if there's one good thing that's come out of this whole debacle, it's that I'll never question a disabled person or someone with a chronic condition when they say nobody understands their problem or takes it seriously. because holy shit if they can't even get a sore tummy right then I have no hope

Me earlier this year: "hey doc the proton pump inhibitor you prescribed me is actually making things worse for both my stomach AND gut"
Them: "ok try this" *hands me prescription for omeprazole*
At that point I was convinced they were trying to make things worse for me as a joke

They've been very helpful and are much nicer to use than plastic cubes!

Spoiler alert: most don't, and instead work full/part time/contracted alongside designing games

This along with "you don't need a complete game to be able to learn huge amounts from playtesting" are my two main pieces of advice

No markings. I agree it's harder to tell the difference, which is why I always look for artist credits before starting to investigate further or accuse. Bosodo (first two images) don't list a lead artist. Their giant card art is horrifically pixelated (implying generated image, scaled lossily)

By the way, giant cards like the ones in the first picture with AI generated art were on and around the MAIN STAGE of SPIEL. You know, where every single talk was held about how board games and the developers and artists who make them are important? Really cool stuff.

1/20 is an estimate, I stopped keeping track of them after a while. The games with AI tended to be the first and only game of an independent publisher with a heavy focus on advertising. I'll attach some images of examples, some will be from websites because as I said I stopped documenting them all

Also, don't feel the need to make an entire game before testing. I'm making a game right now where players are expected to juggle three different kinds of mushroom and I'm going to test it with my friends... with just one type each. To make sure the very base of the game works before expanding on it

To add on to this, for my prototypes, I always learn more information in 30 minutes of playtesting than I do in a month of notebook writing and theorycrafting, but the time spent on theory is not wasted, as it accelerates what you learn from getting the game onto a table. Good luck with your ideas!

Yeah UKGE, my first ever game con, set my expectations high with an entire half hall- imagine half of Halle 2- just being tables for people to sit on, unpack games, meet strangers, etc. So coming to Spiel, which people talk so highly about, and seeing that pushed out to the floor of the lobby is oof

I think heavier games are represented strongly here because of margins: a few hundred sales of expensive games could recoup more of the production cost than the same amount of smaller games. And yes it's definitely a shopping con first, a shake-hands-in-backrooms con second

factorio does a great job of making you feel like an unwelcome invader. everything is beautiful without you. you start expanding your factory and trees wilt, water turns brown, and the native wildlife becomes hostile

They admit they have been struggling to greenlight and conduct long term studies on games in the classroom and student learning. Ideally they would be followed for 4 years. There are problems with logistics and ethics

"It's about providing a low risk, high impact way for children to develop and improve"

As with before, it's important to teach children about the importance of strategic thinking, available resources, expected outcomes, and review the decisions made during a game. Without this review stage ("make thinking visible"), students are less likely to get good takeaways

Strategic thinking and looking for reasons why they might have lost a game helps children develop better emotional regulation and encourages them to improve rather than shy away from failure the way that, for example, a maths test would