Monday, June 26, 2006
Ways To Be A Better Game Designer
I'm not a great game designer (though I aspire to be). I thought I was a great game designer once. Then I found out that game design is hard. It only seems easy until you sit down and do it, and realize that it's not about grand ideas, but about all the tiny little frustrating details and the trade-offs that come with them.
So I'm always looking for tips on being a better game designer. Raph Koster just posted an article with forty of 'em. Not all of 'em are created equal, but they are all useful bits of advice:
http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/06/26/40-ways-to-be-a-better-game-designer/
My favorite ones:
Giant Design Docs Are Useless
Man. If I had a dollar for every GDC presentation I listened to in the 90's where some designer went on and on about his wonderful, complete, awesome design document and how it was gonna make a killer game... and then followed up with either no game at all or a complete and utter flop...
Well, I'd have enough money to buy lunch. But still...
Design docs are important for doing a team job. But the most important thing about them is that they are concise, well-organized, and tell the story of the game's concept as simply and powerfully as possible.
Playtest Early and Often
From what few games I've had exposure to early in development, I think I can say that you could almost predict what games will be a hit from this principle alone. Sure, there are some games that come together at the last minute (Jet Moto is one example that comes to mind), but it's hard to beat a game that is playable and testable and FUN early in the development cycle.
And if it's not very fun, the earlier you can discover this, the better your chances of fixing it before the game ships or you go careening hopelessly over schedule.
Summarize
I like this one. If you can't summarize the gameplay very simply in a few verbs and phrases, you are probably creating a mess instead of a game. Another useful little trick is to use those key verbs and phrases throughout development when you are dealing with feature creep - does the proposed feature or change accentuate these key elements, or does it draw attention away from them and onto something else entirely? If the latter, it should probably be cut.
Limitations Are Good
This was driven home to me a couple of years back while watching the director commentary for Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. The director was talking about how they pulled off a particular scene / set. The original proposal was far too expensive. Forced to work within a much tighter budget, they actually came up with a trick that worked far better than the original, more expensive solution. The director expressed the belief that this was usually the case.
Budding indie game developers, take note!
Labels: Game Design
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 5:28 PM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Nice post, Jay.
I've been inadvertantly applying several of these tips in my latest game. I know I've picked many of these tidbits up just from past experiences. Who knew trying (and failing) to create one overly-ambitious game after another would payoff in the long run?
Here's a few of my favorites:
1). Blue squares. This is something I've had to learn over the years. It used to be that I couldn't (or, rather, wouldn't) start working on a game unless I had the final art ready to go. It's been a hard lesson but I've since learned that fun trascends aesthetics.
8). Don’t design in the code/with the pieces. Here's one I'm getting better at but not entirely sure I agree with. Some of my most fun designs (based on other people's experiences) have come entirely from mucking around with code. Still, I can understand the dangers associated with designing via code, especially when you're on a tight schedule.
11). Assets. This is the one that ultimately lead to my latest game idea. Once I realized and accepted my artistic skills were fairly limited, my game ideas naturally became more managable.
#13-#15 are real gems as well. #15 in particular is something I'm working on. It's difficult to take a 'hands-off' approach when playtesting but it's absolutely necessary. I sent a test of my game to a relative of mine who fits the 'casual gamer' profile (older female who loves those bubble poppers). She had some initial trouble with the control scheme (using WASD, rather than the arrow keys to move was completely foreign to her) so it became apparent I had some work to do. I ultimately ended up coaching her through the first couple minutes which was probably a mistake in the long run.
And on an unrelated note, that WASD vs. arrow keys issue forced to me rethink who my target audience is. I (foolishly) was attempting to cater to both the 'casual' and 'hardcore' markets with something that's easy to play but hard to master. What I'm realizing (and Joshua Dallman's second-to-last .plan on GG.com seems to concur) is that targetting both markets is a mistake and nigh impossible. Tiny, seemingly unimportant issues like the key configuration really reminds you of the gap between 'casual' and 'hardcore'.
I've been inadvertantly applying several of these tips in my latest game. I know I've picked many of these tidbits up just from past experiences. Who knew trying (and failing) to create one overly-ambitious game after another would payoff in the long run?
Here's a few of my favorites:
1). Blue squares. This is something I've had to learn over the years. It used to be that I couldn't (or, rather, wouldn't) start working on a game unless I had the final art ready to go. It's been a hard lesson but I've since learned that fun trascends aesthetics.
8). Don’t design in the code/with the pieces. Here's one I'm getting better at but not entirely sure I agree with. Some of my most fun designs (based on other people's experiences) have come entirely from mucking around with code. Still, I can understand the dangers associated with designing via code, especially when you're on a tight schedule.
11). Assets. This is the one that ultimately lead to my latest game idea. Once I realized and accepted my artistic skills were fairly limited, my game ideas naturally became more managable.
#13-#15 are real gems as well. #15 in particular is something I'm working on. It's difficult to take a 'hands-off' approach when playtesting but it's absolutely necessary. I sent a test of my game to a relative of mine who fits the 'casual gamer' profile (older female who loves those bubble poppers). She had some initial trouble with the control scheme (using WASD, rather than the arrow keys to move was completely foreign to her) so it became apparent I had some work to do. I ultimately ended up coaching her through the first couple minutes which was probably a mistake in the long run.
And on an unrelated note, that WASD vs. arrow keys issue forced to me rethink who my target audience is. I (foolishly) was attempting to cater to both the 'casual' and 'hardcore' markets with something that's easy to play but hard to master. What I'm realizing (and Joshua Dallman's second-to-last .plan on GG.com seems to concur) is that targetting both markets is a mistake and nigh impossible. Tiny, seemingly unimportant issues like the key configuration really reminds you of the gap between 'casual' and 'hardcore'.
targetting both markets is a mistake and nigh impossible. Tiny, seemingly unimportant issues like the key configuration really reminds you of the gap between 'casual' and 'hardcore'.
Amen! I think that was a little bit of a problem with Void War --- I was shooting for something somewhere in-between casual and hardcore, and I ended up having a tough time finding the audience. It wasn't accessible enough for casual players (both in terms of controls AND subject matter), but it wasn't close to hardcore.
Amen! I think that was a little bit of a problem with Void War --- I was shooting for something somewhere in-between casual and hardcore, and I ended up having a tough time finding the audience. It wasn't accessible enough for casual players (both in terms of controls AND subject matter), but it wasn't close to hardcore.
Oh, that's interesting. I hadn't considered what troubles Void War might've had finding an audience.
The Joshua Dallman .plan I reference really opened my eyes as to who my target audience really is. After reading it, I came to the conclusion that, like Shelled!, my game is really targetting the former hardcore player who, for whatever reason, can no longer be hardcore. The hardcore casuals, I guess. They're looking for the game that's easy to get into and addictive but doesn't require a large time investment.
I suppose the good news is that this is an increasingly large market that's probably comprised of mid-20's to early-30's guys who grew up playing video games but now have other, more important responsibilities (families, jobs, etc.).
The bad news is that it's the most logical choice for indies that stay away from the bubble poppers/arcadey-puzzler world and stick to other genres. I imagine the Shelled and Think Tanks of the indie world are ultimately attracting this kind of market.
The Joshua Dallman .plan I reference really opened my eyes as to who my target audience really is. After reading it, I came to the conclusion that, like Shelled!, my game is really targetting the former hardcore player who, for whatever reason, can no longer be hardcore. The hardcore casuals, I guess. They're looking for the game that's easy to get into and addictive but doesn't require a large time investment.
I suppose the good news is that this is an increasingly large market that's probably comprised of mid-20's to early-30's guys who grew up playing video games but now have other, more important responsibilities (families, jobs, etc.).
The bad news is that it's the most logical choice for indies that stay away from the bubble poppers/arcadey-puzzler world and stick to other genres. I imagine the Shelled and Think Tanks of the indie world are ultimately attracting this kind of market.
Early 30s? I'd revise that up. I'm approaching late 30s and fall solidly into that camp. Further, many of my gamer friends are in this demographic.
Yep, you're right. I originally wrote it as 'late-20's, mid-30's' but pulled it back a bit for some reason. I'll blame the late night coding session. :]
Heh - well, Chris, you ARE my target demographic for Void War and, really, Apocalypse Cow (though it's less "hardcore" - but it is definitely for fans of retro arcade).
For the RPGs that are getting plotted out for future development, I'm trying to target a much broader demographic. They are a little more "core" than Aveyond, but not by a huge margin. Somewhere in-between Aveyond and, say, Spiderweb's titles.
Post a Comment
For the RPGs that are getting plotted out for future development, I'm trying to target a much broader demographic. They are a little more "core" than Aveyond, but not by a huge margin. Somewhere in-between Aveyond and, say, Spiderweb's titles.
Links to this post:
<< Home
