1. Completing a Game Design Dr. Lewis Pulsipher Copyright 2008 Lewis Pulsipher

2. October 13, 2015 Who am I  Designed my own games while a teenager  Began playing commercial wargames in 1963  Played the original Atari 2600 and have played some PC games heavily, but rarely play any video games these days; never owned a game console  My favorite game is “the game design game”

3. October 13, 2015 Who am I  Designer of six commercially-published board wargames (most recently November ‘08), more to come  Active designer of board and card games (playtesters solicited!)  My main job has been teaching video game design and development in college

4. October 13, 2015 Some of my games

5. October 13, 2015 The problem and task  I’ve talked about the business side of game design, and about starting a game design, in previous seminars.  You’d think completing a design would be fairly easy; in fact it’s the hardest part  There’s a pyramid, with completing the game at the narrow top, and getting ideas at the very bottom.

6. October 13, 2015 The Design Pyramid: Milestones on the way to production

7. October 13, 2015 Prototypes—”testing is sovereign”  To best improve a game, you must have a playable prototype –Firaxis’ Sid Meier-Civilization series, Pirates –The sooner Firaxis got a playable version of Civ 4, the more they could learn –A playable prototype includes “artwork” or physical components, and rules or programming  The rules for a non-video game are the equivalent of the programming of a video game –Programming must be precise and is very time consuming (game engines may help in the future) –A playable set of rules can be much less precise, relying on the mind(s) of the designer(s), and notes  It’s also much easier to change the non-video prototype to test different approaches  It’s much easier to produce the physical prototype, than to create the artwork for a video game

8. October 13, 2015 Art vs. Science  As in many other creative endeavors, there are two ways of approach –These are often called Romantic and Classical, or Dionysian and Apollonian  Or: art and science –Some people design games “from the gut” –Others like to use system, organization, and (when possible) calculation  Mine is the “scientific” approach, which is more likely to help new designers –I think design is 10% art and 90% science

9. October 13, 2015 One way to look at the difference  Art is something created by an individual, then presented to the public “as is” –There is no “testing” or “focus groups”  Science is something subject to repeated testing –And almost all good games are thoroughly playtested –A sign of an “amateur” designer is insufficient testing

10. October 13, 2015 How to design games  Constraints lead to a conclusion: –Characteristics of the audience (target market) “People don’t do math any more” –Genre limitations –Production-imposed limitations “Board cannot be larger than X by Y” –Self-imposed limitations “I want a one-hour trading game”

11. October 13, 2015 Constraints  Limits lead to a conclusion: –Characteristics of the audience (target market) “People don’t do math any more” –Genre limitations –Production-imposed limitations “Board cannot be larger than X by Y” –Self-imposed limitations “I want a one-hour trading game”

12. October 13, 2015 Publisher-imposed limits  Some are publisher preference, some are market-dictated  For example: many publishers want nothing that requires written records in a game (FFG Britannia example)  Another example: consumers strongly prefer strong graphics, whether in a video or a non-video game

13. October 13, 2015 Self-imposed limits  You have your own preferences –Don’t design a game you dislike to play yourself –If you dislike it, why should anyone else like it? –But don’t design a game “just like you like to play”—it may already be out there, right? –“Pro” designers will design games other people like, that they’re not so thrilled about themselves  Limits/constraints improve and focus the creative process –Great art and music is much more commonly produced in eras of constraints, rather than eras without constraints  Example of a limit: I want to produce a two-player game that lasts no more than 30 minutes

14. October 13, 2015 The Process of Design  See data flow diagram  Circles are processes--activities –The numbers are for identification, DO NOT indicate a strict sequence of events  Lines show flows of information  Rectangles are entities outside the “game design” system  Arc-ed rectangles are “data stores”  Each process could generate another diagram like this one (but I haven’t finished them)

15. October 13, 2015

16. And 19 essential questions that you’ll answer sooner or later  “Distinct” questions (yes/no, or just a few possible answers): (“digital-style” questions)  What is the genre of the game?  Is it competitive or cooperative?  Is it Symmetric or Asymmetric?  Is it Zero-sum (ZS) or Non-zero-sum?  How many (human) "sides" (generally, 1, 2, or many) and (human) players?  Is this an “emergent”/rules-dominant game or a “role-assumption”/story-dominant game?

17. October 13, 2015 19 questions continued  Spectrum questions (a wide range of possibilities along a spectrum, “analog-style” questions)  How “big” and how long will the game be?  How complex is the game?  What is the role of chance, how much does chance play a part in the game?  How strongly will the decisions of the players influence the outcome of the game?  Which kind of skill does a player need to use, adaptability, or planning?  Which kind of skill does a player need, quick reactions (typical in shooters, for example), or careful deliberation?  What is the level of Fluidity or Chaos?  Is the game largely "mechanical" or "psychological"?

18. October 13, 2015 19 questions concluded  Other questions:  What is the outstanding mechanism involved?  What are the dynamics of being ahead or behind in the game?  What phases does the game naturally fall into?  Is the game "serious" or "just for laughs"?  Is the game “ruthless” or “nice” (competition or entertainment)?

19. October 13, 2015 Put yourself in the player’s shoes  What do you want them to feel as they play?  What decisions can they make?  How do they affect the course and outcome of the game?  What must they do that might not be “enjoyable” (especially: recordkeeping)? –So how can this be eliminated?

20. October 13, 2015 The stages of completion of a non-video game design  Idea  Notes about idea  Detailed notes about idea  Rough board/layout of pieces (if any)  Detailed board/layout (if any)  Prototype (pieces/cards added)  Solo-played prototype  Prototype played by others  Full written rules (rarely done before others have played)  "Settled" game  Blind testing  "Done" (but still subject to change, especially by manufacturer)

21. October 13, 2015 The stages of completion of a video game design  Idea  Notes about idea  Detailed notes about idea  Game treatment  “Rules”—very detailed design document  Computer Prototype (usually for show)  Playable Prototype (usually new code)  Development  Testing  “Done”

22. October 13, 2015 “Playtesting is sovereign”  If your target audience likes it, you’re getting somewhere  If they don’t, you are failing  Playtesting is an invitation to say your game sucks (NOT “you suck”)  Don’t take it personally  I devote an entire chapter in one of my books to playtesting

23. What are YOUR ideas about playtesting?

24. October 13, 2015 80/20  The really hard part of making a game is a last 20% of improvement that takes 80% of the time. This is a process of playtesting, evaluating the results, modifying the game to improve it in light of the results, playtesting again, and going through the whole cycle again and again and again. This is called the iterative and incremental development of the game. If you want to make a really good game then you are probably going to be sick and tired of it by the time you get toward the end of this process.  Finally, the game is never really done, you just come to a point where the value of the improvement is less than the cost of the time required to achieve it (Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns). Moreover, you might think you’re “done”, and then find out that improvements need to be made either for your peace of mind or because the publisher requires it.

25. October 13, 2015 Design vs. “development”  “Development” has two meanings –In video games, it means writing the program –In non-video, development (often by a person other than the designer) sets the finishing touches on a game, but may include significant changes –Development takes longer than design, in either case

26. October 13, 2015 The designer’s game vs. the game that’s published  Video games are often overseen by the publisher, who is paying the bills; so it is modified to suit as it is developed  Non-video games are often unseen by the publisher until “done”; some publishers then modify them, often heavily

27. October 13, 2015 Brief “what’s important”  Know your audience! What do they like? No game can satisfy all tastes.  Know your objectives! What are you trying to achieve?  Design is “10% inspiration and 90% perspiration”, especially if you also develop the non-video game.  Writing usable rules (or doing the programming) is the hardest part.  Write everything down (and back it up).  Playtesting is “sovereign”. No matter what you think about how the game will work, only efficient playtesting will actually show how it works. Without a playable prototype, you have *nothing*! (That’s only a slight exaggeration.)

28. October 13, 2015 Summary  Ideas are cheap (easy); a playable game is much harder to create.  Players must be able to influence the outcome of the game by their choices amongst non-obvious alternatives–otherwise it’s not a game (though it might be a story or a toy or a puzzle)..  Be willing to change the game again and again.  Hardly any idea is original...but ideas can be used in new ways. And there’s almost always a new way to treat any subject (many, many ways to do real estate–Monopoly is only one).  Games are supposed to be fun. But “fun” means different things to different people.  Keep in mind the nine fundamental structures of games:  The road to the complete game: 1. Ideas, 2. Playable ideas, 3. Prototypes, 4. Play solo, 5. Playtest, 6. Fully written rules, 6. Keep experimenting. 7. “Blind” test.

29. October 13, 2015 Conclusion of Summary  Don't design games for yourself, design for others. They’re the ones who must enjoy it, your enjoyment in playing is unimportant! But don’t design something you expect you’ll dislike. –If you're only working on one game, or a few, you're not likely to end up with a good one, AND you identify yourself as a dilettante, an amateur. Pros are working on many, many games.  Patience is a virtue. Britannia existed in fully playable form in 1980. It was first published in 1986. In 2008, one publisher told me, "it's a good thing you're immortal, because it's going to take a long time" to evaluate and publish one of my games. I was offered a contract more than a year later.  So if you're the "instant gratification" type, recognize your instant gratification will be in seeing people play your prototype, not in the published game.  Self-publishing is practical, if you don't mind losing a lot of money. Moreover, at some point you become a publisher/marketer, not a designer. What do you want to do?  Playtesting is sovereign. You have to playtest your game until you're sick of looking at it, until you want to throw the damn thing away. Then maybe you'll have something. But you have to be willing to change the game again and again: listen to the playtesters, watch how they react, recognize your game isn’t perfect and won’t be even when (if) it’s published.  When your game is rejected, there’s a good chance the rejection had nothing to do with the game’s quality. Be persistent.

30. October 13, 2015 Books about game design  Academic –More about game analysis than about design –Rules of Play by Salen and Zimmerman, MIT Press (game design as “Art”—very academic)  Video-game oriented –Tends to platitudes and generalities, because it’s so hard to create and try a video game –Rollings and Adams on Game Design, New Riders  Marketing oriented –Primarily about how to get the attention of publishers –Game Inventor’s Guidebook by Brian Tinsman  How-to –Well, there aren’t any! for boardgames; a few being done for video games now

31. Questions? Comments?