Thread Rating:

buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
June 13th, 2012 at 6:35:14 AM permalink
Dan,
How much do you think the 20 minutes time period and 8 games contributed to the smooth operation this time ?
Almost half as many games and twice as much time !!
You were at both focus groups. Was there a difference in the way feedback was solicited ?
teliot
teliot
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 2223
June 13th, 2012 at 7:00:04 AM permalink
Quote: Paradigm

Was Three Card 21 teliot's game?

When GN folded, 3CBJ was returned to me. I approached Roger with it and he invited me to have the game in the focus group. I met with him and he suggested some changes. I don't really know what the final version presented was of my game. My understanding is that Roger introduced a new hand, an actual "3 card 21," and made that the top hand, above a player blackjack. It then made sense to rename the game "Three Card 21." I don't know the qualifier or if my game was played blind or with one card exposed. Roger also created a new side bet for 3CBJ. The side bet that I included with the game, "Ace Plus," was not described in the patent. I did not attend the focus group.

As for the actual name, whether it's "Three Card Blackjack" or "Three Card 21," there may appear to be an issue with trademarks, since Paradigm pointed out there is another game named "Three Card 21." Actually, I know two other games named "Three Card 21." It is not possible to trademark either of these names for a game, since they are merely descriptive. "A mark is merely descriptive under Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1), if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the relevant goods and/or services." The name "Three Card Poker" is likewise struggling with trademark issues.
Poetry website: www.totallydisconnected.com
Paradigm
Paradigm
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 2226
June 13th, 2012 at 7:50:16 AM permalink
Thanks Switch....that was a lot of info and time to post. Appreciate your efforts in updating the forum! It helps to know the games while viewing the results to see what types of concepts were well received and others that need tweaking to do better.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
June 13th, 2012 at 8:32:57 AM permalink
Quote: buzzpaff

Dan,
How much do you think the 20 minutes time period and 8 games contributed to the smooth operation this time ?
Almost half as many games and twice as much time !!
You were at both focus groups. Was there a difference in the way feedback was solicited ?


Huge difference!
The 15 minutes was enough time to show the game (just exactly enough, as opposed to nowhere near enough).
Feedback was not solicited: it was announced, FYI style: "you came here, you need to know this about your score."
It was totally civil and courteous.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
hook3670
hook3670
Joined: May 17, 2011
  • Threads: 38
  • Posts: 436
June 13th, 2012 at 9:28:50 AM permalink
This question/comment is not meant to offend anyone who is trying/has tried to create new table games. I realize it is very very difficult and it costs money and a lot of time. It seems to me there are very very few new games introduced each year. Most of the new ideas also seem to have very complicated games. I just know from my wife she gets and loves the basic games, BJ, 3 card, 4 card etc... but if I show her a game she has to take time to "learn" she just is not interested. How many new games do get introduced and become successful and does a game have to generally be simple so a basic 5 times a year casino goer can learn to play it?
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 187
  • Posts: 10501
June 13th, 2012 at 10:01:09 AM permalink
Quote: hook3670

... does a game have to generally be simple ...?

Hell, YES!

When the Wiz was working with me on my Poker For Roulette side bet, he must had used the phrase "Keep it simple" about a hundred times.

While "it's too complicated" was NOT something I heard about my game at the first Focus Group, what they did tell me has led me to make revisions that result in a simpler game.

Look for my new version to be uploaded and announced in a day or two.
Last edited by: DJTeddyBear on Mar 21, 2021
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ 覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧 Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
hook3670
hook3670
Joined: May 17, 2011
  • Threads: 38
  • Posts: 436
June 13th, 2012 at 10:09:40 AM permalink
It just seemded to me at least a lot of the new games that were debuted sounded too complicated for the casual casino goer and that could be a detriment to having them accepted.
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
June 13th, 2012 at 10:26:40 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

Huge difference!
The 15 minutes was enough time to show the game (just exactly enough, as opposed to nowhere near enough).
Feedback was not solicited: it was announced, FYI style: "you came here, you need to know this about your score."
It was totally civil and courteous.



Would I be correct in assuming the score were totaled privately and the posted, versus the public tallying used in the previous group ?

Were there 15 evaluators this time also ?
Paradigm
Paradigm
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 2226
June 13th, 2012 at 11:06:43 AM permalink
Quote: hook3670

It just seemded to me at least a lot of the new games that were debuted sounded too complicated for the casual casino goer and that could be a detriment to having them accepted.



Hook, you have it right on.....if your wife can't understand the game AND feel like she can play it without making mistakes in 2 or 3 hands, the game is dead. Not only does it have to be a simple concept, but the strategy on how to play the game well must be able to be mastered quickly.

I think the concept of simple is why all the successful games are variants of existing games. Variants can draw on player's previous knowledge of the main game so any twist on the original game is all that is "new" to the player. Variants provide instant familiarity even though a twist is involved. The key to variants is will players drop what they are playing now in favor of the new variant game.

If you look at the two hottest titles right now Ultimate Texas and Crazy Four Poker, that answer with both of these games vs. the other variants is "yes". People are chosing UTH over the three or four other Texas Hold'em games out there (Texas HE Bonus, WPT Texas Hold'em, etc.) and players that were die hard 3 Card Poker players are migrating to Crazy Four.

If your game isn't a variant, the game concept and how to play in order to maximize your chances of winning must be intuitive to a new player, such as your wife, almost instantly.

But too simple also doesn't work and neither does "no strategy" games (with the exception of side bets and Casino War, but CW is a one off). The key is a simple game with a simple strategy that will still have players coming back time and time to play.....it is a very tough nut to crack!
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
June 13th, 2012 at 11:09:33 AM permalink
" The key is a simple game with a simple strategy that will still have players coming back time and time to play.....it is a very tough nut to crack! " Now you tell me ! LOL

On a serious note, if craps were to be invented today, it would wind up in the litter basket of failed games.

  • Jump to: