Vince's Feedbag of Myopic Discordance

Which is not what I think was expected when we went into the: "observation chamber."

For all the technological accoutrements present in the room, we were so helpless at the sight of our game being handled as it was. Herb joked about the poison gas button that we simply HAD to have; I would have settled for a whipped cream button; maybe even a useless-red-light-blinking-on-and-off button. As it was, cackling pseudo-maniacally was poor substitute for some sort, any sort, of real interaction.

"We can hear you," Rick said in response to my laughter. Ah ha! So the barrier can be crossed!

For all the anxiety I felt as the game played out, the game ended up being quite well received by the testers. Likely the source of our anxiety stemmed from the game we just playtested prior; that game seemed to whiz by so quickly that the beginning seconds of Bad Company were agonizingly long. Should we have cleaned up the instructions better? Should we have not bothered with the optional competitive mode? Should we have gone with a different format?

Once the game was underway, we could relax. A little.

Our playtest group was a tougher group...at least looking at the surface level, aka how many decibels registered in the room between Bad Company's playtest and the game prior. Looking back on it, Bad Company is quite the thinker's game; as much as it relies on luck of the draw, ever player's move was moved to create meaning (or at least make a meaningful move). The outcome was this lighthearted piece with bits of absurd pastiche, but the actual placing of cards was this almost ponderous affair, filled with the kind of contemplative silence that accompanies serious poker games.

This was actually a concept we tried to deal with. Bad Company was originally crafted as a competitive game, with players taking on a persona and each persona striving to be the most considerate (or at least least juvenile) guest. Making this competitive aspect optional, a change we implemented late in our various iterations, seemed to be a good move toward making this a more "fun" less "serious" experience. It wasn't until the controlled playtest that we realized that this move actually opened up the possibility space considerably; while playing a card that would earn more "points" for a set character with the hostess is a fairly clear idea, figuring out how to append the story sequence to be more "fun" is far more vague and requires a not insignificant amount more thought.

We were quite happy with the feedback that we got after the playtest. Despite the self-observations above, the players reacted quite positively to the playtest. As we expected, many of the questions and ideas posed centered aroun the optional competitive mode and its partnering concept, connecting players with the individual characters. Players wanted a closer connection to the characters. Perhaps it would have been more beneficial if the playtesting had been on the competitive version, as we still have some questions as to how people would react to the loose judging and interpretation of these cards that do not have quantitative values attached.

A momentarily frightening, hugely educational and enlightening experience.