I agree that game designers should be credited for their work.  Even for games produced by the Hasbro think tank, I’d like to see a roll-call of contributing designers, artists, and even playtesters.

Personally, I don’t feel that crediting a designer impinges on the publisher brand.  I think well of Amigo, Hans im Glück, Ravensburger, Days of Wonder, etc. for the quality of their selection, components, and rules authorship, even though I don’t credit them with the actual design of the games they publish.

Aside from corporate branding, I wonder if there is some apprehension about confusing the consumer by displaying unfamiliar names on the packaging.  I must admit I had this reaction when buying “Motley Fool’s Buy Low Sell High”.  I recognized Reiner Knizia and Überplay, and had played Palmyra, but I had never heard of Motley Fool, and was thus a bit disoriented.  Perhaps it is the question “Do I need to be familiar with this name in order to enjoy this product?” that the big American companies want to avoid.

How are Blokus and Apples to Apples any different than older self or small published games that passed through a couple of companies into mass market success.

Like:
Trivial Pursuit
Uno
Monopoly
Scrabble (maybe?)
Scene It

It seems as if to become a multimillion seller, a game really requires massive amounts of marketing distribution and capital. Always has been.

On the plus side could be a resurgeance of classic 70’s style abstracts.  Maybe Skirrid will get republished.

I wonder what the financial advantage of selling your company is vs. having a steady stream of income from sales, albeit on a smaller scale.  I wonder if they still get royalties of some sort.

In the US, games became “big business” in the 1930s-50s and companies were more interested in promoting company brands (Parker Brothers, Milton Bradley) rather than individual designers, in much the same way that comic book publishers promoted company brands over individual artists and writers.

Gradually, comic book publishers realized that promoting individual artists and writers could lead to more fan interest and sales.  In addition, more writers and artists began to agitate for cover listing.  The combination of both internal agitation and external sales numbers led to a change in how comic book creators were promoted, especially after the advent of the graphic novel.

In Germany in the 80s, my understanding is that there was, again, both internal agitation (for designer cover credit) and increased sales numbers that led German companies to change their previous practice.

In the US, with the stranglehold of two companies, Hasbro and Mattel, on a large part of the game distribution system, internal agitation for designer names as a selling point hasn’t emerged.  The jury is still out as to whether the practice of doing so on imported Eurogames and US hobby games will gradually change the practices of Hasbro and Mattel.  In the long run, I think it will.

I’m certainly seeing a bit more attention paid to my other games due to the success of Race for the Galaxy and increased awareness of my name.  The sales effect isn’t much, but it’s non-zero.  So, I think it makes business sense for companies to put designers names on the cover.

It will take time for the large companies to change their long-standing practices, coupled with internal agitation for cover credit when contracts are negotiated.  I believe Reiner Knizia was successful in getting Hasbro to give him designer cover credit for Rheinlander.  If it had been a huge hit, I suspect we might have seen a change in Hasbro’s policy in this area.  Unfortunately, it wasn’t.

The culture at both Hasbro and Mattel definitely supports this corporate practice.  When you ask well known in-house designers like Rob Daviau or Mike Gray for their latest list of games, they will usually say that it’s a group contribution from many individuals and that they’re all “Hasbro” games.  The lines between designer and developer seem more blurred there than with European publishers, but there also doesn’t seem to be any real desire for proof of authorship.  This is as opposed to Fantasy Flight, another American publisher with a strong in-house staff, where they’ve chosen to promote their designers.  It’s nice to see the team spirit at Hasbro and Mattel, but it is a bit frustrating for those of us who like tracking each designer’s creations.

Mattel did make one exception to their usual rule when they put Brian Yu’s name on the cover for their brief foray into eurogaming.  This was deliberate, since eurogamers expect to see the designer’s name displayed prominantly.