Skip to Content
 

Design tools

14 replies [Last post]
Infernal
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969

As a game designer I have always been interested in increasing the availability of cohices for the player (while still not overwhealming them). I have discovers several "Tools" and techniques for increaseing them. I am hopeing to get a discussion of what tools others use and various ways that they can bee applied.

So to start:
Game theory: This seems a must for any game design toolbox as it deals with games, however it realy is an economic and political (mathematical description) theory. Still it does have some use in game design. There are many "Games" designed with game theory in mind, but they are usually only to ilustrate a particualr situation. The main use of Game Theory, that I put it to, is to validate (balance) particular descision trees and choices.

Combined Arms theory: This was traditionaly used to analise warfare, but it can be used to analise particular strategic choices and see how they will owrk together. The very basic is that of scissors/paper/rock (and it does have overlap with game theory), and how they relate to one another. I use the concepts behind this to create choices that players can make but have, built into those choices a way for their oponents to exploite (if the player does not develop a counter strategy for the expoite).

Psychology: I'm not talking about medical psychology, but a deeper understanding of the drives behind peoples behaviours. this is useful so that you can understand why a person may make the choices that they do (not all choices are rational and covered by game theory). I used this to try to understand why a player makes the choices they do, and so is a complimentary tool to game theory.

Well this is a start. What tools do you use and how and why do do you use them?

Lor
Lor's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

Infernal wrote:
Well this is a start. What tools do you use and how and why do do you use them

I'll bite! This appeals to my nearly perverse need to understand Player Need as a foundation element. But by narrowing to "tools for choice" I can take a vacation!

Beyond the concept of probabilities (here risk mechanics) I don't "know" game theory, so i cannot really discuss it. using established theory to determine player choice is probably valid, and I'm sure we all apply bits and pieces of it, and there is probably more than one theory out there, eh?

Quote:
Psychology:...(snip)... I used this to try to understand why a player makes the choices they do, and so is a complimentary tool to game theory.

Good. Again, i like the Maslow Nine Needs list. Every player possesses a different mindset and comes at a game from varied perspective. I take it you want to understand them all? You have your work cut out for you.

Sometimes moving from abstract to concrete helps. How about practical tools for player choice? Hm. Here's a tickler list:

- Dice
- Spinners
- Deploying a held card
- Set of possible reaction rules hard-wired in
= Possible directions a pawn can travel

-- these all appeal to different kinds of players and themes but provide choice tools.

jkopena
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

One tool I use frequently is a maxim I've seen Ken Burnside of Ad Astra Games (they've launched a couple fairly high profile starship minis games this year) in game design discussions: "Always err toward things blowing up." For example, if you're deciding whether to have the player round up or round down, go for whichever one causes more damage. Things blowing up is exciting, things not is... not.

Another is that I try and think a lot in terms of decision points. "Is the player making a real decision here, evaluating options and choosing, or just picking randomly?" "Is this a real decision, or will it not really affect things?" "Has it been too long since the player made a decision (e.g. during a round)?" Just this concept of the "decision point" as being almighty has helped focus and resolve a lot of decisions.

Lor
Lor's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

jkopena wrote:
One tool I use frequently is a maxim ... (snip)... "Always err toward things blowing up."

Reminds me of John Hendricks, who founded the Discovery Channel, who used to say, "If it can eat you, the ratings go though the roof."

Your Burnside maxim can be generalized to say "Always err toward excitement." The resulting stimulus from choice could come from an explosion you direct, stealing a game treasure, controlling a dangerous animal, the sudden ability to fly, whatever is appropriate to your theme.

Infernal
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

All good. Both theoretical and practical design tools for choices.

Keep them comeing.

Johan
Johan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/05/2008
Re: Design tools

Hi

Actually, I did not really understand this thread. For me the design tool is Word, Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, and paper and pencil. But it looks like you want to know how we think when we design and here is mine "mind design tool".

Fun: The game has to be fun in all aspects (mechanism, theme, game time and so on), otherwise I will not do the game. Several of my games are fantasy, sf, fiction and the dark side, but you often see it from a different angle and with a twist. I won't even start to design a game I don’t want to play.
The fun part also goes for the first prototype. I put a lot of work in the first (and second...) prototype, so the test group knows that I believe in the game and therefore I think that they have a better (and more enjoyable) game experience. Even if the test group ditches the game after the first session, I know it was not because of a crappy prototype.

Interaction: Since the main part of a game is for the players to have fun (you should have equally fun if you win or loose), interaction between the players are a big part of the game. The interaction should be short and meaningful (a pointless battle between 2 players (when we are 6 around the table) that takes 5 minutes is a waist of time). I don’t like solitary games for 4 persons.

Keep it stupid simple (KISS): This is one of the rules that I have both at work and in game design. A game can be complex but each rule should be logical and simple and the combination of the rules should be logical and simple. When a rule are explained, there should be no question marks on how it works or why its there. I always have in mind who is the player (this is one of the things I write down at the beginning of a design to decide who is the main target for the game).
If a rule is complicated in any way, I always add examples (and if they not are complicated I probably will add examples anyway ;) ).

Keep on target (KOT): It is easy to add a lot of rules to a game because it is cool. I always set up the goal for the game first (the theme, how do you win and when does the game end). Then I write down everything I want to have ion the game. After that I remove all parts that that are not in the basic for the game to work. If there are good ideas in the list that was removed, I write them down and put them on for an expansion (or maybe I can find a new theme (and new game) from the cut away parts).

// Johan

Lor
Lor's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

Johan, you offer a very craftlike and sensible approach to design. What sorts of player choice mechanics to you gravitate to as you develop a product? Which do you not like?

Johan
Johan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/05/2008
Design tools

Lor wrote:
Johan, you offer a very craftlike and sensible approach to design. What sorts of player choice mechanics to you gravitate to as you develop a product? Which do you not like?

This is a tricky question that I don’t think that I can answer.
Nearly all games have combination of mechanism to get a game to work and a mechanism can be perfect as a solution in one game can be a catastrophe in an other game.
The reason why I can not answer the question is in my design process. This has been changed and improved over the years. There are several ideas and input that comes from this forum.

I will try to describing my design process.

Nowadays I nearly always start with a theme. Normally the theme directly gives me the goal of the game.
When I have the basic theme ready I make some limitations (number of players, minimum age of the players, time limit for a game and so on). I also decide the main component/components for the game (boardgame, cards, counters, tales, miniatures and so on).
Now it is time to design the game flow. This will describe the different phases in the game and if the players will have different roles. Still there are no mechanisms involved.
After this it is time for the first test. I present the game for a couple of critical friends that will ask a lot of questions and come with comments. All conversations go via mail. The main reason is that I have to write down the ideas and I usually find the main pitfalls before I even send it. I also have a documentation on the conversation.

Now is the "Keep on Target" handling involved. I remove all parts and ideas that are outside the main goal and the main theme. Several ideas are usually good and I write them down as expansions.

Now it is time for the first design. Paper and pencil is the main tool here. I look at the game flow, add mechanism that can work in the game flow and components that works in the mechanism. I work in circles and always work having everything as simple as possible but still have the right feeling on the game and keep the game within the theme and limitations. For each mechanism or component I ask myself if it is necessary or if it could be done in another way.

I now run the second test and that works in the same way as the first.

Next step is to create a prototype and get it tested. The first game session, the main goal is to get the theme and the game flow right.
The second prototype are normally completely rebuild where a part of the components and the mechanism are changed.

So I use the mechanism in the game to get the theme, feel and look, game flow, limitation and the game goal right. The mechanism is just a way to get the game to work in a way that I like and I don’t prefer a mechanism over an other. That is the reason why I can not answer this question.

// Johan

Lor
Lor's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

Nice organic development cycle!

Johan wrote:
The mechanism is just a way to get the game to work in a way that I like and I don’t prefer a mechanism over an other.

I understand. Can you give an example of what you've used, or is that revealing proprietary information? We're looking for interesting mechanisms to facilitate player choice, taken out of context, as a sort of "tickler file" for inspiration.

For instance, if my theme does not involve gambling or risk, I won't use dice, I might supply the player with choice cards he or she can deploy.

Infernal
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

Quote:
That is the reason why I can not answer this question.

In a way it does. You don't tend to gravitate to a particular mechanic, you use the theme to increase player choice and make use the most apropreate mechanic. I think this is a good way to design games as if you get a pet mechanic you tend to use it more. If all you have is a hammer then everything starts to look like a nail. I admit I fall into this trap more often that I'd like. :-)

Lor
Lor's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

Quote:
You use the theme to increase player choice and make use the most apropreate mechanic...(snip).. If all you have is a hammer then everything starts to look like a nail.

Absolutely. I've trained myself never to fall in love with a device fashioned for one context. If it works in another it also has to work in the new game's theme, otherwise it can easily be recognized as an inorganic tack-on.

Nothing wrong with adapting a novel action to another context if it's appropriate. WarHammer/GW has made millions from it.

Lor
Lor's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

Ooooh! That reminded me of another variation-- choices which come into play only when you're impacted by another player's action.

This is sort of a cross between

- Set of possible reaction rules hard-wired in
- Possible directions a pawn can travel

Let's say you're within the other player's blast radius. As your life begins to ebb, you might be given the opportunity to do a couple things, such as a) seek medic, b) apply a powerUp. Of course choices have different rewards-- a medic is more permanent, a powerUp will give you a bolt of energy and crash you quickly.

Johan
Johan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/05/2008
Design tools

I do a lot of reading (games, rules and so on), play several new games per month (I test between 3-10 new games per month (I have a friend that collect games and he buy a pile every month (he have deals with the delivery companies and get the price that the stores got)). I am also opened to test prototypes (from other players), and my test group is opened to test my ideas. I test most of the games I can at least once. You can nearly always find something (at least some detail) that is new and interesting in every game. With more experience on this, the more options and own ideas I get.

Here is some of the games mechanism that I have used (and like). Some of the mechanisms are taken out of there context and there can be more that is done in the same mechanism. The described mechanisms are connected to components but I find it hard to split those.

Action tokens
In several games I have used action tokens with success. The base for the mechanism is that you use the action token for each action you want to perform you have to pay an action token. When it's your turn, you get back the action tokens and then you can act, but you also have to keep some action tokens in reserve to counter other players move (or attacks).
Variant on this mechanism.
- The action tokens are also used as units (resources). The stronger you are, you will have fewer options.
- You only get back one per turn and played action type. If you do the same action type several times the same turn, you will only get one action token back and that action will be harder to use the next turn.
- Use action tokens both as action tokens and bidding resources. This work best in a 2 player game (used it in war games (board and miniatures)), and you will bid on who get the next move.

Random game length
I like random game length. With a random game length the players will not optimize there last move. Some example:
- In the end of the turn draw an event card. Among the last event cards, there is an end of game card.
- Combine the above with a dice roll (2D6). On a double don’t take any event cards.
- Before each players turn, roll the dice (example 2D6) for each 6 roll 2 new dice. For each 1 tick down the time 1 step (when the time reach 0 the game will end)).
- Each player get x score cards (normally 6-8). The cards describe what you get points for next turn. When it is a player's turn he rolls 2D6. On a double, all players select one score card and get points for that. The game will end after the last score card is played.

Multiple card usage
Cards are tricky to handle. Here are some examples on how to have double usage of cards.
- Event/games coring/upgrade in the same card. The card are displayed in the start of the turn. The player that in the end of turn has paid the highest price for the card decides if he wants it for upgrade or the event/game score will be in effect.
- One sided - double sided cards. There are one upper and one lower side of the card. The card will be placed on a component in the game and the two effects (upper and lower) will be in effect (you decide the side that shall be upper and lower) the upper is fixed and the lower is temporary until someone place a new card over the lower part of the card.

// Johan

Infernal
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

Another tool to increase player choice effectivness is to limit them in some way.

As an example, if you have an unlimited movement in a turn then there would be no choice for movement. If you limit the movment allowed then the player now has choices to make. The same can apply with resources,unlimited resources, means no choice and limited resources creates choices for the player.

Lor
Lor's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Design tools

From both Johan and Infernal I sense Ying and Yang at work.

Quite an interesting range of tools thus far! Good to keep all these techniques in mind.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut