James Ernest is the president and lead game designer of Cheapass Games. He was kind enough to spend some time answering questions about his approach to game design.
Jason: On your website, you state “We here at Cheapass Games are aware of two basic facts about games: they cost too much, and they are at some level the same.” Could you give some background on how this angle and the company came together?
James: I worked at Wizards of the Coast from 1993 to 1995, and developed a lot of game ideas on the side (I was working as an editor and technical writer, but not a game designer). I was pretty turned off by the slow pace at which new games went through the system; from designer to print in five years. So, with an urge to design a bunch of stuff and see which ones were good, I started my own game company in 1996.
The “Cheapass” philosophy was a reaction to the current gaming marketplace, where games had become more expensive in the model of Magic: the Gathering, Dungeons and Dragons, and other high-production value games. There was a gulf below $10 that was pretty attractive, especially since I was starting my company on a shoestring.
I’d seen a lot of small press publishers try to hide their insignificance behind big names like “Amalgamated Everything Enterprises,” and I thought that was pretty lame, so I decided to take the opposite tack of embracing my cheapness (and that of my customers). We considered less edgy names, like “Black Pawn,” but I decided I needed a brand that distinguished me from everything else, and “Cheapass” did that the best.
The concept of selling the pieces separately was actually pretty old; I’d contrived a line of color board games called “Chief Herman Games” in 1994. The idea was that you’d buy one box of really nice generic components for like, $60, and then the board games that used them could be lots cheaper, selling for maybe $20 apiece. I wasn’t the first person to think of this, obviously. I was buying D&D books with dice sold separately when I was in grade school.
Jason: Aside from the obvious low costs of your games compared to your competitors, how would you characterize the type of games Cheapass Games offers? Do you have a target profile of the kind of customers that would be interested in your product line?
James: Our core market was originally intended to be players who go to hobby game stores. This was before Internet sales really mattered (argue if you want) so the hobby game distribution channel seemed like a good place to start. And I knew people in that business, so it was relatively easy to get a foothold.
In 1996, that audience was playing core hobby games like Magic and D&D, and German board games like Settlers of Catan. My specific target demographic was, basically, me: a casual gamer who was aware of hobby games, but who was usually in the mood for something lighter. Cheapass Games wound up being treated by many game groups as fillers: play a Cheapass Game while you wait for your whole group to show up. For others, we were gateway games, meaning that casual or non-gamers could play Cheapass Games with their more hardcore friends.
The brand isn’t really mass-market friendly because of the packaging, the brand name, the themes, and so on; but I never intended to break into those markets. As a tiny company, I couldn’t really afford to do large marketing campaigns, nor could I survive even one unpaid order from a big box store. (The worst bad debt we ever had to write off was a $12K distributor order, which sounds like a lot, but not compared to a real mass market account.)
Because of my sensibilities, I think the Cheapass Line is known for humorous storylines and approachable game mechanics; to a few hardcore players this means “light” which in turn means “bad,” and there are also a lot of people who assume Cheapass Games aren’t very good simply because they are cheap. But enough people appreciate them that we did pretty well.
A key element of our approach was a “lots of times at bat” strategy, where a player could risk 5 or 10 bucks on a new game and decide if he liked it. If he didn’t, it was cheap, and there was another one out the following month. In a sense, the Cheapass Games are like trial versions of big retail games, except that there’s no deluxe upgrade.
Jason: Your website talks about utilizing Demo Teams and a Discussion List. Could you talk about these and any other outreach efforts you have for connecting players to Cheapass Games?
James: We don’t have any active outreach programs right now, but in the past we’ve relied on a few key ones: demo teams, convention appearances, and a discussion list.
Our demo monkeys were fans who were willing to teach our games at their local game stores and conventions, and helped spread the word where my on-staff people couldn’t reach. I had one part-time staffer who coordinated those efforts, tracked reports, sent people to conventions, and distributed free games as payment and prizes.
We did have a discussion group that was moderated by a fan. These days we’d probably integrate chat or forums into our Web site, but the discussion list started ten years ago and we didn’t really bother improving it. The demo monkeys had their own discussion list that was much busier.
Cheapass also went to about a dozen game conventions every year, from small local cons to the biggest gatherings like Origins and Gen Con. We usually had a retail booth at those cons as well as running a track of demos, tournaments, and exhibition games.
I don’t know if you’d count other marketing avenues as “outreach programs,” but we definitely relied on print ads, a Web site, and lots of word of mouth. One marketing vehicle that we used abundantly was free games: we would exchange a one-page free game for a one-page ad, which gave magazines some good content, and gave us very cheap ads. We also put free games online, on our business cards, in convention program books, and so on. Sometimes we offered free previews of upcoming games as a way of promoting and playtesting those games.
Jason: There’s a business saying that you should “make something people want.” How easy is it to integrate such an approach to game design?
James: That’s a strange phrase… it seems to go without saying that you should make something people want. Then again, I know some companies that make a strong business out of making something stupid, and convincing people that they want it…
I try to make things that I want. Something else about the “something people want” concept is that people frequently try to guess what other people want… even though they personally have no passion for it. A bunch of middle-aged men going “let’s make a game for girls” is an all too familiar sight, as are the decisions they make based on a sort of misunderstanding or even contempt for their audience. Personally, if I can’t actually enjoy the game I’m creating, I won’t work on it. So my approach is “I would like this, and girls will like this, let’s make this” rather than “I hate this, but girls will like this, so let’s work on this.”
I know designers in the casino industry who really do look down on their customers: math guys say “slot machines are for idiots” and make their living designing slot machines. Personally, I love working on slot machines because I love playing them.
So, as far as entertainment goes, people should make things they like.
Jason: Where do you find your ideas for games come from? Do you have any popular sources for inspiration?
James: Ideas come from everywhere. Everybody has them. People need a creative outlet as a means of culling the ideas they have.
If you have a dream, or hear a conversation, or have a random thought fly through your head, you’ll probably forget it pretty quickly. But if that thought has something to do with your job, or your hobby, you’re more likely to capture it and use it. Creativity requires a willingness to mull over a new idea before you decide whether it’s good or bad. Some people “aren’t creative,” which basically means that they habitually second-guess their own good ideas. I like to say “creativity requires forgetting that you suck.”
Different people will explot the same ideas in different ways. Because I make games, when I have a good idea (or hear one) my first thought is, “how can I make a game out of this?” It might be as simple as a good name for a card or a character, or it might be the basis for an entire game. If I were in the screenplay business, I’m sure the cast of Friedey’s (Give Me the Brain et al) would have wound up in a film rather than in a game.
I keep ideas in a notebook because they’re almost never useful right away. I have a list of funny character names for a Las Vegas game. There are about 12 names on that list, and if I actually make that game, I’ve at least got a head start.
A lot of designers tend to get their ideas from existing games, but I’d rather not. I’m sure someone will call me on that and say “but Game X is clearly based on Game Y” but in general I try to start with a theme or a story first, and see what kind of mechanic fits it. Very rarely I’ll start with a mechanical idea first (like, what if we made a collectible dice game with printed paper dice?) but it’s a lot more work to turn that kind of idea into a well-rounded game.
Jason: I know a lot of your games are of the tabletop variety like board games and card games. Do you have any interest in working in other mediums such as digital or online games?
James: Well, it might surprise you to learn that I’ve been working as a game design manager for Microsoft for two years, working mostly on casual games for the Web and Xbox. Working on paper games certainly gives one a unique perspective on electronic games, meaning that pretty much nobody here agrees with me.
Jason: Last question. What’s your best advice for someone who wants to design games for a living?
James: That’s a tough one. I think there are a lot of definitions of “design games for a living,” but if you want to do it like I did, you’ll learn your best lessons by just doing it. I’ve designed about 150 published games (and more than were never finished) and learned something from each project. I’ve self-published, worked for hire, licensed original designs, and worked on staff at game companies. These are all different approaches to designing games for a living, each with its own mix of good and bad.
If you want to be a self-published designer, fall in love with running a business. It’s crucial that your games get noticed and played, so you need a way (the Web, word of mouth, friends in retail) to get your games noticed and played. If you want to run a game company, even a little one, you’d better like business as much as you like games.
If you want to work freelance for game publishers, you have a chicken-and-egg problem. You get work like that from having done work like that, so figure out where you can start small, getting some work under your belt (writing RPG supplements, playtesting, designing levels or modules) and grow that business job by job.
If you want to sell original designs to publishers, you need to get a feel for which publishers will look at your work and where your work fits in. Some people use agencies or business partners to pursue deals and negotiate contracts, some do it all themselves. This is a business where you need to know the right people, so attending trade shows and building a file of contacts is critical.
If you want a job in the game industry, your best bet is probably to either involve yourself in the business by some of the methods described above, or go to a school with a game design degree. I don’t have one of those, so it’s hard for me to give that advice; when I went to school there was no such thing.
Most of all, like any career you choose, you’ll only be successful designing games for a living if you truly love games. Not just playing them, but understanding them and what makes them tick. If you’d still be making games even if you didn’t need the money (I would) then you’re on the right track.
Jason: James, thanks for your time and the insightful responses!
