I wasn't going to toss up another interview thread for "just another interview," but then I read it: http://truepcgaming.com/2011/09/24/pre-release-interview-card-hunter/ No game content, but large amounts of game design. Multiple passes on the "money" front; I was pleased to see a mention (though not by name) of the Humble Indie Bundle and its buddies, though of course a free-to-play game wouldn't fit well in it. I was particularly interested by discussion on the limitations of player feedback, as this has been a point of contention in other computer projects in my midst. The "players aren't designers" issue was a sticking point, because the designers see the whole world of "what ifs," while the players mostly just tell you about what's in front of them right now. The players may be happy, but have no idea that they could be happier.
I agree. Even as I've been pressing for an icon modification over in the card analysis thread, the truth is that I have never been in a meeting or actually played the game. It's a small detail to change, but the designers have to consider how that change spreads into the whole game: taking up space on cards, altering the look of the art, whether it genuinely aids the ease of play or is just cosmetic. Lots to think about that even well-intentioned feedback rarely takes into account. We players are by nature rather selfish beasts.
I always like to hear developers reference this stuff. Because it is so important. It doesn't matter what game you are making, or how good you are, or how much experience you have. You have to have other people playtest, period. In general, you learn a lot more from watching other people play your game than you do playing it yourself. Because they will, inevitably, approach it differently than you do. You will see things that was completely obvious to you go over their heads. You will see things you were oblivious to but are fundamentally important from their perspective. And it's not just about what they do, but watching them too, their facial expressions and body language can often tell you as just much as their actions in the game. For example, in this type of game, if they are smiling mischievously the whole time while looking at their hand, you probably did something right. In fact, I make it a point to watch other people play games when I can - even if I had nothing to do with that game, especially at conventions and other places where people are most likely playing games for the first time. You learn so much about players and games in general that way.
Generally, it's more along the lines of "They're playing the game, but say they're drastically unhappy, but all of their ideas to make themselves happy are terrible." Most player feedback on any game I see, from Modern Warfare 2 to the smallest indie RPG, is generally something that directly serves that way that player plays, to the detriment of everyone else. Obviously not all players are like that, but how does a designer separate the good from the bad at a glance?
I think it's due to the increasing insularity of gamers as they see the 'game' as a 1/1 experience. I see lots of posts on forums along the lines of "How can I be wrong when all I want is my own way?" The growing trend for "multi-player" has ironically raised that bar exponentially as the game and the designers behind it have to appease the full gamut of players at the same time, from the intense mini/maxers to the casual player, the guys who want to rush to level cap in a day in an MMO, those players who want to build an 'experience' etc.
This has been a very fascinating aspect of Card Hunter to me--I've played dozens of fantasy RPGs, yet here CH has a visual style that is so unlike any other out there right now, yet one that also so clearly shows homage to it's roots, that I've been drawn to the game artistically in a way that most games just don't pull off.
