Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Fergus, Run it! Call it something else if you want! I share your same values on adding novelty and variety to Chess. How many variants did you have so far for Next Chess? Just 3? Lets have a firendly Trio tournament. 3 players, 3 variants, 2 games per variant. Don't throw away the idea and excitement away just because one person wanted to make something different out of your tourney.
I have decided to drop the Next Chess tournament idea, because I think it sends the wrong message. It sends the idea that we're trying to replace Chess, and it encourages people like Rich Hutnik, who actually does want to replace Chess. I do not wish to encourage the idea that Chess needs to be replaced. I am not here to replace Chess but to build upon it. I do not hate Chess and secretly wish for its destruction, like Iago did for Othello. My interest in Chess variants springs from the love of Chess. But my interest in novelty and variety leads me to create and discover other games similar to Chess. This is a common theme for me. I love music but don't limit myself to one kind of music. I enjoy food but don't limit myself to one kind of food. I love Chess but don't limit myself to one Chess variant. I may run a different tournament, one that is more about variety than about the potential to replace Chess. I might do another Game Courier tournament like the ones before it, or I might try something different.
Rich, I don't know all of Fergus rules for the tournament yet, but in MY opinion, I do not like your idea of just playing one variant, and the champion defending the title with someone else's variant. We all design variants because we want to play them, and we don't join tournaments (my opinion) to just play someone else's. I like the idea of playing a mix of variants by different designers (including one's too) and letting the champion be the best overall player in all the variants mix. My 2 cents. Jose
Hello again Fergus. Please understand the position I am coming from. As much as I would like chess variants to be light and casual things, I am involved with a non-profit who is trying to not only represent the interest of players and designers, but also publishers, schools, and everyone else. The interest is to get increased interest by the media, so that we can get more resources so we can do more, and get more of the world to notice, and get variants here greater attention. I do have an interest to get a magazine on the newsstands that would promote chess variants. Throw in also a TV show, or cable network that has room for variants, and I believe we could be onto something. Anyhow, on the note for a tournament format to promote chess variants, I will propose the following as a starting point: * How about having a tournament where the winner then picks what game will be played the following year, and players compete, and the player returns the following year to defend their title? A proviso would be the player can't pick one of their own designs as the game to defend their title against. I believe this format would touch on a lot of what was discussed in this thread. Of course, we should look towards refining the concept, and take it from there. A variant on this last point is, rather than it be an annual tournament, you run an ongoing series of tournaments, and keep playing the same game until someone different wins. They then would end up picking a different game, and is one they didn't design. I would recommend here that the winner of the prior tournament doesn't have to play in the qualifier Please let me know your thoughts on this (This goes to everyone, not just Fergus).
Rich,
I think I understand what you are saying. The main issue of disagreement between us is that we have different values. I place no special value on popularizing some Chess variant. My interest is in Chess variants as a pastime and hobby, not as a competitive sport. I need nothing more than a regular stream of opponents who are interested in playing the same games as I am. I don't need throngs of people playing a variant competitively in order to enjoy it. In fact, one of the things that turns me off about the Chess world is that it is overcrowded and overly competitive.
Furthermore, I conceive of Chess as a Platonic form, not as a particular game, and my interest is in exploring that form in its myriad manifestations, not so much in mastering any particular manifestation of it. If some Chess variant did become hugely popular, I would still be more interested in Chess variants in general than I would be in any one variant. Even if it was one of my own games that became hugely popular, I would still create Chess variants, and I would still play different Chess variants. Nothing much would change for me if your goals were reached. My hope is that any promotion of individual Chess variants will help more people grasp the form behind Chess and its variants, engendering a greater interest in Chess variants in general. But any promotion of a variant is only a means to this end and not an end-in-itself. For myself, I will continue to promote Chess variants in general, not any one in particular, because it is in Chess variants in general that my interest lies, and I am not going to sell out that interest for the sake of bringing in more bodies.
Fergus, let me clarify a bit on my 'dead end' comment: 1. Dead end means that the game itself, if merely a creation of a designer (and held as such) won't have much in the way of modification. 2. For there to be sufficient play to test a game out, and feedback from a game community on it (and them adjusting accordingly), the game won't build much of a following behind it. The community is what gives a game life, and lends to its promotion and it being 'evangelized' to get other players. It take a community to keep a game alive. They need to feel ownership over the game, or least be a stakeholder in it. Chess and other of the more know abstract strategy games have this. The smaller variants, most of which are on here (and not the major ones) don't. So, what I am saying is there needs to be a community behind a game caring about its growth, to take off. And I was suggesting in what I stated that maybe we can do a crowdsourcing version of chess, to see what may develop.
7 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.