"Goedels Incompleteness Theorem says that any (formal) system which is 'sufficiently powerful' is, by the virtue of its power incomplete, in the sense that there are well-formed strings which express true statements...which are not theorems." (Hofstadter.)
The implications of Goedel's theorem on the formal systems of wargames are obuious, and long demonstrated.
Even more so than the written word, a game design is never completely final. Over a period of time an author's ideas may change or he may even obtain new information that necessitates a new edition or revision of the old one.
In fact, the point at which a game is published is as Jim Dunnigan points out simply a point in a game's development in which it is "frozen" in its design so that people can play it for the information that it contains. This by no means indicates the end of a game's development. To remain pertinent and enduring, changes are almost necessitated.
This brings us to errata. To many, the fact that a game has errata indicates a failure by the designer/developer to do his job. The designer slipped up. In a sense this is true, although it is not always the designers or developers who provide the necessary oversights. Regardless, it is these folks who receive the majority of the "brick bats." However, in a real fashion, the fact that a game has errata is more indicative of success (at least as far as moral obligation is concerned) than is a game without any, which usually means the designer or publisher is deciding to not admit that there are any errors in the game. Says Tom Olesen, "It's hard for anyone who has not been personally involved in Game Design or development to realize the impossibility of perfecting rules before they are printed. I use the word impossibility advisedly. When someone comes up with a flawless rulebook, then we can say that it is difficult."
Accordingly, what should the orientation of the designer developer be towards errata? It seems to me that there are two possibilities. One is to "fix" the game, which is fairly standard and is usually what people think of when errata is mentioned. This means noting corrections to the countermix, the wording of the rules and set- up hexes, etc. It can even mean a major overhaul if the game is in real trouble (ie. Drive on Stalingrad without errata). This means the game is not working the way the designer intended it to and must be dealt with accordingly. Even so, there is notable resistance to "major errata." There are two reasons for this. The first is that it makes the designer look a little silly and the other is the human trait to "leave well enough alone."
This brings us to the second method, which takes the "game fix" one step further. Obviously, blatant flaws in the game need to be remedied with errata. But what if some of the game works tolerably well but not up to the designers expectations? The "Fix and Tune" method incorporates more than the standard corrections to the game. It benefits from introspection and hindsight and revolves around a more evolutionary approach to game design. When a game is published, it receives in just a short time many more playtests than any reasonable publisher could afford. Also, the designs and the public are able to view it within its full context with regards to historical content, playability and play halance. In other words, the final game is alot easier to look at, but at the same time its shortcomings are more visible to those who have been in contact with the design since its inception.
This leads me to my final and major point. A good game should not be let go to a static death. Admittedly, if large sections of the game need major revision, then it is best to design a new game. But otherwise, it seems to be an attractive idea to keep good games "fresh," and to tune them periodically so that they fit within the designer's knowledge and intentions and the "state nf the art." This is especicilly important in view of the fact that, in this fast paced industry, the "classics" are not yet twenty years old and many titles find their end in the proverbial closet shelf within five. Such an approach, I believe will increase their interest and longevity in the game while showing a real concern for the buying public.
Back to Wargame Design Vol. 1 Nr. 3 Table of Contents
Back to Wargame Design List of Issues
Back to Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1979 by Operational Studies Group.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com