I have some now though, after a quick trip to the shops to get cereal ended up with me coming home with 2 video games (as you do...). I was pretty anxious about it then, as I don't like to buy on impulse, but I'm glad I did. I came home with Zack and Wiki: The Quest for Barbaros' Treasure. I paid $50 for it, but after playing for 20 mins, I think I would have paid $300 for it if necessary. Great game.
Anyway, I want to lay down the basics on my views of Game Design. I will warn you however, my views are idealistic - to put it in one word. I know that not every game will be perfect - but I strive for perfection when I'm thinking of game ideas, or mechanics, or even patches for pre-existing games.
Game Design is like...
Game Design is like a cube made of pure glass.
It's substance is all clear and consistent - if you look at the core design, you can see right through and view how the entire outside comes together.
On the outside, you have clearly defined faces, edges and corners. There aren't any imperfections, there aren't any jutting out pieces, or chunks missing.
There are a limited number of clearly defined faces, rather than a sphere, that has an infinite amount of indistinguishable facets.
When the game is created, the cube is gift wrapped - it's all pretty, but the inside contents are hidden. People observing the final product can't see all the inner workings, they can't see your intentions, your underlying principles, and why you made it like it is - but they can still clearly see, and touch the faces, edges and corners.
The Criteria for a Game Design
Sorry for the metaphor, but when I think of game design, this is what I think of.
As I said, it's idealistic. A game design should be consistent the whole way through (pure glass), and you should be able to understand the majority of the design by seeing the main structure (gift wrapping hides the inner workings, but players still need to be able to understand the game ideas), and you should understand all the inner mechanics if the developer explains it to you, or shows you the inner workings (transparency).
Designs should also be effective. To put it bluntly, if your design doesn't solve a problem, or meet its intended purpose - it's not worth a damn. This is quite obvious for a patch to a game that is experiencing balance issues ("Does it balance out that overpowered weapon? Yes. Done."), but a total game idea still has to have a purpose. You might have a market driven purpose ("There aren't enough games with Zombies being killed by trigger happy Plants"), experimentally driven ("Let's see what this new game engine is capable of"), or personally driven ("I want to make this"). Make sure there's a purpose.
Fixes and Solutions
If you're making a fix, a good guideline to ensuring that your design is effective is stating the problem - isolating the faulty parameter, then creating a fix to solve the problem, addressing the parameter.
For example, "The new weapon is too powerful" is too bland. Try something like "The new weapon deals too much damage".
At this point, you can make progress - by nerfing its damage.
"The new weapon is too powerful" can mean many things, such as "The new weapon deals too much damage", "The new weapon infringes on that character's main role", "The new weapon counters this character too well", etc.
The best way to do it is by saying:
- What is the problem?
- Can this problem be attributed to a particular aspect of the current design?
- With reference to the problem, and the aspects listed above, here is the simplest, most effective solution.
Make sure to follow these steps when designing anything.
Clean Structure
Similarly, the structure of the design and its contents should be solid, and perfectly shaped - with no random modules added on, and no mechanics missing.
There is nothing worse than having a game where you think "Ugh, if only it had", or, having a game that is all consistent, until you reach a random snag that seems tacked on to fix a major issue without any real thought (such as, if all of your characters had 6 stats, but then one had 9 due to design issues with that character). These seemingly random additions or missing parts just confuse the player, and make the core gameplay convoluted. You want to have everything as clear as glass when you're making your game.
[[ Just a post-publishing note here, this section on tacking on random systems is not trying to persuade you to avoid adding new systems to your games - such as lifesteal on a new weapon, or a new attack modifier, etc. If you want to add something new - by all means do it. The point above is more-so a caution when fixing issues - rather than adding new content.]]
Convolution is represented through the contrast of the cube to a sphere. You might think that a Sphere would be amazing to experience as a game - many players, and early designers say that they want a game that has infinite possibilities - a true sandbox game in which the player isn't forced into anything, and they make their own destiny. I won't lie - I had grand aspirations of this, until a designer once told me that games are all about rules and direction. Games need to be clearly defined and contained, otherwise the player will either be overwhelmed, or they will cut corners to the content they bought the game for, then get sick of the game and don't experience the other 99% .
You want your game to have clear rules, with clear goals - and you want to direct your player to these. Note that I say direct rather than force. I love sandboxes just like everyone else - but you still need rules. Take for example, the game Prototype - it is very sandboxy, you can explore, kill people, fly - but, in order to reach the stage where you have all of your powers, you need to do story missions throughout the game world.
Presentation
The final idea I want to get across is the metaphor of gift-wrapping. You want your game to be clear to the players, you want them to quickly pick up things such as what the game is about, what directions you can take your character in, how you proceed through the game, how the game is played, etc. - but you don't want to show off all the inner workings if the player doesn't want to see them. For example, when a player is playing, you don't want them saying "Oh, the choice of weapons in this game is limited in the range spectrum, so I am expected to get up close and personal" - you want them subconsciously working it out and doing just that, and having a ball.
Similarly, you don't want them saying "The art direction in this game makes heavy use of silhouetting so I can distinguish my enemies from a distance" - you want them saying "Nice graphics", and distinguishing enemies without much thought.
That's not to say you should hide your intentions - I think some of the best leaps and bounds in terms of the developers giving their thoughts and insight to the players comes from Team Fortress 2 and Valve - who, in Single Player mode, have maps with little audio clips that tell you the reasons behind the various aspects of the game. I loved listening to them, and it really drew me into the game. Another example was the Warhammer Online podcasts. I didn't buy the game, I've never played it, but I'm subscribed to their podcast channel.
Conclusion
So really, imagine that the design you're trying to create, whether it is a fix for a bad weapon in your favourite multiplayer game, an entire patch for a game, a large mod for a game, or even an entire game idea in itself - make it as simple, effective, pure, and perfect as possible.
If you're having trouble with an aspect of the design, and you think you're going to have to add a convoluted feature - sleep on it for a few nights, and a better solution will pop into your head.
The reason for my idealism is not because I'm ignorant of the true nature of game design (well, I hope not...), it's because for every problem I've faced, and for every design I have created, I have found a neatly contained, but absolutely effective fix. It hasn't always come to me at the speed of light, and I have had sleepless nights going trough every possible idea that could fix the problem - and hell, sometimes I am totally shut down, and I only get it right when someone else spells out half of it for me - but there's always an elegant, well integrated solution.
Strive for perfection, but not just that.
Strive for
- Consistency
- Clarity
- Simplicity
- Effectiveness
- Efficiency
- Logical problem solving
- Direction
- Communication
Thanks,
Goodnight.
No comments:
Post a Comment