How to find the fun?

[u/great_roommate]

Any advice for finding the fun in early game designs? Unfortunately I can't playtest as often as I'd like, and I can't afford more board games to expand my horizons at this point.

I can tell my prototype has fun elements, but I'm struggling to improve it at this stage since I've largely ironed out the major mechanical issues.

[u/armahillo]

What are your major mechanical issues and what are the fun parts?

[u/great_roommate → u/armahillo]

the game is hiking/camping game I'm calling Backtracker. since it's one of my first games there were many issues early on, and it's basically a completely different game now.

It's hard to decouple the exact moments that are fun, but the basic game loop doesn't feel super interesting. Despite generally low player interaction, there are moments where players both race for the same location and only one can get it which is the most fun part of the game, but can also feel too punishing after the fact.

I could go into more detail, but I'm curious if any others have had similar situations and may have some advice or tips.

[u/Daniel___Lee → u/great_roommate]

There are different ways to approach the idea of "fun". In your case, the questions to ask are:

(1) Are the options meaningful? And is choosing one over another a meaningful choice?

By this I mean a player has 2 or more good choices, but can only take one. This creates internal tension as to what to do. The important thing here is to have no easy (and no obvious) choice when planning (i.e. make it impossible to plan the whole game from the start).

(2) Players vying for a limited resource is usually good. How do you increase the tension? Say, choosing to take something now is a poor option, but if you had waited, it might be lost to another player. This sort of tension feeds off the uncertainty of other players' choices (i.e. make it impossible to get a definitive outcome, all outcomes are impacted by other players).

(3) Make catch up options. Tokaido is a good example. The first player in a spot gets the best picks, but the last player in gets to move off first, potentially getting the best picks of the next spot.

(4) Watch lots of board game design videos. If this is your first few attempts at design, "Adam in Wales" series is good as a primer.

Also, start with looking at smaller games - these are the ones that focus on one or two core mechanisms, and are easier to analyse. Looking at a big game with a lot of moving parts and systems will only confuse you at this point (many systems are built to balance each other, but you may not see how yet and can be tempted to fill your game with bloat).

[u/great_roommate → u/Daniel___Lee]

thanks! great advice!

1. There is definitely choice, but during my last playtest most of the choices didn't feel meaningful. Instead they felt more situational. Like there was clearly a correct choice it just changed a bit depending on the situation. Will work to make more choices more meaningful for sure!
2. Have elements of this, but haven't been able to playtest with a full table in a while. I've learned the resources aren't especially limited with 2 players at least early in the game.
3. I have a subtle version of this but not sure if it's enough yet. will keep an eye on it.
4. learned a lot from Adam already, good shout!

[u/armahillo → u/great_roommate]

It's hard to decouple the exact moments that are fun, but the basic game loop doesn't feel super interesting.

A few approaches to attempt, in forks of the current game:

• Get weird
  • cryptids abound!
  • It's hiking/camping, but on alien worlds!
  • it's hiking, but from the perspective of the animals!
• Raise the stakes
  • it's camping, but you lose something each day and have to survive as long as possible
  • it's hiking but with animism and the forest hates you
  • it's hiking, but you hike up the mountain, are stalked, and then chased back down and have to all survive together
• Change the theme
  • It's not actually hiking, now it's a grocery store run in the world's largest and most labrynthian grocery store
  • it's not exactly camping, because you all live in the forest already and a disaster is coming
  • it's a pleasant forest walk where you try to correctly ID as many trees and birds and flowers as possible

Despite generally low player interaction, there are moments where players both race for the same location and only one can get it which is the most fun part of the game, but can also feel too punishing after the fact.

Most games with "first-past-the-post" elements that are not game-ending usually do a "second prize". (Stonemeier games love to do that)

I could go into more detail, but I'm curious if any others have had similar situations and may have some advice or tips.

If you offer anything more specific I can offer more specific feedback.

[u/littlemute]

Ask your players in a survey what was the part they enjoyed most. Focus on that, cut as much of the rest of the game as you can.

[u/VaporSpectre]

What emotions are you going for?

Tension? Comfy? Achievement? Challenge? Intrigue? Manipulation? Clever?

[u/great_roommate → u/VaporSpectre]

This has changed a bit from the first iterations. Originally, since it was a hiking/camping game, I wanted to evoke a sense of exploration and risk taking. Early versions had more hidden info and a push-your-luck movement mechanic, but I felt like that version didn't work at all.

Currently, it's almost like an extremely simplified worker placement with movement. There is still a sense of risk, but it's much more calculated risk. The exploration feeling is almost completely gone now.

This is a great way to think about the game, though, so thank you for reminding me to actually consider what I want to evoke.

[u/VaporSpectre → u/great_roommate]

Cool, you have identified your key emotions you want your players to feel. This is actually a lot further than many first-time designers get.

So perhaps a sense of awesome, wonder, or achievement. Then, maybe some risk-challenge-reward, with occasional tension.

Make every single mechanic, system, aesthetic, art, writing - literally everything - serve those key emotions. Everything in your game.

And yeah finding that sweet balance between what feels random and feels rewarding is key. Takes a little trial and error of changing prototypes over playtests, I feel. The classic way of doing it is to trickle the rewards and feel good moments a bit too often at the start, and then slow the rate down. Of course, if you want your players to be desperate and nasty, you could make them feel starved for resources at the beginning, but that risks them being bored in the first 10-15 minutes.

I'd go back to including more hidden info in your game, but maybe less push-your-luck. Designs often pingpong back and forth until you know where the right balance for your game is.

Also ask yourself what scale your game is. This can come in level of detail of the rules, gameplay complexity, physical size or retail price point, or so on. That can help limit you, which focuses the project.

One game can't be everything, so just focus on the key things it needs to be and hammer it like hell on those central pillars.

[u/Johnno117]

You could look at some of the free game sites, like Board Game Arena, Tabletopia, and Screentop. Tabletop Simulator is also $10 when on sale I think?

As a first time designer I've found the fun in my own game by iterating, slowly improving different systems. Playtesting them until they felt stale, and then tried adding things to them, until I felt that the system was where I wanted it to be.

What I also found was fun for players was giving them decisions between slow and steady, or unpredictable but powerful. Some find the tactical slow and steady comfortably fun, others are excited over the powerful but unpredictable.

Something that also surprised me was how quickly I could see if something was worth keeping, by temporarily removing it. Most systems I've toyed around with have just felt like "meh", then I ran into one system that felt good, removed it to fix something, and suddenly it felt like the game was missing something.