Tough Love

It is perfectly ok to be a hobby designer who playtests one game for years and never seeks publication. But once you start talking about publishing your game (pitching to publishers or self-publishing), it's time to start asking some tough questions of your design. There are a lot of people who get frustrated when their designs are rejected or fail to fund. Some of that frustration comes out of playtesting with other designers who, in an effort to help create the best possible game in front of them, won't tell you that you need to go back to the drawing board. I love how supportive this community is, but if someone is going to invest several years and their own money to try to self-publish a game, that person needs to be told if they have a viable product or not. (Yes, there are plenty of overly critical playtests that occur. I'm not writing about those today, though.) Fortunately, you can be the one to critique your own design by asking tough questions. Or you can take these questions to a more experienced designer and ask them to evaluate your design. 

1. Did someone smarter than you already make this game? 

I'm actually serious here. If your design resembles another design, that's not a bad thing necessarily. But if your design evokes a Richard Garfield or Reiner Knizia game, you may not want to have that constant comparison (unless it was one of their less successful designs?). I've shelved a game because of this. This is especially true if you don't have any games published previously (aka haven't developed street cred with the public). 

2. Is your theme oversaturated right now?

Right now is not the best time for a new dinosaur game, most likely. Most of the ones coming out were signed last year or the year before or the year before that. So, that popular theme right now? You don't know how many are in development that have yet to be announced. Maybe shelve it for a few years until the time is right for a dino revival. 

3. Is your main mechanic oversaturated right now? Or is the trend dead?

Same idea as above, but with the words 'deck building' instead of dinosaurs. Additionally, certain mechanical trends may need longer between waves before they can be revived. Social deduction games are still in a pretty marked downturn after the craze of the previous decade. Micro games were dead, outside of Love Letter sequels, for a good half decade before their revival as a trend. Yes, your game can succeed even if you have a dinosaur social deduction game but it will be an uphill battle (Dinosaur Tea Party already exists and Rob Daviau was involved, see question 1). 

4. Is your game a product?

Is your component count sane? Will the box required fit on any shelf sold by Ikea? Does the cost of production fit the intended audience? Lighter games for families need to be cheaper than tactical miniatures games. The final price needs to fit the target audience. 

Current pitching advice acknowledges that better looking prototypes can help sway publishers to sign your game. However, you should be wary of making your game look too much like an art project. You want your prototype to catch the publisher's imagination for what product they could create from it. Components should be easily sourced not bespoke. 

5. Is your potential audience smaller than the publisher you are pitching to? 

If your game is too niche or experimental, self-publishing may be the best bet although there are always new start-up publishers you could pitch to. Established publishers are likely going to be risk averse. (If you know your audience is outside the hobby but exists in large numbers, include that on the sell sheet. Also, pitch to publishers who have reach into mass market spaces.) A really good product has a clear primary audience based on theme, price, and complexity. If your intended audience is backpacking bikers (bikepackers, technically) who also enjoy resource management, your audience may be too niche for a standard 1,500 unit print run. In that case, self-publishing may be for you.

6. Is ludonarrative dissonance limiting the size of your audience?

Fort, Root, and Wingspan all made 'cute themes with heavier gameplay' work in their favor. (But all of the people involved in those games are smarter than me.) My belief is that you can make almost any theme work if you pay attention to the details. What is abstracted and what isn't can affect how the rules are absorbed by players. Ask your playtesters, does this game play how you would expect based on the theme? Thematic details also affect resonance. In general, however, you want to be aware of how the overall theme sets expectation for gameplay. Gentle themes tend to pair better with light games and dark themes with heavier games. Subverting those expectations can work very well, but must be approached intentionally. 

7. Does this design have legs?

This is the ultimate question. Is this design worth the investment of your time? If your design has mechanics that clearly offer a different play experience, a theme that helps sell the game, and a proper price-to-heaviness ratio, then your design has legs. The next step is finding out how far it can run.