Game Inventor's Handbook by Steve Peek
Nick Jewell
Can anyone tell me what this book covers? I'm wondering if it's more
appropriate for
game designers/developers or more centred for people trying to copyright and
distribute games?
Cheers,
Nick
Glenn Kuntz
Aren't designers/developers interested in copyrighting &
distributing their games? :-)
If you're looking for hardcore nuts & bolts design issues like
designing a game from scratch, this probably isn't it.
Steve's book is for people who have an idea for a game in mind,
and don't know what/where to go next to bring it to fruition.
He talks about making prototypes, approaching game companies,
self-publishing, marketing (both your game and yourself,) etc.
--
The CROKINOLE Board
http://www.frontiernet.net/~crokinol
M. Petty
History of Games
Inventing Games
Selling a Game to a Publisher
Selling Your Idea
Self-Publishing
Marketing
Getting Exposure
Selling Game Markets
I felt like the book has very little that is helpful in the way of creating
games. There's the one chapter on Inventing Games, and most of that is obvious
observations anyone could make just from playing a few games. Nothing is there
to really lead someone to make a decent game, in my opinion.
Most of it is advice on what to do after you've got a good idea.
Much of the book is negative, mostly claiming that it will cost huge amounts
of money and at best you'll just break even. One successful independent
designer has told me the cost has come down significantly with the use of the
internet and other possibilities for self-publishing. If that be the case, the
book might be out of date.
Mike
--
Free original games:
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Battlefield/1173
Glenn Kuntz
> Much of the book is negative, mostly claiming that it will cost huge amounts
>of money and at best you'll just break even. One successful independent
>designer has told me the cost has come down significantly with the use of the
>internet and other possibilities for self-publishing. If that be the case, the
>book might be out of date.
>
>
>Mike
First, I would characterize the book's tone as "brutally
honest" rather than "negative". I got the impression he didn't
want to paint any rosey pictures and have any reader lose their
home because they had put their nest egg into this kind of
speculation. (And IMO, self-publishing, while rewarding, is
more of a speculation than an investment ;-)
Second, I don't know Mike's (or his source's) definition of
"significantly". (10%? 20%? 50%?)
Some games certainly *can* be put on the market for far less
than the numbers Steve uses ($40K rings a bell,) but he also
points out (IIRC) that these are "average" figures for
"average" (board, box, components, rules) board games with
industry standard production values. Something like SoC might
cost more, things like Kill Dr. Lucky would obviously be much
less.
Allan Bedford
Nick Jewell <LIP9...@shef.ac.uk> wrote in article
> Can anyone tell me what this book covers? I'm wondering if it's more
> appropriate for
> game designers/developers or more centred for people trying to copyright
and
> distribute games?
I just finished reading this book about a month ago. It attempts primarily
to point out the many pitfalls and expenses related to developing and
marketing your game. It especially points out the difficulties of
attempting to take a game to a large manufacturer.
There is very little in the book actually related to 'designing' games.
It's mostly about marketing. Having said that, there is one word that is
missing from the book. It's not the author's fault, it's simply that the
book is a bit out of date. The word that's missing is 'internet'. There
is no mention of it in the book, simply because it wasn't a known issue at
the time the book was written. The web has so changed some of the concepts
of marketing and advertising, that I wonder if many of Peek's ideas about
self-publishing might need to be reworked.
If you can borrow the book from a library (as I did) then by all means,
read and learn from it. However, I'm not sure it's worth purchasing
anymore as there is probably equally relevant and current information found
for free on the web.
Regards,
Allan
--
Expert Builder Website - The Megaproject Showcase
http://www.execulink.com/~apotome/expert.htm
spet...@my-deja.com
wrote:
> First, I would characterize the book's tone
> as "brutally honest" rather than
> "negative". I got the impression he didn't
> want to paint any rosey pictures and have
> any reader lose their home because they
> had put their nest egg into this kind of
> speculation. (And IMO, self-publishing,
> while rewarding, is more of a speculation
> than an investment ;-)
When he wrote "The Game Inventor's
Handbook," Steve Peek worked for Yaquinto,
a Dallas board game publisher. I'm not aware
of *any* products by Peek or Yaquinto that
are still in print. In fact, even his book
seems to have lapsed from publication.
The last I heard from Steve, he was
promoting University Games' "AreYouGame"
catalog as a web site that would sell products
from a variety of game publishers for the
1999 Holiday Season.
Check out the "variety"...
While I wish Mr. Peek better luck in his
future endeavors, board game inventors
would do well to scrutinize the source of any
'helpful' information, especially when they
pay for it with cash ;>)
Best wishes,
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
FREE Pirateer Demos at;
http://www.pirateer.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
The Maverick
>
> While I wish Mr. Peek better luck in his
> future endeavors, board game inventors
> would do well to scrutinize the source of any
> 'helpful' information, especially when they
> pay for it with cash ;>)
Once again, Mr. Liar-ateer attempts to present a warped and uniformed
view of a successful game designer whose jock he isn't fit to carry...
In the seventies, Steve Peek (along with S. Craig Taylor) *founded*
Battleline Games and built it up from a home operation into a full-time
business and respected game company! Many of the Battleline titles
ended up being acquired by Avalon Hill and some were *still* in print at
the time of the Hasborg takeover two years ago.
Peek then went on to help *start* Yaquinto games (again with S. Craig
Taylor on board) which published many fine wargames, some of which are
very highly sought after today (checked the prices for Ironclads or its
expansion on ebay lately?) A few of the Yaquinto titles were later
reprinted by Excalibre games in the early nineties.
Peek had been there and done that when he wrote his book. Readers of
r.g.b. would do well to scrutinize the source of any 'helpful' posts,
especially when they come from a certain biased one-trick pony.
the Mav
--
Cliffhanger Serials, Boardgames, Videogames, and Red Baron I
http://www.volcano.net/~themaverick/index.html
The Classic Microgames Museum
http://maverick.brainiac.com/cmm/index.html
The Space and Fantasy Gamer's Guide
http://www.brainiac.com/micro/sfgg/index.html
spet...@my-deja.com
The Maverick <thema...@volcano.net>
wrote:
> Once again, Mr. Liar-ateer attempts to
> present a warped and uniformed view of a
> successful game designer whose jock he
> isn't fit to carry...
According to the Luding database, Peek is
credited with two game designs, both of
which have been discontinued;
http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/
cgi-bin/luding/author.py/author
As such, publishing a book about successful
game invention takes *giant* cajones,
particularly since the book is dead too.
That being said, the required athletic
supporter for this *load* would be nothing
less than monumental in scale. And being
mere mortal, I would not be "fit" to carry it.
Pirateer? 85,000+ copies sold to date, YTD
sales up 36% and *still* in print ;>)
paulshayne
desiging a game. You can have all the knowledge about the mechancis of
boardgames, yet never have an orginal idea. And believe me, approaching the
large maufacturers is not as hard as you would think - they need to survive
too, and despite what you may belive about theit initial reluctance, it does
crumble with one irreplaceable quality: persistance. Hint: if you do not
htink your idea is ever going to made by a 'BIG' company, try a small one:
they possess a lot more heart and drive toward your project than the big
guys ever will.
How will you ever know...if you don't try?
Allan Bedford wrote in message <01bf62f4$8d7599a0$6f8c2fd1@thx1138>...
Paul McGinnis
> I'm not sure it's worth purchasing
> anymore as there is probably equally relevant and current information found
> for free on the web.
Indeed there is some good material on the Web for free. Two places that
come to mind are:
* http://www.netins.net/showcase/envgames/resource.html -- Matt Ryan's
resource page for game designers with listings for game parts suppliers,
graphic designers, play testers, etc.
* http://www.silcom.com/~tomjolly/design.htm -- Tom Jolly's (co-designer
of DiskWar) page
=====================================================
Paul McGinnis / pau...@pacbell.net / Pau...@aol.com
http://home.pacbell.net/paulmcg/
Netscape/AOL Instant Messenger: PaulMcG
Paul McGinnis
Matt Ryan's great articles on designing games, online at http://www.netins.net/showcase/envgames/Articles/
The Maverick
>
> According to the Luding database, Peek is
> credited with two game designs, both of
> which have been discontinued;
In addition to starting the aforementioned two gaming companies, J.
Stephen Peek had at least 11 published boardgame designs of which I am
aware.
If nothing else, your cheap-shot posts continue to serve as fine
illustrations of the GIGO principle (garbage in, garbage out.)
spet...@my-deja.com
The Maverick <thema...@volcano.net>
wrote:
> In addition to starting the aforementioned
> two gaming companies, J. Stephen Peek had
> at least 11 published boardgame designs of
> which I am aware.
How many of Peek's enterprises are still in
print?
> If nothing else, your cheap-shot posts
> continue to serve as fine illustrations of
> the GIGO principle (garbage in, garbage
> out.)
Perhaps, but when a failure pretends to be a
success, it succeeds only as bad comedy.
Neumaniac
well as many other games. After reading Mr. Peterson's posts both here
and in the archives, I can safely say that he has most assuredly lost a
custome. Criticizing others on the list as well as competitors is both
childish and cynical. And his contradictions are astounding. As a
recent example, in a previous post in this thread he criticizes a game
company for lack of variety when his own company only publishes one
title!
Anyhow, as someone new to this group, I want to thank all those that are
providing useful and insightful input into the broad area of board
gaming as opposed to someone who is only interested in self-promoting
one game.
Mike S.
Stefanie Kethers
>
> spet...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > According to the Luding database, Peek is
> > credited with two game designs, both of
> > which have been discontinued;
>
> Stephen Peek had at least 11 published boardgame designs of which I am
> aware.
>
> illustrations of the GIGO principle (garbage in, garbage out.)
>
>
I'm sorry for the omission in Luding - especially
older games are sometimes not listed, or lack
a good deal of information. Thanks to Rick Heli, I have now
listed 4 games by Steven Peek; can anyone send me the names
and perhaps publishers and other details of the others?
I would like to include them in the database as well.
Cheers,
Stefanie
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stefanie Kethers
Luding Administration
e-mail: lud...@sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de
URL: http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/luding/
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
> How many of Peek's enterprises are still in print?
None, because you don't "print" an "enterprise", you print a *game*.
Now if we follow your misplaced obsession with having games in print as a
key measure of success, then surely companies that have been around for
years yet have only one game in print are miserable failures. I wonder
which companies fit that description....
> when a failure pretends to be a success, it succeeds only as bad comedy.
Which is why your attempts at wit are even more pathetic than the P*r*tical
Parchesi ripoff you're hawking.
--
Dave Kohr <dave...@bestSPAMFOILER.com> Be sure to remove the SPAMFOILER!
Visit the Silicon Valley Boardgamers at http://www.best.com/~davekohr/svb
spet...@my-deja.com
Neumaniac <neum...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
> I'm fairly new to this group and was
> somewhat interested in Pirateer as well as
> many other games. After reading Mr.
> Peterson's posts both here and in the
> archives, I can safely say that he has most
> assuredly lost a custome(r). Criticizing
> others on the list as well as competitors is
> both childish and cynical. And his
> contradictions are astounding. As a recent
> example, in a previous post in this thread
> he criticizes a game company for lack of
> variety when his own company only
> publishes one title!
If your game collection depends on the
opinions of game inventors whom you agree
with, you're not really a customer -- you're
a cultist. In terms of variety, my comment
was made because Peek's delivery fell short
on his promise.
> Anyhow, as someone new to this group, I
> want to thank all those that are providing
> useful and insightful input into the broad
> area of board gaming as opposed to someone
> who is only interested in self-promoting
> one game.
That's not true. I report facts about Pirateer
sales here to help and encourage other
inventors, self-publishers and the board
game industry. Remember, variety comes
from different sources, not different titles
from the same source. And variety is good for
everone.
I would also encourage you to identify
yourself with your full name next time you
post.
Best wishes,
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
FREE Pirateer demos at;
http://www.pirateer.com
Neumaniac
> If your game collection depends on the
> opinions of game inventors whom you agree
> with, you're not really a customer -- you're
> a cultist.
I don't know any game inventors, so it's difficult to agree or disagree
with thir opinions.
Actually, I'm a Christian (as I believe you are since you've said you
attend church), not a cultist, who hopes EVERYONE is successful in their
lives including Mr. Peek and yourself. Love your neighbor!
From a Christian perspective, I find it odd that you appear to gain
pleasure out of belittling the success of Mr. Peek (and many others from
your posts in the archives, wouldn't it be easier to just congratulate
them on their accomplishments...then you might find others who would be
willing to congratulate you on your accomplishments). From a business
perspective, I find it odd that you intentionally take the tact to
lose potential sales by coming across as you do on the board. I don't
know many businessmen who would publicly state that they could care less
if they sold to a particular market segment (whatever that market
is...it seems that there is a broad spectrum of gamers on the group
including those that would potentially be interested in Pirateer).
Instead, most businesses would attempt to penetrate that market
segment. But it's your business and your decisions, of course, so who
am I to say?
To the rest of the RGB group, my apologies for continuing this thread.
I look forward to reading game reviews, rules clarifications,
information on upcoming releases, etc.!
Mike S.
spet...@my-deja.com
Neumaniac <neum...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
> I don't know any game inventors, so it's
> difficult to agree or disagree with th(e)ir
> opinions.
You don't need to know someone to discuss
opinions with them. That's the beauty of
usenet :>)
> Actually, I'm a Christian (as I believe you
> are since you've said you attend church),
> not a cultist, who hopes EVERYONE is
> successful in their lives including Mr.
> Peek and yourself. Love your neighbor!
I attend church on occasion because my
children are Catholic. I agree with the
teachings of Christ like I agree with the
teachings of Mr. Rogers. I question the
morality of those who profit by promoting
either as the son of the Almighty.
> From a Christian perspective, I find it odd
> that you appear to gain pleasure out of
> belittling the success of Mr. Peek (and
> many others from your posts in the
> archives, wouldn't it be easier to just
> congratulate them on their
> accomplishments... then you might find
> others who would be willing to congratulate
> you on your accomplishments). From a
> business perspective, I find it odd that you
> intentionally take the tact to lose potential
> sales by coming across as you do on the
> board. I don't know many businessmen who
> would publicly state that they could care
> less if they sold to a particular market
> segment (whatever that market is...it
> seems that there is a broad spectrum of
> gamers on the group including those that
> would potentially be interested in
> Pirateer). Instead, most businesses would
> attempt to penetrate that market segment.
> But it's your business and your decisions,
> of course, so who am I to say?
I'm sure that Steve Peek has made many
positive contributions as a game designer,
and his contributions as an author have been
helpful to self-publishers, myself included.
However, I don't agree with the idea that
Peek has been *successful* at either venue,
otherwise his work would still be in print.
I'm not belittling his accomplishments, but I
certainly do question his *authority* on
general board game design, particularly
since his experience seems to have been
limited to wargames and the like.
My position on the core/hobby/niché board
game market segment was backed by editor
Brian Fahey when he pulled the plug on
Games Retailer magazine; "There's no there
there." AH, the most respected core game
publisher of all time catered to RGB regulars
and got sold for scrap. I get killfiled and
flamed here all the time and yet somehow
manage to sell 85 tons of Pirateer game sets.
How can that be? Because RGB is obvioiusly
more comic relief than it is a viable market
segment.
> To the rest of the RGB group, my apologies
> for continuing this thread. I look forward to
> reading game reviews, rules clarifications,
> information on upcoming releases, etc.!
And I look forward to more entertainment
from the all-bark/no-bite market segment
;>)
Best wishes,
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
FREE Pirateer Demos at;
http://www.pirateer.com
Neumaniac
decent box illustration on the front, but a dorky photo on the back with
an adult and kids posing as pirates. Although pirates are supposed to
be unattractive, I think it was a bit overdone here...surely you
could have spent a bit more to hire more attractive actors to pose for
the photo shoot. It immediately made me put the box back on the shelf!
Mike S.
DAK
If you base your game purchases on the photos and/or artwork adorning
the game, then you are missing out on a lot of good games my friend. I
guess I'm one of those nutty gamers who likes depth of play, strategy,
action, etc. Quite Simply : Who gives a rats ass what pictures are on
the box.
weird.
Later,
dk
In article <86l5hk$1ft$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
spet...@my-deja.com
Neumaniac <neum...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
> Just out of curiousity, the only copy of
> Pirateer I've ever seen had a decent box
> illustration on the front, but a dorky photo
> on the back with an adult and kids posing as
> pirates. Although pirates are supposed to
> be unattractive, I think it was a bit
> overdone here...surely you could have spent
> a bit more to hire more attractive actors to
> pose for the photo shoot. It immediately
> made me put the box back on the shelf!
Agreed. That's why we upgraded the entire
package three years ago;
http://www.pirateer.com/gamestan.htm
The design team who did the original back
cover was Hamilton/Sternglass. They'd won a
CLIO award for creating the Molson Golden
ads in the early 1980's and had an
impressive portfolio of advertising work.
After I hired them, Lila Sternglass
approached me with the idea of me and my
children as models. I hated the concept, but
she talked me into it. The package never did
very well at retail and was retired after its
second printing.
After Pirateer won the Mensa award, we
decided to upgrade the package and identify
the product with a more mature audience.
The results have been well worth the effort.
During 1999, our active retailers averaged
nearly $300 apiece in Pirateer sales and our
top 100 retailers averaged over $1,000
each. Pirateer's ninth printing is scheduled
for arrival in July of this year.
Good packaging can make all the difference in
the world.
Best wishes,
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
FREE Pirateer demos at;
http://www.pirateer.com
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
> Good packaging can make all the difference in the world.
It makes no difference to gameplay of this, "the most mediocre game I've
ever played", in the apt words of one RGBer. Many others in the group share
this sentiment.
Since we hobby gamers are such an unimportant part of the market for
Bucaneer Backgammon, how about if you spend your time on more worthwhile
marketing efforts than provoking flamewars here, or at least fuck off and
crawl back under your rock.
spet...@my-deja.com
388e759d$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
dave...@bestSPAMFOILER.com wrote:
> It makes no difference to gameplay of this,
> "the most mediocre game I've ever played",
> in the apt words of one RGBer. Many others
> in the group share this sentiment.
Good packaging won't support a bad product
past the first year or two. Your favorite local
store, GameScape in Palo Alto sold $1,975
worth of Pirateer games last year, and that
was year *four* for them. The snapping
mongrels of RGB don't seem to carry much
weight in the real world, Dave.
> Since we hobby gamers are such an
> unimportant part of the market for
> Bucaneer Backgammon, how about if you
> spend your time on more worthwhile
> marketing efforts than provoking
> flamewars here, or at least [snip] off and
> crawl back under your rock.
Assuming this is a question, Dave, it's
because some aspiring game inventor might
be spared the hardship of pouring his/her
life's savings into a weak product. There
aren't enough Dave Kohr's in the world to
support independent hobby/core/niché board
games.
That's probably a *good* thing.
fbra...@my-deja.com
> My position on the core/hobby/niché board
> game market segment was backed by editor
> Brian Fahey when he pulled the plug on
> Games Retailer magazine; "There's no there
> there." AH, the most respected core game
> publisher of all time catered to RGB regulars
> and got sold for scrap. I get killfiled and
> flamed here all the time and yet somehow
> manage to sell 85 tons of Pirateer game sets.
> How can that be? Because RGB is obvioiusly
> more comic relief than it is a viable market
> segment.
There is actually a market segment, albeit a very, very small one.
(Referring here to the US Hobby gaming market.) When you think about it,
the numbers of games we are talking about are just tiny, on the order of
500-4000 copies.
The traditional channels and game producers just cannot survive on that
without changing several business strategies.
I suspect the future of hobby gaming is probably going to go to small
companies either bringing in games from outside the US, or producing very
small runs almost on demand. (GMT's Project 500 could be an amazingly
viable model for a small publisher.)
I suspect the reason that a good chunk of our favorite market is even
still alive is the Internet itself. A few of the games we play leak out
into the general public (mostly through the avid fanatics), but Mr.
Peterson is very correct in stating that we are a tiny blip on the radar.
We play on open tables at a Border's Books in Atlanta. We generally
engage a small number of people in conversation, and drag a few into
games. The story goes like this:
"Well. I used to play games when I was young/with my grandparents. I
thought it was very odd to see people playing games. "
We even had a case where a local radio DJ came by our table and commented
later on the morning show that he just could not believe that people were
playing Battleship in public. (Which I would agree with, but we were in
fact playing Elfenland. If Alan Moon were dead, he'd be turning in his
grave about now.)
Sigh. Enough depressing topics. Go look at Brett and Board for all of the
new Nuremburg stuff to cheer you up. Looks like a good year.
Moo
Frank
Allen Eldridge
Printing (as opposed to Yaquinto Game Co.) is still alive and well, and does
print boardgames.
Allen Eldridge
Nick Jewell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone tell me what this book covers? I'm wondering if it's more
> appropriate for
> game designers/developers or more centred for people trying to copyright and
> distribute games?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nick
spet...@my-deja.com
> In addition to starting the aforementioned
> two gaming companies, J. Stephen Peek had
> at least 11 published boardgame designs of
> which I am aware.
Is it possible for you to list Peek's eleven
published boardgame designs? Thanks :>)
Best wishes,
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
FREE Pirateer demos at;
http://www.pirateer.com
The Maverick
>
> The Maverick <thema...@volcano.net> wrote:
>
> > In addition to starting the aforementioned
> > two gaming companies, J. Stephen Peek had
> > at least 11 published boardgame designs of
> > which I am aware.
>
> Is it possible for you to list Peek's eleven
> published boardgame designs? Thanks :>)
Since you are the expert on why Steve Peek is supposedly a "failure",
you should be able to tell me... I'm certainly not going to educate you
to serve your B.S. agenda about how a game being out of print makes it
(or its designer) a failure.
spet...@my-deja.com
4F5A85414ED60A83.E45CA0B0EBB63167
.7E73BE5D...@lp.airnews.net>,
Allen Eldridge <alle...@airmail.net>
wrote:
> I don't know if Steve is still associated with
> the company, but Yaquinto Printing (as
> opposed to Yaquinto Game Co.) is still alive
> and well, and does print boardgames.
Do you happen to know which boardgames
they print? Thanks :>)
Rich Shipley
>
> In article <388BB4...@volcano.net>,
> The Maverick <thema...@volcano.net>
> wrote:
>
> > In addition to starting the aforementioned
> > two gaming companies, J. Stephen Peek had
> > at least 11 published boardgame designs of
> > which I am aware.
>
> Is it possible for you to list Peek's eleven
> published boardgame designs? Thanks :>)
So you can attempt to belittle them, you pompous twit?
Rich Shipley
spet...@my-deja.com
The Maverick <thema...@volcano.net>
wrote:
> Since you are the expert on why Steve Peek
> is supposedly a "failure", you should be
> able to tell me... I'm certainly not going to
> educate you to serve your B.S. agenda about
> how a game being out of print makes it (or
> its designer) a failure.
I don't believe anyone who gets a board game
published can be called a failure, even when
their work lapses from print. But when one
claims authority on successful invention or
innovation, you'd expect them to have some
work in production. Steve Peek may not be a
failure at board game design, but I wouldn't
qualify him as an authority either.
When you can't account for the majority of
your claim, the "B.S. agenda" is yours, Mav.
The Maverick
>
> When you can't account for the majority of
> your claim, the "B.S. agenda" is yours, Mav.
I can account for 100% of my claim, as Stefanie from Luding can attest
(or as could anyone who is passingly familiar with Battleline, Yaquinto,
Avalon Hill, and Excalibre.) The fact that you are clearly unaware of
Peek's credentials undermines the explicit basis for your criticism of
his book and exposes your meaningless cheap shot for what it was worth.
Adios, Liar-ateer.
Kevin J. Maroney
>"B.S."
Did anyone else catch Prez. Clinton on The News Hour with Jim Lehrer
last night? You could see him struggling not to append "-shit" onto
the word "bull" every time he talked about the Whitewater
investigation. It's nice to see a human side....
Oh, by the way, folks, a reminder: Scot Peterson is a troll. He posts
here solely to generate interest in his game in the belief that any
publicity is good publicity. Please do not respond to his posts; he
cannot be deterred by logic or fact.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | kmar...@crossover.com
Games are my entire waking life <http://www.thegamescafe.com/>
Allen Eldridge
shows a picture of the box for Tripoley, so I assume they print that.
spet...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article
> 4F5A85414ED60A83.E45CA0B0EBB63167
> .7E73BE5D...@lp.airnews.net>,
> Allen Eldridge <alle...@airmail.net>
> wrote:
>
> > I don't know if Steve is still associated with
> > the company, but Yaquinto Printing (as
> > opposed to Yaquinto Game Co.) is still alive
> > and well, and does print boardgames.
>
> Do you happen to know which boardgames
> they print? Thanks :>)
>
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
>Bucaneer Backgammon? 85,000+ copies sold to date, YTD
>sales up 36% and *still* in print
And Scot is still misleading or at least lying in every post he makes, and
we don't have independent confirmation of his sales figures, so it's safe
to assume he's simply lying once again in this case.
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
Neumaniac <neum...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>[Scot's] contradictions are astounding. As a recent example, in a previous
>post in this thread he criticizes a game company for lack of variety when
>his own company only publishes one title!
Indeed. He humiliates himself with every post he makes. When the absurdity
of his posts is revealed, he tries to save face by replying, but his
replies are absurd too so he only digs himself into a deeper hole. He'd be
much better off if he just didn't post, but based on past experience I'm
not optimistic that he'll figure this out.
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
> when one claims authority on successful invention or
> innovation, you'd expect them to have some work in production.
> Steve Peek may not be a failure at board game design, but I wouldn't
> qualify him as an authority either.
As just one example, Peek designed "Submarine" for Battleline, back in
1977. It was certainly in print (by AH) at the time his book came out. So
of course he had "some work in production" at the time he wrote the book.
>When you can't account for the majority of your claim, the "B.S. agenda"
>is yours
That's one of the few true statements you've ever posted, Scot, and
as this example illustrates, yours is a "B.S. agenda", and that makes me
quite justified in saying you're just a lying sack of shit.
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
>Bucaneer Backgammon? 85,000+ copies sold to date, YTD
>sales up 36% and *still* in print
And Scot is still misleading or outright lying in every post he makes, and
we don't have independent confirmation of his sales figures, so it's safe
to assume he's simply lying once again in this case.
spet...@my-deja.com
The Maverick <thema...@volcano.net>
wrote:
> I can account for 100% of my claim, as
> Stefanie from Luding can attest (or as could
> anyone who is passingly familiar with
> Battleline, Yaquinto, Avalon Hill, and
> Excalibre.) The fact that you are clearly
> unaware of Peek's credentials undermines
> the explicit basis for your criticism of
> his book and exposes your meaningless
> cheap shot for what it was worth.
Then why not name the eleven board games
that Peek supposedly invented? That seems
simple enough if your claim is true.
The Maverick
>
> Then why not name the eleven board games
> that Peek supposedly invented? That seems
> simple enough if your claim is true.
I believe that was covered in my previous reply. But how about this:
I don't do requests for trolls.
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
> Then why not name the eleven board games
> that Peek supposedly invented? That seems
> simple enough if your claim is true.
How about if you first validate your claim that Steve Peek didn't have
any games "in production" when he wrote his book, since you're the one
who started all this? Or else admit that you were just plain wrong.
spet...@my-deja.com
<389124f3$0$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
dave...@bestSPAMFOILER.com wrote:
> How about if you first validate your claim
> that Steve Peek didn't have any games "in
> production" when he wrote his book, since
> you're the one who started all this? Or else
> admit that you were just plain wrong.
Because I didn't say that, Dave. I said that he
doesn't seem to have any games in production
now. I guess you could call Peek a "former
authority" on successful board game design,
but given the mortality rate of such a small
body of work, that might be a stretch.
Anyway, Peek is credited with *four* board
game designs, not eleven;
http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/
cgi-bin/luding/author.py/author
In discussion, it's necessary to *remember*
what is said. In gaming, you need to be able to
*count*, right?
Stefanie Kethers
>
> In article
> <389124f3$0$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
> dave...@bestSPAMFOILER.com wrote:
>
> > How about if you first validate your claim
> > that Steve Peek didn't have any games "in
> > production" when he wrote his book, since
> > you're the one who started all this? Or else
> > admit that you were just plain wrong.
>
> Because I didn't say that, Dave. I said that he
> doesn't seem to have any games in production
> now. I guess you could call Peek a "former
> authority" on successful board game design,
> but given the mortality rate of such a small
> body of work, that might be a stretch.
>
> Anyway, Peek is credited with *four* board
> game designs, not eleven;
>
> http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/
> cgi-bin/luding/author.py/author
That is because our data on American games (especially
older ones) is rather sketchy. Sorry for that!
I have received information on the other games
and will add it over the weekend (at least I hope so).
Cheers,
Stefanie
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stefanie Kethers
Luding Administration
e-mail: lud...@sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de
URL: http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/luding/
spet...@my-deja.com
3891CC...@informatik.rwth-
aachen.de>, Stefanie Kethers
<ket...@informatik.rwth-aachen.de>
wrote:
> That is because our data on American games
> (especially older ones) is rather sketchy.
> Sorry for that! I have received information
> on the other games and will add it over the
> weekend (at least I hope so).
Just curious, how is information in the
Luding database confirmed? For example,
how do you verify authorship authorship
with a particular board game?
Thanks for all your great work!!!
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
Stefanie Kethers <ket...@informatik.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
>our data on American games (especially
>older ones) is rather sketchy. Sorry for that!
Stefanie, Luding is doing a great job, so you needn't apologize to anyone.
Least of all to Scot, who owes an apology to all of *us*.
spet...@my-deja.com
<38924913$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
dave...@bestSPAMFOILER.com wrote:
> Stefanie, Luding is doing a great job, so you
> needn't apologize to anyone.
I agree that Stefanie has done a great job. She
certainly has done a great deal of work on
Luding, especially the latest updates on Steve
Peek's board game designs;
1. Alpha Omega
2. Battles & Leaders
3. Dallas
4. Fury in the West
5. Mythology
6. Seven days in Battle
7. Shenendoah
8. Shooting Stars
9. Starfall
10. Submarine
11. Time War
My question is; how accurate is Luding info,
and who confirms it?
For example, "Sequence" has been the most
popular independently produced board game
in the United States for the past five years.
Luding says it's produced by Parker and
Milton Bradley, no authorship is given, and
the publication date listed is 1997. In fact,
"Sequence" is published here by Jax, Ltd.
was authored by Cindy Levine, and was first
published in 1982. For confirmation, Cindy
can be reached by telephone in Minneapolis
at 612/535-6800.
> Least of all to Scot, who owes an apology to
> all of *us*.
Assuming the latest Luding information is
accurate, I apologize for understating Peek's
ability as a prolific board game designer. But
how do *eleven* dead products better qualify
him as an authority on successful board game
design?
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
>In article
><389124f3$0$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
>dave...@bestSPAMFOILER.com wrote:
>> How about if you first validate your claim
>> that Steve Peek didn't have any games "in
>> production" when he wrote his book, since
>> you're the one who started all this? Or else
>> admit that you were just plain wrong.
>
>Because I didn't say that
Either that's what you intended, and it's just plain wrong, or it's not
what you intended, and your statement was even more ridiculous than I
originally thought. Here's why, moron.
If what I claimed is not what you intended, then you're implying that you
should judge a designer's authority on the game industry at the time he was
designing games based on how many games he has in production at the time
you make the judgement. Now this is obviously absurd, because in 50 years
it's quite possible there won't be any games in production by, say, your
favorite designer Steve Jackson, whereas right now there are
Jackson-designed games in production in multiple genres that have sold many
tens of thousands of copies, and even a mean-spirited troll such as
yourself would be forced to conclude that right now Mr. Jackson satisfies
this criterion of yours for authority on today's game industry. And of
course, if 50 years hence every SJG game has lapsed from production, Steve
would *still* be an authority on the game industry as of the year 2000.
I'm sure that simple explanation went way over your head.
>In discussion, it's necessary to *remember* what is said.
It's also necessary to say things that make sense. And you rarely do.
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
> My question is; how accurate is Luding info, and who confirms it?
My answer is: Stefanie, please ignore the troll. It should be obvious by
now that he has no interest in any sort of discussion about Luding, he just
wants to advance his "B.S. Agenda".
>how do *eleven* dead products better qualify him as an authority on
>successful board game design?
It unquestionably qualifies him as an authority, as of the time he wrote
his book.
Once again, I'm sure the importance of this distinction has flown right
over your pointy little head.
M Davis
game designer and publisher to take issue with a couple of things that
Mr. Peterson has said here.
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 21:25:08 GMT, spet...@my-deja.com wrote:
>I get killfiled and
>flamed here all the time and yet somehow
>manage to sell 85 tons of Pirateer game sets.
>How can that be? Because RGB is obvioiusly
>more comic relief than it is a viable market
>segment.
That's not really a fair statement based on our market research.
Although the 'hard-core' crowd does not constitute a 'market' unto
itself it certainly is a viable market segment. We've found (thus far)
that the "RGB" crowd is much more interested in games than the broader
market. Our games will, hopefully, have crossover appeal from what we
would refer to as the hobby-shop crowd (like RGB) to the mall-store
crowd. Some of our subjects most likely won't do real well at the
mall, but they will (we hope) be embraced by the hard-core gaming
community. Without that grass-roots support our games probably will
never make us a dime. Pirateer's strongest market segment is probably
somebody else. If the players represented on RGB are not a viable
market segment, that why are games like Starfleet Battles, Squad
Leader, and (a personal favorite) Wiz War still in print? They must be
making money for someone. There must be an audience somewhere.
Pirateer has been exceptional at penetrating multiple market segments
(I boughy my copy in a nautical themed beach store in North Carolina
which must cater to a pretty wild demographic) and has apparently
enjoyed success with that strategy, but I'd venture a guess that it
doesn't do real well with the hobby-shop crowd. Pirateer just isn't
that kind of game. I'd bet that they don't play a lot of Trivial
Pursuit either. Likewise, Axis and Allies (a great game) would gather
dust at that same store in North Carolina. We would certainly hope
that some or all of our titles will enjoy similar success, but I'll
tell you what: We know that the hobby-shop gamers (like the people
represented here) are probably our core market. I wouldn't be reading
this newsgroup or soliciting it for playtesters if I didn't think that
they were our 'market segment'.
I'll tell you what man: We just hope that at the end of the day people
like and play our games. I don't really care what market segment
they're from to be perfectly honest with you. If we manage to put our
games into the right hands and we produce a quality product at a fair
price) we will be successful. If we don't, we won't and we'll have to
go back to our day jobs.
There is also the possibility that I am completely wrong and talking
out of my ass since I don't have a single game published (yet) and
thus have no market penetration at all. I don't think so. I'll know in
a year.
>And I look forward to more entertainment
>from the all-bark/no-bite market segment
Wow. Why so aggressive Scott? I haven't been reading this group for
very long at all - did you get a bad taste in your mouth up front from
something? If so, I emplore you to give them another chance. Your game
is cool and I for one would be very interested in your input here, but
only if it isn't tainted by whatever it is that is flavoring your
remarks right now.
Marc Davis
Lead Designer, Vice President
Helix Games
RRI1
>game designer and publisher to take issue with a couple of things that
>Mr. Peterson has said here.
I, for one, appreciate your response, Marc.
But Scot has demonstrated over the years that he simply doesn't care what
r.g.b. thinks. Apparently believe it hasn't hurt his sales (though clearly I
have heard many people who will never buy his game.) , and probably helped.
(After all I sold more games after I started posting... Maybe true, but that
simply means there are far more people who don't anything about games--and more
importantly know nothing about Scott Peterson.)
A brick wall pays more heed than Scott.
He has contributed absolutely nothing positive to the group in the five since I
started reading. And don't think he ever will.
Even though the only response your intended recipient will issue is a flame. I
just want to let you know, your presence and knowledge (both on the business
side as well as fun side of games) is welcomed and I hope you have great
success with your game.
Richard Irving
rr...@aol.com
Richard Irving rr...@aol.com
Made with recycled electrons!
Rich Shipley
>
> Wow. Why so aggressive Scott? I haven't been reading this group for
> very long at all - did you get a bad taste in your mouth up front from
> something? If so, I emplore you to give them another chance. Your game
> is cool and I for one would be very interested in your input here, but
> only if it isn't tainted by whatever it is that is flavoring your
> remarks right now.
Scot started out here with drunken insults, then moved to intimidating
new posters, and then to forging newsgroup posts to prove that
everything was anonymous here (he will deny this last one, but it was an
obvious, clumsy attempt). He's been given several chances. I apologized
for calling him a moron early on and encouraged him to be a better
newsgroup citizen because I thought it was important for game designers
to participate. Lately he's moved on to insulting the work of game
designers that don't even regularly post here (Greg Costikian and Steve
Peek). He's used up his chances, he will only get ignored or abused if
he posts here anymore and he deserves it.
Rich
spet...@my-deja.com
<38962080...@news.eclipse.net>,
mda...@nospam.appliedtechs.net wrote:
[snip]
> Wow. Why so aggressive Scott? I haven't
> been reading this group for very long at all
> - did you get a bad taste in your mouth up
> front from something? If so, I emplore you
> to give them another chance. Your game is
> cool and I for one would be very interested
> in your input here, but only if it isn't
> tainted by whatever it is that is flavoring
> your remarks right now.
Because I don't care for people who deceive
others and I disdain those who profit from it.
So start your company, launch your product
and let's talk in five years. But if you plan to
depend on the "hobby game market," I wish
you all the luck in the world, because you're
going to need it :>I
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
> I don't care for people who deceive others and I disdain those who profit
> from it.
In other words, you don't like yourself.
Congratulations on a rare display of good sense.
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
>dave...@bestSPAMFOILER.com wrote:
>> spend your time on more worthwhile marketing efforts than provoking
>> flamewars here
>
>it's because some aspiring game inventor might be spared the hardship of
>pouring his/her life's savings into a weak product.
It's noble that you don't want others to repeat your failures, but
provoking flamewars isn't the way to warn them off.
dave...@bestspamfoiler.com
> I report facts about Bucaneer Backgammon sales here to help and encourage
> other inventors, self-publishers and the board game industry.
Liar. You SPAM the newsgroup at every opportunity in the vain hope that it
will improve sales of the dorky pirate parchesi clone.
>Remember, variety comes from different sources, not different titles
>from the same source.
Wrong again. Variety comes from both. Publishers who mercilessly flog the
sole game they have out after years in business neither garner nor deserve
much respect.
kas...@acadia.net
>I get killfiled and
>flamed here all the time and yet somehow
>manage to sell 85 tons of Pirateer game sets.
>How can that be? Because RGB is obvioiusly
>more comic relief than it is a viable market
>segment.
Three separate issues here:
1. "I get killfiled and flamed here ... and yet ..."
Comment: Personally, I try never to confuse creator with
creation. I'm a writer; lots of my friends are writers; some of my
friends who aren't writers are artists, musicians, and the like. I've
gotten pretty used to the idea that beautiful, brilliant, life-affirming
works can spring from the minds of, shall we say, socially flawed human
beings.
I enjoy Pirateer, because I do most of my game-playing with
kids. It's a quick and fun game, with a big enough luck factor that an
8-year-old can beat a grown-up in any given outing. On the negative
side, the swings of "outrageous fortune" can be quite frustrating to
young players -- as well as to older ones.
If we were to impose a personality test on creative types, the
nation's libraries and art galleries and music stores would quickly find
their holdings severely depleted. It's like the old saying about
sausages: if you like them, you don't want to look too closely at how
they are made. Or by whom.
2. "RGB is obvioiusly [sic] more comic relief than it is a viable
market segment."
Comment: RGB is neither. RGB is a Usenet newsgroup, whose
non-lurking regulars represent a particular segment of the gaming
population. One rule-of-thumb I've heard is that for every person who
posts messages on a Usenet, there are roughly 100 other subscribers who
remain silent. So you have to bear in mind here that you're performing
for an audience. RGB subscribers (lurkers and others) obviously are not
representative of the overall consuming public, but I would think they
are an influential lot, on the whole, in that they are likely to
communicate their opinions to friends, relatives, retailers, editors,
and other people in the world at large.
I don't know how well this analogy carries over to gaming, but
in the technological realm there are people known as "early adopters"
who represent a sort of cutting-edge of public sentiment. If these
people embrace a new technology, then their passion -- communicated not
only by their purchasing decisions, but by their writings, their
incessant chatter, and their general disproportionate influence in the
industry -- tends to serve as an influential and reliable harbinger of
things to come.
3. Should we only be courteous to people who are in a position to
do us harm?
--
Ich brauche nicht immer meiner eigenen Meinung zu sein.
I need not always be of my own opinion.
-- Heinrich Heine
M Davis
On Tue, 01 Feb 2000 16:11:36 GMT, spet...@my-deja.com wrote:
>So start your company, launch your product
>and let's talk in five years. But if you plan to
>depend on the "hobby game market," I wish
>you all the luck in the world, because you're
>going to need it :>I
Well, now. Thanks very much for your candor, professional courtesy,
and advice Scott.
You'll work for me in 5 years with that attitude.
Best wishes,
paulshayne
Please do not take this to heart, as I from Australia, but I have never
heard of Helix Games. Can you tell me about them?
Sincerely
Paul.