We obviously don’t want people to be jerks when we play games with them. But to what degree is our game itself kind of being a jerk? To what extent are our competitive games advocating players to be as toxic as possible? And what alternatives do we have to the traditional D&D / war-game based tropes that we rely on?
This podcast episode is sort of a follow-up to my article, “Beyond the Pentakill“, so I’d recommend reading that as well. Enjoy!
Had a great conversation with Richard Terrell, designer of Bara Bari Ball who’s currently working on designoriented.net. He’s also been on the podcast before, so I would go back and listen to Episode 6 where we spoke earlier this year.
The conversation went really well. We talked about language, “broad vs. narrow statements”, Auro and its reception, and a lot more.
This episode is undoubtedly my most vulnerable episode, wherein I talk about the failure of Auro, a game that I believe in strongly and which I worked on for six years. I talk about the process and the struggle of dealing with that and how it has re-shaped my way of looking at art. It’s a short episode, but I had to talk about this before I talked about anything else.
This week I had a great conversation with NYU Game Center director Frank Lantz about randomness and general game design philosophy. We meant to get to three other topics – execution, reading and improvisation, but not all-that-surprisingly, we never got there in the 70+ minutes of this episode.
What does it mean when something is a “classic”? I think there’s actually a huge problem here that needs to be explored. New work is created using new cultural and scientific understandings, and it’s universally better in almost every case. We need to understand and appreciate this fact, and stop glorifying things just because they’re old.
In this episode, you’ll also hear me talk about classic games like Go and Chess, as well as talk about a better distinction between art and entertainment. Enjoy, and let me know what you think below.