Welcome to Purple Pawn, covering games played around the world by billions of people every day.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
This was going to be our big GAMA Trade Show recap, but alas! There seems to be hardly any news to report, so we talk about the demise of Screen Life, answer a reader post about why a printer didn’t print their game, talk a bit about Digital versus Printed proofs (a remnant from our All About Art show) and generally inform and entertain for an alltogether too brief 30 odd minutes! Happy Spring!
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
GTS was very thin this year. I attended and did not see anything of note. It was tough to even come up with posts on the show!
Trask
Paper Money #62: “You need to design a board game before you can design a good computer game”. I can prove that statement wrong.
Dan-Go for it! I thought it was an interesting statement, which is why we included it for the show, but I can’t see that its gospel. What’s your take?
Paper Money #62: “You need to design a board game before you can design a good computer game”.
Well that’s just foolish.
I will happily wait for your all about boxes episode. =P
I have a counterpoint as to why the statement of board game to computer game isn’t completely true. I’ll use an analogy that should give some clarity as to what I mean exactly.
You have to learn how to water paint before painting the Mona Lisa. Computer games are in the same realm of board game in the sense they have structure, mechanics, and hopefully isn’t confusing for the user. Ultimately though, they are different and have to be approached differently because of the tools required to make them. There are simply some things that can’t be done well for a board game that computer games do and vice versa. Bean counting is the easiest example of bad game design for board games. It’s a huge waste of time and doesn’t enhance gameplay.
Sorry it took so long. I thought you guys were done with that statement and waiting to say my piece on the matter.