When did the act of actually playing games stop being important in the indie game space?

When did the act of actually playing games stop being important in the indie game space?

When did the act of actually playing games stop being important in the indie game space?

If we get some decent feedback on this thread, I’ll use it for Community Feedback tomorrow. Anyone paying attention is welcome to offer their theory, or to reject the premise entirely and tell me I’m full of shit. I love and welcome both. 

32 thoughts on “When did the act of actually playing games stop being important in the indie game space?”

  1. That is an excellent rhetorical question. I believe you are right. I have been following the scene since the early-to-mid 2000’s. It feels like the enfatuation with design (open design, innovation, etc.) drowned out stories of play and analysis based on play sometime after the death of the Sons of Kryos and Have Games Will Travel podcasts. So, around/after 2010. Obviously social media feeds it. People’s need/desire to talk about games outpaces their ability to play the games, or so they think. You guys are definitely the exception that proves the rule.

  2. That is an excellent rhetorical question. I believe you are right. I have been following the scene since the early-to-mid 2000’s. It feels like the enfatuation with design (open design, innovation, etc.) drowned out stories of play and analysis based on play sometime after the death of the Sons of Kryos and Have Games Will Travel podcasts. So, around/after 2010. Obviously social media feeds it. People’s need/desire to talk about games outpaces their ability to play the games, or so they think. You guys are definitely the exception that proves the rule.

  3. That’s true Mischa Krilov. It’s always going to be the case that you buy more RPGs, read more, and dream about more than you will actually play. That’s a practical fact. But the gold standard ought to be play. (Which I think you probably believe too. I know you are just pointing out the reason why not a lot of games get to the table.) Many games seem great til they hit the table. Some games look a little flat/understated until they hit the table. I’ve experienced both of those things. It’s really fun to talk about new games, but until you play them …

  4. That’s true Mischa Krilov. It’s always going to be the case that you buy more RPGs, read more, and dream about more than you will actually play. That’s a practical fact. But the gold standard ought to be play. (Which I think you probably believe too. I know you are just pointing out the reason why not a lot of games get to the table.) Many games seem great til they hit the table. Some games look a little flat/understated until they hit the table. I’ve experienced both of those things. It’s really fun to talk about new games, but until you play them …

  5. Indeed, publication without playtesting is an anti-pattern.  Then again, so is telepathically intuiting others opinions. 😉

    I don’t see much evidence that the community stopped valuing play, ‘though there has been a distinction between playtest and non-playtest reviews for… two decades?… over on RPG.Net.

    Analysis can yield hypothesis, but that hypothesis is only validated by experimentation (i.e. play).

  6. Indeed, publication without playtesting is an anti-pattern.  Then again, so is telepathically intuiting others opinions. 😉

    I don’t see much evidence that the community stopped valuing play, ‘though there has been a distinction between playtest and non-playtest reviews for… two decades?… over on RPG.Net.

    Analysis can yield hypothesis, but that hypothesis is only validated by experimentation (i.e. play).

  7. I should mention when I say “indie game space” in this context, I don’t mean the OSR, the adherents of which have managed to cultivate a culture of play I admire. The vector of the hobby I’m referring to is the story game vector (for lack of a better term). To my mind, that space has become insular and academic; very nearly exclusive. It reminds me a lot of the professors at my elite law school, most of whom were brilliant, and had many interesting things to say, but to a person had never actually practiced law. 

  8. I should mention when I say “indie game space” in this context, I don’t mean the OSR, the adherents of which have managed to cultivate a culture of play I admire. The vector of the hobby I’m referring to is the story game vector (for lack of a better term). To my mind, that space has become insular and academic; very nearly exclusive. It reminds me a lot of the professors at my elite law school, most of whom were brilliant, and had many interesting things to say, but to a person had never actually practiced law. 

  9. I’m fond of the saying: “In theory, there should be no difference between theory and practice.”

    (On a related note, “There are two types of people in the world.  Those who can infer from an incomplete set…”)

  10. I’m fond of the saying: “In theory, there should be no difference between theory and practice.”

    (On a related note, “There are two types of people in the world.  Those who can infer from an incomplete set…”)

  11. Ray Otus That’s an interesting analysis. I didn’t come back to roleplaying games until around 2009, so I would have missed that earlier time you mentioned. Paul Czege said something similar on the podcast, about how play, and analysis of play, had kind of dropped-off at a certain point. 

    You know, I really miss The Walking Eye Podcast and Jank Cast, because, while they emphasized theory (especially Jank), they backed it up with lots of play.

    And I’m not trying to be a gatekeeper here and say “Your opinion only matters if you play games.” In fact, I devour pretty much everything that gets said on G+ about indie games (although I rarely +1 or comment). It’s just I’ve noticed in the last couple of years fewer and fewer of these folks are actually playing games. I think it’s an unhealthy sign.

  12. Ray Otus That’s an interesting analysis. I didn’t come back to roleplaying games until around 2009, so I would have missed that earlier time you mentioned. Paul Czege said something similar on the podcast, about how play, and analysis of play, had kind of dropped-off at a certain point. 

    You know, I really miss The Walking Eye Podcast and Jank Cast, because, while they emphasized theory (especially Jank), they backed it up with lots of play.

    And I’m not trying to be a gatekeeper here and say “Your opinion only matters if you play games.” In fact, I devour pretty much everything that gets said on G+ about indie games (although I rarely +1 or comment). It’s just I’ve noticed in the last couple of years fewer and fewer of these folks are actually playing games. I think it’s an unhealthy sign.

  13. I think a lot of it comes from the fact that Story Games tend to be narrower. They have a single, very specific theme or narrative structure or genre or emotional reaction they want to explore. When you design like this, you’re obviously narrowing your pool of potential players. I guess they require more buy-in from a group. I can sell a setting to a play group much more easily than I can sell “this game will make you sad” or whatever.

    And I think a result of this is people with a bunch of games they want to play but a group that’s reluctant to change. So there’s the next best thing, lonely fun. Reading. Analysing. And, often, more designing.

    And, I don’t necessarily think that actual play is always what a game needs. A lot of really cool and interesting games don’t require any play, and exist more as thought experiments. I don’t think they’re any less valuable for that. 

  14. I think a lot of it comes from the fact that Story Games tend to be narrower. They have a single, very specific theme or narrative structure or genre or emotional reaction they want to explore. When you design like this, you’re obviously narrowing your pool of potential players. I guess they require more buy-in from a group. I can sell a setting to a play group much more easily than I can sell “this game will make you sad” or whatever.

    And I think a result of this is people with a bunch of games they want to play but a group that’s reluctant to change. So there’s the next best thing, lonely fun. Reading. Analysing. And, often, more designing.

    And, I don’t necessarily think that actual play is always what a game needs. A lot of really cool and interesting games don’t require any play, and exist more as thought experiments. I don’t think they’re any less valuable for that. 

  15. I’m not sure I see it. What I encounter on G+, and hell, even what I see on Reddit is at the very least filled with talk about actual games people are playing.

    I just think what trouble people have getting together for a game gets exacerbated by something like Threeforged. With what?–less than a month to get together, read through a bunch of games, learn several of them, sell other people on the concept of what amounts to playtesting unfinished games, and then actually getting together to play? Yeah, there’ll be a lot more talk about these games than there will be play.

    I don’t think you’d be posting this except in the wake of a ton of games that came out of a contest.

  16. I’m not sure I see it. What I encounter on G+, and hell, even what I see on Reddit is at the very least filled with talk about actual games people are playing.

    I just think what trouble people have getting together for a game gets exacerbated by something like Threeforged. With what?–less than a month to get together, read through a bunch of games, learn several of them, sell other people on the concept of what amounts to playtesting unfinished games, and then actually getting together to play? Yeah, there’ll be a lot more talk about these games than there will be play.

    I don’t think you’d be posting this except in the wake of a ton of games that came out of a contest.

  17. Steve Mains Eh, Threeforged is what it is. I knew at the outset no one would play as many of those games as we would. I’m definitely talking about trend, maybe going back two or three years. Granted, I don’t do Reddit, and it might just be a G+ phenomenon based on who I follow.

  18. Steve Mains Eh, Threeforged is what it is. I knew at the outset no one would play as many of those games as we would. I’m definitely talking about trend, maybe going back two or three years. Granted, I don’t do Reddit, and it might just be a G+ phenomenon based on who I follow.

  19. Apparently its very popular to watch other people play video games now (twitch), i dont get it, but i dont understand why so many people choose to watch soccer instead of playing themselves either. I think it might build some relations or community perhaps, or maybe they examine the input before they adapt them into their own skillset. (This is an attempt at an analogy, sorry if it is unclear) As an unpublished amateur at writing games, this threeforged challenge puts me right into a meta with extremely motivated people with what to me seems like a megavault of knowledge and experience of anything RP. This supergroup of people started writing detailed reviews north and west of the theory and feeling of games i participated in, commenting on flaws that are obvious when a finger is pointed at it, and making me smile when some portion of the game is praised because someone likes it. This information i value greatly, and i bet many of the other writers also do, and will use it to work together on a good game polish after the competition ends. And then, maybe, i can present it as a game for my friends to be tested

  20. Apparently its very popular to watch other people play video games now (twitch), i dont get it, but i dont understand why so many people choose to watch soccer instead of playing themselves either. I think it might build some relations or community perhaps, or maybe they examine the input before they adapt them into their own skillset. (This is an attempt at an analogy, sorry if it is unclear) As an unpublished amateur at writing games, this threeforged challenge puts me right into a meta with extremely motivated people with what to me seems like a megavault of knowledge and experience of anything RP. This supergroup of people started writing detailed reviews north and west of the theory and feeling of games i participated in, commenting on flaws that are obvious when a finger is pointed at it, and making me smile when some portion of the game is praised because someone likes it. This information i value greatly, and i bet many of the other writers also do, and will use it to work together on a good game polish after the competition ends. And then, maybe, i can present it as a game for my friends to be tested

  21. I suspect a lot of people struggle to get a group together, much less a group who are interested in their weird-ass and possibly broken indie game (not that I don’t love indie games, but trad is clearly the bigger market). Design is a way you can engage with games despite not having a group.

    But I don’t think play is dead, far from it. It’s just that play has more prerequisites than design.

  22. I suspect a lot of people struggle to get a group together, much less a group who are interested in their weird-ass and possibly broken indie game (not that I don’t love indie games, but trad is clearly the bigger market). Design is a way you can engage with games despite not having a group.

    But I don’t think play is dead, far from it. It’s just that play has more prerequisites than design.

  23. Recent games are better at telling people how to play that specific game (or at least, in theory they are…), so instead of analyzing ten different play sessions, people analyze a single piece of design and infer the consequent play style that should occur at the table.

    I am not saying that this is done right every time, nor that every one has the same skills in doing that. But this seems to be the trend.

    It is probably also a consequence of the number of games out there: playing at the table every single game that got us interested, would require an amount of time that a lot of people don’t have.

    It could also be a phase. The community seem to have moved from theory to analysis of the actual play, and then from the analysis to design.

    Game design is a response to the actual play.

    Designers are trying to either reinforce or change certain play styles or issues they’ve seen at the table. Once the “fuel” of analysis runs out (we’re not there yet), people will have to go back to play and study to come up with something new and better.

    (as always, I find these interesting threads a day or two too late, but I found this really interesting so I had to throw in my own comment)

  24. Recent games are better at telling people how to play that specific game (or at least, in theory they are…), so instead of analyzing ten different play sessions, people analyze a single piece of design and infer the consequent play style that should occur at the table.

    I am not saying that this is done right every time, nor that every one has the same skills in doing that. But this seems to be the trend.

    It is probably also a consequence of the number of games out there: playing at the table every single game that got us interested, would require an amount of time that a lot of people don’t have.

    It could also be a phase. The community seem to have moved from theory to analysis of the actual play, and then from the analysis to design.

    Game design is a response to the actual play.

    Designers are trying to either reinforce or change certain play styles or issues they’ve seen at the table. Once the “fuel” of analysis runs out (we’re not there yet), people will have to go back to play and study to come up with something new and better.

    (as always, I find these interesting threads a day or two too late, but I found this really interesting so I had to throw in my own comment)

Comments are closed.