Postmortem: Chair Force
Chair Force is a checkerslike made by my dad and me as a design challenge. The idea was to take a simple game like Checkers and turn it into a more interesting and fleshed-out experience. Development began in late December 2022 and officially ended on January 12th, 2023. Overall, I would consider the development a success even though the game is boring and unsatisfying. Chair Force is 1 of 13 games that I must develop before the end of 2023, or face the frightening consequence of shaving my head.
Table of Contents
What Went Right
1. Frequent playtesting.
First, we played Checkers to get a feel for the game, reveal what was lacking, and inspire us. Then, we did a brainstorming session and added a new feature. Finally, we playtested. All of these things occurred within 2 hours or less.
Playtesting is probably the single most important part of developing a game. The sooner you’re able to playtest your game, the more time you have to make it fun, and the better chance it has of being enjoyable. Board games are easy to playtest because you simply declare a new mechanic, find some sort of object lying around your house to represent it, then try it out. If you throw something together and it feels good, then, even if it’s rough, it’s a promising idea that you can always polish later. If it feels bad, then trivially you just kick it to the curb. Playtesting, because we did it so frequently, motivated almost all the decisions we made about the game’s design, and helped us turn our ideas into solid mechanics.
Frequent playtesting also gave us greater control during development because it reduced the number of changes we were testing simultaneously. It’s the same reason why science experiments strive to have a single independent variable; in game development, the independent variable is the mechanic you’re testing, and the dependent variable is the fun. So, I think playtesting allowed us to hone in on what needed improvement and make the game as fun as it could be.
2. Rapid development.
We only spent a couple of hours at a time developing Chair Force, but when we did, we were quick and focused. If you let yourself, you can spend a lot of time developing a game thinking about the best thing to do. Often, it’s best not to think, but to just add something and see if it feels right. Being quick and focused allowed us to be decisive, which gave us less time to think and more time to play.
3. A focus on mechanics.
Most of the ideas we tested out were new mechanics or variations of existing ones. Mechanics are the actions that drive the game forward and are a big selling point of games (i.e. the gimmick is often a unique mechanic). I don’t think it’s ever a bad thing to spend a lot of time working on your game’s mechanics. I think, in our case, the simplicity of the “move” and “play a card” mechanics works well with the simple movement it inherited from its ancestor, Checkers.
What Went Wrong
1. The artist’s ego.
There were a couple of points during the development of Chair Force where I felt bad for believing strongly in an idea. Although I think you should never feel bad about having an idea, sometimes it’s hard to have conflicting ideas with others. I was listening to The Always Sunny Podcast when actor Glenn Howerton mentioned something about the grey area of collaborative art, where you can’t tell whether you’re digging your heels in because of your ego or you genuinely don’t think an idea is a “good” one.
My dad and I made this game together with equal agency and input. We both have experience making games, so the legitimacy of our ideas are equal, and neither one of us are shy about our opinions. So, there were several times when working together when I lived in the aforementioned grey area of collaborative art. The grey area can never be eradicated, but I think it can be reduced, and that’s something I’d like to work on in the future. For now, I think it’s safe to say that if you can clearly explain why an idea hurts the design of a game, then it’s more likely that it’s a “bad” idea than you’re an egomaniac.
2. Lack of creativity.
Oh, another military-themed board game. Riveting.
Yes, the military theme is lame. Not in general, but in the context of this game it’s lame because it doesn’t take any creative risks. We had standard game mechanics (move, shoot, reinforce) wrapped up in standard military jargon, and it’s uninteresting.
I do, however, think the fighter jet is a cool ability that takes advantage of the theme. Mechanically, it’s an ability you can use to flush enemies out from corners or walls while giving them at least 1 turn to rescue their piece. Narratively, it makes sense because fighter jets take time to strike after you call them in; they’re not automatic. Thus, it’s one of the only abilities in the game that both enhances the gameplay and capitalizes on the narrative. The rest of the abilities are kinda mid, and I accept that.
Also, I need to mention that we failed to create a custom board, pieces, and art for our game. As a result, it seems unsatisfying and boring because it’s apparent that you’re just playing Checkers with a set of ability cards slapped on top.
3. Low variety.
I previously mentioned that the simplicity of the game in terms of player actions lends itself to the experience. The downside to the simplicity is that there’s a jarring lack of variety. I found that one of our playtesters didn’t use many cards because he didn’t think they were worth sacrificing a move. If you prefer not to use cards or don’t use them at all, then your game devolves back into Checkers.
An easy way to solve the variety problem is to add more cards. While this doesn’t solve any problems for cardphobic players, it’s a necessary addition to improving the experience of players who enjoy using them. As for the variety of actions problem… I’m not sure. And maybe that’s why this game is boring and unsatisfying. I also accept that.
Closing Remarks
Chair Force is a mediocre board game and I’m glad I made it for a couple of reasons.
Above all, I’m fortunate enough to have a healthy relationship with my dad, so anything I get to do with him is worth it for me. Given his recent lack of motivation to create things as a hobby, I didn’t expect him to buy into developing another board game. There were even times during development when I thought we might not finish the game. In the end, we got it to a completed state and had a lot of fun along the way, and that’s what counts.
What’s more is that, despite getting caught between trying to see all my friends before school started and attending the first week of classes, I was able to put a few more wrinkles in my designer brain. It’s hard to stretch yourself thin and still get something out of a process that takes a lot of energy. Thankfully, developing Chair Force wasn’t demanding, and even though it didn’t take much, I got the invaluable experience of making another game from start to finish.
Also, I’m 7.69% less likely to shave my head at the end of this year, so that’s always a bonus.