(x-post from the Forge)

Introduction

This is an idea that comes from Game Chef 2007, where all the participants were assigned to feedback groups of about ten people per group. This made it much easier to give feedback because you could mainly focus on the participants in your own group, and did not have to keep track of them all.

Recently there was a discussion on the Forge about how hard it is to give proper feedback in the First Thoughts forum, and I immediately thought of feedback groups and how they could probably solve some of the problems that were raised in that thread.

The idea is to have a site whereon people can organize themselves into groups, similar to the feedback groups from Game Chef. The people in a group will then be more familiar with each other's games, and will be to some degree committed to give feedback. The site is only to organize the groups; the discussions about the games will happen elsewhere, like on the Forge.

We (I and Lee-Anne O'Reilly) are thinking about making such a site, but before we go to far we really want some feedback on the idea.


Purposes

There are two purposes for this idea. The first – and most important – is to make it easier for people to give each other feedback. There are a few reasons why it can be hard to give proper feedback to a game design on a forum:

• You do not understand the silent assumptions that the person makes for his game.
• You can't relate to the type of game the person wants to design.
• You do not know if he is serious about designing the game, or if it is just his “cool idea of the week”.
• You have limited time and resources to devote to feedback, and can't tell from subject lines where best to lend your efforts and interest.

Design groups should solve these problems in the following ways:

• A game should be presented from the first concepts, so the other members in the group have followed the game from the start, and therefore have a better understanding of the game.
• People should form groups with like-minded people; people that can relate to the same type of games.
• As a member in a group, you have more commitment to actually finish a game, so the other members know that the time they spend in giving feedback will not be completely lost.
• By referencing the design group descriptions, even non-members can better guess which designs might benefit from their input.

The other purpose of the Design Groups is to get people more serious about finishing a game. This is not only a commitment to getting something published, but also a commitment to make a complete, playable-as-written game (another topic that has recently been discussed). Exactly how to achieve this last part is not really well established yet.


The site features

This is an overview of how we imagine the Game Design Group site will work. These are just ideas. Everything here can be questioned and discussed.

The main function of the site is to arrange the members into groups. Each group will have a presentation page where they can have a short description of the games each group member is working on, and maybe some description about what type of game the members in this group are interested in. The basic function is sort of a "mailing-list". When a member wants to present something new about one of the games she is working on, she can notify the others in the group. The actual presentation and discussion will happen other places, like on the Forge (or on Story Game or on a blog - whatever seems more fitting).

If you want to become a member of a design group, you have to go through the following procedure: First you have to browse around the site to find groups that you feel you can relate to (in term of which type of games they are working on), and which have room for more members. Then you will write a form of application that you will post on a forum on the site, and the group that you are interesting in joining will get a notice. There can then be some open dialogue between you and the members of the groups you are interested in, so you can find the right group to join.

In the application you should answer some question about what game(s) you are working on, and what your plans are for this/these game(s). Your answers to these questions should show that you are serious about putting in the work necessary to designing a game.

We have no clear idea yet of how to form new groups, but it will probably also happen through the forum.

Part of the commitment when joining a group, is the commitment to make a thoroughly developed game. To guard against prematurely published games we are thinking about having a way of tagging the games, to show what state they are in, but also to show what still needs to be done. Following are some ideas for tags:

1. "First Ideas": You just have some loose ideas about your game.
2. "Concept Stage":
   
   • "Concept development": The ideas are structured in rules, and a system begin to emerges
   • "Concept playtest": The first playtests to see if the concepts are sound.
3. "Alpha Stage":
   • "Alpha development": More serious development where you flesh out the concepts and adjust the rules so they fit properly together.
   • "Alpha playtest": This is what is called "ashcan version" by some people. You think you have most of the rules nailed down, and the game should be able to deliver a somewhat complete gaming experience.
4. "Beta Stage":
   • "Beta Development": The rules go through final adjustments.
   • "Beta playtest": A last round of playtests just to be sure.
5. "Final stage": You more or less have the complete text; you just want some last minute feedback before it goes to editing.

The "Development" and "Playtest" stages are iterative to put emphasis on playtest as a part of the development cycle. The members of a design group are encouraged to playtest each others' games when they are in alpha stage, and to playtest games from other groups which are in the beta stage. To do playtests is not a requirement, but we are thinking about a system where people get marks for doing playtests, so there will be some social encouragement.

There will probably be a number of other "minor" features. Possibility of uploading documents to make them publicly available. A chat function to have random chit-chat within a group. And probably a resource library with links to game design resources on the internet.

(Continues...)

Anders, um, what's this service accomplish that is not served already by designers getting to know each other and corresponding by email or whatever?

Also, why bind one person to exactly one group? I know that when I am writing different games, I seek feedback from different people based on their abilities and interests and how those relate to the game in question.

I've seen the thread over at the Forge and thought it was a great idea. Still do. This would be immensely helpful for me and many others I think.
You could just create a few subforums, one for each group and place some stickied threads within with the relevant information.

I think I heard about something like this with novel writing where you all agree to write so much in a month then give feedback on the other guys stuff.

Getting into this for a set time, function, or some kind of end point to the group seems like a good idea..

A use case for the system:
Someone starts a group with the proposed of 5 weeks broken down as follows for people that have started doing some writing:
2 weeks to do concepct stage work and expand the game to minimum functionality.
1 week for group feedback.
2 weeks more writing and personel playtesting.
1 week of intergroup playtesting. Everyones game gets a playtest by not the author group member.
1 week to exchange playtest stuff and tweak the game with group feedback.

Then once the group gets 5 people that think they can do this you start it. Afterward your group ends and you probably go your separate ways.

Imagined site features:

• Looking for group area with both informal anything goes and set schedule as above.
  [*] Sign up into time slots or group sizes that activate when they have enough people.
  [*] Some kind of scheduling on site.
  [*] A reminder from the system for the schedule
  [*] Feedback form people in the group on what point they are at. In the above you may be required to drop out if you can't keep up as a form of pressure to work at it.
  [*]A system for posting and chat to cover mostly the group formation and organization
  [*]Group management features
  [*]A public made it/didn't make thing. Such as everyone can see your schedule and your progress reports.
  [*]A way to track and link to stuff on other forums by person and project
  [*]Online RPG support in the chat
  [*]Feedback group histories for others to see.
  [*]Perhaps an informal add a comment feature to go with the uploaded documents.
  [*]Some sort of version control. My RPG v1 had these comments. My RPG v2 has these other comments
  [*]Perhaps a ranking system based on successful feedback groups?