As I noted last time, I asked Andy Lewis for his input after he got home from WBC, and he sent me enough good information that I wanted to just devote a whole section to Andy’s view and process. Part I of this series can be found here. – Gene

——————

Andy Lewis, VP of Acquisitions & Development

Sorry for being away during the first part. I do want to give you guys some information about how I look at design submissions, because. as Gene noted in Part I,  my process is a little different than his.

Regarding where I can best evaluate your submissions: Yes, I would like to see your game at a convention, but my useful time at them is limited. You see, WBC is my main vacation for the year – yes it is a working vacation – so you need to arrange something for Monday or Tuesday otherwise I’ll look if I have free time. Just please be aware the zombie stare doesn’t mean I’m uninterested; I’m just exhausted from gaming all week. Prezcon in February is another option, but I run the booth there 10-6 so again zombie stares will come with the review. The best opportunity is at GMT East in March in White Plains. I am the host and run the “store” there, but have more free time and less zombie stares.

However, I know people are creative at other times of the year, so I generally accept more email submissions than Gene does. Yes I said email. Don’t start by sending me a prototype – it will go to the wrong coast anyway. That’s quite a few steps into the process. The first step is an introductory email about your game. In this intro, you should include a component list and your take on why everyone is going to want a copy. Why a component list to start the conversation? I need to be able to estimate the cost of the game so I can know if it’s viable or not. If the audience is introductory gamers, for example, a game that would sell for $125 is not really viable. Why your view on why everyone is going to want a copy? Similar to the “fun” question that Gene asks, if the designer can’t wow me on why his game is so cool, then we have a problem. I’m a game junkie. I read rules to a lot more games than I ever play because I want to see what the designer did. So I have a pretty good background from which to evaluate the “why everyone will want a copy” answer.

The next steps can vary based on how the conversation has gone. The key will be that I always want to read the rules before a prototype is ever sent. I want to know more about the game. I want to know how polished it looks. I’m probably going to ask, “how much playtesting has been done with the current version?” The reason is that we want to publish the designer’s vision of the topic. Therefore the game needs to be “finished” in the designer’s mind. This does not mean it is finished and ready to be produced. It just means we can put a developer and playtest teams on it to polish it. If they quickly find holes or “opportunities” that need major overhaul then we’ve lost the effectiveness of the process. Either they get into the nitty-gritty of fixing it so it becomes less the designer’s vision or they lose interest because it wasn’t fun or too much time passes before they can make another run at the game. So having a solid, well-tested prototype before I ever see it is really important.

I think the most important thing to understand about me and this process is I come at this from a different perspective than I think most people think I would. I want to accept every game. I understand it’s your blood, sweat, and tears. It’s your passion. It’s your baby. What I have to do is evaluate the likelihood that the game can be successful for both GMT and the designer. This means evaluating whether we can get it through the P500 process and understanding the likely size of  the overall market for the game. I have turned down games that I thought were very good. Some were because I thought it was too niche an audience and we wouldn’t be able to sell the majority of a print run. Others were because I knew the game was focused for a crowd that doesn’t pre-order via P500, so an otherwise-successful game might die never having “made the cut.”  Bottom line for me is I want to see a well-tested game that has a component list that will allow us to price it competitively and profitably, and the target market for your game needs to be both large enough and P500 friendly enough to get quickly and successfully through our pre-order process.

I hope this information is helpful. I look forward to taking a look at some of your games!

Andy

Author: Andy Lewis