Using contests as a way to promote your game

[pells]

This thread is about a very specific context, but first, how I came to this problematic.

The problematic
I came across this little contest, which subject is to create a Rmap for an ongoing campaign. We didn't have one yet for Avalanche, but we liked the idea (even considered it as a must). So, looking at some the given examples they provide for this contest, we decided to create it for Avalanche. Taking part in the contest or not, we're doing it, with the firm intention to provide it with our product. It's not finished yet, but I really like what we're coming with so far. Of course, the fact that we are a team really helps ...
Now, should we take part in the contest ?

The context
I'm not talking about endeavors concerning starting projects (like the ronnies) or finished one (like the ennies, if I'm not wrong on this). I'm really talking about ongoing project, unfinished yet, for which some "parts" may be retrived to take part in contest, if applicable. In my case, for instance, I could take part in contest concerning setting or plots. Some came by earlier this year but I didn't take part in them ... So, the context is very specific here, but could apply to other "types" of projects.
A quick note : the funny thing here (if I may say so) is that this contest really gave us the little "push" we needed to do this. And we quite enjoy doing it, regardless, finally, of the contest ...

I could see the benefit of taking part in the contest as a way to expose my product, to promote it, by distribuing some "parts" of it, showing our expertise. Well, Avalanche is perfect for that, since it is really big, written in a modular way, so any kind of extraction is really easy. But, I'm thinking of two things :
- Once you give some parts for a contest, it is given. There is no way back.
- When someone gives parts of a project for which they have publishing goals, I guess the quality is quite higher than the other participants. For instance, this Rmap is really, but really meant to be published : fully illustrated, full layout. Well, I'll be honest, I do (almost) nothing on this. One member of the team is doing all the job. I do feel it gives an unfairly advantage and, I don't know, I kinda fear some grudge. But maybe, it's not even a problem.

The questions
- I am missing something here ?
- Do I need to keep in mind the date of the final release of the product ?
- Has anyone ever used that kind of way to promote his/her game ?
- Seen any benefit in that ? Have any regrets ?
- Does that seems like a good/coherent way to promote a game ?
- Should someone tries to take part in as many contests as possible ?

Now, I'm really looking for general feedback, not specific to this contest, nor specific to my project.
Because, if it's a good way to promote, I guess I should be "hunting" them !!! And as I see it, a contest could be a good opportunity to acheive some parts of a project (this Rmap for me for instance, or I could see a contest concerning maps, for example) that you know you have to do anyway ...

[Eero Tuovinen]

Hmm, I guess that it really depends on whether you're being genuine in your participation. This is the general case, mind you, but if I saw a creator strutting his stuff in a contest where that stuff just happens to fit all the content guidelines, so much the better for him. We have this kind of a case in a Finnish game design competition our Boargaming Society hosts annually; most participants are hobby designers while one is all but a pro, with dozens of designs ready to go. He usually seems to participate with something he has been brewing for a while, with a full web page and playtested rules to go with the game. Nobody minds that, and not only because we all want him to get on and go commercial with those games: the fact remains that whether his games happen to be better than others or not, he is enriching the competition for everybody.

I'd say that the case is the same here: if you're genuinely interested in the contest interacting with these particular people at this particular time, then the chances are that you're going to enrich the competition by entering with your product. People are very good at smelling a shill from three towns off, so if your product doesn't quite fit or you're not interested enough in the interaction yourself, the people will know and bad mojo will follow. So it's a case of self-policing community all the way, if you ask me. After all, I see no difference between using your own product and using somebody else's. The guy who's been schooled to play only Exalted isn't prevented from entering by his love of this very commercial game, so I fail to see why you should. Your product is not any worse off ethically than the next game a campaign's been based on.

However, one point: if I remember the contest you're referring to correctly, one requirement was that the relationship map would have to represent an actually played campaign. We've never discussed this, but from the look of things it seems to me that much of Avalanche is still a hypothetical campaign, never played. I might be wrong, but in any case I recommend making sure that you participate with a map from a really played campaign, not just the map from the product; the latter would be in something of a bad taste in a contest that is about the actual play of actual hobbyists. So if you haven't played it, don't post it.

Other than that: an Avalanche relationship map sounds like an excellent idea and a piece of art. Be sure to send me a link when you get it up!

[pells]

We have this kind of a case in a Finnish game design competition our Boargaming Society hosts annually; most participants are hobby designers while one is all but a pro, with dozens of designs ready to go. (...) the fact remains that whether his games happen to be better than others or not, he is enriching the competition for everybody.

Well, I guess this was but another false problem from my part. I guess participants are glad, organisers too.
Just a question :are they different bits of design (ie different games) ? Does it come to giving parts of a big game (ie are the contests different in nature, maps, rmap, scenarios, rules) ?
Because there is difference. I'm thinking, if you design a setting with rules, and decide to add some shorts scenarios, you could almost give it all away, parts by parts (maps, characters, scenarios, mechanics ...), by taking part in difference contests, unrelated between them.

Does this help promote his games ?
Does he loose control over what he's submitting ? How should someone deal with that ?
Is this mechanics of "giving pieces" a good idea ? To what extend ? Are there parts you should never give away ? Can it apply to all project ?

What I mean is, yes, for this contest, given the context of my project, I should take part it. But I'd like to adress this issue at large, in a generic way.

However, one point: if I remember the contest you're referring to correctly, one requirement was that the relationship map would have to represent an actually played campaign. We've never discussed this, but from the look of things it seems to me that much of Avalanche is still a hypothetical campaign, never played.

Of course I'm playing it (don't you remember my AP posts ?) !!! But, yes you are right about the rmap itself. We are designing a rmap out of context to be publish (ie without PCs' interaction). So, yes, maybe we will have to adapt it to respect exactly the terms ot the contest. We don't know yet, but I've asked politly (anyway, I think it might be good idea to chit chat with them a lot) and should have the answers soon. The difference in time work is negligeable from our point of view.

Other than that: an Avalanche relationship map sounds like an excellent idea and a piece of art. Be sure to send me a link when you get it up!

I do believe it is a must ...

[Eero Tuovinen]

Well, the thing is that for a roleplaying game or a boardgame even at beta stage it's not a big deal to give it out to public consumption through a competition. To the contrary, you have to be triple-proof established as a designer before it really makes sense to "safeguard" your work from interested eyes. For everybody else it's not that you're lessening the value of your work; you're generating interest! I can say that although my own little zombie game is all but finished for publication, I'll still give everything I have to anybody who comes along and asks for it; the interest of people just is that valuable.

The thing might be different for Avalanche, because it's much closer to a novel or such as a product than a game. Still, I think that you'd really have to push it to manage to give out "too much" material. I have difficulty imagining the kind of potential customer who'd check out a given amount of free material and decide to pass on the product because he already got everything he needed from the free stuff. It doesn't work that way for D&D, which is 99% (or 700%, depending on whether you count third-party material) available for free, so I don't see why it'd work that way for anybody else.

The economy at work here is that of convenience, empathy and consumption; having the rules for a game scattered around the net in bits and pieces is a wholly different thing than having a finished product in your hands. The kind of person who cares about the cost is not going to buy a high-end luxury product like a game anyway, so it doesn't really hurt you if you give out a preliminary, non-productized version of your work. If somebody likes it, he's going to buy the finished one, and if he doesn't, he wasn't going to buy it anyway (hopefully, at least).

As for the example I gave you above from our little game design contest: the guy in question participated in the contest by posting the full rules of his game in the internet. The game's called Deabolik, and he's worked on variants of the theme for three years or so. (Do check that out, by the way; it's in English, and rather tight, as befits one of the young hopes of Finnish boardgame design.) That's the requirement for participating in the first place, how otherwise are we going to judge and critique the game, after all. So basicly he's just giving it all away; that makes perfect sense if you're not Reiner Knizia.

But, that's enough of me sermonizing about the benefits of an open development process. There's no accepted wisdom about this, and as I intimated above, established big-name designers do safeguard their designs to the extent of not shouting them on the rooftops like us small fishes do. Even them, though... I've never met one that wasn't happy to discuss an on-going design, even if they don't go as far as to push the unfinished project on people. There's just no angle of benefit in purposefully hiding your work.