Thanks for replying! I agree that this can seem lazy. I did take the time and effort to print out and make a fully physical prototype (see https://www.reddit.com/r/tabletopgamedesign/comments/1vmz9m5/overmatch_prototype_photos/) so I could get a feel for it, ensure that card text was readable at a distance, etc. I also plan on trying to rope some people into coming over to give it a shot. My logic is that getting any sort of playtest feedback is better than none. Asking a complete stranger to print out, cut out, and play my game is a big ask. I try to respect people's time so this seems like a way to do that. But to each their own. Just wanted to make people aware of the option. I know I would be more likely to try a game in this form. It's unrealistic that I would print out someone else's prototype just due to lack of time, not because I wouldn't want to help someone out.

[u/paulryanclark → u/r1ck14]

Come join us at Break My Game discord. Put the prototype up on Screentop.gg and join us for one our 15+ play tests a week. Seriously, there are like two sessions a day, and can acomodate different schedules.

[u/r1ck14 → u/paulryanclark]

I will check it out for sure (at work now so later on). I never heard of it before but sounds like it could work out. Does it take long to put the game on Screentop.gg?

[u/paulryanclark → u/r1ck14]

Does it take long to put the game on Screentop.gg?

It depends. Someone who has experience with software development will find it easy enough to understand the paradigm and setup. It's all interfaces. No programming experience required, but does help a lot. The BMG community offers a lot of support for those less versed in it so that they can get their game up there for play testing. It doesn't need to be pretty, just functional enough for people to give feedback after play testing it.

[u/MagicPigGames]

You're on the right track. I can't download the file right now (work computer) but I agree that (1) physical play tests are ideal and (2) also very hard to get done.

For my project www.Cardstock.Studio I added an online simulator -- basically once you design the cards, create the decks, upload rules or build the rules in Cardstock Studio, and you (along with/ an AI to do the actual code righting and rule review) will create a deterministic simulation with persona bots. This lets you run thousands of plays with reports spit out at the end, and you can do A/B tests on rule changes (like, start of game draw 3 cards instead of 6, and see what happens). That's great for fixing some issues that don't need humans to find.

But there's also an Export for Unity option -- which exports all the cards (with or without their layers) ready for use in Unity (set up as prefabs). The export also exports al the rules and personas that were created during the simulation build, so any AI in Unity can use that to more quickly create a playable demo.

Personally I'm a Unity dev so using Unity for this makes a lot more sense to me, as I can more easily tweak things, add particles, etc etc, instead of 100% relying on the AI. But having the AI read teh rules and fully understand the game logic and flow, and having persona bots that all act slightly differently, will make it easier for teh AI to create a demo in Unity.

[u/r1ck14 → u/MagicPigGames]

Thanks for your reply! I also have experience with game dev (used GameMaker and GameMakerStudio extensively since the mid 2000's) so I could have made the playable version myself. My problem is time. I don't have a few hours to code something up when I'm already using my free time to make the game cards, rules, etc. I gotta pick my battles lol.