Skip to Content
 

Too much too soon?

"Keep It Simple, Stupid"

That's what my mentor drilled into my head as I took his game design classes. At the time, I think I intellectually understood it, but I never really practically understood it.

It's when I started trying to make games that this rang true. In my first official (video) game designer role, I was given some very strict guidelines...I had a very limited timeline (which, in itself was a hard challenge), I had a limited staff, and I had a small window of time to which I could communicate my vision to the team.

Surprisingly we actually got a product out, but I wasn't able to do everything I had wanted to do. Much of the time we used trying to figure out the primary mechanic, which was in prototype form about 4/5 into production.

When I made my card game, I had more leeway, but I learned a lot from my previous experiences. With my game, I took my time with the game mechanic. Because I did, I was able to create a streamlined and fully tested game.

In my time I've been a designer, I've heard many...many game pitches. Being a college level game instructor didn't help...of course, I assigned my students projects where they had to pitch games anyways.

But there's something I've noticed with many of these newbie designers (and looking back, I did the same thing)...the vision was grand but the resources didn't match their vision.

It's why I assign pitch assignments to my students. I place ridiculous restrictions because no one is realistically going to create a game with unlimited resources at their disposal. In fact, it's more like there's a grand vision and the creator has little or no money...or much time to work on it.

When I see it on these forums, it's subtle. It takes on forms like, "high customization of characters". "thousands of character options", or something of the like. It's not bad per se, but it certainly sets up a high possibility of failure.

I mean how can someone create unlimited options on a character when they haven't even learned to balance a few?

How can someone create thousands of items when they haven't made a game that balances a few?

I think the deception comes when people say they've played games their entire lives and suddenly they think that they can create and balance Twilight Imperium.

I'll counter by saying I love cars and I've been driving many different kinds of cars for about 25 years, but I have no clue about how to build a car from scratch.

Games are made through trial and error. You want to learn from the errors, but you don't want your errors to be so great it destroys your dream or vision.

What I'm saying is to just be realistic. You're going to make a lot of mistakes creating a game...even the most seasoned game designer makes mistakes.

Just be smart about it. If you're proposing high customization, balance the game with solid stats before you move into customizable options. If your game board is large, see if it works on a board 1/4 the size. Thinking of a lot of characters? Try making sure it works with the minimum amount.

Good luck all!

Comments

Well said

Well said, and something I need to hear frequently!

I'm only just beginning to get game creation and keeping it simple has been the hardest part so far - my mind is two-steps ahead with the possibilities instead of trying to find the core things that will make it playable, balanced, and fun. I'm glad to be a part of this forum and I've been digging into the forums and loving it.

In my full-time life I'm a musician and teacher. I'm frequently telling students that making their compositions better is more about taking unnecessary elements away than it is about adding new ideas. I need to apply my own advice to my board game designing!

As I'm developing some of my first games, one thing I do is add a kind of "footer note" to my design document titled "possible expansions." This allows me to recognize the idea but set it aside while developing the core ideas. This has helped me make a lot more progress than I originally expected to make. Any thoughts? Do you have a suggested process or routine?

Prototype AS EARLY as possible

That would be my best suggestion. Why? Because ideas on paper sometimes feel good - but when you get to the table, they are not quite what you expected. On paper, they may seem sound but in reality they just add overhead to your game or make the game too long, make the game too complex, etc.

Don't bother with Design Documents. In my experience MAKING the game as a tangible object is the key towards moving forwards with a game design.

Others can feel freely to disagree - but I do write down notes and ideas about my games. But I feel like the game starts only to come together once I have a working prototype that I can playtest.

As they say playtest OFTEN and EARLY! Two important factors to remember when designing games!

Best of luck with your game.

Note: When I started designing "Tradewars - Homeworld", I bought a notepad and wrote do everything I could think about HOW I wanted to design the game. It was during a very trying time in my life and ... well the results were that my design could not be realized.

But instead of dropping the entire game, I restarted the game based on the elements that I could playtest. From there it became an iterative approach: each time I playtested (or had someone else playtest), certain game elements would change or be refined.

June 2015 was my 2 year anniversary for the game. Now into my second month in year #2, I am preparing a NEW version of the game based on the elements that I have removed.

Soon I will be seeking more playtesting advice and we will see what the results of this third set of playtests result in.

Awesome!

heckmanjr wrote:
Well said, and something I need to hear frequently!

I'm only just beginning to get game creation and keeping it simple has been the hardest part so far - my mind is two-steps ahead with the possibilities instead of trying to find the core things that will make it playable, balanced, and fun. I'm glad to be a part of this forum and I've been digging into the forums and loving it.

In my full-time life I'm a musician and teacher. I'm frequently telling students that making their compositions better is more about taking unnecessary elements away than it is about adding new ideas. I need to apply my own advice to my board game designing!

As I'm developing some of my first games, one thing I do is add a kind of "footer note" to my design document titled "possible expansions." This allows me to recognize the idea but set it aside while developing the core ideas. This has helped me make a lot more progress than I originally expected to make. Any thoughts? Do you have a suggested process or routine?

I usually have a Word document open that's an unorganized mess that contains all of my thoughts on that particular game I'm working on and what can or can't be done. Once I solidify the design (usually in subsequent Word files that organizes my previous information.), then I move to an excel document to explore different possibilities of card, character, and random events.

I believe every designer should have their own way of putting together their ideas. You're most certainly welcome to take my ideas when I post them on my blog or on the forums, I'm not super protective of my designs, but you should do what works for you.

My advice would be to just write down everything...even if you can't find place to put a footer in your own notes. That way the idea is out of your head and will clear your mind for organization and other new ideas.

I believe that all the creative arts (music, arts, poetry, etc.) run well on the idea that "less is more". It doesn't mean every creative project should be small, but it does give a mindset to designers to be efficient rather than embellishing.

But, I truly believe that your experience as a musician can really benefit you as a game designer. Being a musician myself (not so much recently), you inherently know things like balance, timing, organization, beat, storytelling, and working within a box (measures); I've noted those things have influenced my game designs in very small but significant ways.

Good luck on your designs, heckmanjr

questccg wrote:That would be

questccg wrote:
That would be my best suggestion. Why? Because ideas on paper sometimes feel good - but when you get to the table, they are not quite what you expected. On paper, they may seem sound but in reality they just add overhead to your game or make the game too long, make the game too complex, etc.

Don't bother with Design Documents. In my experience MAKING the game as a tangible object is the key towards moving forwards with a game design.

Others can feel freely to disagree - but I do write down notes and ideas about my games. But I feel like the game starts only to come together once I have a working prototype that I can playtest.

As they say playtest OFTEN and EARLY! Two important factors to remember when designing games!

Best of luck with your game.

I think there should be a time to "think" and a time to "do".

Certainly you want to get a prototype early on, but if there's no real plan (or at least a loose one) as far as a direction, it can potentially make a game go in directions you may not want it to go. However, it is a potential way to go as well because you explore things that you may not have if you planned it.

I guess I'm looking at it more like a commercial art rather than a creative outlet. I've found that I operate way better when I create the "box" I'm working in. If I let myself go, I run into "feature creep" (when your game has too many elements it slows development) way too often.

There's many different ways.

Clarification

questccg wrote:
...Soon I will be seeking more playtesting advice and we will see what the results of this third set of playtests result in.

When I say third set, I mean THIRD ROUND. Meaning my game has:

  1. Been playtested by myself and other players who were coached how to play the game.
  2. Been blindly playtested by several independent groups who read my rulebook and played the game.
  3. Will be playtested by people (experts) in the industry (as opposed to individuals who enjoy playing games).

This third round is the most critical because those industry experts will tell me what they think of the game. I'm hoping that at least some of them say they enjoy my game - even if it has been streamlined in to a full out space-battle game! LOL

As some of my playtesters have said: "We started out the game with the full intention of being Traders and win by monetary supremacy. BUT for some reason the games broke out into all out space wars!" (Paraphrased)

radioactivemouse wrote:If I

radioactivemouse wrote:
If I let myself go, I run into "feature creep" (when your game has too many elements it slows development) way too often.

I've seen "Big Game Fever" ruin many a worthwhile project, both tabletop games and video game design. It's worth it to keep KISS in mind when considering game additions, for sure.

I'm the opposite

radioactivemouse wrote:
...If I let myself go, I run into "feature creep" (when your game has too many elements it slows development) way too often.

Usually when I have a design in mind, I find I have to scale back the design. Why? Because the playtime is too long, there are too many parts to the game, too many rules to document, etc.

Already some "non-gamers" say my game has "too many options" from the beginning of the game. However veteran gamers who have played the game state that the "options", once you become accustomed to them, are real *nice* to have in the game.

So the game is not made for "newbies" looking for something to fill up their time. It's a game design for people who enjoy playing games... And so I hope the game itself attracts younger players also. Like under the age of 13...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Syndicate content


blog | by Dr. Radut