3 ms·
Written instructions / explaining board games. In both cases, your best bet is a good tutorial. "Do X and Y will result" gives you instant feedback. If Y did
by sevensor 3y ago
Written instructions / explaining board games. In both cases, your best bet is a good tutorial. "Do X and Y will result" gives you instant feedback. If Y didn't result, you have probably failed to do X correctly. Versus "Do X1. Now do X2... Now do Xn. End." The latter is decontextualized and hard to follow, while a well-illustrated tutorial takes you a long way to success, having actually _done the thing._
- pushedx 3y agoMost recently released board games have a quick start setup "mode" (where some random things are chosen for you), combined with a tutorial, along with summarized rules, more detailed rules, and a glossary. I have found as suggested by the article that the best thing to do is to start playing the actual game as quickly as possible, and answer questions progressively using any of these forms of instruction.
- marcosdumay 3y agoYet, the summarized rules are essential. I get where the article is going, but the way it's written is not correct at all. If you don't read the rules first, you can't try anything.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- drewcoo 3y agoThey're all happy path, like framework tutorials. For any game with complexity, they're not going to touch the odd edge cases that will have a pause while people argue about the rules for half an hour.
- drewcoo 3y ago"Rules lawyers" have their place in any game that's reasonably complicated (or needing more play-testing)