- Oct 17, 2017
- 1,456
- 3,480
And yet many proper games by proper designers end up gaining features, losing features, having systems reworked, dealing with problems like marketing and selling. Have to be salvaged from unworkable states, or else sometimes rebuilt wholesale. Many of the games we'd call classics were made that way.No, I'm not too harsh on your ability to design. I come from a game development background, it crushed my desire to work in game development out of me. It was dreadful, but my armchair is an informed armchair. Based on the product you put out month to month your design is a mess. There's little to no coherent direction or focus which is the difference between designing a game and making one. If you were working on a properly designed game there would be no scenes without artwork, there would be no asking what patreons want you to focus on next, there would be no mechanics that need major changes, there would be no going back and changing certain scenes because they don't fit with what you're making anymore. Game design is the tempered form of a video game. It also means you typically have a very specific route to follow because you're dealing with a detailed design document that is typically hundreds, sometimes thousands of pages long dictating what needs to be done to build the game. Proper game design is knowing what you're going to build before a single line of code is even typed.
The "proper" designers of Paradox interactive made CK2, a game probably unrivaled in terms of my play time. It only took them 10 years of constant itiration to do it.
None of this is to excuse or justify some of our failures. Some of our designs stink. Our process is flawed. We've had problems. And that's why we're comitted to constantly doing better and improving the process for our players.
But, this idealogical notion of game design as being birthed full formed from Jesus' vagina is nonsense. Itiration is design. The best designers are largely those who are the best at improving their own work.